i like the 2nd one best.
Agreed..... but someone is going to ask for the finger too, just wait!
Fred
P.S. How about a nice pumpkin for Halloween?
Whoops.....
Agreed..... but someone is going to ask for the finger too, just wait!
Fred
P.S. How about a nice pumpkin for Halloween?
Whoops.....
controversial design
The forum needs some good controversial designs. The resulting debates are often useful and allow a better understanding of the audio art by exposure to the strongly held veiwpoints of the opposing sides.
Ken L:
First Grey and now you? Am I the only one still on my first wife? She is a saint by the way, which I suppose is obvious to all by now. She even let me go have desert with my former Engineering Co op (who is as bright as she is pretty) as seen below:
I guess I have reached the harmless old poop age already....sigh.
The forum needs some good controversial designs. The resulting debates are often useful and allow a better understanding of the audio art by exposure to the strongly held veiwpoints of the opposing sides.
Ken L:
First Grey and now you? Am I the only one still on my first wife? She is a saint by the way, which I suppose is obvious to all by now. She even let me go have desert with my former Engineering Co op (who is as bright as she is pretty) as seen below:
I guess I have reached the harmless old poop age already....sigh.
Attachments
fedde,
i too find it bad that Jean-Paul has to lurk here now, i would have been interested in what he has to say about his own nonOS DAC experience, and i also had preferred it if he and Remco together had tried to find out what effect or compensation of opposite effects make the non-OS DAC sound as it does. Remco has almost infinite knowledge about the topic, so i have been told. I hope both read it, i hope i did not frighten them away.
But if have observed it too often: if such mutual harrassing escalates (and it does not matter if within rules of formal politeness or not), there exist few things to stop it. Exhaustion? slim chance. Death? yes. Just i am not waiting on that. Not patinet enough.
If someone opens another thread on a this nonOS DAC topic and no harrassing happens, why should the moderator interfere? 🙂 I just wanted the blood to cool down.
Fred,
we can dicker about new smilies but not about the one with one finger, you know, i mean the binary 4 🙂.. this i left intentionally out. Smilies are "i feel" messages, not "you are" messages. okok, i let some less harming "you are" messages in as a safety valve. But not this one.
problem.
Your bright and pretty Eng.Co op ... is she still free? 🙂 ... i like females with FPU working and in use
i too find it bad that Jean-Paul has to lurk here now, i would have been interested in what he has to say about his own nonOS DAC experience, and i also had preferred it if he and Remco together had tried to find out what effect or compensation of opposite effects make the non-OS DAC sound as it does. Remco has almost infinite knowledge about the topic, so i have been told. I hope both read it, i hope i did not frighten them away.
But if have observed it too often: if such mutual harrassing escalates (and it does not matter if within rules of formal politeness or not), there exist few things to stop it. Exhaustion? slim chance. Death? yes. Just i am not waiting on that. Not patinet enough.
If someone opens another thread on a this nonOS DAC topic and no harrassing happens, why should the moderator interfere? 🙂 I just wanted the blood to cool down.
Fred,
we can dicker about new smilies but not about the one with one finger, you know, i mean the binary 4 🙂.. this i left intentionally out. Smilies are "i feel" messages, not "you are" messages. okok, i let some less harming "you are" messages in as a safety valve. But not this one.
problem. Your bright and pretty Eng.Co op ... is she still free? 🙂 ... i like females with FPU working and in use
Alright, I will make one last try to make this point:
1- I was told to listen to a non-os dac as an argument that non-os sounds better than os.
2- I have listened to about 7 different non-os configurations and numerous (estimated around 100) os configs. Would have tried more non-os, but the amount of permutations is fairly limited and there was little sign of improvement.
3- I have provided info on the how, why and where of the cons in non-os and how to solve it in the second post I posted in this thread. If that is inpolite, I'd love to be informed why.
4- When all of this was pointed out, calling names is in my book not the way to retort.
Well, it's been fun here at diyaudio.
Remco, signing off.
Replies per e-mail, please.
OK, I take the risk of being banned, sin binned or whatever sanction could follow. At least I walk in it with open eyes.
In my opinion listening is the only way to determine if DAC A is better than DAC B despite DAC A's topology is better on paper. Same goes for OS versus Non OS. Quality of sound is what it is all about isn't it ? Or we should refine the definition of "better".
I have no comments on point 2 and 3.
If Professor is calling names I am sorry. I think other words could/would cause provocation. The Professor name wasn't meant as an insult.
I just got fed up with the negative way things were going. Being sharp is OK but it slowly became a cold war.Please read our posts again and evaluate. I did anyway and made decisions for avoiding this in the future ( well, if I am banned there will be none on this forum ...)
