Wait a minute..
Do You use the Loxjie with Spdif, optical?
Otherwise the 4114 is not getting used.. (in case of USB).
And yes, the half chip approach is typically an SMSL solution. They can simplify the readout this way, (do not need a summing stage - and the measured results confirm that they get better, cleaner output this way (with respect to a D90, for example, which does the summing).
I think the D50 should be really technically close to the M400.
And last but first of all.. : what is Your impression with respect to the Gustard?!
Ciao, George
Do You use the Loxjie with Spdif, optical?
Otherwise the 4114 is not getting used.. (in case of USB).
And yes, the half chip approach is typically an SMSL solution. They can simplify the readout this way, (do not need a summing stage - and the measured results confirm that they get better, cleaner output this way (with respect to a D90, for example, which does the summing).
I think the D50 should be really technically close to the M400.
And last but first of all.. : what is Your impression with respect to the Gustard?!
Ciao, George
Hello George, yes, I actually need the spdif input more often, but I have a corresponding AK4137 board with which I can output i2s or i2s over HDMI for the DAC.
Can I write about subjective sound impressions here?
I had heard the Gustard X16 about 3 months ago against an AK4499 prototype, as well as other current high-end Dacs in the price range of about € 1200, - - 2500, -.
The resolution, details and precision of the x16 during playback are striking, the difference was astonishingly small.
The expensive DACs simply play more airily and 3-dimensionally, especially with acoustic instruments, also more authentically. But when it comes to price / performance, the X16 clearly wins.
That's exactly where I find the Loxjie D50 disappointing. The difference to the X16 is marginal, so I expected more. I couldn't tell which one was better, nor could I blindly tell them apart.
But I'll listen to them again this weekend.
I would be interested in the difference to the Gustard A18, but unfortunately it's hard to get here.
Can I write about subjective sound impressions here?
I had heard the Gustard X16 about 3 months ago against an AK4499 prototype, as well as other current high-end Dacs in the price range of about € 1200, - - 2500, -.
The resolution, details and precision of the x16 during playback are striking, the difference was astonishingly small.
The expensive DACs simply play more airily and 3-dimensionally, especially with acoustic instruments, also more authentically. But when it comes to price / performance, the X16 clearly wins.
That's exactly where I find the Loxjie D50 disappointing. The difference to the X16 is marginal, so I expected more. I couldn't tell which one was better, nor could I blindly tell them apart.
But I'll listen to them again this weekend.
I would be interested in the difference to the Gustard A18, but unfortunately it's hard to get here.
Last edited:
Friend has the smsl400 and the x16 I have the a18, the differences are tiny between them all. Sighted the x16 is a bit more resolved in the bass than the a18, the smsl400 slightly sweeter overall than both. I'd be happy with any of them and struggled to pick them apart blind and level matched. As in I couldn't tell them apart when I didn't know which was playing but felt they had a mild signature when sighted.
Go figure.
Go figure.
The problem appears to be that MS didn't want to throw a lot of processing power at high quality resampling because perfect sound is not their priority. ASIO and WASAPI Exclusive Mode are for people that want pristine audio. More audio devices support ASIO than support WASAPI Exclusive. The only dac I have seen that for sure supports the latter standard is Denfrips. None of the USB boards we can buy do, at least not so far as I can tell. Ultimately, WASAPI Exclusive Mode is better because Windows won't corrupt it like it sometimes does ASIO, despite any efforts to prevent it.
Whenever a new dac is detected by Windows, it automatically gets assigned as the Default Sound Device, and assigned as the Default Communications Device. In that case windows will resample PCM for sure. One can reassign the Default Devices to some unused sound device (unused/spare dac interface), but Windows may occasionally switch the back without warning to the dac you are trying to protect.
Whenever a new dac is detected by Windows, it automatically gets assigned as the Default Sound Device, and assigned as the Default Communications Device. In that case windows will resample PCM for sure. One can reassign the Default Devices to some unused sound device (unused/spare dac interface), but Windows may occasionally switch the back without warning to the dac you are trying to protect.
Last edited:
humm I understand. And what I don't like is whatever the OS Generation at MS, is there is always disk swaps during process, MS is done like that. Even if you fix it into the OS with no Swap and big Ram, it somewhere needs it !
I'm a MS guy, but sure for hifi no doubt I would go towards an easy wisiwig Linux. Too bad there is not something more than a Rpi with layout made for audio in mind, and with a Linux instead embeded Unix based Rpi's. We need process power for digital : EQ, FIR, oversampling...
