US Audio MartUS Audio Mart
It is currently Sat Oct 20, 2018 12:26 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 265 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 3:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 3:14 pm
Posts: 212
Location: Surrey, UK
My front end for the past couple of years has been the Sonore ultraRendu > SingXer F1.

Last weekend a friend came over with his DCS Network Bridge. This had a tad more resolution and a tad more dynamics - as well as greatly simplifying the spaghetti of cables & LT3045s I have cleaning the DC. All for £3,250.

This got me thinking, the thoughts including:

Is it really worth an additional £2k?
What about the Auralic G1 or G2?
Which effects the SQ more, the F1 or the uR? and
How good is the SOtM Trifecta?

So, I have bought the SOtM Trifecta with a 30 day money back guarantee, this comprises:

SOtM 200ultra 12V with clock input;
SOtM sps500 PSU; and
SOtM txUSB 12V with clock input; and
DC Y cable - copper, they will send me the silver when it is in.

Will this simplify my system? NOT AT ALL. These three boxes will replace just my ultraRendu!

Reports to follow.

M


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 5:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 9:21 pm
Posts: 22
Location: Sky, , NL
Congrats M, interesting comparison ahead. With the master clock input you have the ability for an even further upgrade path.

Music enthusiasm= everything matters = never ending journey :-)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 6:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 8:23 am
Posts: 2244
Location: Seattle, WA, US
Fredoo wrote:
Tubelover2 wrote:
And there is a new toy coming - the Gustard U16. Uses even better clocks then the Singxer, and the new ESS USB chip set. Should be around $240


Good to hear newer DDC solution are ahead, the F-1 is available for quite some time..

I wonder if the U16 will also be available as an OEM? (card only). If so, hopefully it’s small enough to fit inside the DAC casing.

I’m keen on installing a modern DDC in the DAC casing, connecting it via i2s, powered by the internal DAC psu. The size of the F-1 is great for this purpose. Perhaps the introduction of the U-16 will tickle Singxer to update the F-1 :-)
Hi Freedoo, I don't think you'd see Gustard sell just the board. But at $240 for the complete unit - you could just unplug and remove the board. Iplan on bypassing the Gustard U16's built in PS and running a much cleaner est DC power chain.

"I’m keen on installing a modern DDC in the DAC casing, connecting it via i2s, powered by the internal DAC psu."
I'd strongly advise to not do that. The XMOS and I'm the ESS USB processors have high modulation noise on the ground plane - something you do not want feeding into you DAC's sensitive clocks.
One reason I believe we have had so much success with our digital chain's SQ - is the fact they are outside the DAC case and fed from an ultra clean and much improved DC power supply. Using a high quality LPS to a series of ultra low noise LT3045 LDO regs and now the pièce de résistance - the DUAL CAT SQUARED PoE DC 3.1 - a HUGE enhancement in SQ.

If you haven't heard what PoE DC can do for your F-1 and digital chain - try the .1 version. Total cost around $13.
viewtopic.php?f=35&t=1465
The SQ improvement could shock you...in a good way. :mrgreen:

I doubt that would fit in your DAC case.

Anyway my own experience with the Project 2S+ ESS9038 DAC - the SQ is much better fed by SPDIF then the built in XU208 XMOS board. Shared PS - even with some isolation does not cut it.
Interesting - even Amir at ASR analog output measures shows lower jitter on the Project S2 Pre from SPDIF then built in USB.
Attachment:
Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC USB Jitter Measurement.png
Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC USB Jitter Measurement.png [ 71.62 KiB | Viewed 272 times ]

Cheers


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 6:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 8:23 am
Posts: 2244
Location: Seattle, WA, US
Mr Underhill wrote:
Yes, that is the cable I was listening to last weekend, and have reported on before. I would LOVE to say it is foo, but it really does make a positive difference. The Nimak gets you some of the way there, but the Pallas appears to give you an extra active down below and a sweeter top end. Unfortunately the chap who makes them had arthritis and so they might be very time limited.

M

Hi M, Did you hear the Pallas or the Black Pallas? The latter being quite a bit better from what I've read.
How do you think the Pallas compares to the Cut Loose Palladium?

I forget what Digital cable you had before? The Audio Sensibilities Silver Statement?

From my Digital cable rolling by far the best has been the Synergistic Research Element Copper with ECT bullets and Galileo MPC. Bettering the Audio Sens Silver Statement I had before by quite a measure. But after doing ELF EMI tests on the Galileo - massive EMI emitters! Have to be monster SMPS's - which I hate - due to the AC leakage they produce.
I decided to sell them and maybe get the new SR Atmosphere Digital with Grounding block shielding. The next best I have heard was the Audience Au 24 SE's, bettering the AS Silver Statement as well. The new SX's are supposed to be even better - but at $1270 for a 1.5M - kinda ridiculous to me.

