• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

miniDSP Tide16 - Holy Grail with 16 Channel Atmos/DTS:X, high SINAD

They are using 4 DACs per channel, two for each leg of the XLR. That’s end to end balanced. That’s how they are getting the SINAD for a lesser chip to perform at such a high level.
 
They are probably claiming they are electronically balanced rather than transformer balanced however virtually nothing is transformer balanced these days, it has advantages in really hostile RF environments but has significant LF distortion and HF linearity disadvantages.

Basically nothing other than some mic preamps are balanced all the way through the signal chain from input to output.
A single ended connection using a transformer to derive + and - legs is the opposite of end to end balanced
 
They are using 4 DACs per channel, two for each leg of the XLR. That’s end to end balanced. That’s how they are getting the SINAD for a lesser chip to perform at such a high level.
Technically speaking, when people referred to "end to end", they likely meant literally end to end meaning from input to output, every stage is balanced.
As to using X number of DAC channels for balanced/differential connection, you only need 2 DAC channels, since the Tide uses 4 channels to do it, one might call it the quadruple differential implementation scheme that

Here's an example of the so called "double" (Gene called it double but imo that's a misnomer, only double because 2 outputs are used per channel but it really is just a standard balanced/differential connection) differential implementation, for the Denon AVP, since it was mentioned earlier:

It uses only two dac channels per channel, such as FL+ and FL- for the front left channel.

1775078245470.png

The Tide 16 uses 4 dac channels per channel so one might call it quadruple (or double would be more appropriate imo) differential implementation.

That's just the DAC implementation part, we don't have the details of how the analog inputs are configured so I am slightly reluctant to assume it is truly end to end balanced, though it most likely is, as the website specs do say the inputs are balanced XLR; and the ADC part is almost going to be implemented in double differential configuration as the ES9842QPro has 4 output channels, and the Tide 16 has only two analog inputs.

Website info:


Analog Audio Input SpecificationsConverter: ES9842QPRO
Stereo RCA (unbalanced)
Zin: 200 Ω
Max Level: 4Vrms
Frequency response: 20 Hz – 20 kHz ± 0.05 dB
SNR (Digital to analog): 122dB
THD+N (Analog to Digital): -116dB
Crosstalk (Analog to Digital): -120dB
Stereo XLR (balanced)
Zin: 200 Ω
Max Level: 4Vrms
Frequency response: 20 Hz – 20 kHz ± 0.05 dB
SNR (Digital to analog): 122dB
THD+N (Analog to Digital): -116dB
Crosstalk (Analog to Digital): -120dB

The theoretical limit for SINAD gain using the "quadruple" (likewise, only quad if you count the 4 outputs per channel, but imo it is more appropriate to call it double differential connection). In such a scheme the maximum SINAD gain would be 9 dB, the miniDSP specs show 118 dB SINAD, that's 8 dB better than the ES9017 DAC IC's SINAD spec so it came very close to the theoretical limit and as such, I think it is reasonable to assume miniDSP also uses very good quality opamps for all stages including the IV conversion stage.
 
Last edited:
Technically speaking, when people referred to "end to end", they likely meant literally end to end meaning from input to output, every stage is balanced.
As to using X number of DAC channels for balanced/differential connection, you only need 2 DAC channels, since the Tide uses 4 channels to do it, one might call it the quadruple differential implementation scheme that

Here's an example of the so called double differential implementation, for the Denon AVP, since it was mentioned earlier:

It uses only two dac channels per channel, such as FL+ and FL- for the front left channel.

View attachment 521650
The Tide 16 uses 4 dac channels per channel so one might call it quadruple differential implementation.

That's just the DAC implementation part, we don't have the details of how the analog inputs are configured so I am slightly reluctant to assume it is truly end to end balanced, though it most likely is, as the website specs do say the inputs are balanced XLR; and the ADC part is almost going to be implemented in double differential configuration as the ES9842QPro has 4 output channels, and the Tide 16 has only two analog inputs.

Website info:


Analog Audio Input SpecificationsConverter: ES9842QPRO
Stereo RCA (unbalanced)
Zin: 200 Ω
Max Level: 4Vrms
Frequency response: 20 Hz – 20 kHz ± 0.05 dB
SNR (Digital to analog): 122dB
THD+N (Analog to Digital): -116dB
Crosstalk (Analog to Digital): -120dB
Stereo XLR (balanced)
Zin: 200 Ω
Max Level: 4Vrms
Frequency response: 20 Hz – 20 kHz ± 0.05 dB
SNR (Digital to analog): 122dB
THD+N (Analog to Digital): -116dB
Crosstalk (Analog to Digital): -120dB

The theoretical limit for SINAD gain using the quad differential scheme is 9 dB, the miniDSP specs show 118 dB SINAD, that's 8 dB better than the ES9017 DAC IC's SINAD spec so it came very close to the theoretical limit so I think it is reasonable to assume miniDSP also uses very good quality opamps for all stages including the IV conversion stage.
I wasn’t even thinking of the analogue input. Thank you for pointing that out.
 
Technically speaking, when people referred to "end to end", they likely meant literally end to end meaning from input to output, every stage is balanced.
As to using X number of DAC channels for balanced/differential connection, you only need 2 DAC channels, since the Tide uses 4 channels to do it, one might call it the quadruple differential implementation scheme that

Here's an example of the so called "double" (Gene called it double but imo that's a misnomer, only double because 2 outputs are used per channel but it really is just a standard balanced/differential connection) differential implementation, for the Denon AVP, since it was mentioned earlier:

It uses only two dac channels per channel, such as FL+ and FL- for the front left channel.

View attachment 521650
The Tide 16 uses 4 dac channels per channel so one might call it quadruple (or double would be more appropriate imo) differential implementation.

