This might be a good point in time ...
I like to throw in a general comment, specially for readers who have no started any tweaks or modifications (yet)
the choices made with the RC and LC filters were not made by design on paper only or based on "let's through in some filters" of course I had an idea with it, namely, decoupling the several power supply points. With a team or experienced listeners, we went through several options of the early design, which was on a breadboard, so very easy to change things. we listened to the differences, like with or without etc and decided based on what we heard to use it or not...
nevertheless, every audio chain is different and you might gain by doing things different. that is what I like on how the thread develops, many ideas which has been actually tried out.
for those who did not any tweaks, I like to do some expectation management .... we went through several topologies and differences are audible, but it normally is not the huge big thing, where you think it is two worlds.
I know, this position is not very popular, and I ask not to go into deep discussion now....
the real big difference with this DAC is the use of the non digital filter, paralleling DACs, double mono good power supply etc. that makes a significant difference versus many other DACs or CD players ....
Now, if you like to go beyond standard stuff and try out all the different options and possibilities we, gratefully, have seen here, you WILL have a lot of fun and gain huge experience in the hobby and for sure you will end up with a dac which suits your listening experience even better.
I am also intrigued, and as I hope to have more time for the hobby soon, I will start doing lots of things picked up here. I really look forward to that and would like to publish my outcomes on my website as well so there might be a bit of summary thing then....
keep going on the tweaking I would say!
doede
I like to throw in a general comment, specially for readers who have no started any tweaks or modifications (yet)
the choices made with the RC and LC filters were not made by design on paper only or based on "let's through in some filters" of course I had an idea with it, namely, decoupling the several power supply points. With a team or experienced listeners, we went through several options of the early design, which was on a breadboard, so very easy to change things. we listened to the differences, like with or without etc and decided based on what we heard to use it or not...
nevertheless, every audio chain is different and you might gain by doing things different. that is what I like on how the thread develops, many ideas which has been actually tried out.
for those who did not any tweaks, I like to do some expectation management
.... we went through several topologies and differences are audible, but it normally is not the huge big thing, where you think it is two worlds.I know, this position is not very popular, and I ask not to go into deep discussion now
.... the real big difference with this DAC is the use of the non digital filter, paralleling DACs, double mono good power supply etc. that makes a significant difference versus many other DACs or CD players ....
Now, if you like to go beyond standard stuff and try out all the different options and possibilities we, gratefully, have seen here, you WILL have a lot of fun and gain huge experience in the hobby
and for sure you will end up with a dac which suits your listening experience even better.I am also intrigued, and as I hope to have more time for the hobby soon, I will start doing lots of things picked up here. I really look forward to that and would like to publish my outcomes on my website as well so there might be a bit of summary thing then....
keep going on the tweaking I would say!
doede
This might be a good point in time ...
I like to throw in a general comment, specially for readers who have no started any tweaks or modifications (yet)
the choices made with the RC and LC filters were not made by design on paper only or based on "let's through in some filters" of course I had an idea with it, namely, decoupling the several power supply points. With a team or experienced listeners, we went through several options of the early design, which was on a breadboard, so very easy to change things. we listened to the differences, like with or without etc and decided based on what we heard to use it or not...
nevertheless, every audio chain is different and you might gain by doing things different. that is what I like on how the thread develops, many ideas which has been actually tried out.
for those who did not any tweaks, I like to do some expectation management
I know, this position is not very popular, and I ask not to go into deep discussion now
the real big difference with this DAC is the use of the non digital filter, paralleling DACs, double mono good power supply etc. that makes a significant difference versus many other DACs or CD players ....
Now, if you like to go beyond standard stuff and try out all the different options and possibilities we, gratefully, have seen here, you WILL have a lot of fun and gain huge experience in the hobby
I am also intrigued, and as I hope to have more time for the hobby soon, I will start doing lots of things picked up here. I really look forward to that and would like to publish my outcomes on my website as well so there might be a bit of summary thing then....
keep going on the tweaking I would say!
doede
Thanks for that information and great to hear that the 'improve driven development' is alive !
Btw. Maybe if you think about a improved dac board design, please put the TPS7A4700 on your list.
Did someone try or expect any impact of sound by change the IREF resistor (R11,R12) ?
In the PCM1794 Datasheet are not much words about the IREF pin, but 'current reference bias pin' sounds to me it could not be bad to have a good type here ? On other Hand, 6K (Datasheet 10K) implies less current flow = less impact ?
