Frying pcm1792/4s is always a pain and I've fried enough of them. Nice measurements, it's good to see others doing them 🙂
Yeah, I've fried two, and even here in the U.S., they aren't particularly cheap. 🙁
You know the PCM1798 is much less expensive and is quite decent in its own right particularly in mono mode.
You know the PCM1798 is much less expensive and is quite decent in its own right particularly in mono mode.
Indeed, I have some 94/92/95/98s around somewhere in various boxes, I think all the 92s are being used though.
I'm really interested to see what TIs next topline DACs will be like, it's about time we got something new!
I'm really interested to see what TIs next topline DACs will be like, it's about time we got something new!
i dont think texas can manage to do much better than the pcm1794, one thing that made me astonished was the ultra low noise at the output of dac.
The dac of the emu1212m is also very linear ( CS4398)
But we dream with perfection 🙂
The dac of the emu1212m is also very linear ( CS4398)
But we dream with perfection 🙂
The dir9001 that I use don't accept 192khz. But there is no problem for me. I think 44.1khz are good enough. And less distortion.
today I start testing opamp's and the buffers that we talk in the other thread, remember? the buffers are better than I was expecting. When I collect enough data, I will start a new thread about opamp , with a lot of distortion measurement. 😉
I have 24/88.2K, 24/96K, and 24/192K as well as DSF, and the higher resolution higher bit rate recordings generally sound better than most of my 16/44.1K material which nonetheless can sound very good. I get my high res material from a number of sources, including the audio archive here: Download & Streaming : Audio Archive : Internet Archive, HDTracks, and Bluecoast Records.. (Note that Audio Archive is an open source repository for music which is all legally there, and legal to download and share)
I agree, it is a high performance part and when used correctly has low noise and low distortion, but as Kevin says, the distortion does rise with increasing sample frequency.
Now 0.0005% etc is excellent performance if all you're doing is 44/48kHz stuff, but I am sure that TI could manage to come up with something that can manage 0.0005% at 192kHz.
Another thing is that the 92/94 are quite old parts and I really like the direction that some of the newer TI DACs have gone in. Their most recent offerings have a small DSP built in with several different digital filters. Granted the chip lacks the sheer performance that the 92/94 is capable of, but they are not that far away when comparing them at 192kHz.
Maybe coming up with a new 2 channel DAC with even higher performance is very low on TIs list. TI though do like to play the numbers game and up until the ESS Sabre came out the 92 pretty much beat everything else. I almost expected them to fight back by releasing a new chip that matched the ESS DAC, but maybe things aren't so simple.
One things for sure if their new parts are all spec'd to work with 32 bit data and up to around 400kHz too, it stands to reason that a new flagship might be on the cards, but we could be waiting a few years for it yet.
I share this interest. My guess for the most likely new direction is the adding of a minimum phase interpolation filter setting, such as is implemented in the PCM5102. I suspect that there is more fertile ground to be uncovered regarding digital filters than there is in improving on PCM179x converter metrics.
Last edited:
Also of particular interest, is that the single-ended THD performance via a 50R passive I/V on one output phase with the opposite output phase connected directly to ground, is essentially the same as for the ideal differential output via virtual ground I/V conversion.
Last edited:
really interesting experiment result😱
I thought passive IV could not obtain good distortion performance.
I thought passive IV could not obtain good distortion performance.
Thanks for the link Kevin. I will try to get some HD material.
Unfortunately all of my music is 44.1khz 16bit, have only some HD demos.
I personally think that move from 16bit to 24 is more important, than the sampling freq. But off course the higher the better. At the state of technology I prefer 44 or 48 bit ,because the dac is more linear.
Unfortunately all of my music is 44.1khz 16bit, have only some HD demos.
I personally think that move from 16bit to 24 is more important, than the sampling freq. But off course the higher the better. At the state of technology I prefer 44 or 48 bit ,because the dac is more linear.
Well this is what I mean, the 92/94 is a decade old, semiconductor power, especially in terms of raw processing and processing efficiency has improved tremendously in the last 10 years. Even if a new chip would only beat the 92/94 by a small margin in the thd/noise stakes, the new stuff they should be able to add re the digital filters should more then be enough reason for a new DAC line.
I agree with you. I was only thinking in the linearity of the dac itself, not in terms of processing power.
Were can i get a copy of the ess sabre datasheet?
Were can i get a copy of the ess sabre datasheet?
Twisted Pear sell a pretty good DAC board for the PCM1794 that doesn't cost very much. It's just the DAC so it's easy to connect different converters to it.
you can download ES9008's datasheet with google.
I could not find ES9018's on the internet, but I got it from ESS's local sales.
Company Sales Offices
I could not find ES9018's on the internet, but I got it from ESS's local sales.
Company Sales Offices
Hi Dirk,
I know about their products, and i think they are good, and the price is right. But the problem is the customs taxes, one time they wanted me to pay 70 euros for some samples , it was only small smd mosfet with very low value.
For the time being I prefer to buy in europe, as the economy are very bad here and i have to spare my bank account ( unfortunately the future is very uncertain 🙁 )
Last edited: