Thanks for your initial impressions, I am sure the sound will change when you "burn-in" the DAC for the better. Enjoy.
Just a rough comparison, the DAC costs approx. $160 (without Case and Transformer) compared to $690(without USB) from Yulong and $1100 from Matrix, Both are Chinese made. If you have the money buy the commercial DAC otherwise the deal is good one.
thats the most important isnt it? yes so it shows good qualities in sound but i need to do more listening. I havent noticed a change in the noise so far if bitrates change. For the moment i am limited to 24/96 from the spdif/out of my tascam. In general though i prefer 24/96 to 24/192 as i cant really hear substantial difference and they take more space in my drives
I will do some listening over the weekend and check if i can get to work the usb/i2s to from the xmos board
Hi
I have this dac and i have been listening to it for a couple of weeks now. I have only listen to it with a pair of sennheiser HD540 reference gold through a lovely cube. I use the CM6631 USB interface from the same supplier. The PCB and soldering quality is decent, but i do nut trust the authenticity of the components. There was an option to upgrade to better caps, but i want to select them myself. I ordered it with opa627, six of them for 25usd. These are obviously fakes. Real 627 simply cost more and the markings do not look correct. The design of the output stage seems to be the same design as in http://www.esstech.com/PDF/Application_Note_Component_Selection_and_PCB_Layout.pdf, figure 2.
I purchased this DAC with the idea that i would experiment and modify it to see if i can get desent sound for a small ammount of money and have some fun at the same time. Maybe i could share some of my findings on the way in this thread.
I am currently putting together a system on a tight budget where all components are new to me and of unknown quality, so it is very hard for me to comment the sound quality of the DAC. I can only comment my impression of the complete system.
These are my findings regarding the complete system:
I can hear absolutely no noise other than what was recorded. I have not experienced any dropout using the USB interface.
The sound is pretty thin with weak bass but i have a strong suspicion that that is the HD540 signature sound (i would appreciate comments on the HD540). There is a distinct lack of presence, the music sounds distant somehow. I have a strong suspicion once again that it is the HD540 i am hearing. The imaging strikes me as narrow but precise. There is a rather high amount of details but some times in then the music complicated and busy it get mixed up an i can hear (very)slight distortion. I must note that i have listened mostly to 60:s to 90:s jazz from spotify, so you could question the quality of the recording and streaming. I will hook up the amp to the output of my laptop to see if i can hear the same thing. My guess is that the amount of details make me hear flaws that i can not hear in a low resolution source.
My plan for the dac at the moment is:
1. Replace caps around the analogue output with high quality ones(probably silmic II and wima mkp10).
2. Review the analogue signal path and look for improvements.
2. Replace the fake opa627:s with genuine op amps(maybe ad797).
3. move the PCB mounted leds to the front of the chassi.
3. Replace the cheap PCB mounted RCA connectors to chassi mounted quality ones.
4. Connect the balanced output to chassi mounted XLR:s
5. Review the analogue power supply and look for improvements.
Before i do anything of this i should probably test the HD540 and the 'lovely cube' with a known good source source to figure out how they sound. The i am able to isolate the sound quality of the dac i will write a review.
Maybe i sound a little bit critical and right now i am looking for things to improve. Overall this 300 usd system sounds absolutely fantastic for the money and i believe small corrections can take it to the next level.
I have this dac and i have been listening to it for a couple of weeks now. I have only listen to it with a pair of sennheiser HD540 reference gold through a lovely cube. I use the CM6631 USB interface from the same supplier. The PCB and soldering quality is decent, but i do nut trust the authenticity of the components. There was an option to upgrade to better caps, but i want to select them myself. I ordered it with opa627, six of them for 25usd. These are obviously fakes. Real 627 simply cost more and the markings do not look correct. The design of the output stage seems to be the same design as in http://www.esstech.com/PDF/Application_Note_Component_Selection_and_PCB_Layout.pdf, figure 2.
I purchased this DAC with the idea that i would experiment and modify it to see if i can get desent sound for a small ammount of money and have some fun at the same time. Maybe i could share some of my findings on the way in this thread.
I am currently putting together a system on a tight budget where all components are new to me and of unknown quality, so it is very hard for me to comment the sound quality of the DAC. I can only comment my impression of the complete system.
