Re: Re: Re: Conclusion: A fake that can sound somehow good. The genuine is MUCH better!!!
IME a very sibilant configuration.
irgendjemand said:
IME a very sibilant configuration.
On the other hand the pmd-100 sounds rolled off in the highs to me.
Having talked at length with IJ about the listening environments he uses and the reference systems he has access to, I'd say without a doubt that if he thinks the pmd-100 sucked in his test setup then it did.
Having talked at length with IJ about the listening environments he uses and the reference systems he has access to, I'd say without a doubt that if he thinks the pmd-100 sucked in his test setup then it did.
And I guess you listen with test instruments rather than your ears? If you can hear a difference in a straight A/B swap between two filters with the same source material, I say there is a pretty decent chance there is a difference.
Let me put some more oil in the fire...🙂
I and few friends of mine did some experimental listening to pairs of PCM63 with different marking for country of origin/make.
We had Japan, Korea and Phillipines chips, all K grades. They all reviewed different sound! The Japanese showed most clearer mids and highs with obvious lack of midbass and lowmids. Korean chips showed the strongest mid and low bass. The Phillipines chips were in the middle as to the bass presence and revelaed the most balanced sound.
The experimental setup consisted of Parasound DAC 1000 and CDP Sony 338ESD modded by myself employing pair of PCM63 and DF SM5847+reclock. The both setups showed the same differences so I assume they are relevant.
It was absolutely astonishing to see/listen to so much difference between all K-grades of PCM63 differing "just" by manufacturing country!!!
Do you dare to comment on this, please? 😉
I and few friends of mine did some experimental listening to pairs of PCM63 with different marking for country of origin/make.
We had Japan, Korea and Phillipines chips, all K grades. They all reviewed different sound! The Japanese showed most clearer mids and highs with obvious lack of midbass and lowmids. Korean chips showed the strongest mid and low bass. The Phillipines chips were in the middle as to the bass presence and revelaed the most balanced sound.
The experimental setup consisted of Parasound DAC 1000 and CDP Sony 338ESD modded by myself employing pair of PCM63 and DF SM5847+reclock. The both setups showed the same differences so I assume they are relevant.
It was absolutely astonishing to see/listen to so much difference between all K-grades of PCM63 differing "just" by manufacturing country!!!
Do you dare to comment on this, please? 😉
"K" ???
Hi beauty_devine! Good to have you here again!! 🙂 Well, you are really forcing me now to put much much much more oil into the fire... 😉 so here it is:
After listening to a genuine "Y" you will not have any wish to compare "K"s.....
Indeed, I might be much too critical, so here is the opinion of my technician & friend Manfred Hiller, as sent to one of our diyaudio friends only 2 days ago, with a cc to me:
"PCM63P- J * the "normal" PCM63 - it plays music, I think better then the most newer DAC´s. But not more. Sorry BB.
PCM63P-K * the first selection - cleaner, more relaxed. Better in every detail. A very good DAC without considerably problems.
PCM63-K2 * the second step of the selection - A very interesting DAC. I like this K2. But this is my subjective preference,
I like to hear voices, IJ is more the orchestral fan, when i can use this words as a little about how we test Hifi-Stuff.
So for me it´s very difficult to say if they are more badly as the Y´s. At orchestra it´s a little bit clearer = pro Y.
The K2 are for shure as clean as the K or could be a little cleaner. The soundstage is also a little further, more broadly. Hard to find fitting words. I could say there is more air arround the musicians, the room is a little bit bigger as at the K.
PCM63-Y Indonesia (Juang) * There begins the art of being a DAC-Chip I would say. The others are well or good or very good,
the Y are always a little over them. This indonesia Y is wider, again more relaxed and more detailed. You only hear the music, without any kind of thing what you could say, it should be better. Fine.
The Y from Indonesia is between the K2 and the japan / Yamaha Y´s, nearer to the Y as to the K2 I would say.
PCM63-Y Japan / Yamaha original Parts * They are the biggest surprise the last weeks. IJ found them and I would say only he knows how he has this feeling for lucky deals... They are as clean and clear as the indonesia Y but they do form a bigger room, there is a little more free air left and right at the sides. Very easy to hear, relaxed, without any form of beeing exerted.
