jealcuna,
D90 has balanced and single-ended outputs, if that is important enough to someone.
Maybe its that every feature has a cost to implement, and most audio gear is designed to a price point. Someone has to decide what features to include and what to leave out.
EDIT: I noticed you asked about this thread in another thread. There is a list of posts that you may find of interest. You can search the text for keywords and then check out posts that might contain what you want to know about. I will attach a copy of the list here.
Otherwise, if you can't find what you want to know you are always welcome to ask questions.
D90 has balanced and single-ended outputs, if that is important enough to someone.
Maybe its that every feature has a cost to implement, and most audio gear is designed to a price point. Someone has to decide what features to include and what to leave out.
EDIT: I noticed you asked about this thread in another thread. There is a list of posts that you may find of interest. You can search the text for keywords and then check out posts that might contain what you want to know about. I will attach a copy of the list here.
Otherwise, if you can't find what you want to know you are always welcome to ask questions.
Last edited:
Not at all. D90 is fairly better , it adds more features, better performance and also the balanced output. As far as I know the es9038q2m has differential output. So the work to convert this to single ended is extra money that probably represent more extra noise to the system. Balanced output should be mandatory in this kind of products.
Actually, doing balanced outputs properly (in a conventional engineering sense) is more complicated. Consider that unbalanced outputs receive additional filtering by going through the differential summing stage. Some dac designers believe the balanced outputs need the same amount of filtering. Some will add a balancing circuit following the unbalanced output of the differential summing stage so that all the outputs are closer to equally filtered and equally buffered. D90 does something similar.
Last edited:
After the I/V there are two passive filter sections (maybe sorta 3 if we count PCB buried trace capacitance), similar to AK4499 eval board.
There is no I/V integrator at audio frequencies. I was referring to the I/V cap in parallel with the feedback resistor. Thought that was clear.
There is no I/V integrator at audio frequencies. I was referring to the I/V cap in parallel with the feedback resistor. Thought that was clear.
Last edited:
^^^
Source? Have you seen the D90 schematic (or reverse engineered one)?
What makes you thing passive filtering is better? BTW, the Topping DX7 PRO uses the ES9038PRO with output active filtering (I have the schematics and no, don't ask for) and I can't wait somebody to complain about it's sound
.
Topping DX7 Pro DAC and Headphone Amp Reviewed | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum
Source? Have you seen the D90 schematic (or reverse engineered one)?
What makes you thing passive filtering is better? BTW, the Topping DX7 PRO uses the ES9038PRO with output active filtering (I have the schematics and no, don't ask for) and I can't wait somebody to complain about it's sound
. Topping DX7 Pro DAC and Headphone Amp Reviewed | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum
And that's not an active filter? Last time I've checked, such a filter has a pole at RC, even if not at audio frequencies (2.5MHz for the AK4499 eval board).
Aha. So you have no clue what's in the D90, but you are making assumptions based on the AK4499 eval board implementation.
Read what I said again: "D90 doesn't use active filtering in the output stage (other than the I/V integrator caps)."
That means it is the only active filter circuitry. My point was to contrast it with the type of circuitry we are all familiar with, such as that you described, and that ESS uses.
That means it is the only active filter circuitry. My point was to contrast it with the type of circuitry we are all familiar with, such as that you described, and that ESS uses.
No, again. Jeez! I have a D90 too. I took it apart and sketched out a schematic for some of the circuitry including all of the output stage.
EDIT: Sure looks like you are just looking for some angle get away with disrespectful behavior again, and I hope the mods take note of it.
EDIT: Sure looks like you are just looking for some angle get away with disrespectful behavior again, and I hope the mods take note of it.
Last edited:
Stop victimizing yourself, I am just debating your technical opinions. Talking about those passive filters, do you realize those have the frequency response depending on the next stage input impedance? How would that be good for the sound?
^^^
Source? Have you seen the D90 schematic (or reverse engineered one)?
What makes you thing passive filtering is better? BTW, the Topping DX7 PRO uses the ES9038PRO with output active filtering (I have the schematics and no, don't ask for) and I can't wait somebody to complain about it's sound
Topping DX7 Pro DAC and Headphone Amp Reviewed | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum
For the price, amazing measurements but it would be nice to see a flat
distortion vs freq curve. I'm sure they could have achieved this with a little
more effort.
TCD
You can call these passive but they are in effect part of the active filter around
the following phase summing LPF opamp because they feed it. Just for interests
sake, it's worth modelling these on spice to see how they interact with that last
LPF stage.
TCD
At those levels I would not sweat one second over any further improvement in this respect. However, there is another ES9038PRO DAC (Sabaj D5) with slightly lower distortions at high frequencies, but it is slightly worse in other departments, the usual engineering trade offs, I would think. Otherwise, the Gustard X26 with it's dual ES9038PRO is probably the best DAC in the price range that would not require a second mortgage. Part of the amazing performance is the Shark DSP inside.
Review and Measurements of Gustard DAC-X26 | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum
Last edited:
Engineering is full of simplified models, as you know. The simple model is that there are passive filter poles rather than active. In physical reality, everything is more complex than the simplified models we often use. Best be careful though if you don't want to keep it as simple as some people feel they have a right to demand from you, else you may get attacked by several people at once for it. And they may make up all kinds of conspiracy theory stories in their heads about your evil motivation for doing it. Apparently, that's because some people worry that too much complexity will fool people in to buying audio equipment they don't really need. Man, and this isn't even politics or religion.
Would it be too much to ask you to stay away from such rants and focus on the technical stuff? I am still waiting an explanation for why you think a passive filter at the DAC output (as reconstruction filter) would be better than an active filter in the same role/place, at least for the AK4499.
An unbuffered passive filter (and yes, the AK4499 demo board is not buffered at the output) has it's properties (frequency cut off, pass and stop bands ripple, phase response, etc...) dependent on the next stage input impedance, so...?