The bass content and slam along with the transient reproduction. The soundstage gets deeper with better ambient clues and the treble and mid range get more lifelike.
I will have a longer listening session later but the improvements are not subtle
i just wonder how the i2s signals look like after a relative long cable length of approx. 30 cm (using 11 or 16 decks) . has anyone of you measured that with a scope? in the old school i was told not to exceed 10cm if possible ;-)
The dropping of the output impedance with the extra multiple boards would probably account for the improvements.The bass content and slam along with the transient reproduction. The soundstage gets deeper with better ambient clues and the treble and mid range get more lifelike.
I will have a longer listening session later but the improvements are not subtle
Thanks for the quick reply.
Is there a reason why you did choose an I2S receiver?
Can't the WaveIO output the streaming in RJ mode?
I know the 8804 can do just 16-bit in RJ
Thanks a bunch!
With all this talk of turning computers into digital sources using dacs, do we really need to spend thousands of dollars on high end cd transports? There's a used Levinson on A'gon for over $3K. I understand that they're beautiful pieces of industrial art in addition to a first rate transport, but isn't this hobby, and it is just a hobby, turning away from transports when you can just burn disks into a separate dedicated audio hard drive? I certainly wouldn't want to be selling a used transport right now.
Mate! Your cynical and rude manner are not a appreciated!
I know what a CA server is, much better than your little mind is able to tell!!! There are much into it rather just a computer hardware. There is OS refinement, hardware matching and most of all the power supply, SSD, all coming to an overall SQ outcome. Unless your suffering from hearing impair for not appreciate the sound differences between every component swapped, whether it is a software or hardware!!!
Edit: Just to enlightening your narrow little mind, marce, I am doing your a favoure to include some links on Server building for your educational purpose! Pls do research before posting, else it will simply showing your true character and depth of wishdom!
Building the ideal(ish) Music Server - Digital, DACs & Computer Audio - StereoNET
Music Streamers that are DIY - Digital, DACs & Computer Audio - StereoNET
A DIY High Quality Hifi Music Server - DIY Audio Projects - StereoNET
Last edited:
Its a computer....
Sorry for seeming to be rude your certainly getting your own back
But it is nothing more than a computer inside, sorry to disappoint. I see you do know because you have just described a computer.
Now if you are going to tell me that digital data from an SSD is going to sound different from digital data from a HDD then I will have to feel sorry for you.
As for my little mind, I work on the layout of many computers whether they are going to end up as a PC, some sort of data server (music video etc.) or controlling some fancy bit of kit (way beyond a music server), so I know what a computer is....
For just streaming digital data you don't need anything special, if you have an internal DAC then isolation of power supplies etc for the analogue out would be a given.
But an audiophile music server is nothing more than a computer in a fancy case, for distributing digital data to an off board DAC there is going to be little if any difference between a bespoke server and my cheep PC that sits there just spitting music out when required over the network....
Look at the last link, using an Intel motherboard....not my first choice if I was going for ultimate quality... a bespoke motherboard with optimised layout would be best, PC motherboards use the minimum number of layers they can get away with (6-8)... when doing layout for critical equipment, I will often use 12-14 layers to give the best signal integrity and control of SSN etc. But hey what would my narrow little mind know...
Sorry for seeming to be rude your certainly getting your own back
But it is nothing more than a computer inside, sorry to disappoint. I see you do know because you have just described a computer.
Now if you are going to tell me that digital data from an SSD is going to sound different from digital data from a HDD then I will have to feel sorry for you.
As for my little mind, I work on the layout of many computers whether they are going to end up as a PC, some sort of data server (music video etc.) or controlling some fancy bit of kit (way beyond a music server), so I know what a computer is....
For just streaming digital data you don't need anything special, if you have an internal DAC then isolation of power supplies etc for the analogue out would be a given.
But an audiophile music server is nothing more than a computer in a fancy case, for distributing digital data to an off board DAC there is going to be little if any difference between a bespoke server and my cheep PC that sits there just spitting music out when required over the network....
