Douk Audio DAC-Q11--The first USB DAC with Switchable ESS9038Q2M and AK4493?

[raindance]

The one with the higher output voltage will always be preferred. What a waste of time.

 

[Martin]

Utter silliness. The price is insanely cheap but the execution is an exercise in futility.

Topping E70 Velvet (AKM 4499EX)

I received my E70 yesterday and set it up today. I have the E70 running in parallel with my E70 Velvet that I received on Monday. The Setup: PiCorePlayer with embedded LMS on 2GB Raspberry Pi 4 Identical USB A to USB B cables on separate USB 3 ports Topping E70 & Topping E70 Velvet both set...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Martin

 

[Grotti]

What puzzles me is that you should have known the outcome of the "discussion". This is ASR, you know?

 

[Leporello]

I wonder if ESS is better with 1s whereas AK is optimized to 0s. Could be the other way around, of course.

 

[Sir Sanders Zingmore]

I object on the ground it promotes audiophile mythology and misinformation. I particularly object to that being promoted here.

Completely agree
Should earn Douk a big boot straight out of the Desperate Dealers Forum!

 

[Jarrett]

Good idea here, of course ASR will be ASR, doesn't mean it doesn't have appeal this idea.

 

[shion_ca]

To enjoy different sound styles of two top DAC chips via only one DAC?

What do you think of this switchable design? Let's discuss Douk Audio DAC-Q11 together!

View attachment 380483

View attachment 380482

I personally think it's a great idea, as people can do blind A/B's of the equipment (assuming the output is the same volume when you switch between the chips. I would actually like a convenient way to switch between chips (even better if I could plug my own in) so that I could determine through blind testing if I could hear a difference, and if so which I preferred.

 

[shion_ca]

For me - sorry to say - utter nonsense.

We don't want sound effects. We want accurate reproduciton. Both chips are capable of doing that. Pick one - use it and do the design right.

I realise this doesn't help with gimmick marketing. How about, instead, offering features of genuine benefit to the customer. Balanced connections, usable display etc etc. Best of all, you could spend the money from the second DAC chip on some DSP, and implement decent built in room correction.

The only way to really tell if it's utter nonsense is to A/B test. This facilitates that. So wouldn't we be supportive of this as it gives the convenient ability to perform the only truly valid testing of whether the op amps sound different?

I mean technically if someone can tell the difference blind and repeatedly at matched output volume, it's very important scientifically as it means that our measurements don't accurately measure all that's involved in perceived sound difference.

The reason I assume you are against is that you've concluded there is no difference and so this will only either establish what you believe you already know to be the case, or that it will be used incorrectly to foster an incorrect conclusion. I'd rather be given the option to make that decision myself without your biases, I'd personally enjoy the experiment.

 

[shion_ca]

The one with the higher output voltage will always be preferred. What a waste of time.

I often turn down my volume when deciding between 6 and 7 on my preamp based on the particular track. But yes the important point here is the device would ideally match volumes for output.

 

[antcollinet]

The reason I assume you are against is that you've concluded there is no difference and so this will only either establish what you believe you already know to be the case, or that it will be used incorrectly to foster an incorrect conclusion. I'd rather be given the option to make that decision myself without your biases,

No, but because (as stated in my other posts) - the aim of Hifi is accuracy, and:

If you've done the design right, there shouldn't be an audible difference to enable subjective sound/preference - other than bias effects. If you've done the design poorly enough to result in an audble difference, don't expect those of us who value high fidelity to be interested.

If they sound different, then at least one of them is not accurate.

I object on the ground it promotes audiophile mythology and misinformation. I particularly object to that being promoted here. There is too much of that in the world already (regardless of price).

We know from measurements, and null testing, that DACS based on either chip can be designed so that they are audibly perfect. Two aduibly perfect DACS must, by definition, sound the same. So there is no reason why the two chips should sound different unless one of the designs around them was inaccurate.

Further - if my statements are based on engineering knowhow, and professionally performed measurements - it is not "bias".

