OPTERON13
Member
220 euros with shipping and tax to NetherlandsInteresting, I wonder if I could fit it to my Roon endpoint running RoPiee and have it work.
I could then compare contrast to my Schiit Modius, which uses AKM DAC
What is the cost?
220 euros with shipping and tax to NetherlandsInteresting, I wonder if I could fit it to my Roon endpoint running RoPiee and have it work.
I could then compare contrast to my Schiit Modius, which uses AKM DAC
What is the cost?
Huh?dont't like for audiophile listening:
- class D amps
- class H amps
- Delta Sigma dacs
- new generation of solid state preamps
220 euros with shipping and tax to Netherlands
Audiophile Diyer - https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...-dac-hat-for-raspberry-pi-v2-42.413620/page-2Not bad.
Who makes it?
Audible?Ringing from brick wall filters.
This was known last century, ancient problem.
This is factually incorrect. Timing and waveform are severely distorted with NOS DACsBy skipping the oversampling and interpolation processes, the signal retains its original timing and waveform,
Also not true. You'll need a way more complex analog filterThe design of a NOS DAC is often simpler because it doesn’t require the additional circuitry needed for oversampling or digital filters.
Why cares about potentials.. We're talking about real products here.Less processing can mean less potential for digital artifacts or coloration, and a cleaner, more direct conversion from digital to analog. This purity can be appealing to those who prefer the minimalist approach.
Yeah, NOS DACs totally have low distortion at high frequenciesBecause NOS DACs don’t use oversampling, there’s less risk of distortion introduced by filtering at high frequencies. Oversampling DACs often use steep digital filters to shape the output, which can introduce artifacts like ringing or phase distortion.
WTF!In a NOS DAC, the signal is passed through more directly, with fewer stages of digital processing, which some listeners feel results in less artificial distortion.

Surely ChatGPT failed Sampling Theorem 101...NOS DACs can offer a more accurate representation of the original recording’s signal because they don’t interpolate between the digital samples. This means there’s no attempt to artificially increase the sampling rate or fill in the gaps between samples, which some believe can alter the sound.
Digital data gaps???Some audiophiles find that the natural timing and rhythm of music is better preserved in a NOS DAC, as it doesn’t overcompensate for digital data gaps, as oversampling DACs might.
I always find ik hilarious that stairsteps are described as more analogSome people prefer this type of sound because it softens digital harshness, making the music feel more natural or analog-like.

What is glare? I've never seen an objective description of thisOversampling DACs introduce multiple stages of digital processing that can sometimes create digital artifacts, like "glare"
Again, failed Sampling Theorem 101...NOS DACs are often more forgiving when playing older, lower-quality digital recordings or lower bitrates. The simplicity of not upscaling the signal means that the DAC’s sound remains closer to the original recording, which can be beneficial for those listening to older, less-than-perfect recordings that don’t benefit from the oversampling process.
A shipwreck of thought and critical thinking.
Well, the issue is that they didn't ask it to use critical thinking and objective data... If you do, it will come up with a better response. I've tried with "Deep Research" enabled. But then still, it forms conclusions that are incorrect or still contain misinformation, but at least it's a lot closer to the truth. It just shows how well the industry has brainwashed its customers over the many decades.Please no more,’I asked chatgpt’.
Keith
This is why such "AI" chat and response bots are useless forvalid audio relatedalmost all info
This is factually incorrect. Timing and waveform are severely distorted with NOS DACs
Also not true. You'll need a way more complex analog filter
Why cares about potentials.. We're talking about real products here.
Yeah, NOS DACs totally have low distortion at high frequenciesWTF!
Surely ChatGPT failed Sampling Theorem 101...
Digital data gaps???
I always find ik hilarious that stairsteps are described as more analog
What is glare? I've never seen an objective description of this
Again, failed Sampling Theorem 101...
Please no more,’I asked chatgpt’.
Keith
perhaps AI should get trained data hereParticularly here of all places where there is a wealth of real knowledge.
Keith