[MLGrado]

One thing about the wifi connection is it provides isolation. My Mac mini (Roon and HQP server) is connected to my router via LAN cable and then goes into a Gustard switch with a fiber port, so my front end is being fed by fiber (another fiber-LAN converter at the DAC side), which isolates in a similar way.
So if you're going to plug the Mac and PC into the router, I would highly recommend doing the same, with a short LAN cable into a fiber converter, then fiber optic cable to another converter near the Red (assuming it's being used as your streamer), with a short LAN cable from the Red into your DAC. Hope that makes sense.
Another way to approach things is to send the wifi signal to a mesh repeater/booster with a LAN port, then go straight out to the Red with another short LAN cable.

yes, I find that the wifi isolation provided by my iFi STREAM makes a notable difference in quality. I am a big believer in isolation.

It goes back to personal experience for me. At one time I owned a Wyred4Sound DAC-1LE Femto (ESS 9018 chip I think), and although it had onboard galvanic isolation via USB, nothing I could do, including temporarily lifting the PSU ground, could get rid of both a 60hz hum combined with a large amount of white noise.

I purchased an Intona USB Galvanic isolator, and never looked back. It took care of ALL the noise. Dead quiet after its insertion. I am sure several DAC's I have owned since have had no need for the extra isolation; however I have continued to use one anyway, knowing how well they can work.

 

[MLGrado]

Wonder what settings do you use for the dsc2? Pavek recommends dsd512 AMSDM7 512fs on his web page I suppose that was before the 7EC modulators become available?

Cheers

Yeah, GREAT question!

I am in process of building a more powerful PC, since my current HP all-in-one just can't handle the most complex filters or modulators. I wish I could get to 512fs.

Right now I am limited to 256x. My filter of choice for 44.1/48khz material is 'poly-sinc-gauss'. For higher resolution PCM it is 'poly-sinc-xtr-short-mp'. Modulator is one of the adaptive modulators... ASDM5ECv3.

Those parameters put my PC right at 96 percent usage.

For DSD to DSD conversion, if the DSD file I am playing is 256x, I simply pass it through. No need to re-modulate. For DSD64 and DSD128, I use a CIC integrator (which will be similar to what the DSC2 actually does in hardware for conversion), and use the 'wide' setting.

So far these have provided best results for me. As long as you don't input DSD64 into the DAC, it all sounds 'good'. It is just a matter of what sounds even better lol.

Not that DSD64 sounds bad per say... its just the 32tap filter is a bit long for that rate. (For comparison, TI/Burr-Brown uses an 8 tap filter for DSD64, and if I remember correctly, in the discussion I had with T+A audio, they thought the 8 tap filter was even too long! Their FIR filter is a mere 4 tap. It is important to note, that this isn't the only filter used. All of these DAC's have an analog (RC type in case of TI) downstream to complete the reconstruction.

But back on topic... I am researching low noise/high performance PC products and hopefully will have a 512fs capable system pretty soon.

 

[dericchan1]

Dude, I have an intona for both the ifi pro idsd and nos the dsc2, both have built in galvanic isolation, still benefit from having an intona in the chain!!

 

[dericchan1]

Yeah, GREAT question!

I am in process of building a more powerful PC, since my current HP all-in-one just can't handle the most complex filters or modulators. I wish I could get to 512fs.

Right now I am limited to 256x. My filter of choice for 44.1/48khz material is 'poly-sinc-gauss'. For higher resolution PCM it is 'poly-sinc-xtr-short-mp'. Modulator is one of the adaptive modulators... ASDM5ECv3.

Those parameters put my PC right at 96 percent usage.

For DSD to DSD conversion, if the DSD file I am playing is 256x, I simply pass it through. No need to re-modulate. For DSD64 and DSD128, I use a CIC integrator (which will be similar to what the DSC2 actually does in hardware for conversion), and use the 'wide' setting.

So far these have provided best results for me. As long as you don't input DSD64 into the DAC, it all sounds 'good'. It is just a matter of what sounds even better lol.

