[les_garten]

Quote:

Originally Posted by paara /img/forum/go_quote.gif Does anyone know why multiple chips are any better then 1 per channel, will they not just add more noise to the system?

Hi,
I'll bump this thread a nudge. Did you get an answer to this question?

.

 

[paara]

Quote:

Originally Posted by les_garten /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hi, I'll bump this thread a nudge. Did you get an answer to this question? .

Hi, I haven't had time to read much about it yet. I have a huge exame tomorrow, been reading for it the last months. All my reading breaks are here at head-fi

So no, I dont know yet.

 

[les_garten]

Quote:

Originally Posted by paara /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hi, I haven't had time to read much about it yet. I have a huge exame tomorrow, been reading for it the last months. All my reading breaks are here at head-fi So no, I dont know yet.

Kewl, was just wondering if you had a "Good" assessment of it that may explain t better.

.

 

[paara]

Well, I can definetly not explain anything to anyone yet.

 

[Zorlac]

I cannot seem to find a good description of multibit. Can someone at least point out a link?

Also, what is so special about the Burr Brown PCM1704 in comparison to something like the PCM1794A or the newest PCM1798??? (just seems like a lot of DACs are using the PCM1704 chip and I read that it is a spendy chip in comparison to the others I listed)

 

[paara]

If you run (ANY !!) process many times, after each other or in parallel does not matter, the uncertainty or errors in the output of the process will improve with the function of SQRT(n) where "n" stands for the number of events. This trick can be used for example to get very precise resistors or capacitors by paralleling them. Thanks to the current source output we can easily do the same for the TDA1543.......

Is there an optimum? I am sure there is, but I was not so crazy to try all possible variations of "n".... I tried in a prototype 3 DAC's in parallel and this was a major improvement. The low level detail, known from high bit systems was really improved. Listening to the 8 DAC version, it comes very close to SACD.... not bad I think (again an understatement... So how many is realistic? well for each doubling of improvement, which equals 1 bit extra of linearity we need to multiply "n" with 4 !! so with 8 I get one and a half bit extra, which actually is already very good. If I want now 4 bits better performance I need to put 4x4x4x4=256 DAC's in parallel. This will consume 12A supply current and dissipates 100Watt. Feel free to do so, but it seems a bit unpractical to me, not even mentioned the circuitry needed to drive the 256 TTL inputs !!! Why did I mention 4 bits? Well, according to the datasheet, the 1543 is aprox 12-13 bits effective. A PCM63 by the way is also not much better then approximately 15 bits effectively. All the rest is marketing So the choice for 8 is purely based on a combination of maximizing "n" and keeping things within reason technically.........

There is also an additional EXTRA bonus by doing this: by paralleling the DAC's we have to decrease the R(I/V) resistor as the current increases. So the Output Impedance is also reduced by "n". This helps a great deal driving the interlink to the pre amplifier of directly to the end stages if you do so...

Furthermore, the DAC pinning makes is possible to just piggy back them..... this resulted in the "cool tower" you see in the pictures.........

Can you actually measure the improvement? Oh yes, no problem ! below, from left to right the 2 results of 1 DAC and 3 DAC, which is almost 1 bit improvement. Both Measurement at optimum. You might think, the difference is low, but this is exactly (3dB is 0,8 bit) what helps the low level detail to play at less distortion !!

I stole this text from a web page, I did not write it. so I cant answer tricky questions, Sorry.

 

[BigTony]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zorlac /img/forum/go_quote.gif How would you know if a HDCD is being properly decoded? Is there a indicator light on the DAC somewhere? EDIT: I emailed Kingwa and he said that there is indeed an indicator light that turns on when HDCD is being decoded. Also, I asked him if any of his DACs upsample, and he said no. He doesnt believe in upsampling and none of his DACs will upsample.

Just thought i'd mention that.this indicator led isn't external, there is just the power led on the outside of the case. I've been playing hdcd via my squeezebox, but i have to switch replaygain off, which is a pita as i've goten very lazy/used to a set volume level, and now i'm changing volume after each cd!

 

[Mik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong /img/forum/go_quote.gif You could probably ask him if he can make one with USB input. I've asked him for optical input. Better still would be if he could make one using the USB chipset that allows 24/96 USB input.

