Sorry but it is more than adequate, the front end is Cadstar but the routing engine, SIV and PIA are used in the top end range of Zukens products CR5000 and CR8000.
The SIV users a full 3D field solver...
You seem to be prone to CAD snobbery without looking at the full picture.... or knowing the full picture of ECAD, how long have you been using it...
As to EMC layout, again experience and education (from mainly RF engineers if you want the best education on the subject, or real experts such as Henry Ott and Ralph Morrison ) and knowing what to do correctly in the first place is the best approach not just relying on (for EMC) what are quite basic tools throughout the industry... crosstalk analysis, looking for possible dipole structure etc. getting it right in the first place is critical.
Again though in the real world you have to ask your self how often these tools are used, how often simulation and EMC analysis is factored in to the design cycle, for basic commercial gear not very often.
As I said I do not agree with your assessment, there is some ECAD snobbery going on, similar to the many pointless threads that occasionally surface regarding which ECAD software is best.....
The SIV users a full 3D field solver...
You seem to be prone to CAD snobbery without looking at the full picture.... or knowing the full picture of ECAD, how long have you been using it...
As to EMC layout, again experience and education (from mainly RF engineers if you want the best education on the subject, or real experts such as Henry Ott and Ralph Morrison ) and knowing what to do correctly in the first place is the best approach not just relying on (for EMC) what are quite basic tools throughout the industry... crosstalk analysis, looking for possible dipole structure etc. getting it right in the first place is critical.
Again though in the real world you have to ask your self how often these tools are used, how often simulation and EMC analysis is factored in to the design cycle, for basic commercial gear not very often.
As I said I do not agree with your assessment, there is some ECAD snobbery going on, similar to the many pointless threads that occasionally surface regarding which ECAD software is best.....
OK did not know SIV was 3d equipped ☺
Snobbery , well maybe , if one is biased its very hard to detect in ones self , that's the nature of bias, so I have to admit the possibility.
But Just did a 6 month study into the provision of EDA software for a famous semiconductor company. Covering everything from live part selection to SPICE SI and PI, along with DFM, and DFT and obviously thermal management which should be linked to PI.
The candidates were Mentor, Cadence, Altium with keysight (, formally agilent ) getting a look in, Zucken was abandoned long ago . Not my decision , but when you consider Mentor wrote ODB++ , and cadence lead the IBIS steering comitte , its kind of understandable, Altium is there because bang for buck its prob the best.
I covered 1200 features of the individual systems, it was a long and through piece of work.
So I suppose in this arena I could be called an expert ???? , still always learning though, in the audio arena still a baby for example ☺
Yes agree with all your points about getting it right fist time, but to me simulation is critical, ok I will do a bjt bias calculation by hand , but will always spice it then do a monecarlo sweep just in case, that's what computers are for ☺. Same applies to every piece of copper I lay down. So yea I for one do a shed load of simulation just as normal part of the design process, maybe its a cruch ???? But I would be buggered without my cruch ☺
Have you never had a board fail the EMC chamber ???? Never had to do a iteration just trying to make it radiate a little less, or a little less susceptible ?? Well I'm not to proud to say that I have had several , but none since checking the final layout through with SIwave. Find all the dipoles ??? Jesus at 10ghz EVERYTHING is a dipole. Thank F for effective field solvers.
Not used in industry ? Try working in Germany ☺
Oh yes about 20 years with Altium , 10 with mentor and 5 with Allegro , cadence.
Maybe though we are off the original subject a little ?
Having trouble tracking down equipment with 1702 or 1704, best can do is naim cd5sX , but really want a DAC and don't want to spend 500+ if can avoid it , just spent 700 euro on DAPs that don't like.
Well F me with a large barge pole, I THINK , after 200 hours of burn in, the dx90 is becoming not so bad, the manual recommends 400hours burn in, I thought that was BS , what the hell changes sonic character after 400 hours burn in, it's direct coupled for god sake.
Maybe the flat freq response came from a burnt in device, interesting thought
I just hope it continues in this direction, or if its placebo ,that the illusion keeps getting better ☺, I was that close to giving it to the girl friend , she can't hear the diff between anything and don't care!.
I had tried everything including 8 different os combinations, and rockbox, was close to forking the android code base and having a go myself. Burn in ??? Never considered it .
Would need a new unit to do a blind comparison to chech, no idea how to make that happen!
Maybe the flat freq response came from a burnt in device, interesting thought
I just hope it continues in this direction, or if its placebo ,that the illusion keeps getting better ☺, I was that close to giving it to the girl friend , she can't hear the diff between anything and don't care!.
I had tried everything including 8 different os combinations, and rockbox, was close to forking the android code base and having a go myself. Burn in ??? Never considered it .
Would need a new unit to do a blind comparison to chech, no idea how to make that happen!
Taobao has a couple of options - Lite DACs with PCM1702 or PCM63, Dugood DAC with PCM1702s.
https://item.taobao.com/item.htm?sp...865&pvid=47945736-65a4-432e-bcd8-fef3d4dd08af
https://item.taobao.com/item.htm?spm=a230r.1.14.32.AjbqLK&id=27415352579&ns=1&abbucket=13#detail
Also Audio GD uses them and also incorporate a well thought out I/V from what I've been told.
Master-7. Master-11 and Master-19
ºÍ§Óµ响
Cheers George
YES , did not realize Audio DG did one with 1704, their website switched me onto current conveyor implementations, with the ESS iv. i very much like the way they think, at least from the advertising blurb.