You've made your point and signing off is not the way I and probably others would like to see as a result of this discussion that's gone out of hand. Your input is valuable and your knowledge is beyond doubt. In fact I am sure you know exactly what you're talking about where others including myself have a tendency to assume things or put theory aside. That has its merits too sometimes. Beautiful things can come out of doing something impulsive or not backed up by theory. Like green LED's shining on cd's making sound better. Or building a non os DAC while you know it is theoretical worse than a os one ...
Jean-Paul ( that is not replying by mail since the discussion wasn't either )
In my opinion listening is the only way to determine if DAC A is better than DAC B despite DAC A's topology is better on paper. Same goes for OS versus Non OS. Quality of sound is what it is all about isn't it ? Or we should refine the definition of "better".
I have no comments on point 2 and 3.
If Professor is calling names I am sorry. I think other words could/would cause provocation. The Professor name wasn't meant as an insult.
I just got fed up with the negative way things were going. Being sharp is OK but it slowly became a cold war.Please read our posts again and evaluate. I did anyway and made decisions for avoiding this in the future ( well, if I am banned there will be none on this forum ...)
You've made your point and signing off is not the way I and probably others would like to see as a result of this discussion that's gone out of hand. Your input is valuable and your knowledge is beyond doubt. In fact I am sure you know exactly what you're talking about where others including myself have a tendency to assume things or put theory aside. That has its merits too sometimes. Beautiful things can come out of doing something impulsive or not backed up by theory. Like green LED's shining on cd's making sound better. Or building a non os DAC while you know it is theoretical worse than a os one ...
Jean-Paul ( that is not replying by mail since the discussion wasn't either )
NON-OS DAC vs OVERSAMPLED DAC
Hi Remco, Jean-Paul & Fedde,
NON-OS is not better by definition.
If all other factors are not equal it is difficult to compare. Also some preamps and poweramps react allergic to the HF hash coming from NON-OS DAC with no analog lowpass filtering applied after the DAC. Also have the impression that the digital filter is more jitter sensitive than NON-OS. This makes the influence of the masterclock of the CDP also important.
Also I have no idea how a DAC with digital filter reacts to my Asynchronous Reclocker as I don't have a DAC with digital filter.
I did not compare all DAC's with digital filter to all NON-OS DAC's.
I did a few A B-ing with the Theta IV and a early version of the NON-OS KWAK-DAC (four AD1851). Here my DAC was the winner and that made me happy.
And I made a comparison with he AD1865 and the CXD 1244 digital filter in or out the circuit.
Also compared the latest version of my DAC AD1865N-K/Asynchronous Reclocker/ improved digital interface to the SonyCDPX-A30ES of a friend of mine. This CDP is equiped with Sony's latest digital filter with slow/soft roll-off options. The Sony was better tham I expected but not in the leage of the KWAK-DAC.
Does the above <B>PROVE</B> that NON-OS is better?
No I don't think so but for me the results are encouraging enough to proceed on this path and tweak the maximum performance out of it. And I keep a open mind for a linear phase digital filter as a chip or as a DSP.
🙂 😛eace:
Hi Remco, Jean-Paul & Fedde,
NON-OS is not better by definition.
If all other factors are not equal it is difficult to compare. Also some preamps and poweramps react allergic to the HF hash coming from NON-OS DAC with no analog lowpass filtering applied after the DAC. Also have the impression that the digital filter is more jitter sensitive than NON-OS. This makes the influence of the masterclock of the CDP also important.
Also I have no idea how a DAC with digital filter reacts to my Asynchronous Reclocker as I don't have a DAC with digital filter.
I did not compare all DAC's with digital filter to all NON-OS DAC's.
I did a few A B-ing with the Theta IV and a early version of the NON-OS KWAK-DAC (four AD1851). Here my DAC was the winner and that made me happy.
And I made a comparison with he AD1865 and the CXD 1244 digital filter in or out the circuit.
Also compared the latest version of my DAC AD1865N-K/Asynchronous Reclocker/ improved digital interface to the SonyCDPX-A30ES of a friend of mine. This CDP is equiped with Sony's latest digital filter with slow/soft roll-off options. The Sony was better tham I expected but not in the leage of the KWAK-DAC.
Does the above <B>PROVE</B> that NON-OS is better?
No I don't think so but for me the results are encouraging enough to proceed on this path and tweak the maximum performance out of it. And I keep a open mind for a linear phase digital filter as a chip or as a DSP.🙂 😛eace:
nonOS-sense or nonsense?
"Also have the impression that the digital filter is more jitter sensitive than NON-OS."