These are my findings regarding the complete system:
I can hear absolutely no noise other than what was recorded. I have not experienced any dropout using the USB interface.
The sound is pretty thin with weak bass but i have a strong suspicion that that is the HD540 signature sound (i would appreciate comments on the HD540). There is a distinct lack of presence, the music sounds distant somehow. I have a strong suspicion once again that it is the HD540 i am hearing. The imaging strikes me as narrow but precise. There is a rather high amount of details but some times in then the music complicated and busy it get mixed up an i can hear (very)slight distortion. I must note that i have listened mostly to 60:s to 90:s jazz from spotify, so you could question the quality of the recording and streaming. I will hook up the amp to the output of my laptop to see if i can hear the same thing. My guess is that the amount of details make me hear flaws that i can not hear in a low resolution source.
My plan for the dac at the moment is:
1. Replace caps around the analogue output with high quality ones(probably silmic II and wima mkp10).
2. Review the analogue signal path and look for improvements.
2. Replace the fake opa627:s with genuine op amps(maybe ad797).
3. move the PCB mounted leds to the front of the chassi.
3. Replace the cheap PCB mounted RCA connectors to chassi mounted quality ones.
4. Connect the balanced output to chassi mounted XLR:s
5. Review the analogue power supply and look for improvements.
Before i do anything of this i should probably test the HD540 and the 'lovely cube' with a known good source source to figure out how they sound. The i am able to isolate the sound quality of the dac i will write a review.
Maybe i sound a little bit critical and right now i am looking for things to improve. Overall this 300 usd system sounds absolutely fantastic for the money and i believe small corrections can take it to the next level.
it isnt the same as the ESS app note, the ESS app note fig 2 is an instrumentation amp, which calls for 3 single opamps, or a differential opamp and a single opamp. a really cheaped out version my try and cheat and use a dual opamp, then a single opamp, but going by comments it doesnt seem like that either; unless the first stage is dual singles on a dual adapter, sharing pins? why you would bother doing that I dont know.
what makes you blame the senns when you are pretty sure you have fake opamps and fake parts?
so my suspicions were correct about authenticity, if the upgrade options are fake, good chance all the other name brand parts are fake, except the dac you would hope
first port of call is proper decoupling caps, get some high quality ceramics and just solder them directly across the pins on the opamp adapters, they are too far away to be useful otherwise. interesting to see how cheap the dac is when youve finished ...
what makes you blame the senns when you are pretty sure you have fake opamps and fake parts?
so my suspicions were correct about authenticity, if the upgrade options are fake, good chance all the other name brand parts are fake, except the dac you would hope
first port of call is proper decoupling caps, get some high quality ceramics and just solder them directly across the pins on the opamp adapters, they are too far away to be useful otherwise. interesting to see how cheap the dac is when youve finished ...
Hi
I have this dac and i have been listening to it for a couple of weeks now. I have only listen to it with a pair of sennheiser HD540 reference gold through a lovely cube. I use the CM6631 USB interface from the same supplier. The PCB and soldering quality is decent, but i do nut trust the authenticity of the components. There was an option to upgrade to better caps, but i want to select them myself. I ordered it with opa627, six of them for 25usd. These are obviously fakes. Real 627 simply cost more and the markings do not look correct. The design of the output stage seems to be the same design as in http://www.esstech.com/PDF/Application_Note_Component_Selection_and_PCB_Layout.pdf, figure 2.
I purchased this DAC with the idea that i would experiment and modify it to see if i can get desent sound for a small ammount of money and have some fun at the same time. Maybe i could share some of my findings on the way in this thread.
I am currently putting together a system on a tight budget where all components are new to me and of unknown quality, so it is very hard for me to comment the sound quality of the DAC. I can only comment my impression of the complete system.
These are my findings regarding the complete system:
I can hear absolutely no noise other than what was recorded. I have not experienced any dropout using the USB interface.
The sound is pretty thin with weak bass but i have a strong suspicion that that is the HD540 signature sound (i would appreciate comments on the HD540). There is a distinct lack of presence, the music sounds distant somehow. I have a strong suspicion once again that it is the HD540 i am hearing. The imaging strikes me as narrow but precise. There is a rather high amount of details but some times in then the music complicated and busy it get mixed up an i can hear (very)slight distortion. I must note that i have listened mostly to 60:s to 90:s jazz from spotify, so you could question the quality of the recording and streaming. I will hook up the amp to the output of my laptop to see if i can hear the same thing. My guess is that the amount of details make me hear flaws that i can not hear in a low resolution source.
