Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › DIY (Do-It-Yourself) Discussions › Twisted Pear Buffalo Sabre DAC
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Twisted Pear Buffalo Sabre DAC - Page 7

post #91 of 1283
4/29/08 at 6:22pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRobbStory View Post
All well and good. What does any of this have to do with the new offering from Twisted Pear?

Back on topic..
Everything! You can't see how good business practices make a product saleable? Back on topic? I started this topic to pay homage to the guys and the DAC or I would be on Crowbar's policed site. Did you even state anything in you post other than rhetoric? I believe 100% that this is the DAC for me because even if it sounded like sh!t, I know by following others' experiences that these two will do all reasonably possible to ensure my satisfaction. Man, why don't these buy only a mouse and leave the keyboard to those being constuctive?
Reply
post #92 of 1283
4/29/08 at 7:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by akione View Post
I now have a redundant Beta22
ha, I'll have to give it a try for kicks. redundant b22, eh?
Reply
post #93 of 1283
4/30/08 at 3:21am
I was just about to write a scathing reply to rodentmacbeastie's rude and abusive recent posts, however instead of stooping to his level I will instead do the opposite.

I would like to say that the exact reason _why_ I like twisted pear audio and russ and brian is the scientific methods they apply to their work. Instead of waxing on about how their stuff sounds better, they actually work on the "product". So far I've seen extremely few subjective comments about their own gear and I really like that because imho any engineer/diy'er should very well realize that what you create yourself is almost always best:P

Keep up the good work guys and don't listen to "audiophiles" who reject science/good engineering.
Reply
post #94 of 1283
4/30/08 at 3:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_freak View Post
ha, I'll have to give it a try for kicks. redundant b22, eh?


Yeah ........ I suppose that might be a bit of a stretch ....

Bear in mind that my B22 is 3 channel and this is fully differential from dac to 'phones.

I'm thinking I may have to build that 4th amp board though ........

...... don't know where I'll put it
Reply
post #95 of 1283
4/30/08 at 3:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegeek View Post
.........I would to say that the exact reason _why_ I like twisted pear audio and russ and brian is the scientific methods they apply to their work. Instead of waxing on about how their stuff sounds better, they actually work on the "product". So far I've seen extremely few subjective comments about their own gear and I really like that because imho any engineer/diy'er should very well realize that what you create yourself is often best:P

Keep up the good work guys and don't listen to "audiophiles" who reject science/good engineering.
Yes. I think it's often forgotten that they are providing a 'building block' kind of service. What anyone does with it all is entirely their own choice.
The boards/modules/schematics can all be tweaked to do whatever you want.

After all, these are Russ' and Brian's designs for themselves and it's up to us to decide if they meet our needs as well.

I think when that is taken into account it's not really fair to expect 'subjective' responses from Russ or Brian,
as their opinions are based on THEIR versions, not anyone else's.

I've seen comments suggesting the Opus is 'aggressive'. Not in my experience.
I find it very smooth and detailed with excellent control.

Do I need Buffalo ? Dunno.
Reply
post #96 of 1283
4/30/08 at 9:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ White View Post
This is true of analog attenuation is well. The lower the signal level the less well defined it becomes.
Well, the mechanism is rather different because of the fixed resolution of digital - if signal level goes down, distortion goes up. With an analog attenuator (i.e a potential divider) you attenuate both sign signal and distortion/noise by the same amount.

I'm not saying doing it digitally is bad, just that there are draw backs with all methods. Ultimately it comes down to listening.
Reply
post #97 of 1283
4/30/08 at 9:48am
Quote:
I'm not saying doing it digitally is bad, just that there are draw backs with all methods.
The biggest drawback being that the music isn't as loud
Reply
post #98 of 1283
4/30/08 at 10:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy dan View Post
Well, the mechanism is rather different because of the fixed resolution of digital - if signal level goes down, distortion goes up. With an analog attenuator (i.e a potential divider) you attenuate both sign signal and distortion/noise by the same amount.

I'm not saying doing it digitally is bad, just that there are draw backs with all methods. Ultimately it comes down to listening.
I was only pointing out that even analog attenuators (no matter what sort you choose) have their own noise and distortion mechanisms that become more apparent as the signal is more attenuated.

My post was in regard to what I have heard from the DAC, which seems to handle the volume control better than anything else I have tried (digital I mean). It helps that there is vitually zero noise coming from the DAC (partly because of the excellent common mode rejection of the IV stage). So there is for less of that to be attenuated by an analog circuit.

Also by not having to attenuate the signal in the analog realm you avoid the potential need for a buffer after the attenuator. As the signal will be coming direct from the I/V stage at a very low impedance. So you can get a much smaller signal path.

