No. IMHO you need hardware volume control at the amplifier side and possibly XLR interfacing.
Last edited:
Not familiar with Naim. Does that Naim have balanced inputs or are those old fashioned DIN connectors used unbalanced?!
When I first saw the Fosi ZD3 DAC's back panel with 12V DC input, that's the first thing I thought to do. Everybody has 12V batteries laying around; I use those Panasonics in my UPS's.
I only WISH Chord Qutest DAC used 12V DC input. It uses 5V DC input, so I had to resort to series/paralleling a bunch of Eneloop batteries, which comes with the pain of recharging.
But the SQ improvement is definitely worth it.
0808240724a by drjlo2, on Flickr
I only WISH Chord Qutest DAC used 12V DC input. It uses 5V DC input, so I had to resort to series/paralleling a bunch of Eneloop batteries, which comes with the pain of recharging.
But the SQ improvement is definitely worth it.
0808240724a by drjlo2, on Flickr
Caught my eyes: if that device on the left is a multi antenna RF device then it is way too close to the audio devices. If it is a router then it is also so close that everything can be connected with ethernet cabling to it.
The audio setup as a whole is meant. You have one of audios most hated and influential enemies (this time one with 8 tentacles) less than 30 cm away. It is recommended to place it much further away, limit RF output to 75 or even 50% in its web page (update its firmware and disable unused wireless protocols when you are there too) and use mains filtering and ferrite beads on the audio cabling. Blasting RF all over the place when you are only a few meters away with wireless devices is contra productive with best audio results in general. Some wireless devices also choke on too high transmitting levels. So adapt stuff to real life requirements, always. This may have a much higher impact than using audiophile opamps. Are such contraptions even EMI/RF proof?! please see this very good opamps features in that field:
https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/o...460&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fsearch.brave.com%2F
A small ethernet switch only for the audio devices connected to an ethernet port of the wireless router a few meters away also may work out OK. Audio generally does not need ultra high speeds but just good quality wired connections.
https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/o...460&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fsearch.brave.com%2F
A small ethernet switch only for the audio devices connected to an ethernet port of the wireless router a few meters away also may work out OK. Audio generally does not need ultra high speeds but just good quality wired connections.
Last edited:
I've been playing with opamps in my P3 preamp and Burson Swing DAC.
In the Burson family, I'm torn between the V7 Vivid and Classic. You might want to try them.
BTW, both devices are very low noise. The P3 is set up to amplify a 1.0mV cartridge and there is no noise in the system.
Just make sure the opamps are properly seated though. I had some noise issues in a previous iteration of the P3 with looser op amp sockets.
For a while I was involved with measuring RF levels with specialized tools. In that case it was about having the best possible so called 110% coverage so RF blasting in a pattern and with a plan (not determined by ears 😉). We made drawings of the RF levels and what frequencies by what devices and we could determine factors that were hampering the intended coverage. With open line-of-sight and when mounted on towers we could transmit over more than 40 km!
To laymen I found it is handy to explain them to imagine ellipse like pink clouds transmitted by such devices. Imagine RF ellipses and what they "touch" when having line-of-sight transmission. It starts to become difficult when there are metal or water/moist containing obstacles (yes that includes humans, "walking water bags" according our chief designer). It is then also easily understood that open line-of-sight and therefore the height on which the router/wireless stuff is mounted is influential on desired reception. Coincidentally audio likes wireless only at a distance too so all is good. Your audio/cabling an possibly your audiophile opamps are likely drowning in pink 🙂
Details are nice but the basis should be fine and well understood first.
To laymen I found it is handy to explain them to imagine ellipse like pink clouds transmitted by such devices. Imagine RF ellipses and what they "touch" when having line-of-sight transmission. It starts to become difficult when there are metal or water/moist containing obstacles (yes that includes humans, "walking water bags" according our chief designer). It is then also easily understood that open line-of-sight and therefore the height on which the router/wireless stuff is mounted is influential on desired reception. Coincidentally audio likes wireless only at a distance too so all is good. Your audio/cabling an possibly your audiophile opamps are likely drowning in pink 🙂
Details are nice but the basis should be fine and well understood first.
Last edited:
Hallo,
I must confess I have difficulties following you...
Quote:
I also have a DMP-A6 Master Edition with a Beattechnik linear power supply from Eversolo, which is significantly more expensive than the ZD3, but doesn't keep up with its sound,
Quote:
I've now connected the ZD3 to the Eversolo via USB and connected it to my Naim Nait 5si via XLR to 5-pin DIN. It doesn't sound as good. When I connect the Eversolo DMP-A6 Master Edition directly to the Naim, it sounds significantly better.
Could you please clarify what DAC sounds better in what configuration? And what you find better or worst sounding apart from the background noise issue?
Many thanks
MFG
Claude
I must confess I have difficulties following you...
