Serious Question: How can DAC's have a SOUND SIGNATURE if they measure as transparent? Are that many confused?

[Reynaldo]

There are a number subideal choices in PCB layout that, together with the use of an OLED display cause interference from the OLED Display to leak into the Audio circuit.

Looking at everything you wrote in my case that I already have the iFi Audio Zen One Signature, I believe it would not be worth buying the iFi Audio NEO iDSD.
The iDSD Pro is a DAC that is way too expensive.
I still have the M1SDAC that uses the DSD1796 even though it only works with PCM, but it has a great sound quality.
Also connected is the Oppo 205 which is very good and uses the Saber 9038Pro chips. It's an excellent device, but I don't know how to explain it to listen to music, I prefer the other two DACs.
If it's not too much to ask, what do you think of the interior photos of the M1SDAC?

I want to take this opportunity to wish you and everyone here a Happy New Year.

 

[Turambar]

Looking at everything you wrote in my case that I already have the iFi Audio Zen One Signature, I believe it would not be worth buying the iFi Audio NEO iDSD.
The iDSD Pro is a DAC that is way too expensive.
I still have the M1SDAC that uses the DSD1796 even though it only works with PCM, but it has a great sound quality.
Also connected is the Oppo 205 which is very good and uses the Saber 9038Pro chips. It's an excellent device, but I don't know how to explain it to listen to music, I prefer the other two DACs.
If it's not too much to ask, what do you think of the interior photos of the M1SDAC?

I want to take this opportunity to wish you and everyone here a Happy New Year.

I do own the iFi Audio NEO iDSD, and in my opinion as an user the DAC is fine, but as fine as others that are cheaper, I don't really use the Bluetooth feature and the headphone connections are rather disappointing.

 

[solderdude]

How many people here have any experience in manufacturing, process engineering and rerecipes

There are several capable designers and engineers here.

I have no ideas how many of them are good in the kitchen.

 

[Thorsten Loesch]

Yes DSD is more "direct" pathway to analogue right ?

That is a oversimplification. It will depend heavily on the specific DAC IC.

It is true for the BB/TI "Advanced Segment" DAC like the DSD1793.

As a simple rule if there is a digital volume control for DSD in the DAC Chip, it will not have a more direct pathway.

Thor

 

[Thorsten Loesch]

The iDSD Pro is a DAC that is way too expensive.

Yes, I agree. Keep looking 2nd hand .

If it's not too much to ask, what do you think of the interior photos of the M1SDAC?

They could be sharper... Other than that I think it is best if I limit myself to comment on my own designs, strictly.

Thor

 

[posvibes]

I believe the human brain is much more interesting than you originally thought.

I believe the human brain is much more interesting than the human brain originally thought.

 

[Music1969]

That is a oversimplification. It will depend heavily on the specific DAC IC.

Noted - I was specifically referring to DSD1793 as used by iFi for a long time

 

[Thorsten Loesch]

Noted - I was specifically referring to DSD1793 as used by iFi for a long time

Yes, in the DSD1793 and other similar DAC's, by sending DSD256/512 you bypass the third order Delta Sigma modulator that is baked in for PCM and that other than setting the FS ration has no controls for the user by the external DS modulator, which may or may not be superior, sound better etc. et all.

Unless of course you believe in ABX testing, in which case there will assuredly be no audible differences.

Thor

 

[solderdude]

Unless of course you believe in ABX testing, in which case there will assuredly be no audible differences.

Blind AB testing saves me money

 

[Jimbob54]

Unless of course you believe in ABX testing, in which case there will assuredly be no audible differences.

Would there be measurable differences?

 

[Music1969]

Would there be measurable differences?

Definitely measurable differences in different digital filters. Nearly every DAC Amir reviews that uses ESS or AKM with multi filters to select, shows measurable differences.

But then it goes back to the circular argument (like what you quoted from Thor) about audibility

 

[Music1969]

Yes, in the DSD1793 and other similar DAC's, by sending DSD256/512 you bypass the third order Delta Sigma modulator that is baked in for PCM and that other than setting the FS ration has no controls for the user by the external DS modulator, which may or may not be superior, sound better etc. et all.

Unless of course you believe in ABX testing, in which case there will assuredly be no audible differences.