My plan for the dac at the moment is:
1. Replace caps around the analogue output with high quality ones(probably silmic II and wima mkp10).
2. Review the analogue signal path and look for improvements.
2. Replace the fake opa627:s with genuine op amps(maybe ad797).
3. move the PCB mounted leds to the front of the chassi.
3. Replace the cheap PCB mounted RCA connectors to chassi mounted quality ones.
4. Connect the balanced output to chassi mounted XLR:s
5. Review the analogue power supply and look for improvements.
Before i do anything of this i should probably test the HD540 and the 'lovely cube' with a known good source source to figure out how they sound. The i am able to isolate the sound quality of the dac i will write a review.
Maybe i sound a little bit critical and right now i am looking for things to improve. Overall this 300 usd system sounds absolutely fantastic for the money and i believe small corrections can take it to the next level.
Looking forward to your next installment of your impression.
My suspicion is that this DAC is very good value for it can provide, DSD, 24bit(32bit?)/192kHZ, etc. If you compare it against the commercial design like Matrix Sabre(costing about $1100), it will sound less impressive, by how much I don't know. Will you want to pay to the extra is up to each individual?
DIY this DAC is half the fun, and save some money and use the extra money to upgrade the existing DAC, please keep us informed of any upgrades.
The first stage is a dual op amp, the second stage is a single. I believe it is the schematics from the app note.
I don´t blame the senns yet, but i suspect them because the sound like that then connected to other sources as well. When connected to the output of my laptop they sound a little bit warmer with stronger bass, but on the other hand that output is overly warm with a excess of bass. So i need the senns with a proven neutral source before i pass judgement of the dac.
I actually soldered an adaptor cable so i could connect the line out of my Topping D1 mkii (The Topping D1 Mark II | Headfonia) to the lovely cube and the 9018 dac sound so much better in every way. As it should. It confirmed my suspicion of the senns, with this dac it sounded a little punchier and warmer. But still the the same distant feeling. The topping has an overly enthusiastic but well controlled bass. With my porta pros it is simply way too much.
Regarding authenticity of the parts you should as a rule not trust anything on ebay. Maybe the upgrade parts were genuine because the prise was more or less the same as mouser, but on the other hand i could get them my self. Those suspicious under priced opa627 are also delivered with the lovely amp and the users seems pretty satisfied with them. The trouble is that i do not have any known genuines to compare with.
Maybe i should clarify that my first impression of the SQ of the dac is good. I do not think i can do much better for 150 usd. Right now i am looking for weaknesses because i Want to modify it, rather than need to modify it. I even thinking of making my own discrete output stage like the pass d1 or zen variants just for fun. I do not even know if it is possible, but i will do some research.
I don´t blame the senns yet, but i suspect them because the sound like that then connected to other sources as well. When connected to the output of my laptop they sound a little bit warmer with stronger bass, but on the other hand that output is overly warm with a excess of bass. So i need the senns with a proven neutral source before i pass judgement of the dac.
I actually soldered an adaptor cable so i could connect the line out of my Topping D1 mkii (The Topping D1 Mark II | Headfonia) to the lovely cube and the 9018 dac sound so much better in every way. As it should. It confirmed my suspicion of the senns, with this dac it sounded a little punchier and warmer. But still the the same distant feeling. The topping has an overly enthusiastic but well controlled bass. With my porta pros it is simply way too much.
Regarding authenticity of the parts you should as a rule not trust anything on ebay. Maybe the upgrade parts were genuine because the prise was more or less the same as mouser, but on the other hand i could get them my self. Those suspicious under priced opa627 are also delivered with the lovely amp and the users seems pretty satisfied with them. The trouble is that i do not have any known genuines to compare with.
Maybe i should clarify that my first impression of the SQ of the dac is good. I do not think i can do much better for 150 usd. Right now i am looking for weaknesses because i Want to modify it, rather than need to modify it. I even thinking of making my own discrete output stage like the pass d1 or zen variants just for fun. I do not even know if it is possible, but i will do some research.
