Sabre vs classics

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#3
LOL. It's a nice question.. At end the most important thing is the quality of analog section of DA. With a good analog section also tda1545 ( 0.30$ chip ) can sound better than sabre chip with poor filtering + amplifier section.
 
#4
The analog section is indeed hugely important, but since the ESS9018 puts out such a huge amount of HF hash the only way to deal with it and get some semblance of dynamics out is by fairly steep passive filtering. I've not seen an attempt at this anywhere. The S-D modulator adds noise too, so I'd say overall the classics should have no trouble in seeing off ESS9018 based designs.
 
#5
abraxalito said:
The analog section is indeed hugely important, but since the ESS9018 puts out such a huge amount of HF hash the only way to deal with it and get some semblance of dynamics out is by fairly steep passive filtering. I've not seen an attempt at this anywhere. The S-D modulator adds noise too, so I'd say overall the classics should have no trouble in seeing off ESS9018 based designs.
Click to expand...

High speed class A ZFB I-V / integrated LPF / transformer OP.

Did you see the sims of my ZFB Sabre I-V, at 2MHz freq, full swing, around
-90dB distortion. I don't think it will have a problem with RF noise. 🙂

Transformers are also very good at pulling music out of HF hash, you just
need a very good one, and drive it correctly. As such the transformer
distortion will not be far off Sabres (may be better > a few hundred Hz).
 
#6
Have yet to see a sim that produces results indicating the dynamics of a design. Distortion was measured with mutitone stimulus and the sim included all the OOB noise? Agree about trafos - passive is king in high-RF environments. However trafos tend to be rather bulky and heavy.
 
#7
abraxalito said:
Have yet to see a sim that produces results indicating the dynamics of a design. Distortion was measured with mutitone stimulus and the sim included all the OOB noise? Agree about trafos - passive is king in high-RF environments. However trafos tend to be rather bulky and heavy.
Click to expand...

In the past I have verified my designs with AP and most have been pretty
accurate.

The design is actually fairly simple and virtually impervious to RF / IM.
Further to this one characteristic of very good transformers is very low IM
distortion.

The transformer is big - and it requires proper driving, However you are
throwing the challenge out for a design that can suitably deal with Sabres
various difficult traits such as high current swing, low OP Z, significant OOB
noise etc.

Allowing for a factor of 10 x worse real life measurement results and this will
still qualify as very linear measurement wise
 
#8
The ESS9018 Buffalo II ended my search for the perfect DAC.
To me it surpassed a Nakamichi OMS-5EII, some Theta Dac, some PCM1796 design I do nit remember any more, a Parasound D/AC-1500 with PCM63 which I modded to PCM1794. It also surpasses a Sony CDP-X5000, same as XA-7ES, see this http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/251807-sony-cdp-x5000-cdp-xa7es-cdp-xa50es-mechanics-maintenance-vfd-modification.html

It definitely surpasses a Sony CDP-101 which I was lucky to buy a month ago - In new condition. It was "in deep slumber" in the dealer´s cellar for 30 years - with two other units.
 
Last edited:
#9
zenelectro said:
However you are throwing the challenge out for a design that can suitably deal with Sabres various difficult traits such as high current swing, low OP Z, significant OOB noise etc.
Click to expand...

Not me guv 😉 I can't understand why anyone would want to make a rod for their own back in selecting this chip. Its a challenge too far when there are other solutions which don't result in such strong jitter dependency (due to all the OOB noise) and need for extreme dynamic performance.
 
#12
Before we become Peking Duck with years, yes please open a thread for something valuable and cheap with an old DAC Chip you like as TDA154x many of us have.

Can't remenber as well the name of a deutsch fellow who swear only with PCM56 and big speakers coils for passive network after it... remember you talk together in some threads.
 
#13
What is OOB ? A non-governmental organization who fight again DAC chip distorsion ?

Maybe the old new waited Japaneese DAC chip waited and anounced every year like SAKURA for many years will beat the ES Sabre... and the old Kings DAC chips like the Philips, AD1862, PCM56 & 63 series ... or is it just impossible....Argh where is my Rega planar 3...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom