-
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!
NiceHCK Octave dongle DAC
- Thread starter Matias
- Start date
Human Bass
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2018
- Messages
- 870
- Likes
- 959
For those who want a dongle with similar power and UAC1 option, there is the Cayin RU3. It has a 10band peq also. But yeah, it costs a tad more.
VyseLegendaire
Member
The Cayin RU3 can be bought for $99 on BloomAudio. Not recommending it yet as I do not own it, but just a warning AliExpress prices can be either very low or very high.
VyseLegendaire
Member
If you're a fan of SGM8262, it would depend on whether you prefer the CS or the ESS chipset sound. I think CS is 'warmer, detailed, flat', ESS is 'cooler, rounder, more 3-Dimensional'. Also depends on whether you think the DRE/Cirrus issues are acceptable on CS chips, even with the latest firmware updates. 3rd issue would be whether the DAC controller utilizes a pre-amp stage to boost output amplitude before the final volume stage. The Fiio devices I've used do this, whereas TTGK (Octave included) do not. This means you can actually control the volume on the TTGK devices rather than attentuating a full-amplitude output of the original input signal (Fiio KA17 does this for instance). You'd have to ask someone whther on the KA15 the sound signature is identical at max volume as low volume, just quietier, or if it scales the same was as native Windows audio output (1 being smaller, quieter, 100 being big, loud, rather than) But with SGM 8262 you cannot find fault with it as a final stage amplifier.
VyseLegendaire
Member
Just tested the TampeMonkey userscript posted by SlowLife. Works as intended - now you can change the filter type from the web. Strangely, the High-Low setting also works even when the switch is in either position on the device itself. So you can technically switch to Low even with the switch even in the High position on your dongle, so keep track of that.
What do you mean by “DAC controller”? Some DAC do indeed need an intermediate stage, whereas other integrate it onto the chip itself. But how does it relate to the DAC controller you mention, and why would that be an issue?
Could you list which FiiO devices and which TTGK modules you’re referring to (list…)? Is this really a FiiO-brand vs. TTGK-brand issue, or it just depends on the DAC chip + output stage choice?
VyseLegendaire
Member
You summed up the issue pretty well - I worded my advice vaguely because I do not know how other devices from which I've bought actually sound compared to different items from their brands. I have a suspicion that the behavior exhibited by my Fiio KA17 is tied to the requirements of the THX-AAA series amps of having to use a THX pre-amp and LPF filter module as part of the amplification stage, at least insofar as schematics show. Maybe Fiio devices relying on other amp configs. like the KA15 (SGM 8262 only from what is available online) do not have this pre-amp module and thus scale volumetrically from a quiet amplitude rather than a maximal one. A second theory I had is that the pre-amplifcation may be tied to the intermediate DAC control stage which I do not know about in detail, but only theorize how it would be utilized for a pre-amplifying effect. But since I don't own it I can't give a solid recommendation and I would offer caution.
I own both the Black Pearl and Octave from TTGK and both do not have pre-amplifying (well there might be some but it begins at a lower level than max), both relying either on the built-in amp. power of the CS43131, in the case of Black Pearl, or in case of the Octave, direct connection of the ESS chip to the SGM 8262-2 modules. This means that if your PC is set too 100/100 volume, you can get a full fidelity sound but scale the output appropriately to your ears by adjusting output device volume, and low volume is smaller and quieter, while high volume is louder and bigger.
So basically I am cautioning against Fiio but real culprit may in fact be the THX AAA amp system. This was easily tested by me because I could achieve the same sound signature of the KA17 (comparison of small but complex audio clips) - at either very low volume or high volume equally - only on the Octave by maximizing its device volume, but lowering vol. on Windows to avoid going deaf, at which case they resemble each other closely but I'd still prefer SGM's sound. Result of this pre-ampliying system is that the sound is often perceived as being too small due to sound size not matching the sound power as normally would be the caseif using a direct line out from your PC to a speaker or headphones, since Windows volume was meant to scale this way so that full volume would be appropriate to fill a larger room, low volume for a small one.
To Sum up your final question; Its probably a DAC / output stage relation issue, but since particular manufacturers tend to follow their own trend and theory, its useful to correlate them by brand.
I own both the Black Pearl and Octave from TTGK and both do not have pre-amplifying (well there might be some but it begins at a lower level than max), both relying either on the built-in amp. power of the CS43131, in the case of Black Pearl, or in case of the Octave, direct connection of the ESS chip to the SGM 8262-2 modules. This means that if your PC is set too 100/100 volume, you can get a full fidelity sound but scale the output appropriately to your ears by adjusting output device volume, and low volume is smaller and quieter, while high volume is louder and bigger.
