Buffalo III - flexibility without compromise. - Page 20 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Commercial Sector > Manufacturers > Twisted Pear

Twisted Pear Superior quality electronic kits

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 27th July 2011, 12:30 PM   #191
diyAudio Member
 
BrianDonegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: TPA HQ
Quote:
Originally Posted by drone;
Is there an audio reason to Change from Buf II to Buf III if I only listen to stereo?
No
__________________
Twisted Pear Audio
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th July 2011, 01:10 PM   #192
diyAudio Member
 
pmchoong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kuala Lumpur
The reason then is have more flexibility. B111 is easier to configured to have 2-8 channels, is this correct?
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th July 2011, 01:17 PM   #193
diyAudio Member
 
BrianDonegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: TPA HQ
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmchoong View Post
The reason then is have more flexibility. B111 is easier to configured to have 2-8 channels, is this correct?
Partly. 1-8 channels of output, 1-8 channels of input, built in volume control (instead of needing Volumite), more configuration options in the onboard firmware and switches, easier remote control of those options via the IO header. Of course external I2C control is still possible as well.
__________________
Twisted Pear Audio
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th July 2011, 05:10 PM   #194
diyAudio Member
 
regiregi22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Madrid (Spain)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianDonegan View Post
The actual S/PDIF switching is done by the ES9018's internal MUX. The rotary switch is just setting the bits, telling it what source to use. You could switch S/PDIF sources with a switch as well, but...

The S/PDIF input module board is just a 4-channel level shifter, from consumer (0.5Vp-p) to TTL (5V). You can't do that bit with a switch .

The Sidecar is a very simple board, just to make the switching cleaner. Nothing special there.
But with Buffalo II you could directly conect the consumer spdif input to the DAC board, isn't it possible with Buffalo III?
__________________
diyAudio, doing it as big as you can, JUST BECAUSE WE CAN!
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th July 2011, 05:16 PM   #195
LeonvB is offline LeonvB  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Netherlands
May we know which switches/configuration options were chosen?
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th July 2011, 05:18 PM   #196
LeonvB is offline LeonvB  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Netherlands
Quote:
But with Buffalo II you could directly conect the consumer spdif input to the DAC board, isn't it possible with Buffalo III?
There is no comparator on the BIII, so TTL level S/PDIF only. You could use a toslink module, an old mux, or the new S/PDIF input module.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th July 2011, 05:28 PM   #197
diyAudio Member
 
regiregi22's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Madrid (Spain)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeonvB View Post
There is no comparator on the BIII, so TTL level S/PDIF only. You could use a toslink module, an old mux, or the new S/PDIF input module.
That what the point I was missing, thanks!
__________________
diyAudio, doing it as big as you can, JUST BECAUSE WE CAN!
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th July 2011, 05:37 PM   #198
diyAudio Member
 
BrianDonegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: TPA HQ
There will be a single S/PDIF module sometime soon. Basically a single channel of the 4-Input module (trafo, comparator, etc).
__________________
Twisted Pear Audio
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th July 2011, 06:58 PM   #199
cersepn is offline cersepn  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianDonegan View Post
There will be a single S/PDIF module sometime soon. Basically a single channel of the 4-Input module (trafo, comparator, etc).
Any reason why the single module wasn't offered at the same time as the 4-input module? Correct me if i'm wrong, wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to manufacture?

If i knew there would be a single module, i would have probably waited out for that, instead of paying more for the multi-input (which i don't need)
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th July 2011, 08:01 PM   #200
LeonvB is offline LeonvB  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Netherlands
Available time is likely the reason. Plus the 4:1 module is a good replacement for those in need of a Mux (which incidently also is undergoing a full overhaul) for their Buffalo. And I think the 4:1 is relatively cheaper than a single input version (as in the price per port is lower).
  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
Legato or IVY III outputs for Buffalo II? natzev_i Twisted Pear 272 21st March 2011 08:08 PM
Buffalo Dac original vs Buffalo II mrtakib Digital Line Level 7 24th August 2010 06:47 AM
How much compromise, small EQ'ed sub audiobomber Subwoofers 10 15th March 2007 09:46 PM
Considering a compromise mashaffer Full Range 7 14th May 2006 11:45 PM
OB subs: Best compromise? MtnBob Subwoofers 13 26th May 2004 02:19 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:32 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