Maciej,
Thank you for sharing your measurements. I like your results. Certainly gives credibility for a "budget and good sounding" solution.
Have you tried adding a large capacitor after the ADP-151? or increasing the three 10 uF near the chip?
According to the ESS sabre white paper, the difference between voltage mode and current mode is -108db vs 120 db THD...
Thank you for sharing your measurements. I like your results. Certainly gives credibility for a "budget and good sounding" solution.
Have you tried adding a large capacitor after the ADP-151? or increasing the three 10 uF near the chip?
According to the ESS sabre white paper, the difference between voltage mode and current mode is -108db vs 120 db THD...
Last edited:
if 0.01% is OK with you, just use an old ipod.
measurements were with an AP2, but not this dac board, not this IV and of course they were using the AP2 as a signal source...
better yet, just use the EMU...
characterizing an es9018 dac with the EMU0202 ADC
still much better than 0.01% though
measurements were with an AP2, but not this dac board, not this IV and of course they were using the AP2 as a signal source...
better yet, just use the EMU...
characterizing an es9018 dac with the EMU0202 ADC
I would hope any ESS implementation would make the EMU the limiting factor, if not youve done something very very wrong.
still much better than 0.01% though
Last edited:
yes, people using voltage mode quote this all the time, but they do not give a 'voltage mode' circuit in the datasheet, just connecting directly through a cap will not give this performance. then of course we have the issue that the power supply and IV are not suitable for getting -120db THD+N either
the main point was that the ADC being used doesnt have the performance needed to get proper and ideal 'voltage mode' measures, let alone judge a comparison with a proper IV, as the difference would be lost in the noise, both leveled to the performance of the ADC
the main point was that the ADC being used doesnt have the performance needed to get proper and ideal 'voltage mode' measures, let alone judge a comparison with a proper IV, as the difference would be lost in the noise, both leveled to the performance of the ADC
Last edited:
yes, because without some sort of buffer and a very short connection the performance will vary depending on the load the dac sees. the DNR will probably stay roughly the same unless you do something silly, but the THD will vary quite a bit, as will the frequency response. it will depend on the load impedance, capacitance and inductance. it will also vary depending on the voltage compliance/drive capability of the output, offhand I cant remember what that is for the ESS
Last edited:
Yes, I've tried this, and it caused an increase of distortion (again measured with my not pro equipment). Now I have 3.3V VD and VA bypassed with 3300uF low-esr each. I also tried non-low-esr caps, but the results were worse.
I'm sorry: µV, not nV - my mistake.
I still use my old compact cassette player
According to you, I am unable to make any adequate measurements of the diyinhk ES9018 board because I do not posess or have access to pro analysers. I think it applies to most of the diyers. Does that mean I should simply copy solutions of others (mostly untested), populate the board with parts as described in schematics and believe, that it will work well? So diy implementations of ES9018 are pointless, because it's parameters are beyond any amateur home-lab measuring equipment?
I would really love to see someone's diyinhk board tuning process with measurements done by proper pro-tools. I am waiting.
yep, 20nV vs 20µV RMS noise power is ~30dB difference, not insignificant and a further ~10dB for the LM317
For sure i'm still learning, but this is pretty basic good practice, the measurement device needs to be able to capture the measurement if you hope to gain useful data... you disagree?
This is not some opinion i'm trying to convince you of, its simply scientific method. feel free to make measurements while ignoring the scientific method, but why bother?
if you are trying to differentiate between 2 levels of output performance, the sampling device needs to have enough bandwidth to be able to at the very least measure a little bit better than the expected lower performing device/arrangement. If you do not have this minimum bandwidth, you will just be bouncing against the performance of the ADC and its analogue input stage, rather than giving any useful information to separate the 2 DUT.
you said you needed to adjust the levels for the ESS direct output vs IV because the IV was too hot and clipping I guess, did you do this with any method? how much attenuation and what with? the EMU digital attenuator? this will directly lower DNR and THD performance. how and by how much will depend.
i'm afraid its a fact of life, if you are going to measure the ESS dac at its best (as well as the effect of different low noise supplies), thats pretty ambitious IMO, its arguably the highest performance audio dac on the planet. while its performing correctly (even performing sub-optimally it outstrips the EMU by a fair margin), then you do need some pretty serious kit, you just do, thats no comment on you personally, nothing elitist about it, just a fact of life. ESS's own ADC, the ES9102 does not really have good enough performance, or is at least very borderline without long FFT
the ESS dac performing well makes it difficult for even some top grade measurement gear. the EMU is going to do fine for some measures, like some (but not all) power amps, definitely speakers etc, but its ADC is hardly top notch and neither is its preamp stage, it was designed to a budget and not with measuring top flight line level input in mind.
whatever you say vuki, if you can measure a difference with the EMU, basically if youve got either measure poking above the noise floor, youve got some serious issues. i've been working with the ES9018 and 9012 for ~3 years now, have built 5 of them (3 I still own) and have built numerous IV stages for them, myriad power supply configurations and gone through significant objective and subjective characterization. this is along with using direct out and transformers for a while too.Thanks for the measurements Maciej! Your measurements are much more useful then someone else's armchair engineering.
For sure i'm still learning, but this is pretty basic good practice, the measurement device needs to be able to capture the measurement if you hope to gain useful data... you disagree?