Attachment:
MPC L1.JPG
MPC L1.JPG [ 287.27 KiB | Viewed 269 times ]

Attachment:
MPC.jpg
MPC.jpg [ 225.37 KiB | Viewed 269 times ]


Until I decide what to get and find cheaper on the used market, I have been using a BJC digital cable - and to my complete surprise the SQ my system is producing is the best ever. This I attribute to the massive SQ lift from the PoE DC DCS 3.1 on all DC power links.
PoE DC has had so much positive impact on my system it greatly out ways the different (and sometimes subtle) SQ of different digital cables.

So I've been in no rush to spend $500-$600 on a digital cable when I can get a greater SQ improvement spending $50 to $10 on better CAT cables for the PoE DC chain.
Recently a very experienced audio enthusiest tried the PoE DC.1 and was shocked at what it did - so contacted me about the PoE DUAL CAT 3.1's.
Once he got them he was again very pleased with the SQ lift - even post LPS-1.2's and LPS-1's. He came across this $8 CAT 8 cable - the new Vandesail CAT8 which he really liked. I got mine over this past weekend and they are truly excellent. $13 for a pr of 2M shipped!

I'm spoiled now with notable SQ improvements had for so little cost.

Cheers!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 7:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 8:23 am
Posts: 2244
Location: Seattle, WA, US
Mr Underhill wrote:
My front end for the past couple of years has been the Sonore ultraRendu > SingXer F1.

Last weekend a friend came over with his DCS Network Bridge. This had a tad more resolution and a tad more dynamics - as well as greatly simplifying the spaghetti of cables & LT3045s I have cleaning the DC. All for £3,250.

This got me thinking, the thoughts including:

Is it really worth an additional £2k?
What about the Auralic G1 or G2?
Which effects the SQ more, the F1 or the uR? and
How good is the SOtM Trifecta?

So, I have bought the SOtM Trifecta with a 30 day money back guarantee, this comprises:

SOtM 200ultra 12V with clock input;
SOtM sps500 PSU; and
SOtM txUSB 12V with clock input; and
DC Y cable - copper, they will send me the silver when it is in.

Will this simplify my system? NOT AT ALL. These three boxes will replace just my ultraRendu!

Reports to follow.

M
That will be interesting.
Total cost 200ultra $1400 +sps500 Y $900+ txUSB $1200 = $3500 :shock:

And you still 'need' the $1100 CAT 6SE cable and $4000 OCX10 :o
Might be cheaper to go with the DCS.

Here is an interesting review of the SoTM tx-USB Ultra at 6Moons
https://6moons.com/audioreviews2/sotm4/1.html
and
dx-USB HD
https://6moons.com/audioreviews/sotm/1.html

Cheers!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 8:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:44 pm
Posts: 34
Location: San Francisco, CA, US
Mr Underhill wrote:

Yes, that is the cable I was listening to last weekend, and have reported on before. I would LOVE to say it is foo, but it really does make a positive difference. The Nimak gets you some of the way there, but the Pallas appears to give you an extra active down below and a sweeter top end. Unfortunately the chap who makes them had arthritis and so they might be very time limited.
M
[/quote][/quote]

Hi M

Thanks for all the great info!!
Good luck with the SoTM. I would LOVE to be able to do what you're doing with these comparisons. Can't wait to hear your report on the differences between the SoTM and the UR.
Cheers,


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 9:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:44 pm
Posts: 34
Location: San Francisco, CA, US
Tubelover2 wrote:
Mr Underhill wrote:
My front end for the past couple of years has been the Sonore ultraRendu > SingXer F1.


Reports to follow.

M
That will be interesting.


Cheers!


Hi Rob,
Thanks for the 6 Moons link. Yeah, - I have been looking at that SoTM DDC for quite a while and just thinking that it's just too crazy. At 6 times the cost of an F-1, - is it going to deliver even a 20% improvement? Of course, - one can't put a clear number on such things, - but as you rightly point out, - what will an AQ Cinnamon and two DC POE adapters do comparatively? Or the Audience Digital SPDIF cable after an F-1 instead?

The U16 is going to be only $40 more than the F-1. The F-1 sets a very high bar, - not only for the SQ, - but for the SQ for the price. Many people will be comparing the U16 to the F-1. The F-1 makes previous efforts like the WfSound, Bel Canto, Audiophileo, etc. by High End Audio manufacturers simply a joke. I first heard about the F-1 through you, and once again, - thank you!!!