Thor

Why were you against a chip based analogue volume control? None at the time as transparent as analogue pot?

And how about today ? Any chip transparent?

The advantage being practically no channel imbalance

Neo iDSD and Gryphon using chip

 

[Thorsten Loesch]

Would there be measurable differences?

Well, the starting point of this part of the discussion were the measured differences between different ways of feeding the same 44.1kHz Signal to the same DAC (which I designed), as published by the creator of HQ Player:

https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...ature-dac-a-waste-of-money.36833/post-1428479

So yes, naturally there are measurable differences.

Thor

 

[Thorsten Loesch]

Blind AB testing saves me money

Blind ABX testing red wine should save money because I cannot tell a good Rioja and a Wolf Blass Yellow Label Malbec apart.

Still, when drinking for enjomyent of flavour and not to get hammered I prefer the Rioja. So I pay the extra anyway.

Thor

 

[Music1969]

The iDSD micro also measures better if PCM44.1 is "upsampled" to DXD, which he did not show.

He showed PCM768k input which pushes the (measurable) digital "images" higher than would be for DXD rate.

So I guess its possible some measurements will be better at DXD but not all?

 

[Thorsten Loesch]

Why were you against a chip based analogue volume control? None at the time as transparent as analogue pot?

I was?

Only against those with build-in Op-Amp's (e.g. Cirrus CS33XX & TI PGA23XX). There are a number of options that are just resistor ladders and fet switches.

And how about today ? Any chip transparent?

The ones that are purely passive IF APPLIED CORRECTLY (the pot wiper has a highly non-linear impedance - designs must account for this) can be.

Neo iDSD and Gryphon using chip

Yes they do. It is a chip that has a build in Op-Amp, however this Op-Amp can be ignored and the signal can be taken from the wiper without involving this Op-Amp.

(edit added) Plus, the ladder has very low objective distortion (not always a given) and not the least the IC used to have good availability (pre chipageddon) and at a price comparable to a good, selected for good tracking 9mm pot. Sonically I'd say the Chip may be slightly superior to the generic 9mm "green" pots found in a lot of gear.

There was a time when iFi selected the volume control for acceptable tracking, then the process moved to the OEM factory, then the OEM decided they no longer wanted to do it and the in-house testing was never reinstituted. One of these little and in my view unnecessary cost cutting measures that diluted product quality.

Thor

 

[Thorsten Loesch]

He showed PCM768k input which pushes the (measurable) digital "images" higher than would be for DXD rate.

So I guess its possible some measurements will be better at DXD but not all?

I have not tried to replicate his measurements. Ask Jussi. However higher clock rates generally with all DAC's I tested tend to give slightly worse SNR once you get high enough.

Thor

 

[Music1969]

Do ask.

Thor

Hi Thor

Did you design Diablo iDSD?

Thoughts on its technical performance? Significant improvement over micro iDSD BL or iDAC2, for example?

 

[Thorsten Loesch]

Did you design Diablo iDSD?

Yes.

Thoughts on its technical performance? Significant improvement over micro iDSD BL or iDAC2, for example?

The DAC section pretty much matches the iDSD micro (all version), but with a balanced output (including unbalanced), instead of a SE output with DC servo. The Op-Amp is a slightly different version Quad instead of a pair of Duals, the performance differences are minimal, however this device came out as best in listening tests, if you believe into that kind of thing.

The headphone amp is where the difference is large. Not only is it balanced out (but SE in), but it is a multi-loop design (similar to THX AAA principle, but different in implementation).

The volume control is sadly "post dedicated QC for volume control" so balance at lower level is a crapshoot in the dark.

I persistently voted against releasing this and pushed for a redesign similar to "Neo" to have a much more advanced design with many of the basic functional criticisms addressed.

I personally do not feel that the "Diablo" is a significantly superior to a Zen Stack with upgraded power supplies.

Thor

 

[Music1969]

Zen Stack with upgraded power supplies.

Zen DAC Signature V2 is the best of the Zens?

In marketing yes, but in technical?

The volume control is sadly "post dedicated QC for volume control" so balance at lower level is a crapshoot in the dark.

The channel imbalance at lower knob position is so annoying. If it used a transparent chip based solution, this would be king of portables in terms of power (power without imbalance issues)