Imho they all do (cmos based). It manifests itself only at high dsd rates (preferably dsd512, 256 is a lot less problematic) and only at levels around -30 to -60dB. Hence the vague descriptions: not everybody has music that uses those levels, or maybe they listen less loud etc.
It's an Inter Symbol Interference problem, not a low pass filter or single ended vs differential problem and is gone when using AMSDM7 512, or low dsd rates.
I'd love more special versions of the AMSDM7 512 type modulators, for this exact reason. If you've got some time left or need something for the wish list, this is it;-)
I've installed an eval copy of HQP4 on my 'den' Win10 workstation and have been listening to HQP3 & HQP4 using headphones (600ohm BeyerDynamic DT880s and 32ohm Goldring DR150s) via my Buffalo 3SE/Legato DAC (BBB/Botic/NAA and full fit of Salas Regs). SQ is really exceptionally good with HQP4 and the new EC modulators but I could only use DSD128 (CPU at around 65%), above that playback rate CPU loading was very high and consistent playback wasn't possible.
The Win10 workstation is a little long in the tooth but still no slouch, with a 3.3GHz Xeon processor benchmarking at around 9500-10,000 IIRC. I'll try HQP4 on my Music server in the next few days, using the same DAC & headphones. That's a more powerful i7 with CUDA support and running AudioLinux so ought to be a bit more capable.
The Win10 workstation is a little long in the tooth but still no slouch, with a 3.3GHz Xeon processor benchmarking at around 9500-10,000 IIRC. I'll try HQP4 on my Music server in the next few days, using the same DAC & headphones. That's a more powerful i7 with CUDA support and running AudioLinux so ought to be a bit more capable.
Attachments
FYI, based on what I've learned following some HQP threads at audiophilestyle, processor clock speed is one of the keys to running EC mods with no dropouts.
Finally I got my version of Pavels v. 2.6 working properly and with no noise.
My skills in SMD soldering leaves a lot to be desired
But I got it sorted out. No noise and great sound.
I still have this nagging feeling, that the very simple DSD DAC I described here: The Best DAC is no DAC post#2135 .(with some modification in the output ) sounded better, but with the infamous noise still there (though at a much lower level than any of the other simple no-dacs). This was much better sound wise and noise wise than with any other F-F I tried and I wonder if Pavels experiment with a DSC1 made with F-F (Signalyst DSC1 post #577) could be a winner, if 74AUC1G74 was used instead. IMHO the reason AUC1G is performing so well is that rise and fall times are almost equal and q and q bar is also very equal.
Yes, that's why I'm hopeful that my faster i7 server will do the job. That said what I'm hearing at DSD128 is marvellous.
The project on CPLD and 74AHCT574 is slowly developing. But the priority of my time for this project is quite low.
Comparison between DSC2 and 2.5.2 and 2.6.2
Has someone compared the DSC2 to the 2.5.2 and 2.6.2?
I'm just wondering because I currently have the DSC2 and I'm quite happy with it but thought the other day that it would be interesting to know how the other versions sound compared to the DSC2..
Has someone compared the DSC2 to the 2.5.2 and 2.6.2?
I'm just wondering because I currently have the DSC2 and I'm quite happy with it but thought the other day that it would be interesting to know how the other versions sound compared to the DSC2..
Hmm
I am a little confused by the naming of the different DSC versions.
If you look at the Google drive : DSC2 2.5.2-2.6.2 – Google Drive
2.5.2 and 2.6.2 are both called DSC2.
My version is yet another DSC2. In the schematics it is called " BB/Amanero + isolator+reclocker+DSC2" . No idea what version this would be??
Hmm
I am a little confused by the naming of the different DSC versions.
If you look at the Google drive : DSC2 2.5.2-2.6.2 – Google Drive
2.5.2 and 2.6.2 are both called DSC2.
My version is yet another DSC2. In the schematics it is called " BB/Amanero + isolator+reclocker+DSC2" . No idea what version this would be??
The "BBB/Amanero+isolator+reclocker+DSC2" is what I refered to as simply DSC2.
Have a look at https://puredsd.ru/ -here all 3 different versions are listed.
Apparently, I am here referring to the Pure DSD site :PureDSD,
DSC1 are the single ended and DSC2 are the differential version.
Based on your experience, yesterday evening I decided to do a short comparison of HQPD3 vs. HQPD4 with the same setting (upsampling 16/44 to DSD256, closed-form, ASDM7 and DSDIFF poly-lin, standard, FIR). DAC is my DSC2.5.2 with IanCanada board, PulsarClock, BBB naa.
To my big surprise, HQPD3 is still the winner with a more "organic" sound, more "rounded"and subtle nuances. HQPD4 is more precise and with a better separation of the executors/instruments on the stage.
I'm quite suprised due to the fact I was prepared for the same exact sound with identical settings. Additional comparisons planned during weeked if weather conditions will be bad.
EC modulators are really demanding. MacBookPro cpu move from ˜150% to 450%
See you soon