In the PCM1794 Datasheet are not much words about the IREF pin, but 'current reference bias pin' sounds to me it could not be bad to have a good type here ? On other Hand, 6K (Datasheet 10K) implies less current flow = less impact ?
Thanks for Info, could you briefly describe the function of this resistors, how they impact the current segment ? Is this a simple URI calculation (i.e. 8V/6K= 1.33mA of what) ?
Last edited:
Thanks for the comments Doede. I have read through your site, and understand you have reached the current DAC kit after many iterations of circuit trials.
I, myself, am not wanting to replace all the DAC board regulators. I probably will look to add a bit more overhead to the power supply somewhere. I am considering just getting a bigger transformer for your PSU board, spending the time to configure a Salas Shunt board, or doing Supersurfer's unregulated system. I am unsure how well the unregulated output would be without his plethora of shunt regulators populating the DAC boards.
I probably will try to get a BeagleBoneBlack/Botic music file server going, but will have the Wave I/O board in the box as well for a backup if needed, just swapping the cable and power cords out.
Lots of interest for your DDDAC, I think that's a great thing, and testiment to the hard work you have put in getting them designed, and in our hands. Thanks.
I, myself, am not wanting to replace all the DAC board regulators. I probably will look to add a bit more overhead to the power supply somewhere. I am considering just getting a bigger transformer for your PSU board, spending the time to configure a Salas Shunt board, or doing Supersurfer's unregulated system. I am unsure how well the unregulated output would be without his plethora of shunt regulators populating the DAC boards.
I probably will try to get a BeagleBoneBlack/Botic music file server going, but will have the Wave I/O board in the box as well for a backup if needed, just swapping the cable and power cords out.
Lots of interest for your DDDAC, I think that's a great thing, and testiment to the hard work you have put in getting them designed, and in our hands. Thanks.
as you rightly commented, the datasheet has no information at all. I do spend. a few words on it on my website... it is just V\ R and that's Iref controls the Ibias
, hence the output voltage over R I/V
Hallo Doede,
I understand your comment on the design; it is a well designed and good design. But I do not agree with your comment regarding "expectation management" that modifications are marginal in sound.
The power supply mods I made, have made a completely different; more transparant, detailed and dynamic sound in comparison to the standard unit. This was clearly audible during the session we did at Klaus. So it is a "huge big thing" to stick with your words.
You are, still, very welcome to have a listen at my house! You know your way around in Utrecht
Regards,
I understand your comment on the design; it is a well designed and good design. But I do not agree with your comment regarding "expectation management" that modifications are marginal in sound.
The power supply mods I made, have made a completely different; more transparant, detailed and dynamic sound in comparison to the standard unit. This was clearly audible during the session we did at Klaus. So it is a "huge big thing" to stick with your words.
You are, still, very welcome to have a listen at my house! You know your way around in Utrecht
Regards,
"static problem" solved
Hello all,
I read a lot about static problems with the DDDAC, I had same problem but the only thing is, it was not realy a static noise I hear, in my case it was a driver/software combination what was acting as a static distortion.
My configuration is jriver / jplay in kernel streaming which gives the static noise, when using jriver with Luckit Audio 2.0 KS or Luckit Asio, the problem is in my case solved
It's worth to try it
Hello all,
I read a lot about static problems with the DDDAC, I had same problem but the only thing is, it was not realy a static noise I hear, in my case it was a driver/software combination what was acting as a static distortion.
My configuration is jriver / jplay in kernel streaming which gives the static noise, when using jriver with Luckit Audio 2.0 KS or Luckit Asio, the problem is in my case solved
It's worth to try it
I always enjoy reading about other people’s get-to-gathers, so thought some might enjoy reading about ours.
Last night myself Mark (I) Verhoeven (idem forum name), Mark II (friend of Mark I) and Cees Pel had the privilege to be invited around to Stefan (Supersurfer) his place for a DAC comparison/listening session.
The equipment line-up for the test/comperisaon, we had in mind. was:
· Mark verhoeven’s,Audio Note Kit DAC 4.1 pretty tricked out NOS DAC, see picture below.
· Stefan’s DDDAC, 4x board DAC, balanced to single-ended “cap”less out , with Tentlabs shunts and own "hi-end" PSU.
· Cees Pel brought along a PSU he’s build for his own DDDAC implementation which unfortunately wasn’t ready yet, but Is promising to be something special as well.