At this point, - the value, popularity, etc of the F-1 is what all others should be judged by, - and if ANYONE is talking about a DDC, - they are being grossly remiss if they do not include the F-1 in a comparative conversation. I didn't need to read any flowery prose about SoTMs take on a small, digital, power supply. Or, - how great the DAC was.

This doesn't mean that I'm criticizing Mr. Underhill's plan to try out the SoTM stuff as a complete package. But, - am praising his comparisons, and they will carry far more weight as he's using the F-1 (as it should be), - the baseline for ANY DDC.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 9:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 8:23 am
Posts: 2244
Location: Seattle, WA, US
albrecht wrote:
Hi Rob,
Thanks for the 6 Moons link. Yeah, - I have been looking at that SoTM DDC for quite a while and just thinking that it's just too crazy. At 6 times the cost of an F-1, - is it going to deliver even a 20% improvement? Of course, - one can't put a clear number on such things, - but as you rightly point out, - what will an AQ Cinnamon and two DC POE adapters do comparatively? Or the Audience Digital SPDIF cable after an F-1 instead?

The U16 is going to be only $40 more than the F-1. The F-1 sets a very high bar, - not only for the SQ, - but for the SQ for the price. Many people will be comparing the U16 to the F-1. The F-1 makes previous efforts like the WfSound, Bel Canto, Audiophileo, etc. by High End Audio manufacturers simply a joke. I first heard about the F-1 through you, and once again, - thank you!!!

At this point, - the value, popularity, etc of the F-1 is what all others should be judged by, - and if ANYONE is talking about a DDC, - they are being grossly remiss if they do not include the F-1 in a comparative conversation. I didn't need to read any flowery prose about SoTMs take on a small, digital, power supply. Or, - how great the DAC was.

This doesn't mean that I'm criticizing Mr. Underhill's plan to try out the SoTM stuff as a complete package. But, - am praising his comparisons, and they will carry far more weight as he's using the F-1 (as it should be), - the baseline for ANY DDC.
I agree the F-1 is a fantastic DDC when fed the right DC power. My prior experience with re-clockers was successful - but aside from the iPur3 I use now - don't hear their advantage with the PoE DC 3.1 in the equation.

I bought the Matrix SPDIF-2 with high hopes and it sounded good - if a little to clinical for my tastes. This is where the F-1 just gets it so right. That tone! A delicious analog like liquidity and flow.
On paper the Matrix should have crushed it - but in the end I sold it (quite quickly and at little loss).
Attachment:
download (7).jpg
download (7).jpg [ 156.77 KiB | Viewed 282 times ]


I bought and use in my office system a LKS USB-100 with the Amanero Combo384 USB chip set, nice dual Crystek 957 clocks. Externally powered with the LT3045's DUAL CATs it is a top performer. Nice tone as well, just in comparison to the F-1 not the blackest background and transparency. Here again the F-1 gets it so right - with PoE doubly so, along with extraordinary detail. Another area that the F-1 excels at is dynamics - an area the PoE DC further improves.
Attachment:
s-l500.jpg
s-l500.jpg [ 38.89 KiB | Viewed 282 times ]


So my F-1 has been up against some tough competition and still remains the champ. Now with my recent PoE DC improvements - just the most pleasing and realistic sound I have heard yet. I'm beyond satisfied. But of course always curious - I think if I had stopped a year ago, and that was really great sound - I'd be missing out on what I can enjoy now on a daily basis. For far less cost to boot.

The new Gustard U16 could be a major advance - or a bust. Using a completely new USB DDC chip and in fact a whole host of new chips. Previous to getting the Project S2+ 9038 DAC I probably would have written the U16 off, as just more of the ESS Sabre 'house sound' flattish sound staging, etchy treble and tonal brightness. But I have to say the S2+ has convinced me that ESS has really gotten it's act together the S2+ uses not just their ESS9038 DAC chip but also their ES9311 LDO regulator, and Sabre 9802Q output chip - so willing to give their latest DDC a try.
Attachment:
O1CN012AVJMn2TxoHt6Nl_!!125808208 (1).jpg
O1CN012AVJMn2TxoHt6Nl_!!125808208 (1).jpg [ 358.82 KiB | Viewed 282 times ]

The one downside of the U16, like the SU-1, and unlike the Matrix, is the lack of an ext DC power port - that would have been nice. So that'll have to be jury rigged.

Certainly for the cost and resale value, the price of admission is quite low - not nearly in Mr M's league!

