No soup (datasheet) for you! You have to beg and sign your life for, yourself.
Just an implementation and measurements results.
AK5574EN has -112dB ES9068AS has -120dB THD+N
Just an implementation and measurements results.
AK5574EN has -112dB ES9068AS has -120dB THD+N
Being so many times encouraged by Markw4, have you trained yourself to hear the difference? 😀
While typing this, I’m listening Topping E50. For some reason, I’m not thrilled. Probably, better implementation could rectify that.
No, and I don’t give a flying **** about the sound of this chip, I’m not building a standard DAC. About the Topping E50 sound, it‘s time to get Markw4 on board and start massacring with mods what is otherwise a perfectly fine DAC. May I suggest an ultra low close in phase noise clock with under 100fS total jitter, that will for sure make your audiophile day.
Not so hot for Italian digital clock either, prefer much better classic style Swiss Cuckoo clock.
Fantastic idea. And imagine the look of DAC with such clock. 
Now, I must work on interface between pendulum and DAC. Actually, quite simple.
Now, I must work on interface between pendulum and DAC. Actually, quite simple.
Since ESS doesn't provide detailed information on their products without NDA, I consider their brand name a misspelling where the A is swapped for an E. AKM all the way for me, very much interested in their new line up.
Seems that one smiley was not enough to explain my message. 🙂🙂🙂
And mentioning some names and practices certainly warms up the “environment”. 😀
I will certainly not butcher a working DAC. Was hoping for an interesting implementation from your side as you always do an excellent job.
The comment about the Topping E50 and yourself "not being impressed" cancelled the smilies; I belive anybody claiming hearing differences between non pathological DAC implementation (and all Toppings products are definitely not) is not a discussion serious partner, and qualifies as a delusional audiphool. Sorry.
The last pathological DAC implementation I've seen is a Chinese dual ES9038PRO DAC (quite expensive @$450) https://www.ebay.com/itm/185036774120?hash=item2b150d1ae8:g:hJsAAOSwuhZgUdRw using JRC 5532 op amps in the IV stages. 5532 has max 35mA output current, while the ES9038PRO in mono mode requires a minimum of 66mA (100mA preferrable). I am sure my dog would scream while listening at this DAC at full scale output.
Undersizing the output current capabilities for ESS dacs is one of the most common sins against them. What is interesting about this chip compared to previous other than having the useless to me hardware unfolding for 'lossless' streaming services? interested to see what you are doing with them nonetheless.
Yeah. I chose 9028PRO vs 9038pro, as its lower current demands (therefor somewhat more freedom in output stage choice) and equal or very slightly better SNR, at a slightly lower price; turned out to be a better value proposition; for my use-case. SNR is more important for my application in DSP and volume control, than the last few dB of THD. I figure since I can get 8 channels at -120dB THD+N (-126 in stereo) from 9028 and while I may do a 9038 version too, I dont expect meaningful improvements. Less heat to get rid of with 9028 in the whole system including power supply too; especially as I may do a 16 channel build. or at least would like to leave that a possibility. I'd rather my 16 ch DSP wasnt dissipating more than 50W
Me playing with matches near gasoline, it was perfectly reasonable response from your side. 🙂
“Not thrilled” comment was aimed on audiophiles expecting that every new DAC chip will elevate their soul to heaven. I have reasonable expectations.
Ah, thats right, you are aiming this at measurement, so probably just the higher samplerate possibilities for acquisition is an added bonus? plus perhaps more control of the DSP capabilities inherent in their FPGA type arrangement. Probably stepping close to your NDA, so i'll leave that alone 😀