Not that DSD64 sounds bad per say... its just the 32tap filter is a bit long for that rate. (For comparison, TI/Burr-Brown uses an 8 tap filter for DSD64, and if I remember correctly, in the discussion I had with T+A audio, they thought the 8 tap filter was even too long! Their FIR filter is a mere 4 tap. It is important to note, that this isn't the only filter used. All of these DAC's have an analog (RC type in case of TI) downstream to complete the reconstruction.

But back on topic... I am researching low noise/high performance products and hopefully will have a 512fs capable system pretty soon.

I am currently just leaving DSc2 with dsd512x48, 7EC Super (not the 512fs version)

Filter choice depends on materials - xtr short mp for hard rock; default filters gauss long, hires lp for everything else…

Still surprised how everything just sounds like LPs

 

[MLGrado]

Dude, I have an intona for both the ifi pro idsd and nos the dsc2, both have built in galvanic isolation, still benefit from having an intona in the chain!!

I have two Intona's.

The older model for 2.0USB, and the newer one that handles 3.0USB and has option for external PSU.

I agree. The signal chain benefits even if there is internal isolation.

Most internal galvanic isolation is after the input boards, (USB) and before the DAC board. That means any EMI/RF noise present on the USB input affects the USB clocks and other circuitry pre-DAC board, creating potential noise that isn't necessary. (grounding comes into play as well). I would rather have a clean signal right at the input, avoiding any such noise issues. Hence the Intona products. Great stuff.

 

[dericchan1]

I have two Intona's.

The older model for 2.0USB, and the newer one that handles 3.0USB and has option for external PSU.

I agree. The signal chain benefits even if there is internal isolation.

Most internal galvanic isolation is after the input boards, (USB) and before the DAC board. That means any EMI/RF noise present on the USB input affects the USB clocks and other circuitry pre-DAC board, creating potential noise that isn't necessary. (grounding comes into play as well). I would rather have a clean signal right at the input, avoiding any such noise issues. Hence the Intona products. Great stuff.

Yup, I got 3 into 2 industrial one with plastic chassis and 1 for usb 3.0 with aluminum chassis. I agree. Other than the Cyan 2, the intona has had an impact on all my other dacs so far

 

[dericchan1]

I have two Intona's.

The older model for 2.0USB, and the newer one that handles 3.0USB and has option for external PSU.

I agree. The signal chain benefits even if there is internal isolation.

Most internal galvanic isolation is after the input boards, (USB) and before the DAC board. That means any EMI/RF noise present on the USB input affects the USB clocks and other circuitry pre-DAC board, creating potential noise that isn't necessary. (grounding comes into play as well). I would rather have a clean signal right at the input, avoiding any such noise issues. Hence the Intona products. Great stuff.

Also since currently I am comparing the dsc2 and the cyan 2 in the same system, I just connect my NAA to intona, then out to a passive anker usb 3.0 hub and, usb out to both dacs.

I would just go in hqplayer settings and choose the dac of choice in the NAA menu!!

 

[wagninger]

Yeah the time domain stuff is where I can't currently test unfortunately. I'll need to repeat the test in a couple years once my hearing range has dropped a bit and see if there are any remaining differences that can no longer be explained by the treble extension itself

Why don't you simulate that right now and put a filter on the test files starting at, say, 18kHz and see if you can still hear any differences? would be interesting I think

 

[EMINENT]

Heylo.

I used 20k filter once and had a bad case of tinnitus for days.
I found that this happens because our ears are trying to compensate for the range that was missing during the bout of what happened, like the listening session, by boosting those frequencies missing. Eventually there is equilibrium again.
Never again.

 

[castleofargh]

Heylo.

I used 20k filter once and had a bad case of tinnitus for days.
I found that this happens because our ears are trying to compensate for the range that was missing during the bout of what happened, like the listening session, by boosting those frequencies missing. Eventually there is equilibrium again.
Never again.

IDK if the filter and your tinnitus were related. Perhaps if you listened too loud, as we often do when we try new stuff. Or same thing, if the setting and your system resulted in maybe some high energy crap somewhere.
But your explanation looks like a confusing mix of real information, and you, extrapolating on it.
There are many accepted causes for tinnitus (blood pressure, ear infection, drugs, neck or jaw pain...), and the only one that somewhat seems to match your explanation, is hearing damage with a hypothesized explanation about how the missing range might mess with the brain's expectation/interpretation, possibly creating some phantom sound. AFAIK it's specific to hearing damage (and if that was it for you, it most likely wouldn't have gone away after a few days).
I have never heard or seen anything documented about people getting tinnitus from missing frequencies in their playback system. Do you imagine, music on crappy tweeters on a laptop with both bass and treble rolled off like crazy, boom tinnitus. Proper speakers with some nasty comb filtering effect due to reflections, boom, tinnitus. Doesn't seem very likely to me.