Cheers


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 11:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 8:23 am
Posts: 2244
Location: Seattle, WA, US
These Black Cat cables have some folks raving:

TRON SPDIF 1M $1999
Quote:
TRØN is the REFERENCE digital cable, with dual-layer interstitial QuieTex materials and techniques to create an RF and EM insulative blanket of sorts in order to help defray the effects of RF/EM from without and within. It’s an electrically precise 75 Ohm coaxial cable with an outstanding bandwidth. It is the pinnacle of SPDiF performance, peerless in its abilities, and in a class of its own.

https://blackcatcable.com/products/c-tr ... 6972278818
Attachment:
Tron-Digital-full_grande.jpg
Tron-Digital-full_grande.jpg [ 20.17 KiB | Viewed 272 times ]


Trickle down tech to the more reasonably priced DGT: Silverstar! 75 SPDiF MK. II $295 for 1M
Attachment:
fullsizeoutput_3390_large.jpeg
fullsizeoutput_3390_large.jpeg [ 15.07 KiB | Viewed 272 times ]


Quote:
In 2010 I released the first-ever Black Cat Cable product, and it was a little 75 Ohm digital cabled named “Veloce” - it quickly gained a wonderful reputation for being a wonderful performer, and was celebrated for being something of a “sure thing” by Srajan Ebaen of 6moons.com when he said:

“ … that makes the Veloce a sure thing for all but the excessively monied. Sure things in as uncertain a sector as high-end audio are always welcome. When sure things cost only a little, they become sure things for sure.”

"At first I thought I had lost something - and then immediately after, I began to realize the extra information (detail), that the increased smoothness of your cable had initially made MORE, seem LESS. My mistake! It is magnificently musical and satisfying. A huge tonal palette, and bass I never heard before. Wow. You sure know what you are doing. I am so glad I ordered it! ... I was surprised. Seldom does a component create such a totally positive change." ~ Lew Wells, customer (Silverstar! 75 Mk. I)

.
Silverstar! 75 was the evolution of the Veloce, and had been a major underground favorite for good reason – it bested some of the most expensive SPDIF cables out there, and was a steal by comparison!
.
SILVERSTAR! 75 Mk. II!
The raw cable is manufactured to my specifications by a military/aerospace contractor in the USA that I’ve been doing business with since 1994, and then post-processed and terminated right here in my workshop.
.
Mk. II now includes a secondary (pure-copper) shield, addition of RFI rejection material, and an overall braided jacket from multifilament nylon.


and

DGT: Digit 75 Mk. II SPDiF $750 for 1M
Quote:
DIGIT 75 is a “lite” trickle down from TRØN, where I’m using some of our QuieTex materials and techniques to create an RF and EM insulative blanket of sorts in order to help defray the effects of RF/EM from without and within. It’s an electrically precise 75 Ohm coaxial cable with an outstanding bandwidth.
Available with RCA (XOX) or 75 Ohm BNC termination (or mix of the two)

Attachment:
digit75_grande.jpg
digit75_grande.jpg [ 48.19 KiB | Viewed 272 times ]


Crazy looking wire braid:
Attachment:
1_large.jpg
1_large.jpg [ 20.63 KiB | Viewed 272 times ]


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 9:21 pm
Posts: 22
Location: Sky, , NL
Tubelover2 wrote:
Fredoo wrote:
Tubelover2 wrote:
And there is a new toy coming - the Gustard U16. Uses even better clocks then the Singxer, and the new ESS USB chip set. Should be around $240


Good to hear newer DDC solution are ahead, the F-1 is available for quite some time..

I wonder if the U16 will also be available as an OEM? (card only). If so, hopefully it’s small enough to fit inside the DAC casing.

I’m keen on installing a modern DDC in the DAC casing, connecting it via i2s, powered by the internal DAC psu. The size of the F-1 is great for this purpose. Perhaps the introduction of the U-16 will tickle Singxer to update the F-1 :-)
Hi Freedoo, I don't think you'd see Gustard sell just the board. But at $240 for the complete unit - you could just unplug and remove the board. Iplan on bypassing the Gustard U16's built in PS and running a much cleaner est DC power chain.

"I’m keen on installing a modern DDC in the DAC casing, connecting it via i2s, powered by the internal DAC psu."
I'd strongly advise to not do that. The XMOS and I'm the ESS USB processors have high modulation noise on the ground plane - something you do not want feeding into you DAC's sensitive clocks.
One reason I believe we have had so much success with our digital chain's SQ - is the fact they are outside the DAC case and fed from an ultra clean and much improved DC power supply. Using a high quality LPS to a series of ultra low noise LT3045 LDO regs and now the pièce de résistance - the DUAL CAT SQUARED PoE DC 3.1 - a HUGE enhancement in SQ.

