Why? Isn't iTunes on Mac vs Audirvana not one setup with two players?
Feel free not to participate.
This is the simple answer ... but there's another way to tweak the analogue, and that's to reduce the amount of interference being introduced into that area of the circuitry - like an amplifier may be improved either by making its internals far more robust against being sensitive to external noise factors, or you reduce those external noise factors ... ideally, you do both.
Changing the player, or its settings, is adjusting the external noise factors - and therefore the sound alters.
Last edited:
Ummm.... because it's ad copy.
Clearly. Ah well, some people want to understand things, some people want to believe things. Your choice.
I guess it depends on which DAC chip you're playing with. My experience with TDA1387 is that the bottleneck has been elsewhere - power supplies, analog output stages, active crossovers, amps.
Does $0.08 sound "cheap" to you for a DAC chip? With more expensive chips (I played with AD1955 for a while, also PCM1792 in a soundcard) then I couldn't make those sound as close to the recording as a TDA1545A (which costs about $0.30).
Surprising.
You know what a bottleneck is. Power supply: it is easy and "cheap". I used Black Gate N and NX. Output stages: I just tried what I have on the internet and datasheets, never designed my own (except tube). Active crossovers: what is the relevancy? Amps: what kind of amp is required for TDA1387??
You know what a bottleneck is.
TDA1545A? Surprising. I like your taste. Several DIY CDP blind tests have put this chip at the bottom of the competition.
Do you really think the chip really worth the effort? Can you recommend the last circuit configuration for me to try?
Sure - my journey of discovery with this has been quite a long list of surprises.
I haven't paid much attention to brands of caps, here I buy the cheapest ones that have decent enough measurements - the measurement which is relevant is ESR in the main. Typical electrolytics turn resistive above 3kHz, getting low ESR caps can push this corner frequency up to 10kHz or occasionally more.
Tube might be the only one I've not tried - gone through passive and opamp and finally discrete. The primary advantage of discrete is classA operation so power supplies become much less critical.
My system is an active one so I need active XOs.
I started off with chipamps, improved their power supplies but eventually settled on using an output transformer coupled with very low impedance supplies. I speculate that a discrete amp might do even better than the chipamps I have at present, not least because it potentially allows operation at higher voltage.
Peufeu who posts here has a nice design with it - the 'Extremist DAC'. He definitely liked it.
You'd best go to my blog and post up detailed questions there. Blog link is to the left of this post, on the number '121' (currently).
I'm using active too. I wish you have something for me in your blog (have read some related to DAC)
I have built the Extremist and its variations.
Interesting that you think that the strength of your implementation is the dynamics, while the chip spec for that is below average. I hope you didn't parallel the chips as I've got only a few.
I have an active XO design, fully balanced with TL084s (because they're very cheap). Its 3rd order, two-way. If you prefer LR4 that's a fairly simple modification but needs more opamps.
By 'chip spec' do you mean measurements of THD+N? Its quite possible that NXP/Philips did that measurement in the suggested application circuit - which uses opamps. I have DAC designs with parallel chips and with a single chip - you can order up a hundred more for the price of a couple of lattes.
This is your opinion, based on your experience. The fact remains that players do not sound differently (when playing lossless file formats) unless one of them is doing something terribly wrong. What you are supposed to be hearing is the file, not the software. If this isn't the case, then the software or the OS (or both) is/are not configured optimally. This seems to be a much bigger challenge on Windows.
In my experience, all players I have tried on Linux sound identical playing FLAC files when the players are configured to simply dump the bit stream from the file to the hardware. There is no ethereal "noise" associated with this process, no matter how much you want there to be. The bits are delivered to the DAC identically in all cases, and no other variables are changed, therefore the sound is not altered in the least.
Not in the way I'm reading his words. He's saying that's what he hears, he's not saying that's what he thinks about what he hears. So it looks like what you wrote above is your opinion of what he wrote.
The assumption is that the DAC and the analogue circuitry following is not affected in any way by any interference generated by all the other circuitry, power supplies and digital in that environment. Considering this is low end consumer equipment, designed for minimal cost, with no interest in audio quality, that seems a rather long bow to draw, 🙂.
People seem to feel that they have to hear "extra noise" somehow, that can be heard separate from the audio content - sorry, it doesn't work that way, it's mixed in 100% with the music, it alters the apparent quality of the music.
An analogy: speakers, and various types of blankets, sheets, fabrics. You throw one over the speakers - it changes the sound - depending upon how thick, how "holey", etc, etc. Strangely enough, the best is heard with nothing over the speakers - the trick is to work out how to get closest to that ... 😉
Hi i think that this is the problem.
How many people understand really how OS, SW and i would add Bios work in a computer ? This is a very complex field.
For instance many reviewers say that 8.1 is better than 7 for audio.
Other swear about Linux being "potentially" a better OS.
I have here a surely not properly configured pc running with win 7 and a streamer (Squeezebox Touch).
Using the same spdif input on a dac the sound using the streamer is clearly much better than with the PC.
My point is that configuring properly a pc is indeed challenging for the average and unexperienced user.
So i am looking at media players as sources. Much easier and they have potential. I mean something like the Touch but with video streaming abilities.
Kind regards, gino
Noise and power delivery system integrity is probably the MOST critical part of ANY electronic design, if you want the best out of any system especially where some form of measurement-ADC-recording data-DAC-output based system is used, then power integrity is paramount... Start getting that right and a lot of preceding problems will not appear.
I understand the complexities of these systems and there is no difference between an audiophiles requirements to any other system requiring ultimate fidelity. All the software runs in devices on boards that rely on the power system to work, it is the backbone of any system... so instead of looking for magic or demons start with the basics, then cable differences (if any) and other demons will diminish.
I do understand because I use a dedicated PC as my music server...
Well, I was giving foobar a chance, but this might be the last straw - playing directly from CD the accessing is dreadful, the grinding, and whirring of the erratic CD-ROM drive reads drives one crazy through a quiet classical piece. The only solution I've seen so far is setting up a RAMDISK, so chewing up major chunks of memory - and involving extra steps to play ... any other thoughts?
Get rid of cd: rip the music and play from your hard drive. CD are only useful as means of buying music today.
This was looking at the 'problem' of having a general purpose media player, that would behave itself - as in work well in all of the common situations - without having to do anything special. I borrow or someone lends me a CD to try out, so I might have to go through the whole ripping exercise, just to hear the music without being irritated ... foobar seems to need this, so, cross; MediaMonkey doesn't, hence, tick.
On the other hand, the noise of a cd drive access is a completely different issue than what was discussed here until now...
"He's saying that's what he hears, he's not saying that's what he thinks about what he hears"
Apart from semantics, what is the difference?
"The assumption is that the DAC and the analogue circuitry following is not affected in any way by any interference generated by all the other circuitry, power supplies and digital in that environment. Considering this is low end consumer equipment, designed for minimal cost, with no interest in audio quality, that seems a rather long bow to draw,
."
If you use low end, is there any point in pursuing any effort to achieve what will be mediocre at best? I am at loss to understand the motivation, as indeed, am I to understand this thread. The wonders of the universe?
Apart from semantics, what is the difference?
"The assumption is that the DAC and the analogue circuitry following is not affected in any way by any interference generated by all the other circuitry, power supplies and digital in that environment. Considering this is low end consumer equipment, designed for minimal cost, with no interest in audio quality, that seems a rather long bow to draw,
If you use low end, is there any point in pursuing any effort to achieve what will be mediocre at best? I am at loss to understand the motivation, as indeed, am I to understand this thread. The wonders of the universe?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.