Merry Christmas everybody. X-mas music sounds much better with XX playback!

I agree with you, that the new Sabre DAC seems to be the new champ. Today I did some research and learned that actually I have friend waiting for delivery of same (or similar) DAC-kit as you. So, perhaps I can lay my ears to it within the end of the year. Can't wait!


Q: Regarding the I/V converter following the DAC-chip: Will you use a SS (opamp), transformer or tube circuit?

Wow! Are you expanding your enterprise into hardware products? That's cool.

When it comes to designing and building a DAC there are several critical points. PSU is of course one of them. Personally I would like my future "ultimate" DAC to feature a BNC clock input. I belive an external clock with huge PSU can be good. I am not an engineer, so I wonder if this option is easy to implement in your new DAC prototype?

Another thing is that most DAC's are working from x48kHz samplingfrequency. (48, 96, 192, etc). But the CD is 44,1kHz. So inside the DAC, there has to be a samplerate convertion (SRC) chip in front of or integrated inside the DAC chip. I believe this SRC converters are "not good". My ideal DAC, then shoud be runninig on 88,2 then. Eventually the SRC process could be done in a "better" way. Maybe the SRC can be done in a software, implemented as a plug-in in the digital loop available in your FF800 software? (I know there are software solutions in the marked).

What do you think?

Very interesting!

My previous DAC was a NOS filterless construction. (DDDAC 16/44 only). It had the most dynamic sound I have ever heard from CD. Very "immediate" sounding.

BUT: With no filter, there will be a lot of HF noise at the sampling frequency, and above. This noise can be quite stressful for wideband amplifiers. Also it will create IM distortion at audible frequencies. Do you have the possibilty to measure this noise?

I am sorry I cannot participate in this AB evaluation due to newborn baby and busy at work. But all I can say is that my system never has sounded as good as it does now. (See my signature settings). Depending on the recording, the highs can be silky-smooth, extremely high resolution/lots of low level information accross all octaves, the soundstage can be extremely big, the bass so tight and deep that it shakes my whole house, micro- and macro dynamics can be frightly real, and I can play extremely loud without listening fatigue. Yesterday I had a critical listening session with a friend, a very critical listener, and he was in awe. Spellbounded, by the SQ.

I guess the key features here are: : UnAttended * V6a * Q1=-2
(Also I have all software on SS memory, and there are no USB interface in use).

So whatever you do, Peter, don't move away from this direction!

I did my listening test in UnAttended. (I've used UnAttended for several months, because it taxes my PC less and because I didn't notice much SQ difference). Also I use Q1 = -2. As pointed out in my listening report above, I prefer V6a, but still thinks W3 is very good. I found the diferences to be "not so big". I could have lived happily with W3, in other words.

-Maybe Attended playback magnifies the differences (as Peter is sugesting)?

Another point: I prefer Q1 = -2. I think the difference between -2 and +14 is 'somewhat' similar to the difference between V6a and W3. (-2 is more organic/"natural". +14 has a certain dryness, which I don't favour. In my system, that is of course. -These kind of differences are quite small, so system matching also counts of course, when judging the final SQ).

Yes it did!

Thanks again.

Seems I have a similar problem:

Previously I used the w-1a, and it behaved normal. Now I have started to use v-6a because of better SQ. But every time I start up v-6a, it doesn't remember yesterdays settings. Every time I have to change from Engine1 to Engine3, set Playerprio, etc.

What to do?

I have not kept my eyes (ears) on the changes of XX lately, due to all the progress and benefits from Audiolense software, recently implemented in my system.

But a quick A-B test today reveals that my w1a sound very good. But v6a sounds even better. Judging from listening to a few cuts, there is a slight hardnes to the midrange of w1a. The v6a is more organic, slightly more resolved and natural. Voices has more natural dynamic shadings. v6a also draws a (slightly) bigger soundscape. There is (slightly) more dynamic "drama" in v6a than w1a.