Look at the last link, using an Intel motherboard....not my first choice if I was going for ultimate quality... a bespoke motherboard with optimised layout would be best, PC motherboards use the minimum number of layers they can get away with (6-8)... when doing layout for critical equipment, I will often use 12-14 layers to give the best signal integrity and control of SSN etc. But hey what would my narrow little mind know...
Best to leave semantics out of the discussion I think. The traditional laptop, PC mac mini etc with SMPS with output from a common USB bus have proven to be inferior to purpose built music servers which address issues of RFI/EMI.
The reason commercial music servers cost so much is that they sound better than a standard PC and it is not general knowledge that SQ can be greatly improved over their bog standard windows PC by a few simple enhancements.
Your comment that "there is going to be little if any difference between a bespoke server and my cheep PC " is not correct. Any rudimentary listening comparison will reveal it to be the case. The more people that understand and experience this, the easier it will be for newcomers to the scene to access better SQ without paying high commercial prices.
The only way to keep noise from the computing section to the DAC if you think it is a problem is ISOLATION.
I would never use a laptop, but a desk top with an SMPS is no problem. An SMPS is not the only source of noise on a digital based design and with a good SMPS it is not going to be the main source of noise.
As to getting the digital data to the DAC what ever choice you make there is going to be noise (the mains noise is SSN) so isolation is the key, isolate the DAC preferably off board, or by whatever other means of galvanic isolation, IF noise is a problem... this can only be assessed by measurements to determine the level and frequency spread of the noise spectrum.
As I have said using a PC or a bespoke music server built from a PC motherboard is not going to give you any difference in sound quality if you isolate the DAC (and probably not even if it is directly connected by a cable, unless the noise is extremely bad).
You have a system that retrieves digital data from a disk and spits it out of a port to a DAC, be that port SPDIF, USB, Ethernet, this is easy these days and not problematic in any way however much mystique you try and put round it... you then have the business end the DAC, getting the data there is easy, if you suspect noise then confirm that there is noise, filter it or isolate. jitter only matters at the point of conversion so that needs sorting at the DAC (again if it is a problem, more often and not it isn't but!) and then you have an analogue out of the DAC, again the supply to this section is better filtered or from a separate supply as noise here (within limits) can cause problems...
The first thing though it to determine whether there is a noise problem, if so what magnitude it is and then sort it with filtering or isolation.
Spending time discussing whether digital data is better from an SSD or a HDD ro different cables is not the way to do it.
I would never use a laptop, but a desk top with an SMPS is no problem. An SMPS is not the only source of noise on a digital based design and with a good SMPS it is not going to be the main source of noise.
As to getting the digital data to the DAC what ever choice you make there is going to be noise (the mains noise is SSN) so isolation is the key, isolate the DAC preferably off board, or by whatever other means of galvanic isolation, IF noise is a problem... this can only be assessed by measurements to determine the level and frequency spread of the noise spectrum.
As I have said using a PC or a bespoke music server built from a PC motherboard is not going to give you any difference in sound quality if you isolate the DAC (and probably not even if it is directly connected by a cable, unless the noise is extremely bad).
You have a system that retrieves digital data from a disk and spits it out of a port to a DAC, be that port SPDIF, USB, Ethernet, this is easy these days and not problematic in any way however much mystique you try and put round it... you then have the business end the DAC, getting the data there is easy, if you suspect noise then confirm that there is noise, filter it or isolate. jitter only matters at the point of conversion so that needs sorting at the DAC (again if it is a problem, more often and not it isn't but!) and then you have an analogue out of the DAC, again the supply to this section is better filtered or from a separate supply as noise here (within limits) can cause problems...
The first thing though it to determine whether there is a noise problem, if so what magnitude it is and then sort it with filtering or isolation.
Spending time discussing whether digital data is better from an SSD or a HDD ro different cables is not the way to do it.
The audio world has moved on and is doing so at a rapid pace, and perhaps you may like to do some research on the matter starting with some of the studies done by John Swenson and others who have proven that galvanic isolation is easily breached.