Has anyone bought from them ? Is it safe ? Whats the import duties into EU ?
Here's is one going cheap.
FS: [SYD] audio-gd SA-1.32 R-2R DAC with 4 x PCM1704UK chips and USB32 asynch USB - Private Hi-Fi Classifieds - StereoNET
Cheers George
Sold
, and anyway he was only posting to Australia, but DAMN !!! thats a fine DAC, i literally had no idea such fine pieces of kit even existed, and he was pretty much giving it away.
Sold
Here's maybe an even better one, with 8 x PCM1704K's
FS: AudioGD Reference 7.1 USB DAC with extra RCA output - Private Hi-Fi Classifieds - StereoNET
ºÍ§Óµ响
Cheers George
Hey guys, I've had this question for a long time and I think it's on-topic here. Do different decently-made DACs actually sound differently? I have made quite a few attempts to hear any difference, and I never could. I have not heard top of the line DACs, but I have listened to some very cheap ones and some medium-level. An incomplete list of the gear I tried (and by trying I mean trying really hard to hear something interesting):
I have not listened to every pair, but I have compared many of them to EMU 0404. I was very careful to level-match, of course, which - no doubt - contributed to my inability to tell any difference. Recently, I made a switching board with 4 relays switching the output RCAs to either set A or set B of imputs. Immediate switching with a press of a button, still no audible difference (this was a comparison between the cheap PD-S602 and a much more solid Kenwood 7030).
Am I deaf? Is there nothing to hear? Is there something to hear, but it's so subtle you need to finish a music school first?
- Generic $6 PCM2704 board from Aliexpress
- Generic $20 ESS9018K2M board from Ali
- ODAC from Nwawguy (PCM5102)
- EMU 0404 USB (AK4396)
- Sony CDP-510XE (cheap CD player, Sony 1-bit DAC CXD8567AM)
- Pioneer PD-S602 (cheap CD player, PD2029A DAC)
- Kenwood DP-7030 (medium-level CD player, great build quality, good PCB design and schematics, CXD2552Q Sony 1-bit DAC)
- Denon DV-2930 (CD, DVD, DVD-Audio, SACD player, PCM1794A)
I have not listened to every pair, but I have compared many of them to EMU 0404. I was very careful to level-match, of course, which - no doubt - contributed to my inability to tell any difference. Recently, I made a switching board with 4 relays switching the output RCAs to either set A or set B of imputs. Immediate switching with a press of a button, still no audible difference (this was a comparison between the cheap PD-S602 and a much more solid Kenwood 7030).
Am I deaf? Is there nothing to hear? Is there something to hear, but it's so subtle you need to finish a music school first?
For many years I found it close to impossible to hear differences between DACs. So I don't think you're deaf as hearing differences between DACs is rather like looking for differences between photos. Have a try with this example : http://www.cogsci.uci.edu/~ddhoff/cb.html
Great answer, amazing link! Thanks for the perspective. Yes, this is exactly why hearing difference between audio components is hard, and that pause in between makes it that much harder. Besides, images are static, but music is ever changing, so even being able to switch back and forth without any delay still doesn't guarantee being able to hear the change.
What I suspect is going on is we use what Kahneman (in his 'Thinking, fast and slow') calls 'system 2' for doing comparisons. That's the rational, conscious mind, spotlighting various aspects of the sound for comparison and relying on aural memory. Which is very tiring. Whereas I reckon I use 'system 1' or the intuitive, unconscious mind by and large. This way of working isn't fundamentally based on comparison, more on recognition.
You might be right! I haven't read the book yet (although I've been meaning to for years), but I'm familiar with the concept thanks to the (very good) video by Veritasium.
One idea I've just had is to use a more static signal for comparison. Like white noise or pink noise (possibly both mono and stereo). With the ability to switch instantly, I suspect noise will be more revealing than music. Sadly, I don't have that switching device with me, nor the ability to build a new one - can't test it myself at the moment.
One idea I've just had is to use a more static signal for comparison. Like white noise or pink noise (possibly both mono and stereo). With the ability to switch instantly, I suspect noise will be more revealing than music. Sadly, I don't have that switching device with me, nor the ability to build a new one - can't test it myself at the moment.
Last edited:
I think pink or white noise are excellent for detecting frequency response differences - I'm sure NOS droop will show up quite easily using noise as stimulus for example. However I'm more skeptical that it'll show up differences between nominally flat (freq. response) DACs. That's because I tend to find the differences between DACs show up in the 'background' more obviously than in the 'foreground'. By 'background' I mean the acoustic a recording is made in, 'foreground' meaning the instruments/voices being recorded. Since noise doesn't have a natural origin - meaning its lacking acoustic cues from a room, hall or other listening space - I have my doubts. But don't let me discourage you from experimenting!
Makes sense. I'm only interested in DACs with mostly flat measured response, so I don't expect any obvious differences in tonality, they should be in something else. Certainly, all the DACs I have listened to are quite flat, with maybe 1 dB drop at 20 KHz, but I can only hear up to 16. If there was a tonality difference, I would like to think that I would have been able to tell it with music Thanks for pointing out what to listen for.
About the differences that you personally hear: would you be able to hear them if the recording was mixed to mono? Or is it strictly a stereo effect?
Thanks for pointing out what to listen for.About the differences that you personally hear: would you be able to hear them if the recording was mixed to mono? Or is it strictly a stereo effect?