Wouldn't it be possible to make it modular? Start with a simple base board with FPGA and R2R and add DIY friendly second board with isolators, supply, USB etc?
This would reduce the maintenance effort and enable multiple usage scenarios...
fedde, what you describe is close to the 1121 > 1021 > 1941 progression. Hence my wondering whether the bestseller board might not have been the 1121 if it had been first to market. It’s the most DIY of them all.
Anyway, glad to hear all three are likely to get the upgrades. Lots to look forward to.
Anyway, glad to hear all three are likely to get the upgrades. Lots to look forward to.
Viewed from the marketing perspective (and not just us selfish DIYer’s point of view) the feature set of the three existing options covers all the bases from serious experimenter to ‘lets just get up and running’. So, yes, please keep all three and update them.
Why would you need an 1021 (update) if you could buy an 1121 (update) with a 2nd add on board to add the missing functionality? Assuming costs do not rise too much by having dual PCBs and connecting cables. If the cables would be smartly designed, additional scenarios would be possible, e.g. just changing the supply.
As is or updated I’m struggling to see why you would opt for two PCBs with antennas connecting them when the functionality you desire can be had on one PCB by buying the 1021 (as is or updated) or the 1941 (as is or updated). As to the power supply, you can roll your own with the 1121 and even the 1941.
Looks like we are just looking at this from different points of view but I’d always lean in the direction of a single PCB if at all possible.
If there is to be a dam2021, some improvements should probably be made to the power section. Who runs the board with AC input anyway?
Is the ADC design already the best possible? It's a nice improvement from ~0.015% THD to 0.004% THD for 0.05 resistors, but if the same thing could be achieved with 4 ladders of 0.01/0.02 resistors, it's not that interesting technically or practically for 1021 owners, especially those of us running dual-mono. I was hoping for something like 0.0% THD lol
Also, is an external calibration board out of the question for 1021 due to the FPGA limitations? I always liked the idea of having a calibrator at hand to adjust the lookup table in the FPGA from time to time, like how monitors are calibrated. If an ADC chip is the best solution, then the calibrator would also be relatively low cost. I imagine it would be an instant best seller, if it's feasible of course. Btw, how much does calibration improve THD vs. improved Vref?
All in all, great engineering and reminds everyone that the price tag of TotalDAC/MSB only reflects their incompetence.
Is the ADC design already the best possible? It's a nice improvement from ~0.015% THD to 0.004% THD for 0.05 resistors, but if the same thing could be achieved with 4 ladders of 0.01/0.02 resistors, it's not that interesting technically or practically for 1021 owners, especially those of us running dual-mono. I was hoping for something like 0.0% THD lol
Also, is an external calibration board out of the question for 1021 due to the FPGA limitations? I always liked the idea of having a calibrator at hand to adjust the lookup table in the FPGA from time to time, like how monitors are calibrated. If an ADC chip is the best solution, then the calibrator would also be relatively low cost. I imagine it would be an instant best seller, if it's feasible of course. Btw, how much does calibration improve THD vs. improved Vref?
All in all, great engineering and reminds everyone that the price tag of TotalDAC/MSB only reflects their incompetence.
Last edited:
There are idiots like myself whose enclosure layout is so compact that 1021 form factor is the only thing that will work (for a DAC/head amp combo)
Wow! we have Charlie Hansen resurrected from the grave!
They are so incompetent that they have not yet understood the magic of the wonderful Si570.
And they didn't even understand that THD must have at least 1.5 million zeros before the first significant digit.
And think of those idiots who keep using tubes with THD greater than 2% (it's me!).
And they even insist (MSB TEch) to build three-chassis dacs!
Perhaps no one has ever told them about Lego Land.
I forgot ...
now I'm sure I'm the perfect idiot prototype, only one of my master clocks is as large as the whole dac.
I'm just as incompetent as MSB Tech (maybe more), my oscillator board could accommodate up to 39 Si570s.
Maybe if I put them all in parallel (or in series?) I achieve a jitter of 1e-1.5 million fs.
now I'm sure I'm the perfect idiot prototype, only one of my master clocks is as large as the whole dac.
I'm just as incompetent as MSB Tech (maybe more), my oscillator board could accommodate up to 39 Si570s.
Maybe if I put them all in parallel (or in series?) I achieve a jitter of 1e-1.5 million fs.
Attachments
If nobody haven't noticed yet, then SBAF have a dac2541, you can get an idea on how next gen boards will sound like....
Soekris DAC2541 Review And Measurements | Super Best Audio Friends
And Andrea, still using the si570
Soekris DAC2541 Review And Measurements | Super Best Audio Friends
And Andrea, still using the si570
Last edited:
I would be careful to define Totaldac and MSB Tech incompetent.
We have built oscillators with equal or superior performance to the MSB Tech Galaxy Femto Clock, but we have never dared to call MSB Tech incompetent.
Anyway your DAC is here, I have only to find the time to get it working and make the measurements.
Then I'll let you know the phase noise of the Si570.
Can you please tell me where I can pick up the bit clock and the word clock from the PCB?
We have built oscillators with equal or superior performance to the MSB Tech Galaxy Femto Clock, but we have never dared to call MSB Tech incompetent.
Anyway your DAC is here, I have only to find the time to get it working and make the measurements.
Then I'll let you know the phase noise of the Si570.
Can you please tell me where I can pick up the bit clock and the word clock from the PCB?
Hmm. The commercial line is too compromised to draw any meaningful conclusions, but it looks like the 1941 is still king of the hill. Damn Covid.
Last edited:
I don't think there is any need for you to buy a 1021 to prove that there is higher phase noise in an Si than i your clocks. Andrea, if You prove a high phase noise but at the same time DAMs sound very good according to others is not the best advertising for your adventure... But we do know that different DACs differ in pn sensitivity so... I think you should listen to it (over the bare ladder output) and say what you think. It's unfortunate you picked the oldest design which uses the clock directly out of the fpga while there is the 1121 which at least re-clocks before the ladders...
I'll bet the 1121 is still the most competent horse in the stable. But maybe the new power solution in the 2541 gives it an edge...
//
I'll bet the 1121 is still the most competent horse in the stable. But maybe the new power solution in the 2541 gives it an edge...
//
It looks like I can't make it clear that I'm not looking for any advertising.
I care less than zero about other devices like the famous "ultimate FIFO" and this "reference DAC".
We have made and we are making the measurements for the audio community.
Maybe it's not yet clear that we are not audio professionals and we are not interested on starting a business.
This is a hobby for us and it even happens that we lose money rather than earn.
Our current job has nothing to do with audio and we are not thinking of changing it.
We thought we were helping the community with our work but it looks like it's not appreciated.
We are building an audio system for our personal use and clearly we are not obligated to share it.
It's time for reflection.
Back to the topic, I don't need to buy the 1021, it's already here.
I will measure it and I will compare it with other DACs, as I said previously.
At this point I'm not so sure if I share results and impressions.
I care less than zero about other devices like the famous "ultimate FIFO" and this "reference DAC".
We have made and we are making the measurements for the audio community.
Maybe it's not yet clear that we are not audio professionals and we are not interested on starting a business.
This is a hobby for us and it even happens that we lose money rather than earn.
Our current job has nothing to do with audio and we are not thinking of changing it.
We thought we were helping the community with our work but it looks like it's not appreciated.
We are building an audio system for our personal use and clearly we are not obligated to share it.
It's time for reflection.
Back to the topic, I don't need to buy the 1021, it's already here.
I will measure it and I will compare it with other DACs, as I said previously.
At this point I'm not so sure if I share results and impressions.