· & my DDDAC, with 4x standard DAC boards, balanced to single-ended “cap”less out and a slightly modified standard 12Vdc supply.
The reference system used was Stefan’s superb sounding home grown DIY system, consisting of very special (looking and sounding) set of tube amps, which worked something like this (I’m personally not a tube-head, so please excuse any ignorant mistakes) :silver rock input transformer -> emissionlabs EML 20A mesh triod’s -> tamura interstage -> western electric VT-25 triode -> tamura interstages parallel -> EML AD1 triode parallel -> tamura output transformers and these were hooked up to Manger driver augmented with some Vifa kevlarwoofers, again in a home build enclosure.
So plenty of quality there to bring out the good and the bads in our respective DAC builds.
To boot, it also turned out Stefan had an extensive collection of well recorded reference tracks to listen too.
First off was my DDDAC build which meant I could get a feel for what Stefan’s system sounded like. We started off with a Pink Floyd DVD-A track, which we all know to death. Needless to say it sounded pretty great, dynamic and good soundstage, however it revealed a light bit of harshness to my ears and was lacking a bit of body in the midtones. We mainly attributed this to my use of Caddock IV resistors and thinking about it afterwards might also be due my choice of signal path cabling (skin effect?). (I suspect some of the quibbles where in the recording too..) I learned a lot in those first 5 minutes, right there and then.
Next up was Stefans DDDAC. It was quite a remarkable difference. The same track sounded even more dynamic and became more spacious, the tonal quality was better too. Some tracks later (I think it was: Miles Davis - Complete Live At Plugged Nickel 1965 (1995)) the soundstage was simply amazing. The occasional Goosebumps moment of being teleported back to being “there”.., if you know what I mean. Simply superb. I think Stefan is definitely evolving the DDAC in the right direction and the good news is there is still plenty of scope/ideas for further improvements..
Last up was Mark’s Audio Note DAC (4.1), another highly regarded DAC design but a totally different proposition based around a single AD1865N NOS chip and a tube/transformer output stage. In my ears the tonal quality of this DAC was superb, very relaxed and natural. However, especially compared to Stefans’s DDDAC the dynamics and presence was not the same, also the soundstage was not as open/wide/deep with the AN DAC. None of which should come as a complete surprise considering the inherent differences of the designs.
Especially when Stefan switched back to his DDDAC we were all quite convinced this was a step up. However there seems to still be scope to get the tonal balance dialled in further by playing around with the type of capacitors in the design.
Cees his PSU had some interesting features too, like a little hand wound HF filtering coil in the place of the fuse holder, Mills resistors some Ebony encapsulated caps, check out the picture below.. , years of experience shows, should be very intresting to see what he makes of the DDDAC.
Thanks again to Stefan for inviting us and for a very enjoyable evening.
Hopefully we can do it again, maybe next time to compare Field coil PSU’s J
Last night myself Mark (I) Verhoeven (idem forum name), Mark II (friend of Mark I) and Cees Pel had the privilege to be invited around to Stefan (Supersurfer) his place for a DAC comparison/listening session.
The equipment line-up for the test/comperisaon, we had in mind. was:
· Mark verhoeven’s,Audio Note Kit DAC 4.1 pretty tricked out NOS DAC, see picture below.
· Stefan’s DDDAC, 4x board DAC, balanced to single-ended “cap”less out , with Tentlabs shunts and own "hi-end" PSU.
· Cees Pel brought along a PSU he’s build for his own DDDAC implementation which unfortunately wasn’t ready yet, but Is promising to be something special as well.
· & my DDDAC, with 4x standard DAC boards, balanced to single-ended “cap”less out and a slightly modified standard 12Vdc supply.
The reference system used was Stefan’s superb sounding home grown DIY system, consisting of very special (looking and sounding) set of tube amps, which worked something like this (I’m personally not a tube-head, so please excuse any ignorant mistakes) :silver rock input transformer -> emissionlabs EML 20A mesh triod’s -> tamura interstage -> western electric VT-25 triode -> tamura interstages parallel -> EML AD1 triode parallel -> tamura output transformers and these were hooked up to Manger driver augmented with some Vifa kevlarwoofers, again in a home build enclosure.
So plenty of quality there to bring out the good and the bads in our respective DAC builds.
To boot, it also turned out Stefan had an extensive collection of well recorded reference tracks to listen too.
