I had a chance to install the SOtM-SATA and SOtM-PCI-to-USB boards today. Here's what I think:

SOtM-SATA: This is difficult to evaluate really because I didn't have a chance to have a good listen before installing the board. But I think there is an improvement - things just sound a tad more 'fluid'.

SOtM-PCI-to-USB: Well, there's definitely a big difference between this and my mobo USB feeding the NOS1. The sound is more 'forward' and 'alive' - exciting I guess. It seems 'cleaner' somehow and more dynamic also. In my system, I prefer it! Switching back to the mobo USB, everything sounds really 'nice' and relaxed - the sort of sound you could sit and listen to for hours. But it doesn't sound as real or exciting to me.

I'm not sure what Peter's exact concerns about the SOtM-PCI-to-USB board might be. Of course it could be that it's actually adding some sort of 'distortion', which is compensating for an inadequacy elsewhere in my system. But overall, it definitely sounds better than the mobo USB... to my ears... in my system.

Oh, and this has nothing to do with the fact that you can switch the USB power off at the board. I'm using a USB cable that has a separate power leg which I unplug from the PC anyway. But I'm not sure the NOS1 really 'cares' whether the USB cable carries any power or not - I'm pretty certain the USB power leg is not connected.

So in all, that's $365 very well spent in my book (though I did have to pay an additional $100 in import duty & VAT).

Mani.

Yes, I would love this. But hang on... this isn't very far-removed from how I've bought my Sanders amp and of course NOS1 DAC. Even my speakers were factory direct from Quad, albeit through a UK dealer (with his margins).

I'm not sure that shows are the only outlet to evaluate products. I know that I myself am increasingly looking to people such as you lot on this forum, with interesting setups, to hear what's out there. Paul is a case in hand. When I get some time, I'd definitely like to visit Peter again. And I'm sure many of the rest of you also...

One thing I know for sure is that I'll have a much more productive and pleasant time doing this than spending time with dealers or at shows.

Mani.

Hi Paul. I very much doubt you system sounds 'humble'. In any event, I definitely want to take you up on this. It looks like I might have some time available in 4-5 weeks, so will PM you to organise.

Yep, happy to bring the Berning 300B OTL, but will really struggle to get the Quads (even the small ones) into my little Honda

Mani.

Yep, both boards ordered from Jesus R at Sonore and now delivered and awaiting my attention at home.

I'll try one and then the other, and then both together and let you know what I think.

I anticipated that Peter might caution against using the USB board with the USB-NOS1, but wanted to try it myself anyway. If it indeed interfers in any way with the NOS1's already superb performance, I'll simply install the USB board into my work PC and use it with my hiFace feeding an old Musical Fidelity X24 DAC and my old low-end Stax headphones to listen to music while I work .

Mani.

Mine are waiting for me at home as we speak. I'm hoping to be able to try them out this weekend.

But I have the feeling though that Peter feels they shouldn't make a difference with the NOS1...

Mani.

Hi Quint. Wow, these look gorgeous. Very interesting philosophy too.


I've really set my mind on Bert's amps for now - I've just got to hear what a powerful gainclone sounds like with a pair of Quads (I wonder if it's ever really been tried before??).

But thanks for both suggestions - really. This is what I love about the Phasure forum - like-minded people trying to help each other.

Thanks again.

Cheers, Mani.

Hi Joachim. Ahem...

Well, I didn't buy the Soulution. Actually, I was going to and it was all arranged, but then the seller pulled out a couple of days before the amp was due to be delivered. Apparantly, someone (the UK distributor, I think) phoned the seller and told him that £14K was too cheap for an amp which now costs ~£30K in the UK (due to the Swiss exchange rate). If it were the UK distributor who made the call, then this would just reaffirm what I think about the whole hifi industry... But really, I should be thanking whomever made that phone call - £14K is just a crazy amount of money to be spending on an amp (let alone £30K!).

I'm currently in talks with Bert (from BD Design) to see if he could make something up for me, based on his gainclone boards. I'm really eager to pursue this route. The only issue we're facing is finding nice enclosures for the amps - it seems these are not so easy to source when considering very low volumes (i.e. just 2 units).

But I'll let you know what transpires...

Cheers, Mani.

Yes, I can see how this might matter. BUT...


(highlight added)

... both files were played back from the same location (the local HDD). So, files with identical checksums (I assume) played back from the identical location... sounding different!

I really, really hope that I'm just doing something 'wrong' and that I can simply transfer my current ripped files from my NAS to my local HDD without any affect on SQ. All logical reasoning suggests to me that there simply cannot be a difference.

Mani.

I'll be doing some testing on ripping speeds this weekend (time permitting). Will let you know what I find...

But meanwhile, I'm more than a little perturbed that the files ripped directly to a NAS drive and then transferred to my the HDD sound different to those ripped directly to the local HDD. The former sound brighter and more edgy. The latter darker and more liquid. And yet I'm 100% sure the checksums would be identical - the same HW/SW was used for ripping after all.

I agree, "there's a lot more going on than we know", but this just seems crazy to me. The only (totally crazy) explanation I have is that somehow noise is associated with the files on my NAS drive. Such noise might not affect the checksums at all, but may influence the PC/DAC hardware in some way.

Still, totally crazy IMO...

Mani.

Hi Bigear.

The only fast way that I know of to rip CDs is to use a 'real' Plextor drive with 'Forced Unit Access'.

