Even if the WaveIO only runs up to 192k/24bit it could (can) easily have been reprogrammed and supported 384k/32bit and DSD - a hex file with support for 384k/32bit and DSD for the reference design exists..
The referenced XMOS info from "forums" do not match the datasheet informations for the newer and actual XMOS chips I have referenced.
With regard to jitter and XMOS designs vs. exaU2I I would not bet on the exaU2I to be the best, and stating that exaU2I is 50 times better are quite a strange way of marketing.
When I tested exaU2I vs. XMOS it was the 352.8kHz/32bit mode witch is the most important for me that the XMOS design performed without doubt better.
I have converter by JarekC and now waiting for XMOS. Maybe Ill try EXA in future also. Also things like 50 times better 500% faster dont convince me that much (no offence). I still have doubts if PC can be transformed into lets say "high end" hehe. Can we say for sure that in such chain converter is absolute brain of all operations and we are isolated from all garbage from PC, noises, power supply, not real-time system, etc?
Lets say we feed converter by batteries and send signal by USB cable with cut powers supply wires (only data signal). Then we need very good converter and thats it? or its not that simple?
RayCtech again, could you please elaborate what "better" means? Can you describe what aspects etc?
Lets say we feed converter by batteries and send signal by USB cable with cut powers supply wires (only data signal). Then we need very good converter and thats it? or its not that simple?
RayCtech again, could you please elaborate what "better" means? Can you describe what aspects etc?
Last edited:
2.5ns /50 = 50ps - the measured exaU2I jitter. Our jitter measurements are not that precise. Can you provide any approximate or indirect Jitter measurements for WaveIO?
Then the best path forward for you is to continue with the XMOS design. Perhaps you can show how others can repeat you results. Please do this on your own thread.
Can you provide facts that will confirm or disprove that " any external clock is re-sampled to the XMOS internal clock"
The discussion here is about specific commercially available devices - WaveIO and exaU2I. They can be acquired and produce predictable and verifiable results. Both devices come with excellent customer service. Therefore they can be used for real projects. Things that "exist", "could" or "may" be done belong to different threads.
There was a specific question, and I provided a specific answer.
What are the things that convince you much? I can try to help.
-Yes
Regards,
exa065
I just wonder if human perception can catch such things like jitter 20ps vs 2ns. I would like to hear more realistic impressions of comparisions between devices, not only "I plugged xxx and it sounds much better" - such sentence doesnt bring any info. on the other hand I assume that audio is very subjective and everybody hear different. The best possible way is to check it out by myself
Thats why Im waiting for XMOS to compare it on TAS based DIY converter. If I hear audible positive difference maybe Ill try Exa. Problem is much higher cost and tax possibilities as I live in EU. that would be 600 USD for unknown "improvement"
Thats why Im waiting for XMOS to compare it on TAS based DIY converter. If I hear audible positive difference maybe Ill try Exa. Problem is much higher cost and tax possibilities as I live in EU. that would be 600 USD for unknown "improvement"
I re-clock I2S for both exaU2I and XMOS designs with a external isolated audio grade clock (synchronous from/with the DAC masterclock). Thus jitter for both designs will be down in the 1p region. Of course the re-clock / clock hardware cost is higher than the USB -> I2S devices.
Human hearing is much more than FR measurement and you will be surprised to witness what a trained hearing can do. I have seen it( because I could not hear anything)- a friend who is a mastering engineer could identify 10/10 whether the digital signal was coming from a hard drive or an SSD and the change was done in the other room. And that is on the most sophisticated equipment that can be bought at the moment.
The exaU2I is absolutely worth the price and if you do a search you could not find someone who has found a better device(at least I haven't come across), the only thing is that is for DIY and doesn't come in a fancy box, I2S only too. No one can guarantee that it is the BEST(don't we all want that?!?!) but it if you can squeeze the best from it it will make you happy. Not going to make a mini system sound like mastering equipment though.
RayCtech is on another level for sure.
The exaU2I is absolutely worth the price and if you do a search you could not find someone who has found a better device(at least I haven't come across), the only thing is that is for DIY and doesn't come in a fancy box, I2S only too. No one can guarantee that it is the BEST(don't we all want that?!?!) but it if you can squeeze the best from it it will make you happy. Not going to make a mini system sound like mastering equipment though.
RayCtech is on another level for sure.
so you imply an SSD reading the data produces a different result than an HDD?
that's, simply, impossible.
if they could tell which drive did the reading, it must have been something else - not the sound - that was different.