First off was my DDDAC build which meant I could get a feel for what Stefan’s system sounded like. We started off with a Pink Floyd DVD-A track, which we all know to death. Needless to say it sounded pretty great, dynamic and good soundstage, however it revealed a light bit of harshness to my ears and was lacking a bit of body in the midtones. We mainly attributed this to my use of Caddock IV resistors and thinking about it afterwards might also be due my choice of signal path cabling (skin effect?). (I suspect some of the quibbles where in the recording too..) I learned a lot in those first 5 minutes, right there and then.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Next up was Stefans DDDAC. It was quite a remarkable difference. The same track sounded even more dynamic and became more spacious, the tonal quality was better too. Some tracks later (I think it was: Miles Davis - Complete Live At Plugged Nickel 1965 (1995)) the soundstage was simply amazing. The occasional Goosebumps moment of being teleported back to being “there”.., if you know what I mean. Simply superb. I think Stefan is definitely evolving the DDAC in the right direction and the good news is there is still plenty of scope/ideas for further improvements..
Last up was Mark’s Audio Note DAC (4.1), another highly regarded DAC design but a totally different proposition based around a single AD1865N NOS chip and a tube/transformer output stage. In my ears the tonal quality of this DAC was superb, very relaxed and natural. However, especially compared to Stefans’s DDDAC the dynamics and presence was not the same, also the soundstage was not as open/wide/deep with the AN DAC. None of which should come as a complete surprise considering the inherent differences of the designs.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Especially when Stefan switched back to his DDDAC we were all quite convinced this was a step up. However there seems to still be scope to get the tonal balance dialled in further by playing around with the type of capacitors in the design.
Cees his PSU had some interesting features too, like a little hand wound HF filtering coil in the place of the fuse holder, Mills resistors some Ebony encapsulated caps, check out the picture below.. , years of experience shows, should be very intresting to see what he makes of the DDDAC.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Thanks again to Stefan for inviting us and for a very enjoyable evening.
Hopefully we can do it again, maybe next time to compare Field coil PSU’s J
Last edited:
Hey Stefan,
Actually, the current is a flat line on a choke loaded rectifier, much more so than a cap loaded one, the Radiotron Designers Handbook goes over this, is an interesting phenomenon. Being that it is the current surge tthat causes alot of the noise in diodes, having a stable current improves the diodes noise characteristics.
Will see if I can find the appropriate page and take a photo.
Chuz,
Drew.
Hi Drew,
You are right, its the current surge that's making it hard on the rectifiers. It just happens that my psu is not a choke input. I like the sound of a capacitor input psu.
You can use Duncan amps psu designer and fool around with choke and cap input psu. It shows you nicely what is happening in the current and voltage areas.
The psu designer however cannot show a graph of the sound quality of the design
Regards,
You are right, its the current surge that's making it hard on the rectifiers. It just happens that my psu is not a choke input. I like the sound of a capacitor input psu.
You can use Duncan amps psu designer and fool around with choke and cap input psu. It shows you nicely what is happening in the current and voltage areas.
The psu designer however cannot show a graph of the sound quality of the design
Regards,
DUNCAN PSU modeller
No doubt this thing will not bring you to power supply nirvana but it does give you some guidelines as to what does what if you actually configure a few supplies like your models and use them for awhile.
As with any measurement scheme they are only useful when paired with actual listening.
I think one of the most important things the thing teaches you is how quickly the point of diminishing returns occurs with adding capacitance.
I am still waiting for parts for my boards so I have no experience to relay at this point with this project. My comments have been based on other projects.
Since the SILMICs are smaller in physical size than the NICHICONs I am using larger capacities than Doede specified but still way below going too far (I hope!). I am using the "os con" caps in the four Vdd positions. I am using these on faith, and other's recommendations, having never used them before either with the DDDAC or anything else.
I am toggling between choke input and cap input. There are certainly many situations where the choke input is not the best sounding approach even with its many theoretical and measurable advantages.
I know many who have used them for filament supplies and find they give the amplifier a sluggish sound. One would think this type of supply, with its ability to filter out spikes and such, would be ideal for the Vdd supply but on the other hand these circuits need power supplies that can deliver current quickly when needed as opposed to a smooth even flow as a class A amplification circuit.
I think I will be sticking with cap input for Vdd but will try choke input for Vcc initially and then try cap input after becoming familiar with the sound.