Thanks for the link, quite interesting, not at all my findings... I really must sample some other headphones to see what other has to offer. We have a really good hifi store in my town, maybe i can bring my lovely cube an HD540 and compare then with other headphones with the cube. I am commuting daily so i listen several hours per day on my galaxy note II-Topping D1 mkii-porta pro combo. Maybe all that bass and forward presentation has ruined my ears.
Now back to discussing the dac.
Now back to discussing the dac.
quick question ervstil. With what oscillator did yours came with?Mine has this fox one
http://www.foxonline.com/pdfs/f1100h_46.pdf
http://www.foxonline.com/pdfs/f1100h_46.pdf
Hi!
I do not know what oscillator i have on my board. When i get the time i am going to take some detailed pictures of both side of the board so you can get a better view of the layout and components. I was sent a TXCO as compensation for delivery screwup and a dent in the board, so maybe i will replace the original one. The trouble is that the TXCO is missing manufacturer markings, it simply says TXCO. Once again i´m not at all sure sure about the authentically and quality or the part.
Btw i solved my headphone mystery i had a faulty cable that i have now fixed and the headphones has really changed to the better. I think i am starting to hear the dac and a short review of the dac´s SQ would be good but not stellar. I think that big improvements could be done in the output stages. Hopefully the digital side is good enough because my skills and experience does not cover that part. I have serious doubts about the PS of the dac..
I do not know what oscillator i have on my board. When i get the time i am going to take some detailed pictures of both side of the board so you can get a better view of the layout and components. I was sent a TXCO as compensation for delivery screwup and a dent in the board, so maybe i will replace the original one. The trouble is that the TXCO is missing manufacturer markings, it simply says TXCO. Once again i´m not at all sure sure about the authentically and quality or the part.
Btw i solved my headphone mystery i had a faulty cable that i have now fixed and the headphones has really changed to the better. I think i am starting to hear the dac and a short review of the dac´s SQ would be good but not stellar. I think that big improvements could be done in the output stages. Hopefully the digital side is good enough because my skills and experience does not cover that part. I have serious doubts about the PS of the dac..
Hi
I have this dac and i have been listening to it for a couple of weeks now. I have only listen to it with a pair of sennheiser HD540 reference gold through a lovely cube. I use the CM6631 USB interface from the same supplier. The PCB and soldering quality is decent, but i do nut trust the authenticity of the components. There was an option to upgrade to better caps, but i want to select them myself. I ordered it with opa627, six of them for 25usd. These are obviously fakes. Real 627 simply cost more and the markings do not look correct. The design of the output stage seems to be the same design as in http://www.esstech.com/PDF/Application_Note_Component_Selection_and_PCB_Layout.pdf, figure 2.
I purchased this DAC with the idea that i would experiment and modify it to see if i can get desent sound for a small ammount of money and have some fun at the same time. Maybe i could share some of my findings on the way in this thread.
I am currently putting together a system on a tight budget where all components are new to me and of unknown quality, so it is very hard for me to comment the sound quality of the DAC. I can only comment my impression of the complete system.
These are my findings regarding the complete system:
I can hear absolutely no noise other than what was recorded. I have not experienced any dropout using the USB interface.
The sound is pretty thin with weak bass but i have a strong suspicion that that is the HD540 signature sound (i would appreciate comments on the HD540). There is a distinct lack of presence, the music sounds distant somehow. I have a strong suspicion once again that it is the HD540 i am hearing. The imaging strikes me as narrow but precise. There is a rather high amount of details but some times in then the music complicated and busy it get mixed up an i can hear (very)slight distortion. I must note that i have listened mostly to 60:s to 90:s jazz from spotify, so you could question the quality of the recording and streaming. I will hook up the amp to the output of my laptop to see if i can hear the same thing. My guess is that the amount of details make me hear flaws that i can not hear in a low resolution source.
My plan for the dac at the moment is:
1. Replace caps around the analogue output with high quality ones(probably silmic II and wima mkp10).
2. Review the analogue signal path and look for improvements.
2. Replace the fake opa627:s with genuine op amps(maybe ad797).
3. move the PCB mounted leds to the front of the chassi.
3. Replace the cheap PCB mounted RCA connectors to chassi mounted quality ones.
4. Connect the balanced output to chassi mounted XLR:s
5. Review the analogue power supply and look for improvements.
Before i do anything of this i should probably test the HD540 and the 'lovely cube' with a known good source source to figure out how they sound. The i am able to isolate the sound quality of the dac i will write a review.