I knew you would say that, I did not hear anything. But when the notes were checked it was 10/10. 4 times it was the SSD feeding the DAC and 6 times the HDD, random. Go figure.
Have a look at this, I find it interesting, but listen to it till the end. She's DEAF.
Evelyn Glennie shows how to listen | Video on TED.com
Have a look at this, I find it interesting, but listen to it till the end. She's DEAF.
Evelyn Glennie shows how to listen | Video on TED.com
Well Im amazed that your friend didnt gather 1 million yet
James Randi Offers $1 Million If Audiophiles Can Prove $7250 Speaker Cables Are Better
OK, back to converters - I would really appreciate what audible differences are between WaveIo and Exa from ppl who have tested both. I got quite nice headphone system where I can hear a lot of things and Im still in search of the best solution for chain with PC
Last edited:
Well,
I own both and I prefer the ExaU2I -it is more "transparent" as in giving more details, letting you follow each instrument better and having a wider and deeper stage with more spacial clues. It has longer decays and music "flows" better. It is impossible to describe the sound as words have different meanings to different people. I have no idea what you call "better" in your system and I never trust other people's reviews. The way I like to do things is that I buy them all and let them thorugh my system for a month, at least. Then I choose which I like best and I let the rest go. But I kept the WaveIO , it is great and sounds great, just the ExaU2I is better.
here is a picture of my DAC, I have at least tried to do it right, just to give you an diea of the surroundgs:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digi...sic-pass-labs-d1-ess-dac-107.html#post3055754
I have told Exa065 that it is great that he has offered the device to the DIY community, the only device that is at this level of engineering that is not unobtainum to us is Ian's FIFO board. But being a DIY device means that it is used by DIY guys and for DIY guys their stuff is the best, no one trusts the others and reads between the lines and finds exactly what he/she wants. If it were a commercial device with a zero in the back of the price it would have been proclaimed the best by magazines and there would be no questions. Exa065 has made his decision and there are consequences from that. And I do suffer the same consequences from posting:"that's,simply, impossible" - for sure, I was there but it did not happen
I own both and I prefer the ExaU2I -it is more "transparent" as in giving more details, letting you follow each instrument better and having a wider and deeper stage with more spacial clues. It has longer decays and music "flows" better. It is impossible to describe the sound as words have different meanings to different people. I have no idea what you call "better" in your system and I never trust other people's reviews. The way I like to do things is that I buy them all and let them thorugh my system for a month, at least. Then I choose which I like best and I let the rest go. But I kept the WaveIO , it is great and sounds great, just the ExaU2I is better.
here is a picture of my DAC, I have at least tried to do it right, just to give you an diea of the surroundgs:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digi...sic-pass-labs-d1-ess-dac-107.html#post3055754
I have told Exa065 that it is great that he has offered the device to the DIY community, the only device that is at this level of engineering that is not unobtainum to us is Ian's FIFO board. But being a DIY device means that it is used by DIY guys and for DIY guys their stuff is the best, no one trusts the others and reads between the lines and finds exactly what he/she wants. If it were a commercial device with a zero in the back of the price it would have been proclaimed the best by magazines and there would be no questions. Exa065 has made his decision and there are consequences from that. And I do suffer the same consequences from posting:"that's,simply, impossible" - for sure, I was there but it did not happen
I am interested to participate in such test, if your friend is available. I will bring with me an e18 DAC. Send me a PM.
Well,
I own both and I prefer the ExaU2I -it is more "transparent" as in giving more details, letting you follow each instrument better and having a wider and deeper stage with more spacial clues. It has longer decays and music "flows" better. It is impossible to describe the sound as words have different meanings to different people. I have no idea what you call "better" in your system and I never trust other people's reviews. The way I like to do things is that I buy them all and let them thorugh my system for a month, at least. Then I choose which I like best and I let the rest go. But I kept the WaveIO , it is great and sounds great, just the ExaU2I is better.
here is a picture of my DAC, I have at least tried to do it right, just to give you an diea of the surroundgs:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digi...sic-pass-labs-d1-ess-dac-107.html#post3055754
I have told Exa065 that it is great that he has offered the device to the DIY community, the only device that is at this level of engineering that is not unobtainum to us is Ian's FIFO board. But being a DIY device means that it is used by DIY guys and for DIY guys their stuff is the best, no one trusts the others and reads between the lines and finds exactly what he/she wants. If it were a commercial device with a zero in the back of the price it would have been proclaimed the best by magazines and there would be no questions. Exa065 has made his decision and there are consequences from that. And I do suffer the same consequences from posting:"that's,simply, impossible" - for sure, I was there but it did not happen
I agree pple have different taste and I understand what you mean
Now I have DAC with I2S but I also have plans to test AD1865 with SM5813 and WM8804. There will be no I2S connection possibility like with Exa Device even its the best solution. For now XMOS is cheaper and easier to get= I could test it and find whos got similiar feelings to me. BTW Exa do you have something like trial for your products if I ever wanted to buy (test) it?