In practice, it is working very well. Thats the bottom line to me.

Cheers!
Russ
Reply
post #99 of 1283
4/30/08 at 10:16am
As an example of how well this short signal path works. I drive headphones from 32ohms to 600ohms directly from the IVY module. You can't get much more direct than that. It sounds fantastic. Not a hint of hiss or audible distortion. When the music is not playing you won't know the DAC is on except that the lock light is lit up.

Cheers!
Russ
Reply
post #100 of 1283
4/30/08 at 2:27pm
I was just wanted to point out to thegeek that rodentmacbeastie's posts on this forum were not "rude and abusive". He did go a little too far on Crowbar's thread about the same DAC chip, but if your comment relates to his posts on this thread, then you have done him a disservice. Please read them again, allow for his obviously poor English, and it is clear that he is in fact the most pro TPA poster on this site. He LOVES those guys and their scientific based work ethic.

He was justifiably banned for his post on the Crowbar thread, but on this thread he was actually one of the nicest posters, just bad with English and little too passionate.
Reply
post #101 of 1283
4/30/08 at 6:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentmacbeastie View Post
Thanks Russ, but I could not give a rat's ass how it measures! I am one of those people who believe in subjective analiysis and qualatative answers! I like taking an EXPERIENCED listener's OPINION of the sound, not just a spec sheet. If all that was important was the spec sheet so one can PROVE that it is better, who would care about the sound? Vocabulary, literature, and our senses and perception have been all but abolished. Soon, with our newspeak, we will not find it easy to convey emation and all that with be left is the fact are we are prescribed! GIVE ME HYPERBOLE RUSS, TELL HOW GOOD THAT FRIGGIN' DAC SOUNDS, BE PROUD, BE LOUD! Of course you have the right to at least a little one sided opinion, this is your baby! I do not know of a parent that is not proud when their kids perform well, do you? If the world was all ones and zeros... Hey wait, are we already there?
No offence, but to me this seems like an attack of the very core values of the twisted pear gang. I realize that I can't speak for them, but I can certainly say that is how I would have felt reading it if I were in their shoes.

I do realize that rodentmacbeastie did not intend for his comments to be interpreted this way but he could have made some effort to respect their opinions/values.

Granted, "rude and abusive" may have been a little strong, but I stand behind the intent of my post. His post is at the very least disrespectful and inconsiderate, and language is not an excuse, english is not my first language either but I still manage to remain civil.

I would also like to say that as an engineer myself(computer science) the blatant disregard and rejection of the very core principles that has made our modern world possible and thus also the dac in question is quite frankly annoying

To keep this post at least a tiny bit on topic; I can't wait for the kits to be available, I'll be sure to get one
Reply
post #102 of 1283
4/30/08 at 7:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentmacbeastie
GIVE ME HYPERBOLE RUSS, TELL HOW GOOD THAT FRIGGIN' DAC SOUNDS, BE PROUD, BE LOUD! Of course you have the right to at least a little one sided opinion, this is your baby! I do not know of a parent that is not proud when their kids perform well, do you?

thegeek - How is this anything but love? Rodent had been trying to get Russ to say how his DAC sounded, but Russ being the modest man he is wouldn't. Rodent's post was just an impassioned plea to get comments about its sound, on top of the technical discussion that had already taken place - in which rodent made it very clear he appreciated the scientific approach of the TP guys. I'll say no more on this, but I just felt the rat was missunderstood.

Back to topic:
My mind has already allocated funds for a Buffalo, but I just want some listening impressions first, though I'm confident they will be excellent. Come on first 20, make a DAC and tell us about how it sounds.
Reply
post #103 of 1283
4/30/08 at 9:03pm
I'll certainly let everyone know what I think when I get mine put together. I've got all the other boards ready to go (going to do all the casework on Friday), then my FPE panels should be here on Tuesday, hopefully receive the Buffalo the same week if everything goes according to plan. It shouldn't take long to get up and running (crosses fingers).
Reply
post #104 of 1283
4/30/08 at 9:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_freak View Post
I've got all the other boards ready to go
What boards are those? Do tell your Buffalo configuration secrets.
Reply
post #105 of 1283
4/30/08 at 9:59pm
Haha, pretty bare-bones, really. Just an LCDPS to power the Buffalo, a torx input module, and the OTTO (switch spdif between coax and optical), a LCBPS bipolar supply for the IVY output stage. Pretty simple, but it will be beautiful when all executed.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › DIY (Do-It-Yourself) Discussions › Twisted Pear Buffalo Sabre DAC