Maybe i sound a little bit critical and right now i am looking for things to improve. Overall this 300 usd system sounds absolutely fantastic for the money and i believe small corrections can take it to the next level.
Looks like your version ES9018 is a good one e.g. no noise, can you tell us where you got your version from.
@ ttan98
I clarified in my description that the noise in my case is something generic to all dacs i owned and is down to my setup. I am sure that this dac wont be a great performer on noise levels but you get what you pay for. The sound quality though is good, i like it more everyday.
@ervstil
Thanks for the info. Yes the power supply is not great but i suspect its not bad either. I am currently tracking down the components and trying to understand the dac supplies. The kubota style regs for the opamps seems adequately implemented. Let me know if you manage to get a schematic. I havent been able to get it so far.
I clarified in my description that the noise in my case is something generic to all dacs i owned and is down to my setup. I am sure that this dac wont be a great performer on noise levels but you get what you pay for. The sound quality though is good, i like it more everyday.
@ervstil
Thanks for the info. Yes the power supply is not great but i suspect its not bad either. I am currently tracking down the components and trying to understand the dac supplies. The kubota style regs for the opamps seems adequately implemented. Let me know if you manage to get a schematic. I havent been able to get it so far.
@ ttan98
I got mine at Assembled Board ES9018 32bit 192kHz Hi End DAC Optical Coax and Balanced Output | eBay
@ tsip
I asked the supplier for the schematic but he said the designer, Weilang, do not want share it. I now that Weilang shared the schematics for other dacs as long as the weren't shared in any way. Weilang is a member of diyaudio so i will try to PM him and ask. If he wishes that it wont be shared i will respect that, may be we can all ask him individually.
By the way i noticed a 'hump' in the PCB next to the dac, strange that i didn't noticed that before. It is under the lacquer och the dac and has definitively been there since manufacturing. It is about 1 mm thick and runs over several vias. What could it be? It almost look like it is purposely placed therebecausef I can also see it on the close up picture if the DAC from the link i attached. Defect or feature?
BR Christian
I got mine at Assembled Board ES9018 32bit 192kHz Hi End DAC Optical Coax and Balanced Output | eBay
@ tsip
I asked the supplier for the schematic but he said the designer, Weilang, do not want share it. I now that Weilang shared the schematics for other dacs as long as the weren't shared in any way. Weilang is a member of diyaudio so i will try to PM him and ask. If he wishes that it wont be shared i will respect that, may be we can all ask him individually.
By the way i noticed a 'hump' in the PCB next to the dac, strange that i didn't noticed that before. It is under the lacquer och the dac and has definitively been there since manufacturing. It is about 1 mm thick and runs over several vias. What could it be? It almost look like it is purposely placed therebecausef I can also see it on the close up picture if the DAC from the link i attached. Defect or feature?
BR Christian
those of you who have this dac from weilang can confirm (looking at the traces) that the dac is working ONLY on spdif signal even from the USB card?
I mean , looking at the ES9018 datasheet and comparing with the board, you could very easily observ that I2S input pins are not connected to anything in the current chinese implementation
the AK4399 board which is selling on ebay and it is also designed by weilang it is working in I2S mode from the CM6631 USB card, I got a copy of the schematic and I can easily observ it there - but this ES9018 implementation I heard it is using SPDIF signal from the CM6631 board, so that's why I said that it's a lowsy design , not taking full advantage of the DAC chip's potential
I mean , looking at the ES9018 datasheet and comparing with the board, you could very easily observ that I2S input pins are not connected to anything in the current chinese implementation
the AK4399 board which is selling on ebay and it is also designed by weilang it is working in I2S mode from the CM6631 USB card, I got a copy of the schematic and I can easily observ it there - but this ES9018 implementation I heard it is using SPDIF signal from the CM6631 board, so that's why I said that it's a lowsy design , not taking full advantage of the DAC chip's potential
Last edited:
Hi!
I think you are correct about all the inputs using the SPDIF. I have not verified it and i´m not about to disassemble the dac, i´m to busy listening to it. The are two types of usb modules for Weilangs dacs.