Doing my initial trials with one board before moving on to more because I am lazy and hate removing components, too.
No doubt this thing will not bring you to power supply nirvana but it does give you some guidelines as to what does what if you actually configure a few supplies like your models and use them for awhile.
As with any measurement scheme they are only useful when paired with actual listening.
I think one of the most important things the thing teaches you is how quickly the point of diminishing returns occurs with adding capacitance.
I am still waiting for parts for my boards so I have no experience to relay at this point with this project. My comments have been based on other projects.
Since the SILMICs are smaller in physical size than the NICHICONs I am using larger capacities than Doede specified but still way below going too far (I hope!). I am using the "os con" caps in the four Vdd positions. I am using these on faith, and other's recommendations, having never used them before either with the DDDAC or anything else.
I am toggling between choke input and cap input. There are certainly many situations where the choke input is not the best sounding approach even with its many theoretical and measurable advantages.
I know many who have used them for filament supplies and find they give the amplifier a sluggish sound. One would think this type of supply, with its ability to filter out spikes and such, would be ideal for the Vdd supply but on the other hand these circuits need power supplies that can deliver current quickly when needed as opposed to a smooth even flow as a class A amplification circuit.
I think I will be sticking with cap input for Vdd but will try choke input for Vcc initially and then try cap input after becoming familiar with the sound.
Doing my initial trials with one board before moving on to more because I am lazy and hate removing components, too.
Hi Rick,
I am planning to use two 100uf silmic instead of 4x47uf as on the board.
You mentioned there are 4 Vdd caps? I only see one per channel. The cap in front of the Vdd regulator is basically in parallel to the 4 Vcc caps.
I am thinking of tapping the Vdd supply directly from the raw supply, this would give better decoupling of the two supply lines.
As I am using shunts I will solder the Vdd shunt directly on the pin of the dac chip (where the wima is). The raw supply I currently have will be extended with an RC stage with oscon, in this way it is also possible to lower the 12v a bit more so it matches the 3.3v better.
Please keep us posted on your findings with the chokes.
Regards,
I am planning to use two 100uf silmic instead of 4x47uf as on the board.
You mentioned there are 4 Vdd caps? I only see one per channel. The cap in front of the Vdd regulator is basically in parallel to the 4 Vcc caps.
I am thinking of tapping the Vdd supply directly from the raw supply, this would give better decoupling of the two supply lines.
As I am using shunts I will solder the Vdd shunt directly on the pin of the dac chip (where the wima is). The raw supply I currently have will be extended with an RC stage with oscon, in this way it is also possible to lower the 12v a bit more so it matches the 3.3v better.
Please keep us posted on your findings with the chokes.
Regards,
There are two per channel - four per board
I was imprecise!
If you cut the trace, as I have mentioned before, the other cap will be freed from the common supply which is what I will do.
The Vdd supply, a completely separate approx. 5 volts supply, will enter at the "first" cap to "feed" the 3.3V reg and after the reg onto the second cap.
Take care,
I was imprecise!
If you cut the trace, as I have mentioned before, the other cap will be freed from the common supply which is what I will do.
The Vdd supply, a completely separate approx. 5 volts supply, will enter at the "first" cap to "feed" the 3.3V reg and after the reg onto the second cap.
Take care,
Last edited:
There is no need to. You can solder on the position of the wima cap. The shunts do not need this cap anyway.
Hi Doede,
hi all you other DIYers!
As it is all about the "total" amelioration in sound of our superb DDDACs, please allow me to quote something that presumably is of interest in combination with this masterwork. Treblid on the KillerDac-Site just wrote the following:
Login
you might perhaps register to get full access, but I think it is worth it, especially regarding the Linux-explanations and -presentations...
but to me now it is all specifically in avoiding USB, and he writes:
"I avoid everything USB. Now why is that?
This is a cyclictest plot of my PC with USB enabled in the BIOS (For ref, see
https://rt.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Cyclictest)
Note that this is really hardware dependent so YMMV, and don't forget the cyclictest is a artificial benchmark (e.g. if I change the sampling interval and increase the number of threads the plots will be very different). But regardless this is an example of what USB can do. Something in the hardware is polling something at regular intervals. This is actually a good example because it's regular - USB keyboards and mouse can be more random (a mix of servicing IRQs and synchronous vs asynchronous codes so can be unpredictable/YMMV)..
