High end all digital dsp crossover ? - Page 3 - 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 1st October 2012, 10:58 AM   #21
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by qusp View Post
twest is just arguing over minutea because thats all hes got left to argue about
If you have a problem with me agreeing with you let's sort it out in PM. No need to clutter up the thread beyond this point.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2012, 11:08 AM   #22
qusp is offline qusp  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
qusp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
check my post, its already edited before I saw yours, because I realized how it read. you disagree we are arguing about minutiae? (sp) I thought thats what we do here mostly… the original post had an edge I didnt intend, my apologies

my problem is with arguing ideals, but without actually supplying any alternative. we have illustrated on a single page that the posters all want a different dac, how do you suppose there is a viable and top shelf niche product within a niche within a niche? and besides it doesnt exist and i'm not about to develop it; are you?

someone is much more likely to develop a board that can be used by many (or so you would think), even for DIY, once you integrate the dac onboard you limit your market. it certainly limits its appeal to me

Last edited by qusp; 1st October 2012 at 11:25 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2012, 11:41 AM   #23
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by qusp View Post
I thought thats what we do here mostly…
No, no, if you use an ESS pin you can fit nine angels on its head. Gives a sound reminiscent of noval tube sockets but with enhanced sparkle. I'd say the edited version of the post probably doesn't come across as intended either, but no matter; let's move on.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2012, 11:51 AM   #24
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: 100
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 qusp View Post
someone is much more likely to develop a board that can be used by many (or so you would think), even for DIY, once you integrate the dac onboard you limit your market. it certainly limits its appeal to me
I'm developing mine because its the product I'd like to buy myself if it were already available - the secondary aim is to make it easily available and as affordable as possible to others. I disagree that a device with on-board DACs limits the market - I'd contend that there are plenty of people out there who trust the designer's choice of DAC, probably more than those who want to faff around with choosing different DACs. Integrating the DAC I've chosen for several reasons - the main one being cost-effectiveness and a secondary one being the one Steve Jobs often favoured - so that others can't screw it up so easily.

Your requirements don't appear to me to be in the mainstream.
__________________
When you design something for other people you don't have as much motivation to make it beyond excellent - Woz
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2012, 12:22 PM   #25
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sweden
Ok, so it's possible but maybe not technically the best way to do it.
And there is no way that we can settle for Ess-dac's
"twest820" Thank's for the post, it was interresting. We have been guessing
about a multichannel cs-dac for "Chaparks" project but he still want to keep it
to himself (fair enough). Exiting that there are more dsp xo's coming as well.
Qusp want's an all digital because he already has the dac's (likes them to of course).
The rest would rather see at least the dac's as an onbord function, right ?
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2012, 12:31 PM   #26
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
An idea, spdif or lvds i2s from DSP system to each speaker. Then, as close as possible to the speaker have DAC+[reclocking if that's how you roll, synchronising L/R speakers, is an issue here]+IV+amps all intelligently integrated. For 2 way this would be feasible today I expect, for 3-way speakers it is becoming more cumbersome.

Well that is my utopia anyway.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2012, 12:41 PM   #27
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: 100
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
I agree it makes a lot of sense to integrate the DAC with the amp. How would volume control work in such a set-up? Digital volume controlled simply by the XO?
__________________
When you design something for other people you don't have as much motivation to make it beyond excellent - Woz
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2012, 01:07 PM   #28
qusp is offline qusp  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
qusp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxalito View Post
I'm developing mine because its the product I'd like to buy myself if it were already available - the secondary aim is to make it easily available and as affordable as possible to others. I disagree that a device with on-board DACs limits the market - I'd contend that there are plenty of people out there who trust the designer's choice of DAC, probably more than those who want to faff around with choosing different DACs. Integrating the DAC I've chosen for several reasons - the main one being cost-effectiveness and a secondary one being the one Steve Jobs often favoured - so that others can't screw it up so easily.