Quote:
I also have a DMP-A6 Master Edition with a Beattechnik linear power supply from Eversolo, which is significantly more expensive than the ZD3, but doesn't keep up with its sound,
Quote:
I've now connected the ZD3 to the Eversolo via USB and connected it to my Naim Nait 5si via XLR to 5-pin DIN. It doesn't sound as good. When I connect the Eversolo DMP-A6 Master Edition directly to the Naim, it sounds significantly better.
Could you please clarify what DAC sounds better in what configuration? And what you find better or worst sounding apart from the background noise issue?
Many thanks
MFG
Claude
Audio: it is best to use the XC-2 fabric in oversized NorthFace shirt and then have 1500 Euro water repellent XSI socks but those with EMU 16 resistant polyester. I have the Bronco WDI pants with that but like the Kamagurka GTI a little better as that color fits nicer. It may be good to think of buying Apple underwear but only the shielded Vivid in purple. I had the Lila ones of the previous M1 generation but found them a little too tight. The Vivid are known by influencers and YouTube to perform the best when measured with eyes. A Rayban Clubmaster RB might take away those pesky reflections of windows. I found air resistance of them to be giving a large difference. Point being my lenses should be +1.75 with a cilinder of 1.0 which originally only fit well in the Rayban Justin but the Justin measures not that good by Amir on ASR. I have the Aviator and Wayfarer put in storage and think of buying the new Rayban Jack made of oxygen free titanium. According Archimelago this one should be the icing on the cake but of course only when equipped with Rudson coating left and Fartos SS3602 discrete coating on the right lens. Some may object this is not DIY though. Forget about the well tested fixtures by SMSL as these are only good with numbers but SD will never give the same sight as TDA/R2R fixtures. Provided they have good power supplies bought on sales on Black Friday. Clearest sight I ever experienced, like a veil was lifted and black suddenly was blacker than black. My eyes don't lie!
This while standing in the rain without a coat 🙂
This while standing in the rain without a coat 🙂
Last edited:
Apart from that...
1- As already suggested, I would try the original SMPS (or perhaps a better one if you like to play) WITH one of MJ's excellent filters, AmyAlice seeming the way forward. 1 or 2 in series, for sure worth a try...
As a side note, it made wonders on a D50S a few years back... D50S with OEM SMPS was trounced by D50S + SMPS FILTER + OEM SMPS, not exactly a subtle difference (bass, slam/transient, cleaness, 3D image), one that could be even heard by my wife while standing in the next room when I simply plugged in and out MJ's filter on my friend's DAC at his (without changing volume or anything else of course)...
2- I too caught interest in this new unit when it was released. I am though a bit puzzled about what is said regarding OP Amp swapping. For sure changing the one that stands last in the chain when using the RCA outputs affects the sound of the RCA outputs. For sure changing the 2 OPAs that are last in the chain when using XLRs change the XLR output sound.. BUT, when you look into the diagram, it appears that (as often the case) the RCA outputs are "resulting" from the XLR outputs, so for sure swapping the 2 OPAs supposed to act ony for XLR are very likely to change also the RCA outputs sound... opens another field
Have a nice day
Claude
1- As already suggested, I would try the original SMPS (or perhaps a better one if you like to play) WITH one of MJ's excellent filters, AmyAlice seeming the way forward. 1 or 2 in series, for sure worth a try...
As a side note, it made wonders on a D50S a few years back... D50S with OEM SMPS was trounced by D50S + SMPS FILTER + OEM SMPS, not exactly a subtle difference (bass, slam/transient, cleaness, 3D image), one that could be even heard by my wife while standing in the next room when I simply plugged in and out MJ's filter on my friend's DAC at his (without changing volume or anything else of course)...
2- I too caught interest in this new unit when it was released. I am though a bit puzzled about what is said regarding OP Amp swapping. For sure changing the one that stands last in the chain when using the RCA outputs affects the sound of the RCA outputs. For sure changing the 2 OPAs that are last in the chain when using XLRs change the XLR output sound.. BUT, when you look into the diagram, it appears that (as often the case) the RCA outputs are "resulting" from the XLR outputs, so for sure swapping the 2 OPAs supposed to act ony for XLR are very likely to change also the RCA outputs sound... opens another field
Have a nice day
Claude
The Eversolo sounds better on its own than when I use the ZD3 as a DAC. It sounds clearer, a bit more dynamic, and vocals sound natural, even the mellowness of string instruments has more emotion.
Remarkable as ES9039Q2M is supposedly better (as in non marketing so really better) than ES9038Q2M. About all of my DACs perform subjectively a tad better than the internal DACs of the Eversolo. Please try again when the RF spewing router is a few meters away from audio. It may very well be that previously drawn conclusions based on ears only then turn out to be invalid.
In my case the Eversolo steps up in level with just a pair of 1:1 passive transformers at its XLR outputs. Did not bother to find out why. Leakage currents?
In my case the Eversolo steps up in level with just a pair of 1:1 passive transformers at its XLR outputs. Did not bother to find out why. Leakage currents?
Last edited:
It might also have something to do with the output stage! The Eversolo has a Burr Brown OPA1612, and the ZD3 has a Texas Instruments LME 47920. They sound very warm and bloated.