If you haven't heard what PoE DC can do for your F-1 and digital chain - try the .1 version. Total cost around $13.
viewtopic.php?f=35&t=1465
The SQ improvement could shock you...in a good way. :mrgreen:

I doubt that would fit in your DAC case.

Anyway my own experience with the Project 2S+ ESS9038 DAC - the SQ is much better fed by SPDIF then the built in XU208 XMOS board. Shared PS - even with some isolation does not cut it.
Interesting - even Amir at ASR analog output measures shows lower jitter on the Project S2 Pre from SPDIF then built in USB.
Attachment:
Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC USB Jitter Measurement.png

Cheers


Thanks for you reply! Let me elaborate on my situation. Based that my pre-DAC 'chain' (*) will be sorted soon, I reckoned the USB input module of the DAC will probably be the next weakest link.

I've been asking around on alternatives and eventually found a well respected Dutch company which has experience replacing/upgrading hifi products such as USB modules including F-1's, even with the exact same DAC I have (Metrum Onyx). Since the F-1 is an older model, I decided not to jump on the upgrade, perhaps in the meantime a newer version/product would appear..

Unfortunately I'm not technically skilled, so for me it's difficult to process your remark on high modulation noise on the ground plane. I thought the original Metrum USB module also has a 208 XMOS chip, so I can only think (or hope!) that the noise you mention is already addressed in the original design.


(*) after quite some pondering about the pre-DAC 'chain' I decided for an one box solution (TLS One server). I realise I find myself at the opposite site of the spectrum as most digital chain users on this forum. For me (which is a personal view) a server can be well tuned and has it's financial advantages with a much smaller footprint, but hey.. I can imagine it likely wouldn't fit the needs/flexibility to occasionally experiment with new digital insights.. :-)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:44 pm
Posts: 34
Location: San Francisco, CA, US
Tubelover2 wrote:
albrecht wrote:
Hi Rob,

So my F-1 has been up against some tough competition and still remains the champ. Now with my recent PoE DC improvements - just the most pleasing and realistic sound I have heard yet. I'm beyond satisfied. But of course always curious - I think if I had stopped a year ago, and that was really great sound - I'd be missing out on what I can enjoy now on a daily basis. For far less cost to boot.

The new Gustard U16 could be a major advance - or a bust. Using a completely new USB DDC chip and in fact a whole host of new chips. Previous to getting the Project S2+ 9038 DAC I probably would have written the U16 off, as just more of the ESS Sabre 'house sound' flattish sound staging, etchy treble and tonal brightness. But I have to say the S2+ has convinced me that ESS has really gotten it's act together the S2+ uses not just their ESS9038 DAC chip but also their ES9311 LDO regulator, and Sabre 9802Q output chip - so willing to give their latest DDC a try.
Attachment:
O1CN012AVJMn2TxoHt6Nl_!!125808208 (1).jpg

The one downside of the U16, like the SU-1, and unlike the Matrix, is the lack of an ext DC power port - that would have been nice. So that'll have to be jury rigged.

Certainly for the cost and resale value, the price of admission is quite low - not nearly in Mr M's league!

Cheers


Hiya... yes totally.... I expressed some concern about the fact that it has an internal built-LPS a few weeks ago. Yeah, - so true about the Matrix. At first I thought that it was better than the F-1 as it soundstaged super well, and the detail was noticeably better. But after listening awhile, - I noticed that it was a bit etched up top, and the mid-range was just a lot quieter and the tonal fullness simply was not there.

I was grateful for the opportunity to test the Matrix with the F-1.

And, as you say, - I do have the expectation that the power supply in the U16 will need to be replaced. Even if it is a lot better than the F-1 as is, - modding it to allow for an external DC supply will likely make it much better. I don't understand how Gustard did not learn this lesson with their last DDC.

Anyway, - it's going to be interesting once this U16 is out in the world.....

Cheers Rob!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 8:23 am
Posts: 2244
Location: Seattle, WA, US
Fredoo wrote:
Hi Freedoo, I don't think you'd see Gustard sell just the board. But at $240 for the complete unit - you could just unplug and remove the board. Iplan on bypassing the Gustard U16's built in PS and running a much cleaner est DC power chain.

"I’m keen on installing a modern DDC in the DAC casing, connecting it via i2s, powered by the internal DAC psu."
I'd strongly advise to not do that. The XMOS and I'm the ESS USB processors have high modulation noise on the ground plane - something you do not want feeding into you DAC's sensitive clocks.
One reason I believe we have had so much success with our digital chain's SQ - is the fact they are outside the DAC case and fed from an ultra clean and much improved DC power supply. Using a high quality LPS to a series of ultra low noise LT3045 LDO regs and now the pièce de résistance - the DUAL CAT SQUARED PoE DC 3.1 - a HUGE enhancement in SQ.