You hear the thing arround, the folds noises, the movements of the musicians clearer, you hear it and you know what it is, what you hear. So we can say very straight in common with the fluffy performance.
The differences are very little, but clear to name. They are reproducable again and again.
They look bigger in this words, as they are. The K is a very good chip, I have to say again.
From J to K2 and over to Y they become more clearer or cleaner, from K to Y they become more open, with more relaxation and more room around. Details become more unfirced, really easy...
But when you can have a pair of well fitting Y, take it, smile... 😉"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think that Manfred have it right.
IJ
beauty_divine said:
Hi beauty_devine! Good to have you here again!! 🙂 Well, you are really forcing me now to put much much much more oil into the fire... 😉 so here it is:
After listening to a genuine "Y" you will not have any wish to compare "K"s.....
Indeed, I might be much too critical, so here is the opinion of my technician & friend Manfred Hiller, as sent to one of our diyaudio friends only 2 days ago, with a cc to me:
"PCM63P- J * the "normal" PCM63 - it plays music, I think better then the most newer DAC´s. But not more. Sorry BB.
PCM63P-K * the first selection - cleaner, more relaxed. Better in every detail. A very good DAC without considerably problems.
PCM63-K2 * the second step of the selection - A very interesting DAC. I like this K2. But this is my subjective preference,
I like to hear voices, IJ is more the orchestral fan, when i can use this words as a little about how we test Hifi-Stuff.
So for me it´s very difficult to say if they are more badly as the Y´s. At orchestra it´s a little bit clearer = pro Y.
The K2 are for shure as clean as the K or could be a little cleaner. The soundstage is also a little further, more broadly. Hard to find fitting words. I could say there is more air arround the musicians, the room is a little bit bigger as at the K.
PCM63-Y Indonesia (Juang) * There begins the art of being a DAC-Chip I would say. The others are well or good or very good,
the Y are always a little over them. This indonesia Y is wider, again more relaxed and more detailed. You only hear the music, without any kind of thing what you could say, it should be better. Fine.
The Y from Indonesia is between the K2 and the japan / Yamaha Y´s, nearer to the Y as to the K2 I would say.
PCM63-Y Japan / Yamaha original Parts * They are the biggest surprise the last weeks. IJ found them and I would say only he knows how he has this feeling for lucky deals... They are as clean and clear as the indonesia Y but they do form a bigger room, there is a little more free air left and right at the sides. Very easy to hear, relaxed, without any form of beeing exerted.
You hear the thing arround, the folds noises, the movements of the musicians clearer, you hear it and you know what it is, what you hear. So we can say very straight in common with the fluffy performance.
The differences are very little, but clear to name. They are reproducable again and again.
They look bigger in this words, as they are. The K is a very good chip, I have to say again.
From J to K2 and over to Y they become more clearer or cleaner, from K to Y they become more open, with more relaxation and more room around. Details become more unfirced, really easy...
But when you can have a pair of well fitting Y, take it, smile... 😉"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think that Manfred have it right.
IJ
I am still looking for Yamaha Y chip 
I only got K2 and K and I agree with IJ findings. The K2 chips is the one that I like to play them in my DAC. For other chips I listen a while but later I just go back to K2. K2 just sound better to me.
The conclusion above implies that Sony machine is not as musical as Yamaha which indeed a musical instrument manufacturer instead of a Hifi manufacturer. I believe Yamaha can make and select a better chip compare to Sony guys.
Believe it or not, as long as you are happy with the money you pay on this chips (obsoleted), enjoy the music.
I am sure finally I will get my hand on a real yamaha Y chip...
I only got K2 and K and I agree with IJ findings. The K2 chips is the one that I like to play them in my DAC. For other chips I listen a while but later I just go back to K2. K2 just sound better to me.
The conclusion above implies that Sony machine is not as musical as Yamaha which indeed a musical instrument manufacturer instead of a Hifi manufacturer. I believe Yamaha can make and select a better chip compare to Sony guys.
