Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › The Hopelessly Derailed ODAC/Objective DAC Anticipation/Discussion Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Hopelessly Derailed ODAC/Objective DAC Anticipation/Discussion Thread

post #1 of 256
Thread Starter 

c851d40e_Derail_1.jpeg

 

I just can't help myself sometimes...

 


 

The search tells there isn't a thread for the ODAC here in the Source Components section so I guess it's time to start one.

 

Recently announced by He Who Must Not Be Named and now available for preorder from JDS Labs, the ODAC is a 24/96 USB DAC designed for transparent performance at minimum cost.

 

It uses the ESS Sabre ES9023 DAC chip and the Tenor TE7022 USB interface chip.  The ODAC is USB powered and simply has digital input via USB (no coax, optical, etc) and one stereo output.

 

I've got mine preordered already...


Edited by maverickronin - 5/4/12 at 8:16am
post #2 of 256

I've taken an interest into it as well. I've heard some mixed things about either getting the ODAC + O2 separate or in one case by JDS. For example, for the single ODAC+O2 case, there is no line-out to use an external amp nor is it portable since it doesn't have batteries.

 

I'm just curious as to which is better, separate or together? 

post #3 of 256

 

Funny, I made this thread exactly 1 minute before you did.

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/607975/jdslabs-odac-epiphany-acoustics-e-dac-discussion (1:54 PM, GMT+10)

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/607976/the-odac-objective-dac-anticipation-discussion-thread (1:55 PM, GMT+10)

 

Hahaha.

 

post #4 of 256

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by maverickronin View Post

24/96 USB DAC

 

24/88 actually.

 

My ESS ES9023 is 24/192 ftr, not that I think it matters.

 

post #5 of 256
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by option12 View Post

I've taken an interest into it as well. I've heard some mixed things about either getting the ODAC + O2 separate or in one case by JDS. For example, for the single ODAC+O2 case, there is no line-out to use an external amp nor is it portable since it doesn't have batteries.

 

I'm just curious as to which is better, separate or together? 

 

It's would all depend on how you're going to use it.  The separate enclosure plus an IC wouldn't take up much more space and would give you the best flexibility but it's the most expensive.

 

I've got just the bare board ordered.  First I'm going to just put it in a cheap Radio Shack project box and use it mostly at home.  After the the ODA is released and I build one I think I'm going to put my O2 w/ batteries (which is mostly used at home), the ODAC, and a crossfeed circuit into a longer version of the O2's enclosure and make a killer battery powered transportable combo.

 

For home use I'll either buy another ODAC or possibly get something more versatile with coax and optical inputs as well.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kiteki View Post

Funny, I made this thread exactly 1 minute before you did.

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/607975/jdslabs-odac-epiphany-acoustics-e-dac-discussion (1:54 PM, GMT+10)

 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/607976/the-odac-objective-dac-anticipation-discussion-thread (1:55 PM, GMT+10)

 

Hahaha.

 

Curses!

post #6 of 256

Well, I just canceled my pre-order since I'm going to be on an oversea trip soon. I won't be back until July, so I won't be able to receive the ODAC in time (unless someone ships me one either next week or the week after). So I gave up my spot. Hopefully someone who pre-ordered after me will get dip. :(

 

It's a shame. I was REALLY looking forward to it. The O2 has been an excellent performer, and I can't wait to "hear" how the ODAC would be.

 

First order of business when I'm back in July would definitely be to grab one of the standalone ones. Hopefully supply is abundant at that time.

post #7 of 256
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiteki View Post

24/88 actually.

 

88.2 is the one (halfway important) sample rate that the TE7022 can't do.  The ODAC does 16/44, 16/48, 16/96, 24/44, 24/48, and 24/96.  88.2 to 44.1 is a clean operation so only the most pathological resampling algorithms should have an issue with it.

 

Somehow you'll just have to make due with the OS mixer resampling your 16kHz and 32kHz podcasts though...

post #8 of 256

 

Ah, thanks for the correction!

 

 

If I fail my future blind-test between my DAC and the ODAC (very likely), then I'll try another one with 24/192 upsampling versus 16/44.1 native.

 

The meyer & moran study was inherently flawed & statistically impossible according to this discussion, so I don't consider that survey valid for 24/192, DSD, or DAC transparency.

 

It may have tested A/D/A transparency, since one CD was the original, and the other went through an A/D/A loop, but both CD's were played back through the same equipment, in other words you may as well prove the transparency of mineral water and tap water drinking both mixed with Coke.

 

post #9 of 256
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiteki View Post

 

If I fail my future blind-test between my DAC and the ODAC (very likely), then I'll try another one with 24/192 upsampling versus 16/44.1 native.

 

The meyer & moran study was inherently flawed & statistically impossible according to this discussion, so I don't consider that survey valid for 24/192, DSD, or DAC transparency.

 

Well I'd like to say something about that, but not so much that I'm going to have to pay to read the actual paper myself.

 

I doubt that most people who argue over it endlessly have actually paid to read it either.  Until I actually do I don't think think there's much to talk about.  Arguing over other people's arguments about something they only know about from breadcrumbs dropped by the few who've actually read it doesn't do much good for anyone.

post #10 of 256

So Kiteki anticipated that you were going  to create an anticipation thread and beat you to the punch. Ouch.  evil_smiley.gif

post #11 of 256
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by estreeter View Post

So Kiteki anticipated that you were going  to create an anticipation thread and beat you to the punch. Ouch.  evil_smiley.gif

 

S/He beat me by like 30 seconds or something.

 

I should have posted it with just the title and filled in the rest afterwords...

post #12 of 256

Im about to pull the trigger with a separate ODAC since I already have the O2

post #13 of 256

     Quote:

Originally Posted by maverickronin View Post

 

Well I'd like to say something about that, but not so much that I'm going to have to pay to read the actual paper myself.

 

I doubt that most people who argue over it endlessly have actually paid to read it either.  Until I actually do I don't think think there's much to talk about.  Arguing over other people's arguments about something they only know about from breadcrumbs dropped by the few who've actually read it doesn't do much good for anyone.

 

That's a good point, but a statistician read it and found an error so I like to quote that, just to balance it's over-quoted-ness.  The sa-cd thread has lots of interactive comments from the Author of the study which puts it in context.

 

The Lavry Gold DAC DA2002 costs $11,250 so I'm not completely sure why Lavry articles are cited in relation to the ODAC either ...

 

post #14 of 256

I'm interested to see opinions on the separate ODAC when it comes out, since I already have the O2.  I'll likely pick up a ODAC eventually but it'd be nice to have all the components housed in a single desktop case.

post #15 of 256

got mine on pre-order.

 

Going with the stand alone version from JDS so it can pair with my O2 as a portable setup for my Laptop when vacationing.

Will post impressions when i receive it.

 

Camping with LCD2's is gonna be sweet :D

 

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › The Hopelessly Derailed ODAC/Objective DAC Anticipation/Discussion Thread