or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Review: Jkeny’s modified Hiface
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Review: Jkeny’s modified Hiface - Page 9

post #121 of 431

I'll finally send you mine on thursday and not wednesday of next week. Glad to hear these short reviews of satisfied users, I'll give my input here also when mine will be modded too.


Edited by Pacha - 5/16/10 at 1:46pm
post #122 of 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pacha View Post

I'll finally send you mine on thursday and not wednesday of next week. Glad to hear these short reviews of satisfied users, I'll give my input here also when mine will be modded too.


There are lots of other user reviews that I haven't gotten permission to post. Look forward to receiving your unit.

post #123 of 431

I'm wondering how the upcoming Hiface EVO will compare to the battery powered original.

post #124 of 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveBSC View Post

I'm wondering how the upcoming Hiface EVO will compare to the battery powered original.

I will be interested in doing a sonic comparison between the two. I haven't heard one so I can only speculate.

 

As far as I know the Evo still uses on-board regulators but can be powered from an external 7V to 12V source instead of the using the USB power. I would imagine that this is a step up in sound quality - a lot depends on the regulators used & how isolated the clocks are from the rest of the chips on the 3.3V power circuit.

 

The battery powered modified Hiface removes the 3.3V regulator & isolates the critical clocks & clock handling circuits from the rest of the Hiface. It then powers the clocks independently & directly with a 3.3V battery & the clock handling circuits independently & directly with another 3.3V battery.

 

The batteries chosen have been tested & reviewed as easily better than the top rated commercially available regulator boards which are sold as replacements for on-board chip regulators (see my website review).

 

So I would hope that the battery powered modified Hiface might sound better than the Evo because it is a more radical redesign focused exclusively on sound quality but the ears will be the final arbiter in this comparison.

 

One thing is certain, the Evo will win hands down in the flexibility stakes with many more options for outputs, PS, clock input, etc.


 


Edited by jkeny - 6/6/10 at 11:18am
post #125 of 431

Any idea why 7-12V was used in the EVO?  If the clocks need only 3.3V, that means another power regulation in the circuit to downgrade the SQ?

post #126 of 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenLeo View Post

Any idea why 7-12V was used in the EVO?  If the clocks need only 3.3V, that means another power regulation in the circuit to downgrade the SQ?


The Hiface requires the following supplies internally:

5V for the SPDIF chip

3.3V for the clocks & output circuits of the CPLD (Xilinx chip)

1.8V for the logic circuits of the CPLD

 

So there are probably at least 3 regulators on-board the Evo. 

post #127 of 431

M2Tech is also apparently working on a pair of DACs with built in USB support for up to 32/384, which I didn't even know was possible. 

post #128 of 431

It will be interesting to see how M2Tech DACs compare with the upcoming Centrance DACmini and other DACs that license Centrance USB audio technology.

post #129 of 431


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jkeny View Post




The Hiface requires the following supplies internally:

5V for the SPDIF chip

3.3V for the clocks & output circuits of the CPLD (Xilinx chip)

1.8V for the logic circuits of the CPLD

 

So there are probably at least 3 regulators on-board the Evo. 

I know those three different voltages required -- thanks for the info that you've given in the forum and I always follow.

 

What I'm wondering is the EVO needs more voltage regulators and how can this improve the SQ and I just wonder that do you think about this more regulator to improve the SQ business?

 

Regards 
 

post #130 of 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenLeo View Post


 

I know those three different voltages required -- thanks for the info that you've given in the forum and I always follow.

 

What I'm wondering is the EVO needs more voltage regulators and how can this improve the SQ and I just wonder that do you think about this more regulator to improve the SQ business?

 

Regards 
 


I'm merely speculating that there is a potential improvement in sound over the stock Hiface. I haven't heard one yet. I imagine that they are using better regulators & these are now powered from an external supply rather than powered from the PC power over USB.

 

BTW, I have another sound improvement on the way in the form of a special cable adaptor - just need to test a range of these adaptors to find the best one. This will minimise the sonic effect of cables & may even allow BNC to RCA without sonic penalty. It will be applicable to the Hiface only. 

post #131 of 431

Another potential competitor is the Weiss INT 202. Does anyone know what that's going to cost?

post #132 of 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveBSC View Post

M2Tech is also apparently working on a pair of DACs with built in USB support for up to 32/384, which I didn't even know was possible. 


Whether it's possible or not isn't even the issue.  It's entirely unnecessary and is nothing more than a marketing gimmick.  24/192 is a gimmick too.  24/96 is the most you'll ever need for audio playback.


Edited by IPodPJ - 6/6/10 at 10:03pm
post #133 of 431

x2

Dan Lavry and others have pointed that also. There is no use to go over 24/96.

post #134 of 431

Reminds me of Bill Gates's "64Kb is the most you'll ever need". ;-)
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by IPodPJ View Post




Whether it's possible or not isn't even the issue.  It's entirely unnecessary and is nothing more than a marketing gimmick.  24/192 is a gimmick too.  24/96 is the most you'll ever need for audio playback.

post #135 of 431

Saying you don't need more than 24/96 isn't quite the same as saying nobody will ever need to use more than 64k of data. First of all, it takes a pretty serious sound system to even be able to appreciate 24/96 over 16/44.

 

Second, quality microphones and production in the studio is far more important than sample rates. A 24/96 recording that was mixed and mastered with care will beat a mediocre 24/192 recording any day.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Review: Jkeny’s modified Hiface