Believe it or not, as long as you are happy with the money you pay on this chips (obsoleted), enjoy the music.
I am sure finally I will get my hand on a real yamaha Y chip...
spencer said:
Hi Spencer,
I am looking forward to put my hand on some "Y" chips for you...
this might take a bit of time, but we will get them!
IJ
irquindemand -
You mentioned one of your test mules was the Stoke tube DAC.
Would you say that the SM5842 digital filter is a a negative (like the PMD100) vs the DF1704 slow when used with the PCM63x ?
What I am getting at is there are no available PCB's that use the DF1704 + PCM63. Its an odd combination the choices or always SM5842/PMD100 + PCM63 or DF1704 + PCM1704.
You mentioned one of your test mules was the Stoke tube DAC.
Would you say that the SM5842 digital filter is a a negative (like the PMD100) vs the DF1704 slow when used with the PCM63x ?
What I am getting at is there are no available PCB's that use the DF1704 + PCM63. Its an odd combination the choices or always SM5842/PMD100 + PCM63 or DF1704 + PCM1704.
Regal,
I would not say that the SM5842 is negative, but please note that I didn't listen to the Stock DAC (Tube) with it, so I can't really tell. I think that I heard it in the Rotel 951 and the results were quite good. I have to check this - I am not sure.
You should consider that at the time that the PCM63 was new, BB released the DF1700 as a partner. Later, when they brought the DF1704, it was brought together with the PCM1704. So you will not find original implementation of PCM63 together with a DF1704.
However, the PCM63 works indeed excellent with the “new” DF1704 (SLOW).
Several people were able to put the DF1704 on a DIP 28 Pin adapter (see for example www.audiotuning.de or on eBay) and this is also what I am using. It “drives” the PCM63 to best performance.
However, I am about to try an adaptor with SM5847. Once I get it, I will report.
p.s. On his homepage, Mr Sallenthin from ASE-Audiotuning, writes that the DF1704 is much better then the SM 5813 or the DF 1700. As he wrote in German: "Diese Platine ersetzt den NPC SM5813 oder Burr Brown DF1700 Digitalfilter durch den wesentlich besseren BB DF1704".
I was assuming here that the SM5842 is a newer Filter, just like the DF1704 is, but Mr. Sellenthin write also:
"Spezialplatine für Teac VRDS-8 CD und D-3 Wandler, ersetzt den NPC SM5843 Digitalfilter durch den wesentlich besser klingenden Burr Brown DF1704 Digitalfilter" which means - the DF1704 is much better then the SM8543!
I know Mr. Sellenthin personally, and I can tell you that he is really OK.
IJ.
I would not say that the SM5842 is negative, but please note that I didn't listen to the Stock DAC (Tube) with it, so I can't really tell. I think that I heard it in the Rotel 951 and the results were quite good. I have to check this - I am not sure.
You should consider that at the time that the PCM63 was new, BB released the DF1700 as a partner. Later, when they brought the DF1704, it was brought together with the PCM1704. So you will not find original implementation of PCM63 together with a DF1704.
However, the PCM63 works indeed excellent with the “new” DF1704 (SLOW).
Several people were able to put the DF1704 on a DIP 28 Pin adapter (see for example www.audiotuning.de or on eBay) and this is also what I am using. It “drives” the PCM63 to best performance.
However, I am about to try an adaptor with SM5847. Once I get it, I will report.
p.s. On his homepage, Mr Sallenthin from ASE-Audiotuning, writes that the DF1704 is much better then the SM 5813 or the DF 1700. As he wrote in German: "Diese Platine ersetzt den NPC SM5813 oder Burr Brown DF1700 Digitalfilter durch den wesentlich besseren BB DF1704".
I was assuming here that the SM5842 is a newer Filter, just like the DF1704 is, but Mr. Sellenthin write also:
"Spezialplatine für Teac VRDS-8 CD und D-3 Wandler, ersetzt den NPC SM5843 Digitalfilter durch den wesentlich besser klingenden Burr Brown DF1704 Digitalfilter" which means - the DF1704 is much better then the SM8543!