I still use old audio gear and a crappy radio in the car too, but I wouldnt bother upgrading to an ESS dac if 0.01% was good enough, particularly if I already had an EMU.I still use my old compact cassette player
According to you, I am unable to make any adequate measurements of the diyinhk ES9018 board because I do not posess or have access to pro analysers. I think it applies to most of the diyers. Does that mean I should simply copy solutions of others (mostly untested), populate the board with parts as described in schematics and believe, that it will work well? So diy implementations of ES9018 are pointless, because it's parameters are beyond any amateur home-lab measuring equipment?
I would really love to see someone's diyinhk board tuning process with measurements done by proper pro-tools. I am waiting.
This is not some opinion i'm trying to convince you of, its simply scientific method. feel free to make measurements while ignoring the scientific method, but why bother?
if you are trying to differentiate between 2 levels of output performance, the sampling device needs to have enough bandwidth to be able to at the very least measure a little bit better than the expected lower performing device/arrangement. If you do not have this minimum bandwidth, you will just be bouncing against the performance of the ADC and its analogue input stage, rather than giving any useful information to separate the 2 DUT.
you said you needed to adjust the levels for the ESS direct output vs IV because the IV was too hot and clipping I guess, did you do this with any method? how much attenuation and what with? the EMU digital attenuator? this will directly lower DNR and THD performance. how and by how much will depend.
i'm afraid its a fact of life, if you are going to measure the ESS dac at its best (as well as the effect of different low noise supplies), thats pretty ambitious IMO, its arguably the highest performance audio dac on the planet. while its performing correctly (even performing sub-optimally it outstrips the EMU by a fair margin), then you do need some pretty serious kit, you just do, thats no comment on you personally, nothing elitist about it, just a fact of life. ESS's own ADC, the ES9102 does not really have good enough performance, or is at least very borderline without long FFT
the ESS dac performing well makes it difficult for even some top grade measurement gear. the EMU is going to do fine for some measures, like some (but not all) power amps, definitely speakers etc, but its ADC is hardly top notch and neither is its preamp stage, it was designed to a budget and not with measuring top flight line level input in mind.
Last edited:
I hope the above doesnt come off as a rant, its not a rant, people are trying to make useful measurements (I hope) I tried to give useful information. I think its great that some measurements are being undertaken here and I do applaud the effort. I wish there was the 'spoiler' function like they have at head-fi so it could be hidden unless you wanted to read it and clicked on it.
A goat with lipstick is still a goat
If you were trying to give good information, I couldn't see any...
Appreciate all those who are sharing measuring results and building tips. It is obvious that even low-end measurement equipment cannot randomly produce results. If you measure something and there is no change, then it can be argued that the measurement equipment does not have the resolution, but if there is a difference, it is unlikely a random event. All you have to do is measure it again. I got to buy one of those cards and measure things myself too...
If you were trying to give good information, I couldn't see any...
Appreciate all those who are sharing measuring results and building tips. It is obvious that even low-end measurement equipment cannot randomly produce results. If you measure something and there is no change, then it can be argued that the measurement equipment does not have the resolution, but if there is a difference, it is unlikely a random event. All you have to do is measure it again. I got to buy one of those cards and measure things myself too...
Last edited:
I was expecting something that is not so obvious and elemental, especially from you
Besides, I use quantum entanglement cables and the power amps are ideal.
A goat with lipstick is still a goat
If you were trying to give good information, I couldn't see any...
then you are a bit slow arent you? your measurement gear cannot show/descriminate what you are trying to measure and is rather showing the measurement noise floor and setup error.. is not useful? neither of the 2 regulators being compared are suitable for AVCC... is not useful? the reason there are only some spikes difference is because they are the only things poking through the noise floor...is not useful?
sorry you really need to get a grip on reality.
my mistake, I assume when people are posting measurements and have taken the time to take those measurements, that they are attempting to gain something useful from those measurements.
its not happy news, but not everything is joy in diagnostics
Last edited:
OK, Back to our regularly scheduled program.
I got the OPA 134's into the DAC. Much better and I mean much better. No more bleeding ears. It will be interesting to see how they settle in. Used for IV and buffer.
I am getting weird lock and mute problems. Sometimes the auto mute LED does not go on when I stop the CD player. Once it starts doing this it will not work right without a power restart. It seems to be affected by my shop lights. I am not sure about this, but it seems that it works better when the lights are on. Any idea what that is?
I got the OPA 134's into the DAC. Much better and I mean much better. No more bleeding ears. It will be interesting to see how they settle in. Used for IV and buffer.
I am getting weird lock and mute problems. Sometimes the auto mute LED does not go on when I stop the CD player. Once it starts doing this it will not work right without a power restart. It seems to be affected by my shop lights. I am not sure about this, but it seems that it works better when the lights are on. Any idea what that is?
I took the DAC over to a friends house. We were both surprised by how good it sounded. Pretty impressive for $200 total.
My friend has no fluorescent or LED lights in his house. The DAC ran perfect the whole three hours we had it running. At my house with a lot of fluorescent and LED lights, the DAC will start to act up. Automute not working etc. I have all my audio stuff plugged into dedicated circuits, still there must be a lot of junk on the line. Now how to clean it up. Do I do it by component or some whole system approach. Time to start researching power conditioning.
My friend has no fluorescent or LED lights in his house. The DAC ran perfect the whole three hours we had it running. At my house with a lot of fluorescent and LED lights, the DAC will start to act up. Automute not working etc. I have all my audio stuff plugged into dedicated circuits, still there must be a lot of junk on the line. Now how to clean it up. Do I do it by component or some whole system approach. Time to start researching power conditioning.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.