But feel free to purchase this pointless device to satisfy your own curiosity. Just be sure when you do any comparisons to do them carefully enough to avoid your own perceptive biases (we all have these - it is part of the way we are built) confounding your results. And note that the output levels from the device are NOT matched between the two chips - so somehow you need to control for this yourself.

 

[kemmler3D]

I appreciate engaging with the community on product designs, however at ASR it's generally believed that two good DAC chips should have no "sound" of their own at all. So perhaps this forum is not the best audience to get feedback on this concept.

 

[Brian Hall]

I appreciate engaging with the community on product designs, however at ASR it's generally believed that two good DAC chips should have no "sound" of their own at all. So perhaps this forum is not the best audience to get feedback on this concept.

Or it is the best possible place to understand that a product idea may not be as good as it originally seemed and why that is the case. Better to know before releasing it than after it is out in the world.

I'm sure most of us have come up with some idea that seemed great until we discussed it with someone else.

 

[JSmith]

The product is already designed, tested and on pre-order... I don't think they're after feedback on the concept.


JSmith

 

[Bjorn]

Should have spent the resources on a balanced/differential design instead. This is a waste IMO, and l honestly don't understand why anyone would not choose balanced today.

 

[Sokel]

Will that be recognized as 4-channel dac by the PC?
Cause that would be interesting.

Regarding the different chips,nope.Maybe 10 years ago,not now.

 

[antcollinet]

Cause that would be interesting.

But only if it were possible to balance the output levels - because they are not by default.

 

[Brian Hall]

The product is already designed, tested and on pre-order... I don't think they're after feedback on the concept.


JSmith

That's a shame. They should have asked about it here before they went that far. I don't think anyone would "steal" the idea after reading about why it was a bad idea.

 

[Haskil]

Douk Audio can make this Dac equipped with two competing chips on the market (for 170 dollars remember) when other brands offer them which are worth 10, even 100 times more expensive... crowned with wonderful virtues justifying their "musicality "...

Provided that this Douk Audio model passes Precision Audio measurements without any problems... It is not this device and this approach from Douk which will have the slightest influence on the dominant opinion in audiophile circles: 1) the conversion chips have an intrinsic sound and 2) a DAC at this price can only be a device without interest... These are beliefs and you just have to read the evasions of the subjectivists on these subjects to understand that it is wasted effort. When you hear the sound of a mains cable or an Ethernet switch: there is nothing more we can do for you.

I have never managed to hear the effect of the switchable filters of my DACs and CD players, nor have I ever heard any differences between ESS and AKM and yet the dominant idea in the market is that ESS has a surgical treble and AKM has a more natural sound than its competitor... (We should investigate the psychological effect produced by the very name of these manufacturers on the way in which the makers of subjectivist opinions hear the sound that comes out of their chips: "ssss"... )
So basically this Douk is not for me... but I can see that we can do that... much more than selling luxuriously presented shaky designs at a high price or downright sidereal rubbish weighing 30 kilos to fight against the vibrations...

The style exercise of this manufacturer must at least be saluted... and my goodness, if for one reason or another, psychological obviously, an owner of this device prefers one option to the other: what is the problem?

Yesterday I put an audio chromecast back into service with Roon, I found the sound better than after a double conversion Topping DX 3 Pro and analog input from my TACT 2.2X, then I connected the PC directly to the Tact optically and I found the sound worse... 1) Chromecast, 2) Topping, 3) Optical touch... I went to lunch. On the way back, it was the opposite... last night, it was indistinguishable... Only way to know: Chromecast + Roon = cuts... Result, the ADC of old Tact 2.2X is excellent... it is so transparent...

I would prefer to know if the two outputs can work together and if their output level is the same...

 

[Sokel]

But only if it were possible to balance the output levels - because they are not by default.

If recognized by PC it should be easy through windows mixer or MP or so.
What I consider as interesting is more the possibility to be used by people who always ask about 2.1 or 2.2 systems.

Although it doesn't seem to be the case and we don't know if the DACs share the same clock,etc.

 

[TonyJZX]

i'd pay a bit more if they could fit in a Crystal CS43131 as well