You may have just hit the nail solidly on the Head! This seems to agree with my listening test with diferent transports and digital interfaces so far.
Fred
"Also have the impression that the digital filter is more jitter sensitive than NON-OS."
You may have just hit the nail solidly on the Head! This seems to agree with my listening test with diferent transports and digital interfaces so far.
Fred
Re: nonOS-sense or nonsense?
Since the only place that jitter ultimately counts is at the DAC itself, it ultimately boils down to how sensitive the DAC is to jitter, no?
se
Fred Dieckmann said:
Since the only place that jitter ultimately counts is at the DAC itself, it ultimately boils down to how sensitive the DAC is to jitter, no?
se
It seems quite logical that the higher sampling frequency and more bits words demand lower jitter. Half of the time that belongs to one bit is the limit. More than that could be considered as error.
1/(2x65536x44100)=173ps for 16bits, 44.1kHz
Not hard to calculate different cases...
Kusunoki (among the others) discusses this.
Pedja
1/(2x65536x44100)=173ps for 16bits, 44.1kHz
Not hard to calculate different cases...
Kusunoki (among the others) discusses this.
Pedja
Wauww.... looks nice ... I would love to see some close-ups of this one... any schematic too? That would help me alot.
But most important... how does it perform? Any comments on the perceived sound quality?
Greetings,
Thijs
But most important... how does it perform? Any comments on the perceived sound quality?
Greetings,
Thijs
the original
Just a link to an interview with Kusonoki San:
http://www.tnt-audio.com/intervis/kusunoki_e.html
I missed it and maybe some of you non os "adepts" did too. If someone has the march and december 1997 copies of MJ I am curious how his newer DAC's are designed and built. Maybe you can mail me the schematics ? 😀
Just a link to an interview with Kusonoki San:
http://www.tnt-audio.com/intervis/kusunoki_e.html
I missed it and maybe some of you non os "adepts" did too. If someone has the march and december 1997 copies of MJ I am curious how his newer DAC's are designed and built. Maybe you can mail me the schematics ? 😀
fedde,
pls keep up with your work - I see absolutely no problem with the content of your page (specially since you mentioned and linked others).
I mean it is a DIY page and can contain even controversial ideas, why not ?
( - the only people who can eventually complain are the wise guys from 47labs, and they would have REALLY MUCH to do stopping all those "gainclone" efforts and pages... I am sure they browse through all the pages and than have a cup of tea, smiling...).
I myself am looking forward to your "gainclone" pages and to the discussion too.
Klaus
pls keep up with your work - I see absolutely no problem with the content of your page (specially since you mentioned and linked others).
I mean it is a DIY page and can contain even controversial ideas, why not ?
( - the only people who can eventually complain are the wise guys from 47labs, and they would have REALLY MUCH to do stopping all those "gainclone" efforts and pages... I am sure they browse through all the pages and than have a cup of tea, smiling...).
I myself am looking forward to your "gainclone" pages and to the discussion too.
Klaus
Thanks lohk for the support 🙂
I do not think (and hope) that 47 labs are unhappy with all the enthusiastic cloners. Most of the concepts they use are quite controversial, and it's good for them if a lot people back their ideas up. Anyway, most of the DIY-ers here would never buy any commercial products again so their not directly losing sales!
I think it's not a problem if some of their concepts are used in our experiments. Things change of course when direct copies of their products are sold in a commercial way...
The gainclone page is progressing well, I hope that I am able to finish it in the next days. Yesterday, a friend of me made some nice pictures with a digital cam for the page.
Some concepts of the gainclone are not completely clear to me, I will soon start a new thread for them. (eg. the low capacitance thing...)
Very hard topic I think. The 'things happening' in the design are too complex for a few simple formulas IMHO.
Fedde
(who's now going back to the party where he came from, hic 🙂
I do not think (and hope) that 47 labs are unhappy with all the enthusiastic cloners. Most of the concepts they use are quite controversial, and it's good for them if a lot people back their ideas up. Anyway, most of the DIY-ers here would never buy any commercial products again so their not directly losing sales!
I think it's not a problem if some of their concepts are used in our experiments. Things change of course when direct copies of their products are sold in a commercial way...
The gainclone page is progressing well, I hope that I am able to finish it in the next days. Yesterday, a friend of me made some nice pictures with a digital cam for the page.
Some concepts of the gainclone are not completely clear to me, I will soon start a new thread for them. (eg. the low capacitance thing...)
Very hard topic I think. The 'things happening' in the design are too complex for a few simple formulas IMHO.
