Unless you have XLR cabling and no RF source nearby 🙂 You could be right that the signals pass 2 opamps before entering the tower like device. This means that if those 2 opamps are OPA666 they already have put a spell on the sound before sending it to the tower like structure. I would be very careful with playing back albums backwards!
BTW the "normal" DMP-A6 has OPA1642 which sound nicer than OPA1612.
BTW the "normal" DMP-A6 has OPA1642 which sound nicer than OPA1612.
Conclusion!
On my power amp without tone control, the ZD3 has audible background noise, but on the Naim Nait 5si, it doesn't.
Sonically, the DAC is slightly behind the Eversolo, in my opinion, but this is only due to the op-amp output in the preamp. I've now plugged in the Burson Audio V7vivid Pro dual again, and it sounds significantly better than the Eversolo without the ZD3. The included op-amp sounds very warm, but also imprecise; with the V7, it sounds almost perfect! The connected speakers are Elac Vela BS404.2
On my power amp without tone control, the ZD3 has audible background noise, but on the Naim Nait 5si, it doesn't.
Sonically, the DAC is slightly behind the Eversolo, in my opinion, but this is only due to the op-amp output in the preamp. I've now plugged in the Burson Audio V7vivid Pro dual again, and it sounds significantly better than the Eversolo without the ZD3. The included op-amp sounds very warm, but also imprecise; with the V7, it sounds almost perfect! The connected speakers are Elac Vela BS404.2
With a discrete Burson Audio OP and battery power supply, the ZD3 sounds very audiophile and, in my opinion, offers more sound quality than the DAC and output stage of the Eversolo DMP-A6 Master Edition
Last edited:
Well, don't know if "I" am right, the question is rather "is FOSI right?"... as the following scheme is what THEY advertise.
My interpretation is clearly that the sound of the RCA output has to go through 3 OPAs... but then that's me and not FOSI LOL
My interpretation is clearly that the sound of the RCA output has to go through 3 OPAs... but then that's me and not FOSI LOL
Again, nothing new under the sun and quite classic configuration with these DAC chips, so rather to be expected... IMHO
Yes, a new idea!
I wasn't familiar with these diagrams from Fosi Audio.
The pop-noise circuit is not an operational amplifier.
Each XLR output has its own dual operational amplifier, and the unbalanced RCA output, accordingly, only has a dual operational amplifier.
I wasn't familiar with these diagrams from Fosi Audio.
The pop-noise circuit is not an operational amplifier.
Each XLR output has its own dual operational amplifier, and the unbalanced RCA output, accordingly, only has a dual operational amplifier.
No. ClaudeG saw it right. Just look at what is written at the input of the RCA opamp. DACs with such specifications are meant to be used balanced.
Yep, Jean-Paul is right 🙂)
So, again...
The pop noise cancelling device has indeed nothing to do with all that and is... hopefully something different than a cheap chinese transistor (as those fail on SMSLs and Toppings as we found out, sometimes with catastrophic results - shorts and unit death) - eg. a nice transistor from a reliable manufacturer fingers X, no rocket science.
Now to what is of interest to us, the OPAs...
LME49720, one per channel, for the XLR output. Classic layout.
FROM that XLR output, Fosi deviates it (again, quite classic) to obtain the RCA output, using a third OPA (again LME49720).
So...
If you follow the entire RCA path, it goes per channel through one ("XLR OPA" plus "half of another one, the "RCA OPA"".
Bottom line: swapping one of the 3 OPAs, where ever they are, affects the RCA sound, at least one channel.
Now, you have to be carefull with OPA rolling... the OPAs in the XLR position don't do the same as the last one advertised for RCA, neither do they see the same impedances etc.
What sounds best to your ears in one position may not in another. And the required specs might be different (very likely), not even mentioning PS decoupling to the OPAs depending on what unit is used. Lucky us, some OPAs are quite tolerant regarding all these, hence possible (reasonableà) roll amping... but always best if knowing what you are doing.
No miracle, as said I looked into this unit (one the net) when it was released, a friend of mine might have needed a cheapo DAC but at the end he didn't, so I could get my hands on it LOL. But I found the unit nevertheless interesting indeed...
Amp rolling, presuming you know what you are doing, is an option. Filtering the SMPS "outboard" clearly another- very easy- one. More for advanced tweakers and ruining the warranty, playing with the PS caps and bypasses around the OPA is also something perhaps worth considering, depending on what was done already (no scheme sadly, but I presume minimum cheap SMD caps, whereas some top OPA may benefit from a better decoupling... perhaps)
Have fun!
Claude
So, again...