Kudos to LydMekk for crying out. He deserves a prize, Peter! 

Gentlemen,


http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/pcaudio/messages/9585.htm

I just found this link to an interesting thread about the (initial) shortcomings of USB. I write "initial" because the thread is from 2006, 2 years old. However most so-called USB-DAC's for sale today, still have the limitiations as discussed in by Mr Swensson. Judging from Benchmark's last DAC with custom drivers enabling 24/96, there are still areas where USB can improve. Time will show. Remember though, that of-the-shelf USB DAC's necesary doesnt show all the potentional of PC-audio (and XX, ofcourse!).

(Thanks to LMC for hinting about the thread).

Welcome to the "club", glynnw. XX is simply better than anything else. If you tweak you media-PC a little bit (e.i. avoiding USB interface) then you will get a sound closer to the mastertapes than any CD-player at any price. That is my experience and opinion.

PC-audio is still like shooting on a moving target. Not all the stones have been turned yet. You will find lots of tips and hints here on the forum.

Peter,

I have a dedicated PC similar to your suggestions:
*Intel Core Duo 2.16G T7400 4MB
*2GB DDR2 PC6400
*Kontron MB 986LCD-M/mITX
*Mtron SSD 32GB 100MB/s read/write for OS
*4x 750GB 7200 HD over Sata II
*Twinn aluminium 19" 2U chassis with passive cooling (heatsinks). No fans.

-Because Vista is installed on a SSD HD, the computer is up and running within few seconds from push-on, and it is dead silent.
-On the negative side, my Core Duo is outdated compared to your Core 2 Duo.

---------

I still get a few ticks (aproximately 10 seconds duration) at the end of each song. Probably because the system is prepairing for next song.

Do you think I shold upgrade my Core Duo to Core 2 Duo?

Best regards
Pedal

True. A friend of mine has purchased this 8 channel DAC from RME. It's their top model, about €3,000.- retail price. He says it really sounds up there with the expensive audiophile DAC's. The clue is that from FF800 you can export 6 or 8 chanels from ADAT to the RME DAC in 24/96 rez. And then you are much closer to true digital XO and volume controle, since you can attenuate the signal digitally within the DAC, and the DAC can drive the poweramps directly. (BTW: My friend says the FF800 has enough capasity to output 8 channels of 24/96, but the FF400 hasn't).

Tell me more, tell me more, tell me MOOOORRRREEEE


In the meantime I can tell you that I have purchased an expensive Firewire PCI card + an upgraded external powersupply unit for my media PC. I will compare if these new components improves the SQ or not, compared with standard motherboard and standard cheap wall-wart powersupply.

Also I am curently comparing high quality coax, cheap Toslink and expensive Toslink ($1000.- AQ glass fibre) cables between FF400 and DAC. There ARE SQ differences, but I need to listen more closely before drawing a conclusion.

One more end note: The RME FF400 allows for bitperfect digital loops, making it possible to use plug-in programs like SOUNDLENSE in the pure digital domaine. This PC program can correct just about anything in your system: Frequency response, Phase, Impulse response, Room reflections, etc. It can also act as a crossover with unsurpased functionality (whatever number of drivers and speakers you have - Soundlense can do the XO). Initial testings are very promising.

I changed from USB to RME Fireface 400 interface between PC and DAC. The sound improved. Not a huge difference, but it was worth it. A slightly more transparent and "focused" sound. USB sounds (slightly) veiled in comparison. My gues is that the RME re-clocking circuit provides a spdif signal with less jitter, than the input USB receiver of my DAC is capable of.

Read more about RME claims here. (it's sales literature of course, but shows some serious measurements).

Can the FF400 be further improved with an external super precise clock? -I don't know. If I can get my hands on such a clock I will try it. Maybe a dCS Verona Master Clock?

Where does it end? An Alpermann Rubidium GPS 10MhZ clock? (Does anybody know what this things costs BTW?)