A Ref1 with asynchronous usb input using the TAS1020 chip (and an input selector) would be my dream dac.

 

[les_garten]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mik /img/forum/go_quote.gif A Ref1 with asynchronous usb input using the TAS1020 chip (and an input selector) would be my dream dac.

Pitch that to him and see what he says. He is quick to respond and will tell you what he thinks about it.

.

 

[Mik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by les_garten /img/forum/go_quote.gif Pitch that to him and see what he says. He is quick to respond and will tell you what he thinks about it. .

Okay, I sent him an email. Will let you know what he says.

 

[edselfordfong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mik /img/forum/go_quote.gif A Ref1 with asynchronous usb input using the TAS1020 chip (and an input selector) would be my dream dac.

That does sound nice, doesn't it? I've been emailing him about that stuff, but I don't think he's that into it. He has his doubts about USB SQ compared to CD input, but told me he's going to think about 24/96 USB. He also said he doesn't like input selector switches.

Still, it's good for people to email him about USB, so he sees that there's a market for it.

I think he's a long way off from asynch usb dacs.

Hey, I'm wondering if his DSP-1 make asynch unnecessary. As I understand it, asynch solves USB jitter problems. The DSP-1 also deals with jitter. So, perhaps DSP-1 addresses the same jitter that asynch does?

But I don't have any technical knowledge. I doubt it actually works that way, but it just occurred to me.

Has anyone asked him about the ref 3? It will have USB input. Will it have others?

EDIT: he did tell me that the ref 3 will have the usual other inputs as well.

let us know what he tells you.

 

[Mik]

I will let you know what he says for sure. From other comments I've seen, I get the sense he's not impressed by usb either, but hopefully that's just because most usb implementations are not that creative.

Intuitively to me it seems better to start with less jitter to begin with rather than struggling to remove lots of jitter after it has already been introduced. I wish more dac makers were more interested in the problem of getting low-jitter digital audio out of computers since that's the direction home audio is going. So far all of the good implementations are very expensive.

 

[les_garten]

Quote:

Originally Posted by edselfordfong /img/forum/go_quote.gif That does sound nice, doesn't it? I've been emailing him about that stuff, but I don't think he's that into it. He has his doubts about USB SQ compared to CD input, but told me he's going to think about 24/96 USB. He also said he doesn't like input selector switches. Still, it's good for people to email him about USB, so he sees that there's a market for it. I think he's a long way off from asynch usb dacs. Hey, I'm wondering if his DSP-1 make asynch unnecessary. As I understand it, asynch solves USB jitter problems. The DSP-1 also deals with jitter. So, perhaps DSP-1 addresses the same jitter that asynch does? But I don't have any technical knowledge. I doubt it actually works that way, but it just occurred to me. Has anyone asked him about the ref 3? It will have USB input. Will it have others? let us know what he tells you.

Listen Dude,
We don't care what you think or what you're interested in!

Your questions are stupid, and you're stupid! Please quit with your inane stupid posts, you irritate me!

Why don't you just Break your Keyboard and go away now! While I eat my Hot Pot in peace!!

Just thought you might be homesick for the Compass thread, and thought I would make you feel at home here

I don't think Kingwa is a huge fan of the USB or Optical interface on his "Big Iron"

Sorry man, just had to have a little fun with you...

.

 

[Mik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by les_garten /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't think Kingwa is a huge fan of the USB or Optical interface on his "Big Iron"

Which is unfortunate considering the preferred audio source for many people these days is a laptop which likely has USB as the only digital audio output option, or possibly firewire. An asynchronous firewire input on a Reference One would be great too if USB is totally out of the question.

 

[les_garten]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mik /img/forum/go_quote.gif Which is unfortunate considering the preferred audio source for many people these days is a laptop which likely has USB as the only digital audio output option, or possibly firewire. An asynchronous firewire input on a Reference One would be great too if USB is totally out of the question.

I asked him to put an Optical S/Pdif on my REF1 and he didn't flinch, The USB is a bigger deal I'm sure. I guess the Big question for him would be, how many people would want a DAC like his reference series and would use it with a Computer?

.