The pop noise cancelling device has indeed nothing to do with all that and is... hopefully something different than a cheap chinese transistor (as those fail on SMSLs and Toppings as we found out, sometimes with catastrophic results - shorts and unit death) - eg. a nice transistor from a reliable manufacturer fingers X, no rocket science.
Now to what is of interest to us, the OPAs...
LME49720, one per channel, for the XLR output. Classic layout.
FROM that XLR output, Fosi deviates it (again, quite classic) to obtain the RCA output, using a third OPA (again LME49720).
So...
If you follow the entire RCA path, it goes per channel through one ("XLR OPA" plus "half of another one, the "RCA OPA"".
Bottom line: swapping one of the 3 OPAs, where ever they are, affects the RCA sound, at least one channel.
Now, you have to be carefull with OPA rolling... the OPAs in the XLR position don't do the same as the last one advertised for RCA, neither do they see the same impedances etc.
What sounds best to your ears in one position may not in another. And the required specs might be different (very likely), not even mentioning PS decoupling to the OPAs depending on what unit is used. Lucky us, some OPAs are quite tolerant regarding all these, hence possible (reasonableà) roll amping... but always best if knowing what you are doing.
No miracle, as said I looked into this unit (one the net) when it was released, a friend of mine might have needed a cheapo DAC but at the end he didn't, so I could get my hands on it LOL. But I found the unit nevertheless interesting indeed...
Amp rolling, presuming you know what you are doing, is an option. Filtering the SMPS "outboard" clearly another- very easy- one. More for advanced tweakers and ruining the warranty, playing with the PS caps and bypasses around the OPA is also something perhaps worth considering, depending on what was done already (no scheme sadly, but I presume minimum cheap SMD caps, whereas some top OPA may benefit from a better decoupling... perhaps)
Have fun!
Claude
Last edited:
I use a 12V lead-gel battery as my power supply. Thank you, there's no arguing with that.
It simply sounds better than any power supply.
The Burson Audio V7vivid Pro also performs very well, although it's somewhat neglected here in the forum.
I find the V7's sound to be at least a notch better than any other op-amp I've heard so far. It simply sounds more authentic and less tiring.
I'll be receiving two more V7 Vivid Pro duals soon and will install them in the ZD3 as well. I'll let you know my impressions!
It simply sounds better than any power supply.
The Burson Audio V7vivid Pro also performs very well, although it's somewhat neglected here in the forum.
I find the V7's sound to be at least a notch better than any other op-amp I've heard so far. It simply sounds more authentic and less tiring.
I'll be receiving two more V7 Vivid Pro duals soon and will install them in the ZD3 as well. I'll let you know my impressions!
The Vivids sound more forward than the Classics. I'd say the midrange is higher.
Both V7s are also much more detailed than the V6s. I also have the V5s and V4s, no contest. As they've moved up the chain there's more detail in the music. And the V7s are shorter which is nicer as with the risers ( the plug adapters ) they can get pretty tall. I had to put spacers on the P3 box to fit the lid on it.
Both V7s are also much more detailed than the V6s. I also have the V5s and V4s, no contest. As they've moved up the chain there's more detail in the music. And the V7s are shorter which is nicer as with the risers ( the plug adapters ) they can get pretty tall. I had to put spacers on the P3 box to fit the lid on it.
Attachments
Give OPA1656 a try ;-)
But admitely Vivid V7 is a 'nice" performer to my ears...
Your battery sounds better than any power supply? Quite a statement, I assume you tried them all LOL?
There is more to the sound and specs than DC current, such things as impedance / rising fronts, oscillations etc.
But given it is very likely they are LDOs a bit everywhere in your DAC this might not be sooo relevant.
In the past we used to drive modest power amps or preamps with batteries... and found on some occasions that putting powerbanks (big lytics decoupled by smaller PPP caps) enhenced the sound. Ok, enhenced is subjective, "notably modified it" less so ;-)
Perhaps worth considering if you really want to stick to batteries... Jean-Paul listed already a few drawbacks...
Having said all that, SMPS + MJ's filter realy impressed me... simple, educative (small DIY fun workshop) and non expensive try.
Whatever, let us know your findings please
Viel Spass
Claude
But admitely Vivid V7 is a 'nice" performer to my ears...
Your battery sounds better than any power supply? Quite a statement, I assume you tried them all LOL?
There is more to the sound and specs than DC current, such things as impedance / rising fronts, oscillations etc.
But given it is very likely they are LDOs a bit everywhere in your DAC this might not be sooo relevant.
In the past we used to drive modest power amps or preamps with batteries... and found on some occasions that putting powerbanks (big lytics decoupled by smaller PPP caps) enhenced the sound. Ok, enhenced is subjective, "notably modified it" less so ;-)
Perhaps worth considering if you really want to stick to batteries... Jean-Paul listed already a few drawbacks...