I know Mr. Sellenthin personally, and I can tell you that he is really OK.
IJ.
Ps
Regal,
I remeber the discussion about the PMD100. Well, on the same above mentioned web-page, you will find also this:
DF-PMD - PMD100 Digitalfilter Adapterplatine
"Diese Platine ersetzt den PMD 100 Digitalfilter von Pacific Microsonics durch den in Filterstellung 'Slow' besser klingenden DF1704"
Which means - the DF1704 have to be on SLOW - and then it is better then the PMD100.
On the page there is also some "DF-UNV" which is an DF1704 Universal Adapterplatine - also for D.I.Y. Projekte. 🙂🙂🙂
Greetings,
IJ.
Regal,
I remeber the discussion about the PMD100. Well, on the same above mentioned web-page, you will find also this:
DF-PMD - PMD100 Digitalfilter Adapterplatine
"Diese Platine ersetzt den PMD 100 Digitalfilter von Pacific Microsonics durch den in Filterstellung 'Slow' besser klingenden DF1704"
Which means - the DF1704 have to be on SLOW - and then it is better then the PMD100.
On the page there is also some "DF-UNV" which is an DF1704 Universal Adapterplatine - also for D.I.Y. Projekte. 🙂🙂🙂
Greetings,
IJ.
SM5842 and SM5843???
I only know the NPC SM5842 and the 5847. The 5843 is onknown to me !!!!
BTW in my TentLabs-DAC's I can hardly hear any difference between the 5842 and the 5847.
irgendjemand said:
I only know the NPC SM5842 and the 5847. The 5843 is onknown to me !!!!
BTW in my TentLabs-DAC's I can hardly hear any difference between the 5842 and the 5847.
5842/3
OK IJ, I missed something......
But (because of lack of time) could anybody tell me wy I should examine a 5843? Is it only a different specification with more/other possibilities? I know that the 5847 has 'more possibilities' (and a different housing) but in my 256.fs environment with 8x oversampling the 47 is not more/better/... than the 42., and when I read Cobra2 the 43 performes not (much) better than the 42, so........
I think we are wasting our time at this point.
OK IJ, I missed something......
But (because of lack of time) could anybody tell me wy I should examine a 5843? Is it only a different specification with more/other possibilities? I know that the 5847 has 'more possibilities' (and a different housing) but in my 256.fs environment with 8x oversampling the 47 is not more/better/... than the 42., and when I read Cobra2 the 43 performes not (much) better than the 42, so........
I think we are wasting our time at this point.
Re: 5842/3
well, maybe
I found the 47 sounded slightly better than the 42, but differences were very small. I attribute them to the difference in packages hence different jitter behaviour.
But then again, if you apply decent reclocking after the digital filter, the discussion indeed becomes a waste of time.
best
PA0SU said:
well, maybe
I found the 47 sounded slightly better than the 42, but differences were very small. I attribute them to the difference in packages hence different jitter behaviour.
But then again, if you apply decent reclocking after the digital filter, the discussion indeed becomes a waste of time.
best
decent reclocking influances
Guido,
Wait! There is one more step to clear-up here:
Herb is saying since long, that if you apply a decent reclocking after the Digital Filter, the all discussion about PCM63 Selection-Grades (K/K2/KY/Y) becomes a waste of time and money(!) as well! There will be no differences to consider, so Herb. His/yours decent reclocking make all PCMs 63 to sing the same (!).
BTW he also got some negative reactions about this!!
Can you support him in this point / clear this up, please?
Greeting,
IJ
Guido Tent said:
Guido,
Wait! There is one more step to clear-up here:
Herb is saying since long, that if you apply a decent reclocking after the Digital Filter, the all discussion about PCM63 Selection-Grades (K/K2/KY/Y) becomes a waste of time and money(!) as well! There will be no differences to consider, so Herb. His/yours decent reclocking make all PCMs 63 to sing the same (!).
BTW he also got some negative reactions about this!!
Can you support him in this point / clear this up, please?
Greeting,
IJ
- Status
- Not open for further replies.