DAC-END R (ES9018) - Page 9 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Source

Digital Source Digital Players and Recorders: CD , SACD , Tape, Memory Card, 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 17th November 2012, 02:41 AM   #81
qusp is offline qusp  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
qusp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by zzzmonster View Post
SNR is not the main thing right, with dual or quad mono, many have claimed it sounds more analog - with a single 9018, it sounds very clear and detailed, but dry and uninvolving. I do not believe that the more analog sound simply comes from better implementation alone - cos almost all single 9018 sounds uninvolving
ES9018 in stereo or mono, is completely unchanged, nothing at all changes in the dac or analogue stages unless you want to adjust for lower voltage, or if your IV stage uses parts that cannot cope with the increased current.

all is identical except for the signal is all left or all right, its even sent the same signal in most dual mono dacs, the registers are simply set to identify as device 0 or device 1, depending on which one the dac will decode the left or right channel portion based on which Mono setting is used, there are 3. if there is more than 2 chips you need some sort of MCU and often a DSP, the Accuphase uses a completely custom digital filter and DSP on FPGA to run with the DSD signals interleaved and increase resolution I gather

It sounds like its not your experience, rather other peoples anecdotal reports or advertising.


myself i've been using it for ~3 years and have built myriad IV stages (have used transformers, passive Zfoil IV, NTD1 (highish voltage common gate mosfet), SEN and CEN jfet, several opamp based multiloop IVs) have 4 different USB-i2s convertors, the i2s fifo, 2 master clocks run synchronously and asynchronously and currently own 5 ess dacs... 2 buffalo II, 2 Ackodac AKD12P, and the 32S as well as a few built for others

it is much more sensitive to jitter than once thought, it is particularly sensitive to the quality of AVCC and DVCC supplies, i2s and clock quality and grounding is absolutely critical. Because it operates at quite high speed for a dac this puts demands on the layout and power supply decoupling, the Burson is a mess...

a well implemented single chip does not sound dry, or brittle, not in the slightest.

it really is ALL about the implementation with ESS, many designers get lazy with this dac because its such a turnkey solution with integrated digital filter, receiver and MUX. and produces sound acceptable to some with little effort

Last edited by qusp; 17th November 2012 at 02:55 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2012, 02:49 AM   #82
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
I agree qusp, as a lazy designer myself I'm far too lazy to spend time getting the implementation right on an ESS DAC. There are simpler and cheaper routes to involving sound.
__________________
It doesn't have to take the form of a conspiracy, rather a consensus... James H Kunstler
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2012, 03:20 AM   #83
qusp is offline qusp  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
qusp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
hes got one thing right though, its absolutely not about increased SNR or THD, there are reasons to go dual mono with it, but thats not one of them, its hard enough to make -120dB THD+N count, i'm just saying it doesnt magically change the sound signature, because its just more of the same

Quote:
Originally Posted by abraxalito
I agree qusp, as a lazy designer myself I'm far too lazy to spend time getting the implementation right on an ESS DAC. There are simpler and cheaper routes to involving sound.
yep, its not a magic bullet, ive heard a few shockers and the popular notion that an ESS dac is automatically great sounding is delusion. of course there are all manner of other solutions to good sound, i'm a tinkerer at heart and I do like the results with ESS, so it does suit me, I like the flexibility as well as the analogue performance when done right.

OT warning: i'm particularly interested in your experiments with DSPs and ARM, are you looking at going all the way and implementing a custom crossover and dac all in one FPGA+ARM solution? lazy? lol, just different priorities/obsessions. I was disappointed the ARDA stuff never made it into DIYERs hands, but maybe it saved me a whole world of new pain... I need to focus my efforts on other areas of my system for now; I have enough dacs

Last edited by qusp; 17th November 2012 at 03:30 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2012, 03:29 AM   #84
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
As its so OT on this thread, I'll reply by PM. But feel free to start a thread to discuss these questions (which are definitely interesting), I'll contribute
__________________
It doesn't have to take the form of a conspiracy, rather a consensus... James H Kunstler
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2012, 03:36 AM   #85
qusp is offline qusp  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
qusp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
cool, OK i'll do that, look forward to your PM, cant give an opening post enough thought today i've got work and GB responsibilities that need taking care of. definitely worthy subject matter though

back to your regularly scheduled program
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2012, 03:42 PM   #86
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Send a message via MSN to audiodesign Send a message via Skype™ to audiodesign
Here the last input circuit to use with both the USB-I2S module and 3 other sources.

It is necessary a micontroller connected to the ES9018 to select the different inputs.