New CM6631 USB Module Assembled Board for DAC3 AD1955 DAC7 WM8741 by Weiliang | eBay
and
New CM6631A USB Module Assembled Board for DAC5 WM8741 DAC9 AK4399 by Weiliang | eBay
The first one is used for this dac. The obvious difference is the number if pins and that maybe reflecting SPDIF vs I2S output.
IS SPDIF automaticall a bad thing? I heard (don´t know where, so unconfirmed) that the ES9018 SPDIF implementation is a very good one. If you look at the SUBBU DAC v3 that uses the es9023 dac, the designers recommend using the SPDIF as designed instead of using a I2S mod. It makes for a simpler (cheaper) design and i am not sure that there are any significant drawbacks. There are a lot of hi end combos that uses external USB to SPDIF without users complaining. If using I2S would give significant gains with perhaps the Amareno USB to I2S converter it might be a worthwhile mod.
So I can not tell if the SPDIF only implementation is crappy or clever design. I suspect that looking over AVCC, DVCC, caps in general and specifically decoupling of the opamps will give more potential improvements.
Best Regards Christian
I think you are correct about all the inputs using the SPDIF. I have not verified it and i´m not about to disassemble the dac, i´m to busy listening to it
. The are two types of usb modules for Weilangs dacs.New CM6631 USB Module Assembled Board for DAC3 AD1955 DAC7 WM8741 by Weiliang | eBay
and
New CM6631A USB Module Assembled Board for DAC5 WM8741 DAC9 AK4399 by Weiliang | eBay
The first one is used for this dac. The obvious difference is the number if pins and that maybe reflecting SPDIF vs I2S output.
IS SPDIF automaticall a bad thing? I heard (don´t know where, so unconfirmed) that the ES9018 SPDIF implementation is a very good one. If you look at the SUBBU DAC v3 that uses the es9023 dac, the designers recommend using the SPDIF as designed instead of using a I2S mod. It makes for a simpler (cheaper) design and i am not sure that there are any significant drawbacks. There are a lot of hi end combos that uses external USB to SPDIF without users complaining. If using I2S would give significant gains with perhaps the Amareno USB to I2S converter it might be a worthwhile mod.
So I can not tell if the SPDIF only implementation is crappy or clever design. I suspect that looking over AVCC, DVCC, caps in general and specifically decoupling of the opamps will give more potential improvements.
Best Regards Christian
Hi!
I just want to add something. I´m simply not qualified to make definite statements regarding the design of any dac. I´m sure that there are others that are qualified, but i´m not one of them. I must judge this dac´s design from the SQ it produces. My trouble right now is that the rest of my equipment is probably the weakest part of the chain. I would need a decent CD transport, decent amp (I probably have that, but i need a decent source to verify that), and a decent pair of headphones or speakers to really isolate and analyze the SQ of the DAC. I can only tell that after fixing my headphones it sounds quite good! Is there any one else that have this DAC in a good system that can give us some kind of baseline for the performance of this DAC?
BR // Christian
I just want to add something. I´m simply not qualified to make definite statements regarding the design of any dac. I´m sure that there are others that are qualified, but i´m not one of them. I must judge this dac´s design from the SQ it produces. My trouble right now is that the rest of my equipment is probably the weakest part of the chain. I would need a decent CD transport, decent amp (I probably have that, but i need a decent source to verify that
), and a decent pair of headphones or speakers to really isolate and analyze the SQ of the DAC. I can only tell that after fixing my headphones it sounds quite good! Is there any one else that have this DAC in a good system that can give us some kind of baseline for the performance of this DAC?BR // Christian
one of the taobao sellers in his ad gives a clue on the spdif/usb connections and that pin 5 and 7 should be shorted when the usb module is not used. I dont think thats i2s and getting the usb module whould be probably not a very good investment.
In the dac chip d3-d5 seems shorted and i cant see whether DATA_CLK is connected to anything. Anyway over the weekend if i get the time i will try to connect the xmos board directly to the dac pins to get i2s. SPDIF sounds nice though and the implementation is not that bad.
In the dac chip d3-d5 seems shorted and i cant see whether DATA_CLK is connected to anything. Anyway over the weekend if i get the time i will try to connect the xmos board directly to the dac pins to get i2s. SPDIF sounds nice though and the implementation is not that bad.
Attachments
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.