If you haven't heard what PoE DC can do for your F-1 and digital chain - try the .1 version. Total cost around $13.
viewtopic.php?f=35&t=1465
The SQ improvement could shock you...in a good way. :mrgreen:

I doubt that would fit in your DAC case.

Anyway my own experience with the Project 2S+ ESS9038 DAC - the SQ is much better fed by SPDIF then the built in XU208 XMOS board. Shared PS - even with some isolation does not cut it.
Interesting - even Amir at ASR analog output measures shows lower jitter on the Project S2 Pre from SPDIF then built in USB.
Attachment:
The attachment Pro-Ject Pre Box S2 DAC USB Jitter Measurement.png is no longer available

Cheers


Quote:
Thanks for you reply! Let me elaborate on my situation. Based that my pre-DAC 'chain' (*) will be sorted soon, I reckoned the USB input module of the DAC will probably be the next weakest link.

I've been asking around on alternatives and eventually found a well respected Dutch company which has experience replacing/upgrading hifi products such as USB modules including F-1's, even with the exact same DAC I have (Metrum Onyx). Since the F-1 is an older model, I decided not to jump on the upgrade, perhaps in the meantime a newer version/product would appear..

Unfortunately I'm not technically skilled, so for me it's difficult to process your remark on high modulation noise on the ground plane. I thought the original Metrum USB module also has a 208 XMOS chip, so I can only think (or hope!) that the noise you mention is already addressed in the original design.


(*) after quite some pondering about the pre-DAC 'chain' I decided for an one box solution (TLS One server). I realise I find myself at the opposite site of the spectrum as most digital chain users on this forum. For me (which is a personal view) a server can be well tuned and has it's financial advantages with a much smaller footprint, but hey.. I can imagine it likely wouldn't fit the needs/flexibility to occasionally experiment with new digital insights.. :-)
Well looking at the Metrum USB board I see rather generic XO clocks and a standard board layout.
Attachment:
proxy.duckduckgo.com.jpg
proxy.duckduckgo.com.jpg [ 250.41 KiB | Viewed 260 times ]


What Singxer, and well others before them like Berkeley Audio and Tanly, found about the XMOS chip - it puts out obscenely high levels of noise on the ground plane.
These wise designers choose a 'dirty' side vs 'clean' side design - separated by various moats: CPLD's, FPGA, Isotransformers.
F-1:
Attachment:
IMG_9182.JPG
IMG_9182.JPG [ 525.66 KiB | Viewed 257 times ]


Tanly:
Attachment:
TB26YavaVXXXXXLXXXXXXXXXXXX-888047659.jpg
TB26YavaVXXXXXLXXXXXXXXXXXX-888047659.jpg [ 220.89 KiB | Viewed 260 times ]


Berk Alpha:
Attachment:
alphausb332.jpg
alphausb332.jpg [ 152.82 KiB | Viewed 260 times ]


This moat is to help provide the cleanest DC to the audio femto clocks (Crystek 957's in each case).
The issue is the noise created by the modulation of the USB reciver (see John Swenson's excellent three part Audio Stream expose on USB noise), can infect the ground plane of the DAC itself and pollute it's clocks. Not good and almost impossible to isolate.

https://www.audiostream.com/content/qa- ... at-digital
https://www.audiostream.com/content/qa- ... -just-bits
https://www.audiostream.com/content/qa- ... fect-sound

Quote:
]Let’s start with the local oscillator, the “clock”. It turns out that almost all ultra low jitter oscillators are quite sensitive to ground plane and power supply noise. As the noise increases the jitter increases, and the spectrum of that extra jitter is directly related to the spectrum of the noise. This phenomenon is well known by many digital designers, so many will use decent low noise regulators with the clocks, but many don’t bother with that step, guaranteeing that the low jitter spec of the oscillator is going to be drastically compromised. Not only do you have to deal with the self generated noise of the regulator, but also its ability to block noise coming in on its input supply. Most regulators are very poor at this for high frequencies. This means that noise generated by the other logic elements on the board is going to sail right on through the regulators used in many DACs, causing jitter in the clock whose spectrum is highly correlated to what the rest of the board is doing. It IS possible to do a good job of providing low noise clean power to the clock, but it’s not easy and the designer really has to work at it.
Read more at https://www.audiostream.com/content/qa- ... 5fqbTho.99

Here the exception is the phenomenal LT3045 with PSRR out ot 10Mhz!
Attachment:
ca371e817535dd3a2ee9f400172b8581.jpg
ca371e817535dd3a2ee9f400172b8581.jpg [ 81.25 KiB | Viewed 260 times ]


Quote:
And we still haven’t even talked about the ground plane! The noise on the ground plane is just as important to the jitter of the clock, but it doesn’t have a regulator, it just is what it is. If the clock is going to do what it is supposed to do, the ground plane it is connected to HAS to somehow be isolated from the noise generated by other parts of the circuit. I’ll go into this in detail later on.