 

[EMINENT]

IDK if the filter and your tinnitus were related. Perhaps if you listened too loud, as we often do when we try new stuff. Or same thing, if the setting and your system resulted in maybe some high energy crap somewhere.
But your explanation looks like a confusing mix of real information, and you, extrapolating on it.
There are many accepted causes for tinnitus (blood pressure, ear infection, drugs, neck or jaw pain...), and the only one that somewhat seems to match your explanation, is hearing damage with a hypothesized explanation about how the missing range might mess with the brain's expectation/interpretation, possibly creating some phantom sound. AFAIK it's specific to hearing damage (and if that was it for you, it most likely wouldn't have gone away after a few days).
I have never heard or seen anything documented about people getting tinnitus from missing frequencies in their playback system. Do you imagine, music on crappy tweeters on a laptop with both bass and treble rolled off like crazy, boom tinnitus. Proper speakers with some nasty comb filtering effect due to reflections, boom, tinnitus. Doesn't seem very likely to me.

Good theories.
It was a one off correlation so perhaps another trial should be in order to further eliminate variables. Although, I do suspect ultrasonics are in play with our auditory senses beyond what we know.

 

[GoldenSound]

@jlaako Are you able to say what the DAC corrections are doing/altering?

 

[ra990]

@jlaako Are you able to say what the DAC corrections are doing/altering?

If you ever have the time, I'm sure we'd all be super curious what your measurements tell you. I'm pretty sure @jlaako wants to keep it a secret, which is fair. Lots of posts have asked and he has not ever responded in detail.

What does the new DAC correction feature actually correct? Can you elaborate on that @jlaako? Is it just making sure it's outputting optimal sample rates for the DAC, is it modifying filtering, modulation, changing DAC bits value to be optimal, or what? There's no good explanation for what it's doing. This page just has a table of DACs and their supported sample rates.

What is it doing for my Spring 3 when I select it?

 

[Ghoostknight]

Heylo.

I used 20k filter once and had a bad case of tinnitus for days.
I found that this happens because our ears are trying to compensate for the range that was missing during the bout of what happened, like the listening session, by boosting those frequencies missing. Eventually there is equilibrium again.
Never again.

Oh seriously? i wouldnt say i have seen a correlation between my tinnitus and what im listening to, unless its high volume ( IME 90dB+ will trigger tinnitus fairly quickly, tho i usually can listen to 70-80dB for hours with no real problem afterwards )

Tho, after watching @GoldenSound Dac comparison which was released 1 or 2 days ago i was yesterday curious if i could still hear 20khz on higher volumes.... "there was something" (and i would say "full volume" i get to around 14-15khz).... and afterwards i got a strange feeling in my ears with tinnitus.... i probably shouldnt have listen to 20khz sinetone at around 80dB.... (it was just for like max 30 seconds with testing different frequencys) but the feeling and tinnitus stayed for half an hour or so

i also played around with the 20khz filter, but i just got the expression that high frequemcy "crap" gets cut out, which was still audible to some degree, it seems to let you focus more on the "real" lower audible band
Tho this 'crap' can be part of the (intended) recording, specially if we talk overtones and all that, thats why i settled with my own filter doing only a few db at 18-22khz, which still lets you focus more on the audible band without cutting "details or this airy feeling" completely

 

[dericchan1]

If you ever have the time, I'm sure we'd all be super curious what your measurements tell you. I'm pretty sure @jlaako wants to keep it a secret, which is fair. Lots of posts have asked and he has not ever responded in detail.

And I do respect Miska's decision to keep his proprietary work as proprietary...
I don't need to see a hiqplayer, hixplayer, hibestplayer launching the market...

As much as I am super curious as well what was done to the sound!!!

Cheers