• Disclaimer: This Vendor's Forum is a paid-for commercial area. Unlike the rest of diyAudio, the Vendor has complete control of what may or may not be posted in this forum. If you wish to discuss technical matters outside the bounds of what is permitted by the Vendor, please use the non-commercial areas of diyAudio to do so.

Buffalo DAC (ESS Sabre 9008)

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Jump to Latest
mikelm

mikelm

Member
Joined 2003
Re: Re: off topic - sorry

rolls said:
Mike
I would like to learn more from you about this lightspeed type of volume control. Is it possible to do a bal/unbal conversion? I have never heard of it.
Thank you!
Click to expand...

read this thread:

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=80194&highlight=

There is a lot to read but it's worth reading it all because an already great idea gets a lot better with group input ( in my opinion )

I cannot think how to use this for balanced to unbalanced

now I guess we better let this thread get back on track - hehe
 
B

Beefy

Member
Joined 2008
SPDIF MUX switch?

Russ White said:



Sure, basically there are 2 inputs which represent a two bit binary number. You can use a 2 pole 4 pos switch (like a rotary switch) or a microntroller (or maybe a counter or some other logic device) to step through the sources.

There is a pin header on the board with the that looks something like this VDD,b1,b2,GND.

Cheers!
Russ
Click to expand...

So it has come to pass that I might need to make a Mouser order very quickly, to take advantage of an opportunity that has come up...... thus I am desperately in need of good alternatives for this 2 pole 4 pos switch for the SPDIF MUX.

Can you supply any recommendations that are likely to be in stock at Mouser?
 
F

fmak

Member
Joined 2001
Re: #41 is ALIVE!!!!

JonPike said:



The Buffalo is syncing on 44.1 and 48k, but not 96. I get brief, occasional flashes of the lock LED, and tiny pops.

BTW, is there any significant preference sonically to one or the other setting? (I imagine the answer may depend on input source CD or 24/96 files, etc...)
Click to expand...

Its the comparator!

I am running the Buffalo thru the WM8804 at 192k I2S and Ivy balanced right now. Pity it won't do 176.4k as my best files are at that resolution.

Two points.

1. The system is as spdif cable dependent as anything else; so much for jitter attentuation thru the 8804. This Buffalo is somewhat brighter than the last one.

2. I am supplying thru Twisted Pear modules feeding 4 Jung type regulators (< 10uV noise floor). These do make a great difference; the sond is somewhat mellower thru the LM317/337 preregulators (0.15 mV noise floor).

I am looking forward to Russ and Brian fitting the faster comparator which would make it the only high quality 192k capable dac available in a package. Forget the asrc variants.
 
F

fmak

Member
Joined 2001
Re: Re: #41 is ALIVE!!!!

fmak said:


Two points.

Actually three and this one for Russ
Click to expand...

There is a marked difference in sound between DPLL medium and lowest in I2S operation. I prefer lowest; it is less bright and more "musical".

Can Russ please expalin what is happening? I don't see this immediately from the ESS material available to me.
 
Russ White

Russ White

Member
Joined 2005
twistedpearaudio.com
Re: Re: Re: #41 is ALIVE!!!!

fmak said:


There is a marked difference in sound between DPLL medium and lowest in I2S operation. I prefer lowest; it is less bright and more "musical".

Can Russ please expalin what is happening? I don't see this immediately from the ESS material available to me.
Click to expand...


Quite simply, its less jitter at the lower DPLL setting. The jitter reduction effect is simply more pronounced the lower the DPLL setting. the higher the DPLL setting the more input jitter can get through.

This is why prefer I2S input. :)
 
Russ White

Russ White

Member
Joined 2005
twistedpearaudio.com
The reason I say I prefer I2S input is because both the WM8804 and the CS8416 have some degree of Jitter rejection. this means that their I2S output is likely somewhat better (lower jitter) than the original SPDIF input.

So using a receiver almost always allows the user to run the Buffalo at the lowest DPLL setting which allows maximum jitter reduction.

Its a nice Synergy. :)

Cheers!
Russ
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Top Bottom