So right at the beginning the clock itself is susceptible to influences outside itself in almost all implementations.

Read more at https://www.audiostream.com/content/qa- ... 5fqbTho.99


Quote:
Next is PLLs. Every USB receiver chip has at least one if not more PLLs. These PLLs are affected by both the previous types of jitter and since almost all the circuitry inside the chip is clocked by these PLLs, the jitter on output signals and ground plane noise is going to be significantly affected by the noise spectrum coming out of the PLLs. This is filtered by the PLL loop filter, but there are still major components related to the input jitter.

So how do we keep all this noise from the USB receiver from getting to our sensitive DAC circuits? It’s called ground plane isolation. You have separate ground planes for the USB receiver and the rest of the DAC circuitry. This DOES prevent ground plane noise from crossing over. BUT if you cut the ground plane there is no way for the return current from the signals crossing the boundary (the I2S signals and clock etc) to get between the “ground domains”. The solution is digital isolators. There are many different technologies to choose from, one most people are familiar with is opto-couplers. Some of these actually add huge amounts of jitter to the signals going through them so are bad choices for our purposes.

Read more at https://www.audiostream.com/content/qa- ... 5fqbTho.99


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 8:23 am
Posts: 2244
Location: Seattle, WA, US
On the Black Cat cables I found this interesting in the 2014 6Moons review of the Black Cat Silver Star USB cables:
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/blackcat2/1.html

Quote:
This photo shows a run of Black Cat NeoMorpheus in Atlanta/Georgia having its secondary pure copper shield applied over an Aeron™ nylon insulator. "The interior of this cable is a pure OFHC copper tube with 0.008" thick walls inside a pure Teflon continuous filament Aeron dielectric and pure copper shield." This settled that Chris is a white cat when it comes to rebranding Asian-sourced volume spools. He rolls his own and does so with home-grown US of A labor.

Attachment:
5.png
5.png [ 335.28 KiB | Viewed 254 times ]
Two layers of copper shield separated by a Teflon insulator - JSSG360 years ago?

Quote:
Enter Aeron, a process applied to both multi-filament nylon and equivalent pure unbleached Teflon insulators. Resultant internodal air gaps lower their dielectric constants to drive down capacitance and increase propagation velocity. In principle this air injection mirrors what DuPont call foamed Teflon.

Quote:
Their website has this: "Today DuPont pioneer innovations by foaming fluoroplastic resins to support advanced TIA/EIA Category 6- and 10-gigabit comm, coaxial and other cables with high data-transmission ratios. Foamed fluoroplastic resin insulators show lower dielectric constants to provide opportunities for miniaturization and weight savings with lower dielectric wall thickness. Because this reduces dissipation factor, such insulated wires have lower capacitance and less signal attenuation. Foamed insulation also increases the relative velocity of data transmission over insulated wire."


This is simliar the dielectric used in the AQ CAT700 Carbon CAT 7 spooled Ethernet cable I've been trying to buy.
https://www.audioquest.com/cables/bulk- ... 700-carbon
Quote:
Hard-Cell Foam Insulation
Hard-Cell Foam (HCF) Insulation ensures critical signal-pair geometry. Any solid material adjacent to a conductor is actually part of an imperfect circuit. Wire insulation and circuit board materials all absorb energy. Some of this energy is stored and then released as distortion. Hard-Cell Foam Insulation is similar to the Foamed-PE used in our more affordable Bridges & Falls cables, and is nitrogen-injected to create air pockets. Because nitrogen (like air) does not absorb energy and therefore does not release any energy from or into the conductor, distortion is reduced. In addition, the stiffness of the material allows the cable's conductors to maintain a stable relationship along the cable's full length, producing a stable impedance character and further minimizing distortion.


Many paths converge!