Here the last firmware available for 16LF877.
Attached Images
File Type: gif Spdif_cir7.gif (46.2 KB, 617 views)
Attached Files
File Type: zip ES9018_DAC32.zip (8.9 KB, 86 views)

Last edited by audiodesign; 17th November 2012 at 03:46 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2012, 02:22 AM   #87
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by qusp View Post
ES9018 in stereo or mono, is completely unchanged, nothing at all changes in the dac or analogue stages unless you want to adjust for lower voltage, or if your IV stage uses parts that cannot cope with the increased current.

all is identical except for the signal is all left or all right, its even sent the same signal in most dual mono dacs, the registers are simply set to identify as device 0 or device 1, depending on which one the dac will decode the left or right channel portion based on which Mono setting is used, there are 3. if there is more than 2 chips you need some sort of MCU and often a DSP, the Accuphase uses a completely custom digital filter and DSP on FPGA to run with the DSD signals interleaved and increase resolution I gather

It sounds like its not your experience, rather other peoples anecdotal reports or advertising.


myself i've been using it for ~3 years and have built myriad IV stages (have used transformers, passive Zfoil IV, NTD1 (highish voltage common gate mosfet), SEN and CEN jfet, several opamp based multiloop IVs) have 4 different USB-i2s convertors, the i2s fifo, 2 master clocks run synchronously and asynchronously and currently own 5 ess dacs... 2 buffalo II, 2 Ackodac AKD12P, and the 32S as well as a few built for others

it is much more sensitive to jitter than once thought, it is particularly sensitive to the quality of AVCC and DVCC supplies, i2s and clock quality and grounding is absolutely critical. Because it operates at quite high speed for a dac this puts demands on the layout and power supply decoupling, the Burson is a mess...

a well implemented single chip does not sound dry, or brittle, not in the slightest.

it really is ALL about the implementation with ESS, many designers get lazy with this dac because its such a turnkey solution with integrated digital filter, receiver and MUX. and produces sound acceptable to some with little effort
Since you own buffalo ii, have you tried it in dual mono?
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2012, 05:45 AM   #88
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vietnam
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via Yahoo to quanghao
After many revisions Layout has been completed.
With the input
1. XMOS USB-I2S, USB Amonero
2. SPDF
3. Torx
4. AES
I arranged for the USB DAC is sent on the PCB, to ensure the shortest connection for I2S.

Please see it! Thanks
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 32-PCB-NICE.jpg (966.1 KB, 568 views)
File Type: gif Layout1(2).gif (5.9 KB, 512 views)
__________________
Group buy DAC-END R (ES9018) full assembled board
update 06/14/2013 :http://www.audiodesignguide.com/DAC32/index2.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2012, 10:42 PM   #89
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiodesign View Post
Last weekend I did a listening test comparing my second AD1955 DAC output stage hybrid with the ES9018 DAC output stage with OPA627 + OPA2134.

The detail and definition seemed more good with ES9018 but the sound was too dry and not very musical.

I think the problem on the ES9018 DAC is the high feedback of op-amp so I decided to test it with a vacuum tube output stage.

The my choice is the Raleigh Audio Line Stage clone, a Differential parafeed line stage push-pull with a pair of CCS (constant current source) to isolate the power supply from the signal.

http://www.audiodesignguide.com/HiRe...eighaudio1.jpg
Chapter 4
USB DAC 2 - Hi-Resolution System

Using a pair of ECC86 for each channel is possible to get a good result.

Here the first measurements of the output stage only.

To get 3Vrms on output it is necessary use 20 ohm as I/V instead of 10ohm.
Have You listen and compare to op amp output stage . Any better worse?
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2012, 02:24 PM   #90
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Vietnam
Blog Entries: 2
Send a message via Yahoo to quanghao
Quote:
Originally Posted by kocurmarcin View Post
Have You listen and compare to op amp output stage . Any better worse?
Please see it:
ES9018 USB DAC - Hi-Resolution System*

thanks
__________________
Group buy DAC-END R (ES9018) full assembled board
update 06/14/2013 :http://www.audiodesignguide.com/DAC32/index2.html
  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
ES9018 DUALMONO DAC KIT heartwinter Vendor's Bazaar 7 15th September 2012 09:40 AM
ES9018 DUAL MONO DAC PCB syllable Vendor's Bazaar 7 15th September 2012 08:50 AM
ES9018 DAC chip McCrackers Swap Meet 1 5th November 2011 12:15 PM
FS Saber32 ES9018 DAC (chip only) randytsuch Swap Meet 2 19th September 2011 10:53 PM
Help me pick a dac? $500 range. ES9018? Docks Digital Line Level 6 7th May 2011 10:07 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:06 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