Fedde
(who's now going back to the party where he came from, hic 🙂
Re: the original
I do have a xerox copy of the schematic in the December 1997 issue of MJ magazine.
I can send it by classic mail in a envelop. I can't understand the article as all text is in Japanese!😕
PS my avatar is not Japanese but Chinese for Kwak.😀
Hi Jean-Paul,jean-paul said:
I do have a xerox copy of the schematic in the December 1997 issue of MJ magazine.
I can send it by classic mail in a envelop. I can't understand the article as all text is in Japanese!😕
PS my avatar is not Japanese but Chinese for Kwak.😀
I'm not a passionate fan of electronic self-doing and don't like forums that need registering. But after reading posts of this thread again I could not resist and registered - to ask one question. Sorry I didn't do it earlier.
I understand that what counts most are personal findings - it's the same with myself. But are there really members of this forum that don't read general hifi magazines at all? Or if they do, consider all that is written there - and contradicting their beliefs - being stupid?
There are writing people who love both music and technology and who have listnened to awfull number of different stuff. There are still nonos players being made - and dacs - and usually nonoses are not the least expensive ones. The reactions of editors from very different magazines to nonos dacs are - suprisingly? - similar. When reading some posts in this thread I got an impression that authors of these messages will declare magazine people dumb and deaf - if they will have an opportunity. Is it really so?
Old estonians said that a wise person will also learn something form the mistakes of other people. Think about it.
I was really suprised to smell burning infidels in a place like this. Come on, people, stop behaving religiousely! Happy new year to everybody, OS and NON-OS!
I understand that what counts most are personal findings - it's the same with myself. But are there really members of this forum that don't read general hifi magazines at all? Or if they do, consider all that is written there - and contradicting their beliefs - being stupid?
There are writing people who love both music and technology and who have listnened to awfull number of different stuff. There are still nonos players being made - and dacs - and usually nonoses are not the least expensive ones. The reactions of editors from very different magazines to nonos dacs are - suprisingly? - similar. When reading some posts in this thread I got an impression that authors of these messages will declare magazine people dumb and deaf - if they will have an opportunity. Is it really so?
Old estonians said that a wise person will also learn something form the mistakes of other people. Think about it.
I was really suprised to smell burning infidels in a place like this. Come on, people, stop behaving religiousely! Happy new year to everybody, OS and NON-OS!
I really don't know what to do with your post Ola. First you state that you don't like electronic self doing. You're obviously on the the wrong website if so.
Secondly reading the magazines doesn't make any difference at all. Some ( but certainly not most ) reviews of gear are coloured because the reviewer can keep the reviewed gear after testing it in some cases. Since I have learnt that from a reviewer of a magazine ( !) I changed my opinion about reviews. Besides that, it all depends of what YOU think of it. Not the magazine. Most of the serious DIY ers will listen to every amp, cdplayer or whatever they can listen to to form an opinion. For most of us it is not only a hobby but an obsession.
Price is totally irrelevant to quality. See for example a Gainclone, almost no parts and very good quality. Some even say it is better than some tube amps. I read Peter Daniel's experience and he stated that it sounds better than his Aleph 5. The latter will cost a lot more to build I think. And in DIY we skip the marketing costs you know.
Not only wise people learn from the mistakes of others, we all do.
Today I obtained an old tubed OS DAC
because I liked the sound, not because a reviewer told me it is good, I liked it myself despite my non os preference. In fact I traded it for one of my non os DAC's. Thank God there's no religion involved. Otherwise we would have slaughtered eachother by now. 😉
Happy new year to you too !
Secondly reading the magazines doesn't make any difference at all. Some ( but certainly not most ) reviews of gear are coloured because the reviewer can keep the reviewed gear after testing it in some cases. Since I have learnt that from a reviewer of a magazine ( !) I changed my opinion about reviews. Besides that, it all depends of what YOU think of it. Not the magazine. Most of the serious DIY ers will listen to every amp, cdplayer or whatever they can listen to to form an opinion. For most of us it is not only a hobby but an obsession.
Price is totally irrelevant to quality. See for example a Gainclone, almost no parts and very good quality. Some even say it is better than some tube amps. I read Peter Daniel's experience and he stated that it sounds better than his Aleph 5. The latter will cost a lot more to build I think. And in DIY we skip the marketing costs you know.
Not only wise people learn from the mistakes of others, we all do.
Today I obtained an old tubed OS DAC
because I liked the sound, not because a reviewer told me it is good, I liked it myself despite my non os preference. In fact I traded it for one of my non os DAC's. Thank God there's no religion involved. Otherwise we would have slaughtered eachother by now. 😉Happy new year to you too !
- Status
- Not open for further replies.