Metrum Octave Dac - What are the Chips used - Page 23 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Line Level

Digital Line Level DACs, Digital Crossovers, Equalizers, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 7th April 2012, 08:23 PM   #221
Telstar is offline Telstar  Italy
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Italy
Fck iPhone I lost my message. Will try to rewrite later on computer
__________________
"The total harmonic distortion is not a measure of the degree of distastefulness to the listener and it is recommended that its use should be discontinued." D. Masa, 1938
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th April 2012, 08:49 PM   #222
jitter is offline jitter  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
jitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic_real_one View Post
Do you think it does even hold a candle to DAC1?
Sonically, yes, the Octave sounds better than the DAC1.

Quote:
To me, the 5kHz @ 44.1kHz one looks like is a 4 bit sinusoide... Those distortions are not outside the audio band, I bet that using some headphones you could hear the difference.
Don't bet too much money, though. I listened to a 5 kHz sine on my Sennheiser HD600, but no difference with the DAC1. Things get really different, though, in the treble and with the volume turned up quite a bit. Then all sorts of strange sounds depending on the frequency of the sine can be heard. To answer 5th elements, yes there are things happening in the audio band. The reason they're not audible is because they're low level, constantly changing with the music and masked by it.
It's this dynamic behaviour of the hearing threshold that really gets in the way of the interpretation of these measurements. "What you see is what you get" really doesn't work in this case.

Quote:
I am very interested in a mix of 19+20kHz 1:1 - for both of them.
Here they are, this time limited to the audio band:
Octave; 44.1 kHz; 19 kHz + 20 kHz sinewaves, 1:1;
Octave; 96 kHz; 19 kHz + 20 kHz sinewaves, 1:1;
DAC1; 44.1 kHz; 19 kHz + 20 kHz sinewaves, 1:1.
Attached Images
File Type: gif oct_ms19k20k_44k.gif (8.2 KB, 150 views)
File Type: gif oct_ms19k20k_96k.gif (7.0 KB, 149 views)
File Type: gif dac1_ms19k20k_44k.gif (6.3 KB, 147 views)

Last edited by jitter; 7th April 2012 at 09:14 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th April 2012, 08:56 PM   #223
Previously: Kuei Yang Wang
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Hi,

Quote:
Originally Posted by jitter View Post
Sonically, yes, the Octave sounds better than the DAC1.
This is where trouble starts.

Without having heard the Octave I'd still agree.

The real question is, how do we reconcile this?

The Non-OS Stuff I design does usually measure a little less extreme (in detail, not on THD+N) but it is still far from DAC1 levels or even the new Weiss.

Do we really "like distortion that much", or do the common measurements simply fail to correlate with "good sound"?

Ciao T
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th April 2012, 09:05 PM   #224
Telstar is offline Telstar  Italy
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Italy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telstar View Post
Fck iPhone I lost my message. Will try to rewrite later on computer
OK, so what I wrote is pay attention to the first two sinewaves, the second one 1khz at 96k sampling rate is very good. Now imagine the 20khz sinewave if the sampling rate was 352/384khz.
To basically eliminate the need for an aliasing filter, we need DXD resolution, native or oversampled... and a R2R DAC

A good paper:
http://www.digitalaudio.dk/media/dxd...ution_v3.5.pdf
__________________
"The total harmonic distortion is not a measure of the degree of distastefulness to the listener and it is recommended that its use should be discontinued." D. Masa, 1938
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th April 2012, 09:12 PM   #225
Telstar is offline Telstar  Italy
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Italy
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThorstenL View Post
Hi,
Do we really "like distortion that much", or do the common measurements simply fail to correlate with "good sound"?
I have >19khz hearing and my ears still prefer a filterless DAC.

I think the answer is this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jitter View Post
As I wrote before: the perfect low pass filter is already in us!
...But something that gets intermodulated from a NOS filterless DAC must still affect the signal in the audible band and creates the "lively" sound mostly associated with NOS dac probably. To move much higher in the frequency spectrum this spuriae is the better solution.

Also, the time distortion of sigma-delta dacs is NOT measured by conventional means.
__________________
"The total harmonic distortion is not a measure of the degree of distastefulness to the listener and it is recommended that its use should be discontinued." D. Masa, 1938
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th April 2012, 09:13 PM   #226
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
Quote:
Originally Posted by jitter View Post
Here they are, this time limited to the audio band:
Octave; 44.1 kHz; 19 kHz + 20 kHz sinewaves, 1:1;
Octave; 96 kHz; 19 kHz + 20 kHz sinewaves, 1:1;
DAC1; 44.1 kHz; 19 kHz + 20 kHz sinewaves, 1:1.
Thanks! The first two are what I was expecting from my tests, the DAC1 looks like you have only one frequency there...
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th April 2012, 09:16 PM   #227
jitter is offline jitter  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
jitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Please view the pictures in my previous post again. I discovered that, like Sonic remarked, not all of them were two sine waves. This has been corrected.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th April 2012, 09:18 PM   #228
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
The DAC1 is freakishly good. Seems that they are right about the 110kHz samplerate chosen for up-conversion. And their reason behind the chosen ASRC (AD1896) seems to be right. I won't touch an ASRC that is not DSP generated, but their implementation seems to work.
Hey, now that you like that much the Metrum, don't you wanna sell that garbage of DAC1? I can help you to take care of that poor old DAC

Last edited by SoNic_real_one; 7th April 2012 at 09:45 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th April 2012, 09:28 PM   #229
jitter is offline jitter  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
jitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Hahaha, who knows? Actually, I already have another purpose for it...
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th April 2012, 12:02 AM   #230
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 96
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThorstenL View Post
I also noticed a few things, but being in the industry and all I think I should avoid comments in public...
One thing that sticks out as a discrepancy is the difference between the freq response as plotted on the AP and as tabulated in the results. The AP response measurement is done at 48kHz - I'm inclined to ask 'why?' as hardly anyone uses that SR these days.

If you look closely at the AP plot - the red line gets thicker above 18kHz and doesn't follow the slope downwards. This almost looks as though it was touched up by hand. But it shows a mere 0.7dB droop at 20kHz which does not accord with either the theory or the tabulated measurements.

Secondly the THD in the table looks uncharacteristically poor, even for a NOS DAC. I wonder if the imaging products got into the measurement? Just estimating by eye from the FFT I'd guess some 10dB lower than what's presented (-60.5dB). The wideband FFT for -10dB stimulus actually shows a test tone around -4dB and harmonics all below -83dB so its surprising that tabulated figure is so poor (-62.3dB).
Attached Images
File Type: png octave_fr_48k.png (60.5 KB, 144 views)
File Type: png octave_fr_tab.png (26.4 KB, 146 views)
__________________
It doesn't have to take the form of a conspiracy, rather a consensus... James H Kunstler
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
dac chips kiwi88 Digital Line Level 2 5th August 2009 02:25 PM
dac chips for trade tubedude63 Swap Meet 1 25th May 2007 10:04 PM
Looking for 6 x TDA1545A DAC chips WALTER BURKHARD Swap Meet 2 5th April 2007 10:24 PM
F.S.: various Dac-chips Cobra2 Swap Meet 4 23rd November 2004 10:00 PM
Best DAC chips 5th element Digital Source 7 7th June 2004 04:08 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:24 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2