That thing looks to be pin-compatible with the CS @solderdude mentioned. So I wasn't wrong with my Chinese copy Also the filters appear to be a bit slower than the CS version.an Everest Semiconductor ES7144LV DAC chip. It's pretty grim.
That thing looks to be pin-compatible with the CS @solderdude mentioned. So I wasn't wrong with my Chinese copy Also the filters appear to be a bit slower than the CS version.an Everest Semiconductor ES7144LV DAC chip. It's pretty grim.
It uses the same chipsets though so possibly the same device but branded. The FiiO does have a switch for input select.
The cheap ones have both in parallel.
The filter (singular) appears like this:That thing looks to be pin-compatible with the CS @solderdude mentioned. So I wasn't wrong with my Chinese copy Also the filters appear to be a bit slower than the CS version.
There are three, which one is this? The quad filter stopband starts at 0.792, so would be 34kHz. That would fit the picture in post #1
That's at 48 kHz sample rate.There are three, which one is this? The quad filter stopband starts at 0.792, so would be 34kHz. That would fit the picture in post #1
Umm, mine doesn't do this..... Even into an amp with no DC blocking. No idea which version 'cos it's so darned old.When you've had a cheap dac-in-a-can trip the DC protection in your preamplifier/amplifier chain or make an almighty pop when locking onto a datastream, you'll understand what the differences are.
Don't make unsubstantiated claims about DBTs in relation to a product like this. They always betray themselves due to the inadequate design and engineering.
Interesting - so then the Fiio measures so much better because of better power filtering? Better analogue stage? Better reconstruction filtering?
With this kind of Generic Products you really can't tell what you get just from the looks of it.
View attachment 182584
This is an completely different board in the same case and even this version had an Opamp output buffer at some point.
Maybe the thing Amazon sells was capable of 192kHz at some point but the "manufacturer" switch to a cheaper and "equivalent" board without informing anyone...
Would not be the first time with this sort of products.
Are you saying that this atrocity is a good sounding DAC?I wouldn't say ripped off. Getting from $14 to $140 requires a certain amount of extra engineering, higher parts costs and more complex manufacturing. The improvements are measurable but not necessarily audible anymore. It does then beg the question what is the point of moving to the next level anymore? When you are talking $1000 for a slightly better measuring product that is now deep into the inaudible territory, it's probably a pointless endeavour.
My DAC, as posted above, sounds great to me. I am admittedly pretty far from golden eared given my age. I do think that within a few years the current edge of audibility for most people will be under $100 and possibly close to $50. At that point, for most people, the $14 DAC will be at the very least "good enough" and I doubt many would be able to select it in a blind test from a higher-priced unit.Are you saying that this atrocity is a good sounding DAC?
TV HDMI to receiver plus optical to Amazon DAC to sub? You wouldn't have the ability to set crossovers or do room correction but the sub's controls would serve their purpose. That's if your tv can do both outputs, of course, and it's highly likely your AVR has a sub output already.So could I use this to feed a signal to my analogue, powered subs via a digital only input/output DAC? Like for example the new Minidsp SHD Studio or the soon to be released, Flex Digital only version?
There are some very "constant" costs including labor/automation.I wouldn't say ripped off.