Given the potential achievable specs these two chips can achieve when deployed together, I would assume so. It is also possible to run it as a dual mono solution for even higher performance.
The first preliminary prototypes are said to be sonically impressive, even against the old AK4499, but that's hearsay so far. These statements are very similar to those made when the AK4499 was introduced versus the AK4497.
But you must not forget that the real performance depends on the implementation of the device developers. And there it is similar to the development of lenses. Time and cost increase squared as development gets better and the last 2-10% is 10-1000 times more expensive.
For all other predictions you would need a crystal ball, especially as long as there is not even an evaluation board.
Who have heard AK4499EX vs. AK4499EQ in a listening test - and what kind of audible differences are to note ?
This question rises up in my head after reading this:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/akm-is-dead.38857/
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/ast...-collaboration-with-empire-ears.964863/page-8 (post #111)
Last edited:
In order to answer this we would need to design and implement 2 different DAC designs that would be as similar as possible, so as to indeed judge the quality of the DAC chips and not the different receivers / power supplies / I/V stages / etc.
Dam thats cheap. Dual AK4499EX, a case and streaming input for US$1000? Death of DIY for AK4499EX DACs.
I have built my power amp and my speakers. But I am not sure it is really worth it to DIY a DAC. How would you approach it?
IME it takes more than one DIY DAC project to learn how to do it well. So far as I know there are no books on DAC building like there are good, helpful books on on building preamps, power amps, speakers, etc. Yet I tend to agree with Dimdim, if you are up for the journey you can do pretty well. However, its not necessarily low cost. Over time and with multiple design iterations it can add up.
Exactly. You will need to do multiple iterations, starting with implementing a basic reference design (datasheet) inspired board and improving upon it with time and experience. You will learn a lot.. but it will not be cheap.
For example, regarding AKM dacs, I started with this little AK4490 proof of concept board:
moved up to a dual AK4490:
..then on to a dual AK4493:
..then on to a dual AK4497 with integrated XMOS and S/PDIF receivers, as well as the controller:
..an just when I got a hold of an AK4499 the factory burned down, making an AK4499 design essentially an one-off, so I went back to ESS chip-based designs.
Now I'm waiting on the AK4191 & AK4499EX for my next design.
But each iteration has taught me quite a lot.
For example, regarding AKM dacs, I started with this little AK4490 proof of concept board:
moved up to a dual AK4490:
..then on to a dual AK4493:
..then on to a dual AK4497 with integrated XMOS and S/PDIF receivers, as well as the controller:
..an just when I got a hold of an AK4499 the factory burned down, making an AK4499 design essentially an one-off, so I went back to ESS chip-based designs.
Now I'm waiting on the AK4191 & AK4499EX for my next design.
But each iteration has taught me quite a lot.
Costwise diy dac does not make much sense especially with modern lower priced dac chips. E.g. Topping E30 II with dual AK4493 costs around 150 USD. While it is possible to make a dual AK4493 diy dac that sounds better, measures as well and has similar feature set the cost will be 2x or 3x if a decent chassis is included.
But since most of the cost is in the ancillary circuits making a diy dac with high grade chips such as AK4491 & AK4499 may even make more sense costwise.
It is all a matter of priorities / needs.
If a Topping E30 II sounds good enough to you, you will save a lot of time and money by buying it instead of going DIY.
If you want to squeeze the very last drop of performance from, say, an AK4493, you will definitely need to go DIY.
And you will need to design / build a top quality USB receiver, and use shunt power supplies as pre-regulators followed by top quality LDOs, and use the best available parts to design your overengineered output stage, etc etc.
If a Topping E30 II sounds good enough to you, you will save a lot of time and money by buying it instead of going DIY.
If you want to squeeze the very last drop of performance from, say, an AK4493, you will definitely need to go DIY.
And you will need to design / build a top quality USB receiver, and use shunt power supplies as pre-regulators followed by top quality LDOs, and use the best available parts to design your overengineered output stage, etc etc.
That what I was conjecturing. With objects like the the Topping E70 around, one can be confidently sure that they got more or less the best one can get (except for those that believe they hear the effect of jitter at -160Db, which I am going to ignore - the folks, not the jitter - well, also that jitter).
For my speakers I have about 4K of materials, and for my amps another 2.5K (an overengineered Purifi 1ET400A build and two Hypex Fusion single channel plate amps for the sub-woofer sections of the two channels). With this I got SQ that exceeds that of commercial systems that cost at least one order of magnitude more. But for a DAC? It requires skills I do not have (and am not sure I want to acquire, even though I am a mathematician) and a financial investment that goes way beyond the price of the Topping E70.
Of course there is the fun factor. If we do it for fun, expenses are secondary, but up to a point. I had a LOT of fun building speakers and amps (I have also a few more amps around) - and at the end I also saved quite a few bucks. Not sure with a DAC project. Definitely not the circuitry, not for me.
OTOH I would be interested in the development of efficient filters. Both the maths and the programming. So, if there is a SotA board I can start to use, maybe with an FPGA, and the suitable dev kit, that could be interesting.