You can use FUA with EAC by adding '-usefua' in the command line. With dBpoweramp, there is an option to test the drive for its FUA capabilities and then set it to use this. But in my opinion, this test is not 100% accurate. The strong recommendation given by the dBpoweramp developer is to only use FUA with Plextor drives, even if the test proves +ve with a different drive.

The affect of FUA is to bypass the drive's cache and re-read directly from the CD (google FUA to learn more). With my Plextor Premiun-U drive I can rip a CD in totally secure mode' in about 2 minutes flat. If there are scratches on the CD (never any on mine, but my wife's CDs have plenty!), the re-reads kick in exactly as expected. Of course, the rip then takes longer, but really not by much. With FUA engaged (and a Plextor drive), the re-reads are done really very quickly.

This is very topical for me because I've just installed a 3TB spinning HDD in my computer... mainly because I wanted to test Peter's findings on HDD vs. SSD, and also because it'll make my life easier when using 'Minimise OS'.

BUT... the thing that I found over the weekend was that a CD ripped directly to the new HDD sounds better than a previous rip transferred from my NAS to the new HDD!!! It may well be that I will be re-ripping my CD collection. I really don't want to, but will if I have to. In which case, this FUA command helps a lot.

I'd love to hear other people's thoughts on this subject though.

Mani.

Hey Praphan, thanks for the write up - a really great read.

I've been banging on for longer than I can remember that the performance of the Model Two is ultimately determined by the interface used to connect it to the computer. I'm not 100% happy with either my Weiss AFI1 (even after upgrading its power supply to a linear Paul Hynes one) or my RME AES-32. But I reckon I might be able to improve the performance of the RME quite significantly if I adopted the 'PCI extender' method that Peter employed in the original NOS1. Perhaps you should give something like this a go with your Lynx before even thinking of buying the Berkeley USB interface? It might save you some money, especially considering someone we all know should have quite a few of these PCI extenders hanging around by now ;-)

Mani.

Hi praphan, congratulations on the USB NOS1 - I'm sure you'll love it. And thanks for the write- up.

But personally, I would remove the attached images. It's just too easy for the 'competition' to see what Peter has been slaving away at for so long.Also, there's thread on gearslutz.com at the moment where some posters are calling the NOS1 a 'scam'. You'll probably get some of these total idiots saying things like, "He claims there are 8 DAC chips but it's obvious from the images praphan posted that there are only 4". Of course the twits wouldn't realise that there are another 4 on the underside of the board! The same idiots (supposedly industry 'experts') believe that the PCM1704 only accepts 96KHz sample rates. One claims that Peter has got the chip name wrong and that he must be using another chip really!

Of course, this is totally your call. And perhaps Peter doesn't mind. But personally, I'd never post images of the insides of any gear I own, out of respect for the designer/manufacturer.

Cheers, Mani

No, actually no 5KHz multiples show at all. Many peaks above 22.05KHz look very, very close to being 5KHz multiples, but they're really not.

There's probably nothing to be learned here. But I had fun playing with this all, and still remain impressed by the fact 2. is so 'clean', even having passed through a DAC, an analogue output stage, an analogue input stage and an ADC.

Mani.

Like I said, it occurred to me that what I was trying to do was just full of flaws and a bit silly.

But as we say here in the UK, "In for a penny, in for a pound":

Find below three spectrum plots. These were derived from a 10 second 16/44.1 file of a 5KHz square wave.

1. This is the spectrum of the file 'upsampled' to 24/192 using the iZotope program without any anti alias filter applied. So this upsampling was done purely in software.

2. The second file is a 24/192 recording of the 16/44.1 file being played back on XX. The details here are:
- XX set to Double Octo (16x) Arc Prediction -> 705.6KHz
- PC connected to NOS1 via USB
- NOS1 set to 'DAC is 24/786'
- NOS1 analogue output connected directly to PM2 analogue input
- PM2 analogue-to-digital conversion set to 24/192
- PM2 digital output connected to Weiss AFI1 via dual-AES (PM2 master clock)
- AFI1 connected to second PC via firewire
- digital output captured on second PC with Sony 'Audio Studio'

3. This files shows the noise floor of the complete chain above.

So what's there to learn from all this? I'm not sure...

But firstly, all the peaks above 22.05KHz are really 'false' and unwanted - only peaks which are an integer multiple of 5KHz would be 'real', and there are essentially none above 20Khz because the original file was only 16/44.1.

However, I'm amazed at the similarity in the waveforms between 1. and 2. Something is telling me that what I'm showing is a great demonstration of the accuracy of the NOS1 - the fact that it can match, almost identically, the upsampling done in software.

What none of this shows, however, is how the NOS1 sounds with Double Octo Arc Prediction. I've compared a number of tracks upsampled with iZotope to 24/192 (with and without an AA filter) vs. DOAP. Upsampling using iZotope just 'kills' the music (and iZotope is supposed to be the best SW upsampler!).

What I set out to do was to 'prove' how good DOAP was. Again, I think I failed. But did I manage to show something of any value meantime? Maybe...

Mani.

Yep, 'Minimise OS' works fine on the music PC in my office, with Home Premium. (Peter, in case you're wondering, this is NOT the machine with which I had issues initially - that was the music PC in my main room. But of course we got that sorted anyway.)

The Home Premium version is W7 Vanilla (build 7600). I had updated it to SP1, but this has been reversed off, and only three KBs remain on top of a totally vanilla install.

HTH, but let me know if you need anything else.

Mani.