Your requirements don't appear to me to be in the mainstream.
no, I suspect your requirements are no different from mine, would you accept an ESS dac for example? no, no you wouldnt and have stated as much. mainstream? who said anything about mainstream? most people dont like to choose what goes in the food they eat either and look at the obesity rates.

i'm endorsing something that means nobody HAS to choose. for instance, if you make a reasonably priced and quality DSP unit like this, with built in dacs, a number of people will just hack up and bypass your dacs, still sound like good signal integrity?

what you WILL find however is a number of people who already have spent quite some time building high spec dacs that would prefer not to throw all that away in favor of using 'something cost effective that cant be screwed up easily' sounds real attractive, better get a marketing team; something Steve knew very well. seems like you cherry picked and morphed an idea of what he might say. cost effective was never really part of his MO

twest lol tubes, angels and magic? dont use them, bad aim with your generalization. I prefer things I build are modeled and tested on high end agilent and AP analyzers, do I have one that can reliably measure sub ps close in phase noise? no and i'm guessing you dont personally either and would need to rely on your models and the work of others for much of what you do too.

yes I prefer ESS, I just do, just as you just dont, but I dont expect others to fall in line with that

thats what you call moving on is it?

Last edited by qusp; 1st October 2012 at 01:17 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2012, 01:26 PM   #29
qusp is offline qusp  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
qusp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahlberg View Post
Ok, so it's possible but maybe not technically the best way to do it.
And there is no way that we can settle for Ess-dac's
"twest820" Thank's for the post, it was interresting. We have been guessing
about a multichannel cs-dac for "Chaparks" project but he still want to keep it
to himself (fair enough). Exiting that there are more dsp xo's coming as well.
Qusp want's an all digital because he already has the dac's (likes them to of course).
The rest would rather see at least the dac's as an onbord function, right ?
I already guessed what the dac was and said as much, wasnt difficult to figure out. his dacs can never work for me, a number of problems are dealbreakers for the analogue side, the largest being it only has single ended output.

OK i'll just leave you guys to talk about replicating existing products but with a different dac.... sounds exciting!
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2012, 01:28 PM   #30
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: 100
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 qusp View Post
no, I suspect your requirements are no different from mine,
The difference is I design to my requirements, you (to my limited knowledge, do correct me here if its mistaken) adopt other's designs for your ends.

Quote:
would you accept an ESS dac for example? no, no you wouldnt and have stated as much.
I don't follow - I don't design in ESS for a number of reasons - price being the main one, difficulty of implementing a high quality analog stage is another, relative secrecy surrounding the device a third.

Quote:
mainstream? who said anything about mainstream?
That was my interpretation of your words '...can be used by many...'.

Quote:
i'm endorsing something that means nobody HAS to choose. for instance, if you make a reasonably priced and quality DSP unit like this, with built in dacs, a number of people will just hack up and bypass your dacs, still sound like good signal integrity?
That would be fine by me, one very good reason for not selling people ESS DACs that they're then going to bypass is it not?

Quote:
what you WILL find however is a number of people who already have spent quite some time building high spec dacs that would prefer not to throw all that away in favor of using 'something cost effective that cant be screwed up easily'
Yep - they're not my intended market, too niche for me

<edit> Referring to your later amendment - who's Steve? Ah OK you meant Jobs, I'm a bit slow
__________________
When you design something for other people you don't have as much motivation to make it beyond excellent - Woz

Last edited by abraxalito; 1st October 2012 at 01:51 PM.
  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
DSP StudioX: active/digital crossover simulator with features... Under construction. s3tup PC Based 11 22nd November 2012 06:03 PM
High End digital 50W amplifier board sunlight009 Vendor's Bazaar 0 19th March 2012 03:12 AM
High quality DSP crossover setup on a budget? Thunau Multi-Way 2 2nd November 2007 10:55 AM
A high-end digital amplifier for everyone DAXgroup Digital Source 82 30th June 2007 03:16 PM
High end digital cable MichaelJHuman Everything Else 1 30th August 2005 02:41 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:31 AM.


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