Anyway with my example, if you bin all those occurrences into say "< 20 us", and "> 20 us but < 40 us", "> 40 us but < 60 us" and so on. A pattern will emerge - the ratio of "< 20 us" vs "> 20 but < 40" is about 2:1. And there are heaps in the bins > 100 us.
Now this is another plot with USB turned off in the BIOS.
Apologies for the different Y scale (small screen). Notice how the big latency spikes are now gone. And the ratio of "< 20 us" vs "> 20 but < 40" is ~7:1... More importantly no big spikes. If I overclock the CPU, all latencies are likely to fall to the "< 20 us" threshold, but it really doesn't matter AQ wise (at least I can't hear it).
This is why async USB is very important ;D, and why I choose a PC over a notebook setup, for more control over the components I can use. Despite the benefits of a notebook's ability to run on a battery vs a SMPS for a PC."
...well, I am "dreaming" of this NON-USB solution for quite some time now: getting completely rid of USB, and I am impressed with the viewable results that he shows...
why? because the amelioration in sound regarding our DDDAC's separate power supply of 5 Volt (specifically not via USB-cable) but from externel controlled power supply is that good that I now want to get rid of the rest of the USB-connection(s)...
1. I see him taking off (if I see right) the digital signal directly from his sound card ? I am not a technician, but wouldn't it be "better" to take the digital signal directly from the motherboard without "deviation"? I would wish that...
2. I see him having no plugs and sockets in between and on the flip-side of his PC - that surely is advantageous...
3. and last not least for the three different voltages within PCs own power supply I would wish three independent controlled power supplies - for example like Stefan's, and of the same size as with the 5 Volt for the DAC...
...but unfortunately, as I am not a technician, let me at least invite you to discuss...
thanks
hi all you other DIYers!
As it is all about the "total" amelioration in sound of our superb DDDACs, please allow me to quote something that presumably is of interest in combination with this masterwork. Treblid on the KillerDac-Site just wrote the following:
Login
you might perhaps register to get full access, but I think it is worth it, especially regarding the Linux-explanations and -presentations...
but to me now it is all specifically in avoiding USB, and he writes:
"I avoid everything USB. Now why is that?
This is a cyclictest plot of my PC with USB enabled in the BIOS (For ref, see
https://rt.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Cyclictest)
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Note that this is really hardware dependent so YMMV, and don't forget the cyclictest is a artificial benchmark (e.g. if I change the sampling interval and increase the number of threads the plots will be very different). But regardless this is an example of what USB can do. Something in the hardware is polling something at regular intervals. This is actually a good example because it's regular - USB keyboards and mouse can be more random (a mix of servicing IRQs and synchronous vs asynchronous codes so can be unpredictable/YMMV)..
Anyway with my example, if you bin all those occurrences into say "< 20 us", and "> 20 us but < 40 us", "> 40 us but < 60 us" and so on. A pattern will emerge - the ratio of "< 20 us" vs "> 20 but < 40" is about 2:1. And there are heaps in the bins > 100 us.
Now this is another plot with USB turned off in the BIOS.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Apologies for the different Y scale (small screen). Notice how the big latency spikes are now gone. And the ratio of "< 20 us" vs "> 20 but < 40" is ~7:1... More importantly no big spikes. If I overclock the CPU, all latencies are likely to fall to the "< 20 us" threshold, but it really doesn't matter AQ wise (at least I can't hear it).
This is why async USB is very important ;D, and why I choose a PC over a notebook setup, for more control over the components I can use. Despite the benefits of a notebook's ability to run on a battery vs a SMPS for a PC."
...well, I am "dreaming" of this NON-USB solution for quite some time now: getting completely rid of USB, and I am impressed with the viewable results that he shows...
why? because the amelioration in sound regarding our DDDAC's separate power supply of 5 Volt (specifically not via USB-cable) but from externel controlled power supply is that good that I now want to get rid of the rest of the USB-connection(s)...
1. I see him taking off (if I see right) the digital signal directly from his sound card ? I am not a technician, but wouldn't it be "better" to take the digital signal directly from the motherboard without "deviation"? I would wish that...
2. I see him having no plugs and sockets in between and on the flip-side of his PC - that surely is advantageous...
3. and last not least for the three different voltages within PCs own power supply I would wish three independent controlled power supplies - for example like Stefan's, and of the same size as with the 5 Volt for the DAC...
...but unfortunately, as I am not a technician, let me at least invite you to discuss...
thanks
Last edited: