leo
Been here a while!
Team wtf is it?
Posts: 3,638
|
Post by leo on Jan 14, 2012 1:29:25 GMT
Hi Jeff, I'm sure I'll have a couple of Mica's in my stash somewhere ta, may be higher voltage than yours though so may be physically larger which is what we don't want. I'll have a look
BTW hows it compare against your other dac now?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2012 8:30:56 GMT
Jeff, Purely technically speaking 2.2uF gnats poo is too large a value for 50MHz. They are usable from 200kHz to 10MHz and above that the impedance rises quickly (above 0.1 Ohm) which is what you don't need . Leave them in though as you can make a so called 'compound' decoupling. Using 1nF (or smaller) is more to keep the impedance down from 10MHz to 1GHz which is good for the harmonics suppression. remember the risetime/falltime is the important thing and is 10 to 100 times faster than the basic clock freq. This needs to be decoupled because even short traces already poses a significant inductance (impedance) at these freq. so 1nF gnats poo soldered directly on top of 2.2uF gnats poo gives a resonable decoupling. 1nF only gives about 1Ohm resistance in that area though, if you want a closer 'connection' to the 2.2uF gnats poo and want to keep the impedance as low as 0.1Ohm (which might be needed should you ever want to pass EMC emission tests I recommend a 10nF gnats poo in parallel to the 2.2uF gnats poo. a 10nF bottoms out it's impedance around 40 to 60Mz (depending on poo size) and ensures a low (0.1 Ohm) resistance of 1MHz to 200MHz (still 10 times lower ESR than 1nF at 200MHz). May be silver Mica or ceramic type. The compound decoupler (if all is well) should decouple properly, resistance below 0.1 Ohm, from 200kHz to 200MHz and to 1Ohm nearing 1GHz. but that's just technical bable, how that would reflect on audio.... The PCB design looks good enough (with ground plane and all) b.t.w. Alex I agree you and I agree more than disagree certainly about PS and glowy bottles. With the 'experts' I meant the writers of those technical articles....
|
|
leo
Been here a while!
Team wtf is it?
Posts: 3,638
|
Post by leo on Jan 14, 2012 16:35:50 GMT
Thanks for the tip Frans, stacking gnats poo shouldn't be too hard.
Patrick on diyaudio has been working with this chip far longer than us, he settled on 2.2uf 0603 MLCC's soldered directly onto the ES9022/23 pins (along with higher value polymers further away from the chip ). Some of us wanted to give them a try too just on parts of the dac (AVCC, Charge pump and internally generated neg supply pin) The dac has some 1.5mhz noise from the neg supply generator pin.
There is no gnats poo on the 50mhz XO or digital receiver chip yet. Some people like small value MLCC's in those positions and other like small PPS. Most of us use the standard non inductive 100nf panny films and polymer caps there for now. Still a lot to try yet although most seem happy with how the dacs sounding as is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2012 10:27:01 GMT
The decoupling is one thing I personally would have done slightly different. No point now as the PCB design already is there (and isn't bad at all)
I know the 100nF is 'standard' in audio and application notes. For most audio opamps (circuits) the 100nF is a good choice. For digital the 100nF is not always the best choice and bigger values even less so, unless a smaller value is also present. But that is just techno babble. As you say most are perfectly happy with it already and that says enough.
The charge pump circuit I wouldn't have used myself, but is convenient.
The XO may benefit from proper decoupling (as well as the receiver) expose a bit of the groundplane near the XO power pin and solder the gnats poo (4.7nF to 22nF silver mica or multilayer ceramic) on the power pin and the plane is what I would do. leave the big un where it is.
Mind you... it seems technically well performed decoupling does not always seem to go hand in hand with subjective 'tuning'.
I am looking forward to see what my evil twin has come up with (ODAC).
|
|
leo
Been here a while!
Team wtf is it?
Posts: 3,638
|
Post by leo on Jan 15, 2012 12:39:52 GMT
Nothing wrong with techno babble Frans, its nice to have it mixed in so theres enough interest for everybody. Your contributions are always appreciated.
The ES9022/23 chip is very cheap indeed, they added all the extra's like charge pump, output stage etc inside the chip to make implementation compact and cheap. What sets this cheap chip apart from the competition is that it borrows a few nice bits from its much more expensive brother . Its interesting when you compare Wills little dac sonically against some more expensive offerings
|
|
pagan
Been here a while!
Posts: 512
|
Post by pagan on Jan 15, 2012 13:07:47 GMT
The ES9022/23 chip is very cheap indeed, they added all the extra's like charge pump, output stage etc inside the chip to make implementation compact and cheap. What sets this cheap chip apart from the competition is that it borrows a few nice bits from its much more expensive brother . Its interesting when you compare Wills little dac sonically against some more expensive offerings
[/quote] Leo How much difference between the two dac's? technically speaking? Is the 9022/3 just the 2 channel version of the 9018? being the jitter recovery/filters etc function all there?
Allan
|
|
|
Post by jeffc on Jan 16, 2012 11:01:31 GMT
Hi Leo, different flavours but with its presentation now being more forward than before I added those extra silver micas I've been listening to it a lot, and at vols a touch too loud in the evening that have been getting me into trouble . I started drafting a storey about my impressions of it yesterday but this diverged into stuff about qualities of my DML panels that are adding to my loudness woes and me being sent to the sin bin for time outs . More on the panels one day and I will endeavour to compare the PK-DAC SQ against the SC-DAC in a more considered way soon. And great if you can find some time to try extra decoupling caps as suggested by Frans and with batteries to confirm my findings. Hi Frans, terrific insights as usual . I'm contented for the time being but might try extra decoupling caps on the DAC, XO and WM8804 receiver as you suggested. With the SC-DAC, improving the supply of the DIR9001 receiver made one of the biggest improvements to its SQ so it certainly is something worth investigating. I have a second PK-DAC PCB built that I was hoping to test with a USB-I2S input 'sooner or later' so I could practice on the reciever of this one and if I mess it up, no great loss. And thanks again for encouraging experimentation based on technically sound reasoning. cheers.. jeffc
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2012 17:18:53 GMT
Hi Leo, different flavours but with its presentation now being more forward than before I added those extra silver micas I've been listening to it a lot, and at vols a touch too loud in the evening that have been getting me into trouble . I started drafting a storey about my impressions of it yesterday but this diverged into stuff about qualities of my DML panels that are adding to my loudness woes and me being sent to the sin bin for time outs . More on the panels one day and I will endeavour to compare the PK-DAC SQ against the SC-DAC in a more considered way soon. And great if you can find some time to try extra decoupling caps as suggested by Frans and with batteries to confirm my findings. Hi Frans, terrific insights as usual . I'm contented for the time being but might try extra decoupling caps on the DAC, XO and WM8804 receiver as you suggested. With the SC-DAC, improving the supply of the DIR9001 receiver made one of the biggest improvements to its SQ so it certainly is something worth investigating. I have a second PK-DAC PCB built that I was hoping to test with a USB-I2S input 'sooner or later' so I could practice on the reciever of this one and if I mess it up, no great loss. And thanks again for encouraging experimentation based on technically sound reasoning. cheers.. jeffc Hi Jeff your experiments have made for an interesting read especially the cap changes. mine is still pretty much unchanged but i did notice you wondering on JK dac and one thing different stood out for me. he uses Async USB and sync to the DAC chip. from reading his post's between the lines i think that he may have bypassed the up sampler also but could not swear to that. (digital is still a little murky for me). i for one would love to hear more on your DML panels as they look pretty interesting. your volco problems may be due to the sensitivity of your digital amp as most I've seen have high sensitivity IP. sin bin bahhh ear plugs for Xmas? ? ;D ;D ;D ;D I'm still liking the sound I'm getting from the buffered OP and when you have built the Class A amp and use the Class A pre your going to have a spare DC1B to try that with. as you say just a little forward but bags of detail and pretty musical. not bad for a few quid (AUS $ ) YOUR BUILD IS TOTAL CLASS WELL DONE take care
|
|
leo
Been here a while!
Team wtf is it?
Posts: 3,638
|
Post by leo on Jan 20, 2012 23:15:47 GMT
The ES9022/23 chip is very cheap indeed, they added all the extra's like charge pump, output stage etc inside the chip to make implementation compact and cheap. What sets this cheap chip apart from the competition is that it borrows a few nice bits from its much more expensive brother . Its interesting when you compare Wills little dac sonically against some more expensive offerings Leo How much difference between the two dac's? technically speaking? Is the 9022/3 just the 2 channel version of the 9018? being the jitter recovery/filters etc function all there? Allan [/quote] Allan, ESS are very secretive regarding their chips inner workings. They both have patented jitter reducing technology. The ES9022/23 uses internal op-amp to give it voltage output . No idea what op-amps its based around. No spdif input where as the ES9018 is Spdif or I2S. Regarding the outputs the ES9018 is a different animal, It gives I or V output depending on output impedance . They stripped out a few things so its less manipulated , theres no switching capacitors etc ,only downside is this made PSRR on the AVCC pins worse making the quality of regulation more important. Its digital filters can also be programmed ES9018 is a fantastic chip but unfortunately takes a lot of work and expense to get the most out of it. Theres already been reports a top implemented ES9022/23 can sound better than some ES9018 efforts out there. For the casual diyer wanting a cheap solution not minding some limitations the ES9022/23 is hard to beat, for the hardcore diyer wanting more control over the design the ES9018 is the better choice
|
|
leo
Been here a while!
Team wtf is it?
Posts: 3,638
|
Post by leo on Jan 20, 2012 23:21:18 GMT
BTW Jeff, I found a couple of 1n Mica's, their now fitted but not had any time to check yet though. Their a little bigger than I'd hoped
|
|
|
Post by PinkFloyd on Jan 20, 2012 23:40:08 GMT
"They're a little bigger than I had hoped" Sorry..... just had to correct that one.... "Queen's English" and what have you
|
|
|
Post by PinkFloyd on Jan 20, 2012 23:41:09 GMT
They are a little bit bigger than......
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2012 23:52:17 GMT
Hi Mike Actually, you are one of the worst offenders here, although I know that you have by far a better command of "The Queen's English" than almost any other member of this forum ! People just need to revisit some much older posts by you to realise just how well educated you are.Perhaps we as a group have corrupted you ? P.S. All good fun, innit ?
|
|
leo
Been here a while!
Team wtf is it?
Posts: 3,638
|
Post by leo on Jan 21, 2012 0:47:59 GMT
"They're a little bigger than I had hoped" Sorry..... just had to correct that one.... "Queen's English" and what have you Thanks sir Its hard trying to type on a 4inch touch screen
|
|
pagan
Been here a while!
Posts: 512
|
Post by pagan on Jan 21, 2012 1:47:26 GMT
The ES9022/23 chip is very cheap indeed, they added all the extra's like charge pump, output stage etc inside the chip to make implementation compact and cheap. What sets this cheap chip apart from the competition is that it borrows a few nice bits from its much more expensive brother . Its interesting when you compare Wills little dac sonically against some more expensive offerings Leo How much difference between the two dac's? technically speaking? Is the 9022/3 just the 2 channel version of the 9018? being the jitter recovery/filters etc function all there? Allan Allan, ESS are very secretive regarding their chips inner workings. They both have patented jitter reducing technology. The ES9022/23 uses internal op-amp to give it voltage output . No idea what op-amps its based around. No spdif input where as the ES9018 is Spdif or I2S. Regarding the outputs the ES9018 is a different animal, It gives I or V output depending on output impedance . They stripped out a few things so its less manipulated , theres no switching capacitors etc ,only downside is this made PSRR on the AVCC pins worse making the quality of regulation more important. Its digital filters can also be programmed ES9018 is a fantastic chip but unfortunately takes a lot of work and expense to get the most out of it. Theres already been reports a top implemented ES9022/23 can sound better than some ES9018 efforts out there. For the casual diyer wanting a cheap solution not minding some limitations the ES9022/23 is hard to beat, for the hardcore diyer wanting more control over the design the ES9018 is the better choice[/quote] Thanks Leo If the 9022/23 doesn't have spdif input... then I can't see a reason to use the jitter reduction. As the device that converts the spdif to i2s would have already done the damage, before it gets to the dac. allan
|
|
|
Post by jeffc on Jan 23, 2012 11:58:52 GMT
Hi Leo, thanks for humouring me with this ;)and I’ll be extremely interested to hear whether you can perceive and sonic improvements. I was lucky in having 100V SM types that are more ideal size wise. I actually inserted them from under the PCB to leave short legs protruding above a few mm to play about piggybacking additional caps. I have some 10nf multilayer ceramics so as suggested by Frans, I might add these next time the PK DAC ventures upstairs out of interest. I’ve been listening to it most evenings and it is a great sounding little chip for what it is, and with the battery supplies is do dead quiet with black as black backgrounds. With the Aust Open tennis on ATM and a couple of Aussies going OK until recently its been hard to drag myself away from the TV. cheers.. jeffc
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2012 23:04:05 GMT
Hi All well I'm still using mine and combined with Lucien's Xmos USB/I2S board it sounds pretty darn good IMHO. i really like the slightly forward sound which seems to do a nice job of projecting vocals forward from the mix. detail retrieval is also first class as is the bass which goes nice and deeeeep. the sound stage is large but just a tiny bit flat depth wise but that's a small thing given what it does well. the clarity of the 9023 DAC is quite a shock on first listen (it was for me)just crazy good for the price. it really is a great DAC especially when the price is taken into account. i do think on replacing it from time to time but then i have another listen and then it hits me like a brick in the face ;D ;D it's going to get pretty expensive finding something to better Wills PK. WELL DONE WILL take care
|
|
|
Post by jeffc on Mar 13, 2012 5:49:13 GMT
Hi Shaun, Spot on. My WPK-DAC has been loaned to mates Rob and Bill for listening impressions. Rob has a Buffalo II with all HP regs and PSUs, 4 transformers and the latest Legato 3 capless output stage filled with boutique resistors etc, Burson discrete opamp etc. Bill has a Denon 3910 multiplayer with $1400 mods by Joe Rasmussen including a no-feedback output stage (from memory) and Terra-Firma Lite clock, and uses the DSD1796 DAC chip that convinced me was quite special, and hence me joining Alex in building the SC-DAC. Long storey short, both liked my tiny battery-powered WPK-DAC instantly and better overall, so I'm with you, terrific work Will. I hope Rob won’t mind me pasting here what he emailed me on day 1 of listening, but it kind of sums up my impressions of it's sonic attributes and what you’ve been hearing too. cheers.. jeffc DAC "Hi Jeff, Well mate - you've really kicked a goal with your DAC. Absolutely sensational! Super quiet, exceptionally detailed - with low colouration - and smooth as a babe's bum. In fact, it's well balanced across the frequency spectrum and presents a very engaging (foot-tapping) sound. This is a genuine high-end DAC. Compared with the Buffalo: yours reveals more detail - it really digs out the fine stuff. Less components to stuff things up! In the Buffalo's favour - the Buff is a little more holographic, with better separation of detail within the sound stage. It also has a slightly bigger presentation, with a touch more weight in the bass - this could be due to the over-the-top PSU. In saying that, some may prefer one presentation over the other. Yours reminds me of the Weiss DAC202 ($7000) that a friend from Melb brought up for a listen last year - using the Sabre chip - similar presentation. Bottom line - your DAC is a winner. Bill needs to get out the soldering iron and get into this project! Well done, Rob" Further to DAC "Hi again Jeff, Further listening - I have got to build one of these DACs!!! It's better than the Buff. It has an ease and calmness about it (probably from the batteries) that makes listening more pleasurable. It's clean and involving - and very natural. Bass is actually better than the Buff - cleaner and better defined, with more rhythm. The only improvement I could desire is a touch more depth and space to the sound stage. It's not as 3D as the Buff. But a minor quibble... So, how do I go about making one of these? Can you send links and info? Again Jeff - excellent work. Cheers, Rob"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2012 12:23:30 GMT
Hi Jeff thanks for the interesting post which confirms pretty much my listening experience with this DAC. i have mine with Salas LV shunts which seem to work pretty well. but I've not tried batteries yet so that still sounds interesting to me. OK on the up side i still have one Board and DAC chip left so if Rob wants to give me a PM I'll be happy to pass on what i have. just one stipulation it would be nice if Rob would be willing to share his build with us as that way we all learn and benefit from the experience. i have passed on one board to a Belgium friend with the same condition so hopefully we should be getting a post re his build soon. I've had great success with USB/I2S (luciens great board from diy audio) so maybe you may care to check that out at some point. i have been curious about how the 9023 stacks up against a well implemented 9018 so it's interesting to hear the reports from down under. it's a shockingly good DAC for the price isn't it and maybe another board GB would be in order if there is sufficient interest. take care
|
|
Spirit
Been here a while!
That's where I'm gonna go when I die
Posts: 1,107
|
Post by Spirit on Mar 13, 2012 16:02:00 GMT
I dunno if I like the sound of Rob's review, Jeff I'll have to have a read of what you've done battery-wise, and attempt to replicate it, if it's going to sound comparable, seemingly better than Rob's BII/Legato setup.
|
|
|
Post by jeffc on Mar 13, 2012 23:51:16 GMT
Hi Shaun, I'm really interested in USB-I2S connection to this DAC, and am quite envious of you. I have a second board built for this, hence me being a bit relucent just yet to pass this one on to Bill/Rob, so I will pass on your PCB offer with those strict conditions and ask whehter they'd be interested in a Ver3 PCB and parts GB should this gather any momentum. Why no movement on the USB-I2S front, ..... (i) I'm a slow poke, (ii) I really haven't decided on a good computer-based source for my downstairs grotto system that will be user friendly and allow use of players capable of ambiophonic VST plugins that I’ve been playing with which I see as The Future (stuck with CD-SPDIF for the time being) and (iii) I'm currently in the middle of building these H-frame Alpha 15A dipole bass units that really would work best if low-passed actively (minidsp is the route I'm thinking of for this but if you have suggestions similar in price) and (iv) gearing up for the 15W Class A amp build, all of which are draining me of all mental/physical and relationship capacity, and of course with spare time for DIY audio being a perpetual enemy. On Will's PK DAC, based on what I've seen in the way of power supply decoupling in other implementations, and even with super dooper shunt regs like you’re using, I can't help but think there might be a few more tweaks to squeeze out some more goodness from it. Howdy Phil, we really need to catch up sometime soon to discuss Class A amp parts we can share and so you can report back to Alex that I’ve completely lost it thinking that a Class D Audio amp and foam DML panels can sound any good. Cheers.. jeffc
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2012 1:45:43 GMT
Hi Shaun, I'm really interested in USB-I2S connection to this DAC, and am quite envious of you. I have a second board built for this, hence me being a bit relucent just yet to pass this one on to Bill/Rob, so I will pass on your PCB offer with those strict conditions and ask whehter they'd be interested in a Ver3 PCB and parts GB should this gather any momentum. Why no movement on the USB-I2S front, ..... (i) I'm a slow poke, (ii) I really haven't decided on a good computer-based source for my downstairs grotto system that will be user friendly and allow use of players capable of ambiophonic VST plugins that I’ve been playing with which I see as The Future (stuck with CD-SPDIF for the time being) and (iii) I'm currently in the middle of building these H-frame Alpha 15A dipole bass units that really would work best if low-passed actively (minidsp is the route I'm thinking of for this but if you have suggestions similar in price) and (iv) gearing up for the 15W Class A amp build, all of which are draining me of all mental/physical and relationship capacity, and of course with spare time for DIY audio being a perpetual enemy. On Will's PK DAC, based on what I've seen in the way of power supply decoupling in other implementations, and even with super dooper shunt regs like you’re using, I can't help but think there might be a few more tweaks to squeeze out some more goodness from it. Howdy Phil, we really need to catch up sometime soon to discuss Class A amp parts we can share and so you can report back to Alex that I’ve completely lost it thinking that a Class D Audio amp and foam DML panels can sound any good. Cheers.. jeffc Hi Jeff interesting stuff my Belgium friend is thinking minidsp/I2S for his implementation of Wills PK. so hopefully he will post and we can start the discussion on that as it looks like fun. active subs would be my choice in the context that you've mentioned and should help your panel speakers out nicely. what amps are you thinking on to drive the subs? the Alpha's are fairly sensitive but I'm not sure how they are going to behave in ''free air'' er Q wise (I've seen them used for OB's so should be OK). I'm pretty limited Ambiophinics wise but did make some recordings using that format at college for my end of course exam piece (er a series of Nick Harper concerts ). it was all done on pretty primitive ADAT stuff but still sounded pretty good. on the USB front people are going to tell you that one board sounds pretty much (exactly) the same as another bot it's not so IMHO. JK Hi face woke me up to that and i was blown away by it likewise the Lucien Board (available from a good DIYHIFI retailer near you). i think that the fact that both boards run ASYNC might have something to do with the super SQ from both of these boards. i suspect that you are right on the PK tweak front but ahhh that's where my skill level comes up short. I'm just drawing breath from building Alex's fantastic class A and it's all sounding so good I'm a little reluctant to get under the bonnet again for a little while ;D I'll put a reserved sticker on the board and DAC chip so if interested tell them to drop me a line. I'll dig out what i have. interesting project Jeff take care
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2012 16:15:51 GMT
Hi Jeff OK it's cats Vs pigeons time ;D while I've been setting up my System to accommodate Alex's superb Class A PRE/HA PA combo and the new speakers I've been running the PK without the Hot rod DC1 buffer. i popped it back in today for a listen and bloody hell it sounds fantastic with the buffer in place. much more in the way of drive and Bass slam along with a wider and deeper (yes deeper) sound stage. it also has a really nice liquidity to the sound which is just superb. the sound that just makes you go ooooooooooh I've heard others who have tried with various buffers over on DIY audio describe the sound as a mixture of a very good NOS DAC and OS DAC. I'd agree with that totally I'm getting the rich detailed musicality of NOS but without the loss of speed often associated with them combined with slam attack and bass weight of OS without the harshness that can sometimes be heard. the buffer is unity gain (well slightly less than unity) so no gain trickery involved. but it does sound much bigger in my set up with much more meat around the bone. the only slight down side is a very small loss of top end AIR (and i mean small) but the end rest is just absolutely stunningly beautiful. soooo two things 1) next time you have the your DAC on someone Else's equipment take your B1 along and hook it up between DAC and their PRE (so just using it as a buffer). crank the B1 vol pot full up and have a listen I'd be interested on your thoughts. it's fairly easy for you to try as you already have a DCB1. 2) i vaguely remember you saying that you'd etched your own DCB1 board. do you still have the artwork for that? I'd like to etch a few more in the event that anyone here would like to try for themselves. it would only involve a transformer, a dual reg and two JLH to try it out. hell i may even knock one up to post round if time allows. i know that thought vary on the use of a buffer after the 9023 with some saying ones not needed. fair point the 9023 does not ''need'' a buffer but in my system it's transformed the sound so mine is staying. IMHO in my set up it's awesome just to mention that it took partnering equipment of the sheer class (pun intended) of Alex's Class A to fully resolve the above jump in quality. take care
|
|
|
Post by jeffc on Mar 16, 2012 4:58:22 GMT
Howdy Shaun, Interesting find indeed, just need a stay-at-home clone of myself to keep up with you. As you know, I do have a capless B1 built on vero board powered by +/-10V JLHs that I could fire up for a test, though that being positive as you’ve found, I’ll then have another job stuffing that Salas reg-based B1 PCB that I have most parts for. Just what I need, another project . The B1 PCBs that Phil etched for me are dinky and are just to supply +/-V supplies to the fets, with pads to fit a capacitor close to these, and signal in-out lines and TBH, I made a very minor mistake that requires the signal resistor in - resistor to gnd pads positioned side by side to be linked, no big issue but .... I'll see if can dig up the PCB artwork when I get home. H-frames for the dipole woofers are taking shape, and hopefully will get a lick of paint this weekend. And if interested in DML, and you haven't seen this DIYaudio thread, you might be interested. It seems that Balanced Mode Radiators are at the doorstep of becoming available "more cheaply" to the DIY speaker fraternity, and based on what I've been hearing from my DML panels, these look like they are going to be a game changer for wide band line arrays and those who enjoy stuffing drivers into planks of wood . www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/191853-near-full-range-bmr-balanced-mode-radiator.htmlGet back to you on Async USB-I2S and miniDSP later. cheers.. jeffc
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2012 6:23:44 GMT
Jeff What Shaun is indirectly saying here,is that the output of this DAC will be sensitive to load and cable capacitance issues. That is why most DACs have some sort of buffer stage after the DAC. Alex
|
|