That's just the DAC implementation part, we don't have the details of how the analog inputs are configured so I am slightly reluctant to assume it is truly end to end balanced, though it most likely is, as the website specs do say the inputs are balanced XLR; and the ADC part is almost going to be implemented in double differential configuration as the ES9842QPro has 4 output channels, and the Tide 16 has only two analog inputs.

Website info:


Analog Audio Input SpecificationsConverter: ES9842QPRO
Stereo RCA (unbalanced)
Zin: 200 Ω
Max Level: 4Vrms
Frequency response: 20 Hz – 20 kHz ± 0.05 dB
SNR (Digital to analog): 122dB
THD+N (Analog to Digital): -116dB
Crosstalk (Analog to Digital): -120dB
Stereo XLR (balanced)
Zin: 200 Ω
Max Level: 4Vrms
Frequency response: 20 Hz – 20 kHz ± 0.05 dB
SNR (Digital to analog): 122dB
THD+N (Analog to Digital): -116dB
Crosstalk (Analog to Digital): -120dB

The theoretical limit for SINAD gain using the "quadruple" (likewise, only quad if you count the 4 outputs per channel, but imo it is more appropriate to call it double differential connection). In such a scheme the maximum SINAD gain would be 9 dB, the miniDSP specs show 118 dB SINAD, that's 8 dB better than the ES9017 DAC IC's SINAD spec so it came very close to the theoretical limit and as such, I think it is reasonable to assume miniDSP also uses very good quality opamps for all stages including the IV conversion stage.
I've noted this previously but I'm still convinced Zin: 200 Ω has to be wrong, no? Maybe kΩ?
 
I've noted this previously but I'm still convinced Zin: 200 Ω has to be wrong, no? Maybe kΩ?
We know they're still working on the manual so typos are going to be common at this time. Perhaps in the act of finishing the manual, they found some other things to "adjust" and the reason for the production delay.
 
I'm still undecided: Tide 16 or Marantz AV30. The Tide has the best customizability, the Marantz Auro3D. That's not easy - or even the Cinema 30, if unbalanced preouts are ok
 
I'm still undecided: Tide 16 or Marantz AV30. The Tide has the best customizability, the Marantz Auro3D. That's not easy - or even the Cinema 30, if unbalanced preouts are ok
I am going to wait to see if the Tide has more processing/filters/taps when used with Dirac ART versus the Denon & Marantz AVRs and then I’m am going to make a decision on the Tide vs AV10/20/30 or stick with my Denon 3800H. For me personally, the Tide having only 3 sub outs in a 7.3.6 layout is a disadvantage but I can work around it if it has better processing.
 
I am going to wait to see if the Tide has more processing/filters/taps when used with Dirac ART versus the Denon & Marantz AVRs and then I’m am going to make a decision on the Tide vs AV10/20/30 or stick with my Denon 3800H. For me personally, the Tide having only 3 sub outs in a 7.3.6 layout is a disadvantage but I can work around it if it has better processing.
I am in the same situation. The Tide 16 intrigues me. We all know the processing power and customizability of the miniDSP. I'm also waiting for the launch of the Tonewinner AT600 which is another alternative to the Tide and HP-1.
 
I am going to wait to see if the Tide has more processing/filters/taps when used with Dirac ART versus the Denon & Marantz AVRs and then I’m am going to make a decision on the Tide vs AV10/20/30 or stick with my Denon 3800H. For me personally, the Tide having only 3 sub outs in a 7.3.6 layout is a disadvantage but I can work around it if it has better processing.
The Tide prob beats Denon for taps but if you NEED 4 sw outs, I rather stick w/the Denon. Besides, how many unhappy ART users out there are suffering by using Denon?
 
I am going to wait to see if the Tide has more processing/filters/taps when used with Dirac ART versus the Denon & Marantz AVRs and then I’m am going to make a decision on the Tide vs AV10/20/30 or stick with my Denon 3800H. For me personally, the Tide having only 3 sub outs in a 7.3.6 layout is a disadvantage but I can work around it if it has better processing.
I’ve been following off and on, so I probably missed it, but are we sure Tide only allows 3 subs? Seems odd to me (no pun intended). IIRC from my experience with owning the Flex, you could apply low or high pass filters to any output, and set up any output as a sub.
 
The Tide prob beats Denon for taps but if you NEED 4 sw outs, I rather stick w/the Denon. Besides, how many unhappy ART users out there are suffering by using Denon?
For me 4 subs outs are a must. But reading the Tide specs and looking at the back of the unit you can do 4 subs if you go with a 7.4.4 set up which is what I'm going to end up doing.
 
The Tide prob beats Denon for taps but if you NEED 4 sw outs, I rather stick w/the Denon. Besides, how many unhappy ART users out there are suffering by using Denon?
Agreed. I would also add that more taps are obviously better, but also a question of why you would need to support everything with anything. Perhaps in some systems yes but at large it does not really mean more is better (despite what Joss says). Some members actually reduced the levels of cross support and claim better results.

I use 93/94 filters but could easily drop that down without noticing in my 9.4.4 system.
 
I am in the same situation. The Tide 16 intrigues me. We all know the processing power and customizability of the miniDSP. I'm also waiting for the launch of the Tonewinner AT600 which is another alternative to the Tide and HP-1.
Thanks, I didn’t know about the Tonewinner.
 
I’ve been following off and on, so I probably missed it, but are we sure Tide only allows 3 subs? Seems odd to me (no pun intended). IIRC from my experience with owning the Flex, you could apply low or high pass filters to any output, and set up any output as a sub.
It only supports 3 subs if you have 7 bed layer and 6 Atmos speakers.

It is a 16 channel processor.
 
Back
Top Bottom