So basically I am cautioning against Fiio but real culprit may in fact be the THX AAA amp system. This was easily tested by me because I could achieve the same sound signature of the KA17 (comparison of small but complex audio clips) - at either very low volume or high volume equally - only on the Octave by maximizing its device volume, but lowering vol. on Windows to avoid going deaf, at which case they resemble each other closely but I'd still prefer SGM's sound. Result of this pre-ampliying system is that the sound is often perceived as being too small due to sound size not matching the sound power as normally would be the caseif using a direct line out from your PC to a speaker or headphones, since Windows volume was meant to scale this way so that full volume would be appropriate to fill a larger room, low volume for a small one.
To Sum up your final question; Its probably a DAC / output stage relation issue, but since particular manufacturers tend to follow their own trend and theory, its useful to correlate them by brand.
Last edited:
VyseLegendaire
Member
Realistically, the device is tonally flawless. The main difference of all ESS 9039Q2M/9069Q devices I own is the volume and gain scaling logic, which will alter your perception of the output markedly. That's why in my view more chips, more features, more money is not always better.
Edit; Definitely don't trust any of the 1st party measurements esp. since the clips are zoomed and cropped.
Last edited:
Those measurements are dubious. 127 dB SNR, even A-weighted, is impossible to achieve with SGM8262. 2 watt power is nonsense, too.
He probably meant this and this and his post #47 in the above, which are based on his groundless theory.
Please do not say your theory as if it were a fact. What you're saying about the "volume and gain scaling logic" makes no sense.
Does anyone understand what @VyseLegendaire is talking about?
VyseLegendaire
Member
The theory would cease to be groundless if someone else owned and compared each of the devices I've mentioned - but of course I won't ask them to spend money on such an adventure. Thusly I've given my groundless personal advice and observations to help guide buyers in what I think are sound directions, assuming their funds are limited.
I do think its a mistake to rely only on measurements of various data to decide ultimately about preferences for a tool designed mostly for musical enjoyment, which is far from a grounded and hard science to be frank. That's why we have a forum after all because its not going to be possible to prove to someone the superiority of a purchasing decision based on marketing and data analysis alone.
So, if anyone wants any deeper insights I can provide for one of those products you could ask me via DM
I do think its a mistake to rely only on measurements of various data to decide ultimately about preferences for a tool designed mostly for musical enjoyment, which is far from a grounded and hard science to be frank. That's why we have a forum after all because its not going to be possible to prove to someone the superiority of a purchasing decision based on marketing and data analysis alone.
So, if anyone wants any deeper insights I can provide for one of those products you could ask me via DM
I am NOT takling about your subjective preference or recommendation, with which I have no problem at all. You are firmly attributing such preference to a baseless theory about device designs. Please stop doing that.
VyseLegendaire
Member
Okay, I see where the misunderstanding is. But the basic problem is that to provide scientific evidence of any of the issues I've experienced when trying to match the sounds I get from any two devices would be rather difficult - unless I either; A. get direct information from the manufacturer, nearly all Chinese or B. speculate about how its design/engineering are leading to my experience.
So in a sense, I have no choice but to postulate about the design philosophy of the device if I am to believe the veracity of my own experience, which of course I do.
Also I might save someone reading this thread 100$ here or there on thinking a certain item fulfills their needs better when in my experience it probably won't.
Insofar as I can tell, it is definitely possible for a device which is measuring great in technical analysis to totally fail to meet the use case of many potential users for any variety of reasons.
So in a sense, I have no choice but to postulate about the design philosophy of the device if I am to believe the veracity of my own experience, which of course I do.
Also I might save someone reading this thread 100$ here or there on thinking a certain item fulfills their needs better when in my experience it probably won't.
Insofar as I can tell, it is definitely possible for a device which is measuring great in technical analysis to totally fail to meet the use case of many potential users for any variety of reasons.
Last edited:
No, I know this from objective testing. The CS43131 cannot achieve an A-weighted SNR of 132 dB (BAL) or 127 dB (SE) even without additional op-amps. I am certain that the specs mistakenly show DR (dynamic range) results with DRE engaged. The ES9039Q2M's theoretical A-weighted SNR is 130 dB without any additional output stage. And the state-of-the-art SNR number of DACs like Topping D50 III or E1DA 9039S reaches around 127 dB (A-weighted) with OPA1612's in its output stage. No way to achieve it with SGM8262.
Last edited:
VyseLegendaire
Member
I also wanted to add that using something like a Topping HS02 USB signal isolator + linear power supply for it can add something like +3 SNR IIRC, and maybe even the manufacturer tests are doing this. If you're asking whether I have this setup with my dongles, yes so maybe its improving my experience compared to average. I do also prefer to use somewhat comparatively expensive silver/gold plated cables at nearly every stage of connection. I've experienced detail loss if using a cheaply made USB-C cable as the final stage into the dongle, even when using an HS02.
USB signal isolator + linear power supply—feeding the HS02 I assume…. Why don’t use a good desktop DAC/Amp combo instead of a dongle? Oh, and you’ll only need one USB cable…
not sure if I would spend more than the dongle itself to add a USB signal isolator
Similar threads
