XXHighEnd

Ultimate Audio Playback => Your thoughts about the Sound Quality => Topic started by: Matt E on May 12, 2010, 02:42:48 pm



Title: 'Lightspeed attenuator' vs digital attenuation?
Post by: Matt E on May 12, 2010, 02:42:48 pm
I saw this nice looking DIY schematic 'Lightspeed attenuator' that uses optocouplers to attenuate the signal and my soldering iron started to get itchy, when I had the thought that maybe the digital attentuation inherent in XXHighEnd was as good/better. Any thoughts?

I have to admit that I am probably going to have to build one of these babies because the 'Legit' volume increments in XXHighEnd are too large  for my system - in one step it goes from quite quiet to waking my children up, although I guess there is always soundproofing.


Title: Re: 'Lightspeed attenuator' vs digital attenuation?
Post by: Telstar on May 12, 2010, 06:06:08 pm
I saw this nice looking DIY schematic 'Lightspeed attenuator' that uses optocouplers to attenuate the signal and my soldering iron started to get itchy, when I had the thought that maybe the digital attentuation inherent in XXHighEnd was as good/better. Any thoughts?

I have to admit that I am probably going to have to build one of these babies because the 'Legit' volume increments in XXHighEnd are too large  for my system - in one step it goes from quite quiet to waking my children up, although I guess there is always soundproofing.

Any connectors or cable on the signal path will be worse than a lossless digital attenuation, period.
But I also agree with you that the steps in xxhe are too broad. That's the only way he could make it lossless, so it's a give or take.

the lightspeed requires that the source and amp are ALREADY matched in impedance, otherwise you'll need a buffer (i.e. more components along the way).


Title: Re: 'Lightspeed attenuator' vs digital attenuation?
Post by: PeterSt on May 12, 2010, 06:19:14 pm
Hey Matt,

Quote
because the 'Legit' volume increments in XXHighEnd are too large  for my system - in one step it goes from quite quiet to waking my children up, although I guess there is always soundproofing.

This can only be because you have to attenuate more than 48dB (always bad) or you have a 16 bits DAC. Otherwise you must be wrong somewhere ...

?

Peter


PS: Please put your settings etc. in your signature, so it may be clear in a glance for us the next time, ok ? thanks.


Title: Re: 'Lightspeed attenuator' vs digital attenuation?
Post by: Matt E on May 14, 2010, 05:35:55 am
Peter,

I haven't got time to put my settings in my signature at the moment, but I do use a 16-bit DAC.

Matt