Twisted Pear Audio - Buffalo32S (ES9018 DAC) - Page 12 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Commercial Sector > Manufacturers > Twisted Pear

Twisted Pear Superior quality electronic kits

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 5th April 2009, 09:51 AM   #111
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally posted by BrianDonegan
A couple things I want to mention though. The new IVY (IVYII) is really a mono design, so the implementation on the Buf32s is really two IVYs, so a more accurate apple to apple comparison would be Buffalo + IVY + IVY (part count wise).

Also, you can't see it from the picture, but there are a lot of parts on the bottom of the board. The original Buffalo had a single cap. This makes building the boards a lot more tricky, so we will likely send them out to be assembled. An estimate of this cost is included in the posted pricing, but again, will likely change a bit.
Brian, you have quite a few points there and, rest assured, noone here believes you're trying to make any real money out of the DIY community. You have proven otherwise too many times for that to be an issue.

Do take under consideration though that, at least up until now, when asked both here and in TP's support forum, you guys were unable to tell if and to what extent the Buffalo32S would sound better than the original Buffalo + Counterpoints combo. Under this prism, the price is high. I'm genuinely hoping this will all change when we see the measurements and read the first listening impressions of the new board.

I'm sure an option to buy a kit which includes a partially populated board (thus offered at a lower price) would be a welcome addition.
I understand there'll be some SMD soldering involved but that shouldn't put off people in Buffalo's target group (and, to be honest, once you get the hang of it, it's faster than working with through-hole components).
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009, 03:38 PM   #112
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North Carolina
Brian,

Can't wait till you guys start shipping/accepting orders. I check the site and this board every single day. Can you post a picture of the underside of the Buffalo 32 board to show us the complexity you mentioned previously?

Instead of going with my own separate analog output stage, I might try it with the integrated IVY board at first and see what all the hububb is about! Of course I will be using my own power supplies using Paul Hynes Shunt regulators, etc...

Anand.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009, 05:14 PM   #113
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Boston USA
There is an attached pic of the board back side on Brian's post #1810 above on this page.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009, 07:25 PM   #114
Muser is offline Muser  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Default Buffalo's availability / price

Brian & Russ
My frugal nature wanted the Buffalo to remain the same price as before. So I, too was a little disappointed that it was more expensive.

But, I am amazed at how much effort you two have put into your various projects, not just the various Buffalo iterations. Your courteous replies and regular presence on this board have likely addressed and alleviated a lot of concerns. I for one would like to thank you both for all of your efforts, seen and unseen by the people on this forum. Whatever my financial concerns are, if you don't get sufficient return for your labors (financial as well as "karmic") you are simply not going to sweat out getting your various projects to market.

I am not yet a Buffalo owner, but intend to be - I've stocked my paypal account in anticipation, though now I'll have to add to it. But, I look forward to having a high quality DAC as I immerse myself this time in the world of DIY. And, thanks to people ("audio heaven" aka James especially) for sharing what they have learned. It's certainly been a pleasure waiting for this project. Again thanks for putting these projects together.
Larry
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009, 07:45 PM   #115
NeoY2k is offline NeoY2k  France
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Good work guys

How are you dealing with soldering components on the back? I do it too, but find that stenciling the bottom after having soldered the top is a pain. It's largely feasible, in fact I never missed any, but it really requires to calm down. Plus the Sabre32 isn't that easy to precisely place, surface tension will put it approximately in place, mine drifted a little bit (something like 0.1mm though) and it scared me a bit. But it's fine, anyway. It requires some skills.

Happy yours already outputs sounds, I haven't sent sound in mine yet, just soldered and verified it.

Cheers,
Nicolas

P.S: For those thinking the price is not adequate, I think it is, components count is high, Sabre32 isn't exactly cheap, I use the same kind of components as you and yes, they are expensive. I think it's a correct price, at least, I don't see how I could beat it!
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009, 11:41 PM   #116
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Longmont, CO
Default Buffalo latency?

Talk about the cost of the new Buffalo has me curious. What is a typical latency of DAC chips? In other words, how much might the synchronization of analog output differ among different signal types supplying the ESS chips? And more to the point, how much might output latency differ between identical signals processed by unlike DAC chips?

For example, for bi-amped channels: Would it really be a problem if the main midrange/treble "voices" ran through a superlative Buffalo and the bass signal (say, 180hz and down) originated from a much more affordable (but still quite nice!) Opus? Let's assume all are receiving time-aligned I2S.

In other applications where super fidelity would be largely imperceptible (i.e. "wasted" - for example rear channels in typical home surround systems), why not a mixed bag of DACs? Digital crossovers can time-align signals in very small increments. Wouldn't they just need good data to effect good coherence?

Any data or speculation?

Frank in Mpls.
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2009, 01:19 AM   #117
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Cheltenham
Quote:
Originally posted by Russ White

AVCC is a voltage reference as well as the analog supply. That is why it can be though of as having a poor PSRR, but that is not fully accurate. Because any modulation or noise here while not good will be common mode to the balanced outputs, and will be very effectively canceled later down the line if you use an I/V stage like I do, that is super symmetrical.
Hello Russ,

Ok, so you are saying the PSRR is equivalent (give or take) to the CMRR of the analog stage? Food for thought. Do you have a CMR figure for IVY?

On another note, how compatible is the new 32 bit chip with the older design ..... if one had the tools to do so, is it feasible to fit the new chip onto the older Buffalo PCB?

Thanks.
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2009, 04:43 AM   #118
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally posted by Spartacus
On another note, how compatible is the new 32 bit chip with the older design ..... if one had the tools to do so, is it feasible to fit the new chip onto the older Buffalo PCB?
They're pin compatible.
That's what Lampizator in order to test the new chip.
Perhaps TP guys will offer Sabre32 chips in their parts bin for those of their previous customers who feel bold enough to upgrade.
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2009, 03:22 PM   #119
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Cheltenham
Quote:
Originally posted by TheShaman


They're pin compatible.
That's what Lampizator in order to test the new chip.
Perhaps TP guys will offer Sabre32 chips in their parts bin for those of their previous customers who feel bold enough to upgrade.


Cool, and thanks for the reply. It's actually very easy with a hot air gun. I don't have one, but I know someone who does .....


May need new firmware though?
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2009, 03:43 PM   #120
rolls is offline rolls  Switzerland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Quote:
Originally posted by TheShaman


They're pin compatible.
That's what Lampizator in order to test the new chip.
Perhaps TP guys will offer Sabre32 chips in their parts bin for those of their previous customers who feel bold enough to upgrade.
They could offer old boards and chips, but then you haven't got the new clock.
I don't know if they compared old and new clock with the same chip. We actually don't know the influence of the new clock. Once I had the idea to mount a better clock on the lower side of the board, very near the chip.

regards
Andre
  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



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:17 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