There is a 30 day money back warranty for the e18 DAC. Sorry, we don't have a trial program for the exaU2I.
Of course that is not going to happen because he is not interested in any tests and he doesn't care about competitions. And I don't care about that either because I don't have time for that. And I am sorry that I mentioned it because I was not trying to say anything apart from this being just a funny fact, not meant to give me credibility of the most trustworthy owner of an ExaU2I, I did not hear ANY difference. I only wanted to say that there is stuff that is beyond anyone's limit of acceptance. I could not care less if he heard it or not,but if he was that lucky he would not need the 1 million, he would win the lottery all the time. He is not happy either because he hears the 98th violin playing out of tune.
I do hear differences in cables, stands and supports but to lesser effect than when changing speakers, cartridges and DACs sometimes. I do hear mpingo discs on DAC chips but not on loudspeakers. Most of all - I do enjoy music and not audio competitions, I enjoy Floyd on my system, I have heard it being mastered and that has been the most exciting thing in my life with music but I don't die in terrible pain when I switch on the CD in my car and I smile when I hear Massive attack in the Mall. It is just toys that we are playing with and I am trying not to forget that, it's been many years now in audio and I have learned that I shouldn't say "impossible".
With respect to everyone here.
Sorry, Nikola. I didn't mean to make you angry. It is possible to hear the difference between different hard drives, if the interface is not asynchronous, or if the interface is not working well. I was just hoping to be able to prove that our interface can take care of such differences.
I also agree with you that the human hearing is complex, and it can go beyond the commonly accepted boundaries.
Most of all I agree with you that we should enjoy music, instead of being "measurebators".
I also agree with you that the human hearing is complex, and it can go beyond the commonly accepted boundaries.
Most of all I agree with you that we should enjoy music, instead of being "measurebators".
I did not get angry at all, thanks for saying that Obviously audio is our passion, you can't avoid differences in opinion, the more mature we handle these the better the chance that we learn something. It is difficult to be objective all the time too.
Your device is great and it is the end of the search for me, at least for now. Yes, there is or there will be a better device but I have other parts of my system that are well behind the level of the ExaU2I, I will concentrate on these trying hard to balance between the variables along the way, the ExaU2I will not be the bottle neck.
Obviously audio is our passion, you can't avoid differences in opinion, the more mature we handle these the better the chance that we learn something. It is difficult to be objective all the time too. Your device is great and it is the end of the search for me, at least for now. Yes, there is or there will be a better device but I have other parts of my system that are well behind the level of the ExaU2I, I will concentrate on these trying hard to balance between the variables along the way, the ExaU2I will not be the bottle neck.
Erroneous output is one possibility. The more interesting case is when the output is bit-perfect, an there is a noticeable difference in sound quality. Different hard drives can produce different timing during read operations. For example SSD can be faster. Different hard drives can be serviced by different software drivers, and drivers can use different buffer sizes, DMA implementations etc. Since consumer operating systems are not real-time systems, eventually the result of all this is different errors in the timing of the output sound stream. With "simple" words, big errors can cause dropouts, mid-size errors will cause deviations of the sampling rate, and small errors will cause jitter.
The same timing errors can be caused by any computer activity, like network operations, starting and using any program, screensavers, video playback etc. That's why some people try to configure and run minimalistic versions of Windows. Their rational is - less software activity, less background interrupts, less fluctuations in the timing of the audio stream. The same logic applies to hardware - less hardware components, less power line noise.
Unfortunately the approach to make the computer to run quiet and smooth doesn't work very well. It is focused on reducing the symptoms, but the root cause remains. The consumer operating systems are not capable of delivering precise timing for audio. The solution is to take the necessary measures outside the computer to re-clock the audio stream and to isolate the computer noise. There are different techniques for doing that. The best that I know of are:
- Using an asynchronous interface to restore accurate timing (and eliminate computer jitter)
- Using galvanic isolation to eliminate computer noise