More interesting stuff:
Quote:
Turning our attention briefly to the Silverstar 75 S/PDIF namesake, we already get ±1Ω constant impedance (in this case 75Ω), "tens of GHz of bandwidth limited only by the connectors and connected gear, broadband 75Ω BNCs with >6GHz bandwidth and extensive shielding using both flat-wound metal foil and silver-plated copper woven shields." What is the native impedance for USB? I sent Chris the above for comments. His lengthy very candid reply provides us with a perhaps unexpected but invaluable insight into the risks of hifi entrepreneurship:
Now with audio in a range of 20Hz-20Khz why would Ghz bandwidth be of importance? Well in the electrical world much rides at Ghz frequencies.

On the PoE DC we are using CAT 7 and CAT 8 cables with bandwidth in the Ghz ranges! Most high end DC cables (like Ghent Audio) use Canare wire and are limited to Khz ranges
Attachment:
911.jpg
911.jpg [ 22.41 KiB | Viewed 252 times ]


Again an interesting convergence of paths.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 3:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 3:14 pm
Posts: 212
Location: Surrey, UK
Tubelover2 wrote:
That will be interesting.
Total cost 200ultra $1400 +sps500 Y $900+ txUSB $1200 = $3500 :shock:

And you still 'need' the $1100 CAT 6SE cable and $4000 OCX10 :o
Might be cheaper to go with the DCS.

Here is an interesting review of the SoTM tx-USB Ultra at 6Moons
https://6moons.com/audioreviews2/sotm4/1.html
and
dx-USB HD
https://6moons.com/audioreviews/sotm/1.html

Cheers!


Yes.

The cost of the three to me is £2,400 - ultra being 2nd hand. This is about what I would pay for the DCS NB second hand.



Well, three days in, and I have been listening.

It was immediately apparent that the tonal signature of the uR is rather brighter than the SOtM. The SOtM has more meat on the bone, and I am aware of greater resonance.

The bass lines on the uR are more obvious, but the SOtM goes deeper.

Initially the SOtM was throwing out a few zingers on vocals, this has been reducing over time.

Last night we were listening to Les Miserables, 10th Anniversary. I was immediately aware of the emotions that the singers were placing into their singing. As my wife entered the room she didn't say anything but she sang a phrase picking up the anger and dismissiveness of Colm Wilkinson. As the music moved into complex passages I was able to follow the sung overlapping interplay with far greater ease. The soundstage was more 3D, with front to back positioning slightly more pronounced.

There is more work for me to do setting up the SOtM gear. I have not: plumbed these units into my earthing loom; ensured I am using the right USB cables from 200 ultra > Iso Regen > txUSB; used any anti-vibration treatments under the units.

I do have PoE from the sps500 to the 200 ultra and the txUSB ultra.

Interestingly the gap in quality between files on the StarTech and Qobuz has norrowed.

Burning in nicely.

M


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Oct 14, 2018 7:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 8:23 am
Posts: 2244
Location: Seattle, WA, US
Mr Underhill wrote:
Tubelover2 wrote:
That will be interesting.
Total cost 200ultra $1400 +sps500 Y $900+ txUSB $1200 = $3500 :shock:

And you still 'need' the $1100 CAT 6SE cable and $4000 OCX10 :o
Might be cheaper to go with the DCS.

Here is an interesting review of the SoTM tx-USB Ultra at 6Moons
https://6moons.com/audioreviews2/sotm4/1.html
and
dx-USB HD
https://6moons.com/audioreviews/sotm/1.html

Cheers!


Yes.

The cost of the three to me is £2,400 - ultra being 2nd hand. This is about what I would pay for the DCS NB second hand.



Well, three days in, and I have been listening.

It was immediately apparent that the tonal signature of the uR is rather brighter than the SOtM. The SOtM has more meat on the bone, and I am aware of greater resonance.

The bass lines on the uR are more obvious, but the SOtM goes deeper.

Initially the SOtM was throwing out a few zingers on vocals, this has been reducing over time.

Last night we were listening to Les Miserables, 10th Anniversary. I was immediately aware of the emotions that the singers were placing into their singing. As my wife entered the room she didn't say anything but she sang a phrase picking up the anger and dismissiveness of Colm Wilkinson. As the music moved into complex passages I was able to follow the sung overlapping interplay with far greater ease. The soundstage was more 3D, with front to back positioning slightly more pronounced.

There is more work for me to do setting up the SOtM gear. I have not: plumbed these units into my earthing loom; ensured I am using the right USB cables from 200 ultra > Iso Regen > txUSB; used any anti-vibration treatments under the units.

I do have PoE from the sps500 to the 200 ultra and the txUSB ultra.

Interestingly the gap in quality between files on the StarTech and Qobuz has norrowed.

Burning in nicely.

M
Nice report M - Have you tried the chain sans the IR?
Which CAT cables are you using in the PoE 3.1 - the AQ's?

Cheers!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 265 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group