Having said all that, SMPS + MJ's filter realy impressed me... simple, educative (small DIY fun workshop) and non expensive try.
Whatever, let us know your findings please
Viel Spass
Claude
Question about the Fosi ZD3.
What is the source into it? What bit rates are you seeing at the DAC? Are you trying 24/96 and above?
I've been playing around with a WiiM Ultra inserted as a go between between the streams from Android and Chromebooks ( and PC ) to it and the DACs.
Before
Source Tidal HiFi (Chromebook, Android) --- USB-OTG ---> DAC
Problem: USB-OTG drivers are re clocking the signal. Tidal shows the bit rates of the music change. But the DAC shows that with the Chromebook, everything is 24/48, with Android Tablet everything is 24.192. Not bit perfect.
Now:
Source Tidal HiFi (Chromebook, Android) --- WiFi ---> WiiM Ultra ---> USB ---> DAC
Solution
The WiFi drivers do not re clock the signal. The USB driver in the WiiM does not re clock the signal either. Now I see bit rates up to 24/192 in this configuration. The bit rate at the DAC now reflects the bit rate that Tidal HiFi is processing, it is dynamic and changes with the source.
Note, I disabled all audio processing in the WiiM (Fixed volume means no volume, no room correction).
Looking at the Fosi, I see it has wireless too, but only Bluetooth, so it only supports 24/48, which means it's not bit perfect either. Hmm...
Also, when you connect the Fosi to the DAC via USB, do you see the higher bit rates at all? 24/96? Even when you drive it with a coax signal?
Perhaps this is the reason why you don't like its sound? Yes, the opamps sound great, but the bit rate manipulation is what's changing the sound?
What is the source into it? What bit rates are you seeing at the DAC? Are you trying 24/96 and above?
I've been playing around with a WiiM Ultra inserted as a go between between the streams from Android and Chromebooks ( and PC ) to it and the DACs.
Before
Source Tidal HiFi (Chromebook, Android) --- USB-OTG ---> DAC
Problem: USB-OTG drivers are re clocking the signal. Tidal shows the bit rates of the music change. But the DAC shows that with the Chromebook, everything is 24/48, with Android Tablet everything is 24.192. Not bit perfect.
Now:
Source Tidal HiFi (Chromebook, Android) --- WiFi ---> WiiM Ultra ---> USB ---> DAC
Solution
The WiFi drivers do not re clock the signal. The USB driver in the WiiM does not re clock the signal either. Now I see bit rates up to 24/192 in this configuration. The bit rate at the DAC now reflects the bit rate that Tidal HiFi is processing, it is dynamic and changes with the source.
Note, I disabled all audio processing in the WiiM (Fixed volume means no volume, no room correction).
Looking at the Fosi, I see it has wireless too, but only Bluetooth, so it only supports 24/48, which means it's not bit perfect either. Hmm...
Also, when you connect the Fosi to the DAC via USB, do you see the higher bit rates at all? 24/96? Even when you drive it with a coax signal?
Perhaps this is the reason why you don't like its sound? Yes, the opamps sound great, but the bit rate manipulation is what's changing the sound?
Doubtful there is just one reason. With a good enough dac the resampling most OS'es now do by default can be audible. Whenever Windows switched back to resampling without warning, I always thought my dac must have broken. OS'es like in Chromebook and Android generally resample because there is only one presumed overall whole-system audio stream and it needs to be able to play content from any source app or apps sending audio at the same time.
What I don't understand is why all the fiddling around with toys when this stuff has already been figured out before? Why not spend the same overall amount of money on a much, much better dac in the first place instead and find out what you're missing?
Okay, but its not the only OS that tends to resample by default. For some OS'es there are ways to bypass or disable the resampling. If so, then that option should be used. Then there are only the other problems to worry about.
The OS may resample the audio going into DAC, but they do not resample the audio DATA going over an interface. If you think about it, the OS drivers have to treat the data as pure data with no compression.
This is why the audio data going out over WiFi to the WiiM Ultra is not being resampled and the bit rates switch along with the source material.
It is unfortunate that Chromebook and Android are so intrusive.
Windows has drivers that do not compress the data over USB nor reclock it. ASIO it's called. I drive DACs directly from Windows with ASIO and device drivers... but I wanted to use Android and Chromebooks because I'm cheap and I don't see spending 800 bucks on a PC to drive Tidal HiFi into a DAC. Sure, I did blow 350 on the WiiM Ultra... so I'm getting close, but, but, this is more fun.
Kudos to be given to the WIiM Ultra for not resampling when streaming the data out over USB...
So, again, I'm wondering about the Fosi.... is the data getting to it being reclocked and affecting the DAC downstream?