For some inexplicable reason some people still believe a computer is infallible and only components connected to it affect SQ. That is an argument of convenience that has been disproven many times over.
Your suggested solutions, with respect, are antiquated when you consider that digital audio has been with us for over 30 years. take a look how the real experts in digital audio have addressed these issues with their high end CD players for a clue.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Now ask yourself, who would want design an audio component using the highest possible levels of RFI, EMI using the cheapest and nastiest components? The answer should be "no-one" but that is exactly what is happening with the average PC.
My last word.
Tassop, I work on designs that are far more sensitive to noise than audio, I have also worked on audio related products, so I do know what I am talking about and my ideas (though not my own what I have learned) are not antiquated.
John Swenson sells products and the stuff he has put out recently is well known, including shock horror packet noise...And I have read what he has put out and some of his stuff on another forum, very audio related....
I study info from the likes of Henry Ott, Ralph Morrison Howard Johnson etc and have all their books, do you? I also advise on such matters and provide practical guides for layout etc.
As to real experts in digital audio, digital audio is like analogue audio just part of the whole spectrum of electronic design is is nothing special, in fact quite often esoteric audio is not that cutting edge...
Your last statement goes on about PCs yet the links were for PC motherboards!!!!!! As I stated I do designs where signal integrity and EMC are paramount and often do boards with 14-16 layers and such things as DDR length matching taken to the extreme.
So I am more aware I should imagine of the issues related to analogue /digital design, how to combat noise and get the best possible EMC results than most as I do it every day for quite bespoke customer, including noise and EMC immunity up into the GHz range (18). I do not follow audio fashion design and ideas, but standard engineering practices that are know and proven to work.
I was interested to read what Tam Nguyen is doing, he is going the right way, I would look at filtering for higher frequencies and some differential filtering.
Anyway back to the DAC, my apologies for the OT stuff, its my little mind.
A bonus list of interesting links that you may find useful, I have a much larger set of documentation, so if you want any info on related stuff such as digital noise....
Tassop, I work on designs that are far more sensitive to noise than audio, I have also worked on audio related products, so I do know what I am talking about and my ideas (though not my own what I have learned) are not antiquated.
John Swenson sells products and the stuff he has put out recently is well known, including shock horror packet noise...And I have read what he has put out and some of his stuff on another forum, very audio related....
I study info from the likes of Henry Ott, Ralph Morrison Howard Johnson etc and have all their books, do you? I also advise on such matters and provide practical guides for layout etc.
As to real experts in digital audio, digital audio is like analogue audio just part of the whole spectrum of electronic design is is nothing special, in fact quite often esoteric audio is not that cutting edge...
Your last statement goes on about PCs yet the links were for PC motherboards!!!!!! As I stated I do designs where signal integrity and EMC are paramount and often do boards with 14-16 layers and such things as DDR length matching taken to the extreme.
So I am more aware I should imagine of the issues related to analogue /digital design, how to combat noise and get the best possible EMC results than most as I do it every day for quite bespoke customer, including noise and EMC immunity up into the GHz range (18). I do not follow audio fashion design and ideas, but standard engineering practices that are know and proven to work.
I was interested to read what Tam Nguyen is doing, he is going the right way, I would look at filtering for higher frequencies and some differential filtering.
Anyway back to the DAC, my apologies for the OT stuff, its my little mind.
A bonus list of interesting links that you may find useful, I have a much larger set of documentation, so if you want any info on related stuff such as digital noise....
Hello,
I agree but because there is not much news to mention on the dddac this thread didnt get a lot of visitors the last month. It has been without any new post for 2 weeks some time ago.
I did start modifying my present ( Curcio dac) device using some of the chokes i did buy to build my dddac because there werent any updates on the new boards that will be on the market with the shunts allready installed.
i did spend just a few hundred $ / euros because most of the parts i did use for modification just come from my vast stock of parts that i did collect in the last 3 decades.
Now will probably focus on building a new tube amp ( just need to buy one or two lundahl chokes because to me common mode connected input chokes is the way to go.)
Once this amp is ready. The new boards will be available.
greetings, eduard