I didn't know people were buying hifi streamer like the Chord in Ken Newton thread (lampie fellow)... seems always odd to me because all the long wires to link them all in the digital domain !
I'm a MS guy, but sure for hifi no doubt I would go towards an easy wisiwig Linux. Too bad there is not something more than a Rpi with layout made for audio in mind, and with a Linux instead embeded Unix based Rpi's. We need process power for digital : EQ, FIR, oversampling...
I didn't know people were buying hifi streamer like the Chord in Ken Newton thread (lampie fellow)... seems always odd to me because all the long wires to link them all in the digital domain !
Last edited:
I already turned my back on the MS world in 2008 and professionally in 2012. It's unbelievable how much more usable free time I have since then.
I test the DACs with my MAC and Audirvana. For the AK4499 DAC with MQA I got 2 different DAPs (also with MQA).
Audirvana has a mode in which it limits computing power for other processes, maybe it does the same with Windows?
I test the DACs with my MAC and Audirvana. For the AK4499 DAC with MQA I got 2 different DAPs (also with MQA).
Audirvana has a mode in which it limits computing power for other processes, maybe it does the same with Windows?
I use Windows server 2016 with a skeleton number of applications running in the background, by default. Then, I also disable all services/applications I can.
Then, the CPU gets downclocked to the lowest possible frequency/voltage. FielizerPro isolates one core for audio-only for me. It's NUC11 with my liner power supply of very low noise. It does sound exceptional with JRiver with its DSP disabled, i.e. native file rates only -> sent to Holo May DAC running in true ladder NOS.
If I get bored, I load HQ Player, enable turbo-boosts and then start listening to PCM / DSD at some crazy rates (this is more to impress the onlookers / casual trespassers)... Nevertheless, it's good to have choices.
AK4499 now listed as EOL on AKM's website.
AK4499EQ | Audio D/A Converters | PRODUCTS | Asahi Kasei Microdevices (AKM)
AK4498 also listed EOL.
However, not all dac products are listed that way. For example, AK4493 is listed as MP
AK4493EQ | Audio D/A Converters | PRODUCTS | Asahi Kasei Microdevices (AKM)
AK4499EQ | Audio D/A Converters | PRODUCTS | Asahi Kasei Microdevices (AKM)
AK4498 also listed EOL.
However, not all dac products are listed that way. For example, AK4493 is listed as MP
AK4493EQ | Audio D/A Converters | PRODUCTS | Asahi Kasei Microdevices (AKM)
I think that these are mistakes at the web site.
How 4498 can be EOL if it was never be MP?
4497 and 4499 are EOL w/o replacement?
4458 - marked as "Preview", but it was MP many years, also DS is still from 2017!
All ADC, except few very old - are EOL, but many old ADC are "Preview". How it possible?!
Of course everybody knows what happened, and that now all AKM ADC/DAC/etc. are not manufactured at all.
I cannot believe that AKM decided to start the new production of the old chips only, and live without their tops!
How 4498 can be EOL if it was never be MP?
4497 and 4499 are EOL w/o replacement?
4458 - marked as "Preview", but it was MP many years, also DS is still from 2017!
All ADC, except few very old - are EOL, but many old ADC are "Preview". How it possible?!
Of course everybody knows what happened, and that now all AKM ADC/DAC/etc. are not manufactured at all.
I cannot believe that AKM decided to start the new production of the old chips only, and live without their tops!
AK4137 is another one listed as 'Preview.'
Perhaps the part status codes are indicating how long its likely to take a part to get back into production, if ever.
AK4499 was said to require a special manufacturing process. Maybe they didn't sell enough to justify starting it back up. The big high end Japanese audio equipment manufacturers went off in different directions, rather than going with AK4499. Some went discrete resistor dacs, so-called FPGA (more like Chord), or with Rohm BD34301EKV. Not what AKM was expecting.
Perhaps the part status codes are indicating how long its likely to take a part to get back into production, if ever.
AK4499 was said to require a special manufacturing process. Maybe they didn't sell enough to justify starting it back up. The big high end Japanese audio equipment manufacturers went off in different directions, rather than going with AK4499. Some went discrete resistor dacs, so-called FPGA (more like Chord), or with Rohm BD34301EKV. Not what AKM was expecting.