[439598]

Thanks. I'm starting to see that all the posts were based on not even hearing the DAC.

I want an R2R DAC and was considering the Soekris 1421 but I didn't get a response from them after about a week and can't find a place to buy it from. So I found this thread and this looks like a good DAC for the money. Still reading.

The DIY dam1121 is still probably the best DAC I've ever heard, there was some slight colouration/harshness compared to better measuring DACs but it's the perfect example of measurements not telling the full story as it resolves insanely well and naturally, particularly with dynamics, bass and timbre. R2R11 otoh had heavy colouration impossible to ignore and poor resolution.
But the 1421 is over 3 times the price and my 1121 had fancy power supplies etc. that I dont think it's fair to compare with 1421 even

 

[gimmeheadroom]

The DIY dam1121 is still probably the best DAC I've ever heard, there was some slight colouration/harshness compared to better measuring DACs but it's the perfect example of measurements not telling the full story as it resolves insanely well and naturally, particularly with dynamics, bass and timbre. R2R11 otoh had heavy colouration impossible to ignore and poor resolution.
But the 1421 is over 3 times the price and my 1121 had fancy power supplies etc. that I dont think it's fair to compare with 1421 even

Thanks for this info. I decided to order the R2R-11 today since I didn't get a response from Soekris and it's difficult for me to shell out that amount of money right now.

I'm with you 100% on measurements not correlating to enjoyment or sound quality. I hope the audio-gd will be good enough and I'll run it into a good headamp which should help.

When I get back home maybe I'll try again to see about buying the 1421.

 

[sajunky]

R2R11 otoh had heavy colouration impossible to ignore and poor resolution.

R2R11 can sound weird, I would express it in much worse term. Device is very sensitive to the ground loops and our laptops/PC are being a main source. If you notice a poor resolution, try optical input (Coax also helps). If sound is improving, then you know, you need USB plug with galvanic isolation. In my case reversing Euro (2 pin) power plug of the laptop PSU removed a weird sound.

As for comparison with Soekris, it shouldn't be a big difference. If it is, then I would look for ground loops solution in first place. The other possibility is that your amp poorly handle ultrasonic noise generated by a ladder. A-GD DACs use low voltage, high speed switching curcuits. It give the most accurate discrete output values, but produce a lot of HF spikes. HF spikes will go away, but require quality amplification. The same concept is implemented in Denafrips DACs, but here a high impedance output helps filtering spikes on the cable.

Soekris's DACs are different in this respect. He prefer a high voltage, slower switching circuits. A period of time when ladder is changing discrete values is increased (giving less accurate discrete output levels), but it produce less high frequency noise. Wether it is better, it is disputable, Soekris claims on a DIY forum that it is better. In my opinion a total amount of noise seem the same, but energy density is shifted towards a lower frequency, so it is even more difficult to filter out.

With respect to the above, Soekris DACs should sound more similar to the traditional chip ladder dacs, while both A-GD and Denafrips can deliver better conversion accuracy.

 

[439598]

R2R11 can sound weird, I would express it in much worse term. Device is very sensitive to the ground loops and our laptops/PC are being a main source. If you notice a poor resolution, try optical input (Coax also helps). If sound is improving, then you know, you need USB plug with galvanic isolation. In my case reversing Euro (2 pin) power plug of the laptop PSU removed a weird sound.

As for comparison with Soekris, it shouldn't be a big difference. If it is, then I would look for ground loops solution in first place. The other possibility is that your amp poorly handle ultrasonic noise generated by a ladder. A-GD DACs use low voltage, high speed switching curcuits. It give the most accurate discrete output values, but produce a lot of HF spikes. HF spikes will go away, but require quality amplification. The same concept is implemented in Denafrips DACs, but here a high impedance output helps filtering spikes on the cable.

Soekris's DACs are different in this respect. He prefer a high voltage, slower switching circuits. A period of time when ladder is changing discrete values is increased (giving less accurate discrete output levels), but it produce less high frequency noise. Wether it is better, it is disputable, Soekris claims on a DIY forum that it is better. In my opinion a total amount of noise seem the same, but energy density is shifted towards a lower frequency, so it is even more difficult to filter out.

With respect to the above, Soekris DACs should sound more similar to the traditional chip ladder dacs, while both A-GD and Denafrips can deliver better conversion accuracy.

It shouldnt be a big difference... or just maybe what you hear isnt the same as me?
From you earlier in thread ''My amp is entry level, speakers 15 years old and abused, my ears are much much much older, so you can be right. If there is a difference at 12 o'clock it is small, I guess... ''

They are no ground loops, I'm fully aware of the importance of the digital source for SQ. There are many possible reasons it sounds ''weird'' though... barely resolving 10 bits, 10 times greater THD+N than soekris, high amounts of IMD, issues in the digital end causing jitter/glitches on output.

 

[sajunky]

.LOL. for not quoted part.

They are no ground loops, I'm fully aware of the importance of the digital source for SQ. There are many possible reasons it sounds ''weird'' though... barely resolving 10 bits, 10 times greater THD+N than soekris, high amounts of IMD, issues in the digital end causing jitter/glitches on output.

You may think that your awareness of ground loops is adequate, I wouldn't be so sure, as you are refering to the measurements that were affected mainly by ground loops, similar to what happened in a TotalDAC Six tests. Refer to my earlier post about ground loops during R2R11 tests here and also on the ASR forum - TotalDAC tests.

You are also seems to be completely ignorant of the fact that with a presence of high frequency noise our measuring equipment do not bring any meanful results.

 

[439598]

.LOL. for not quoted part.

You may think that your awareness of ground loops is adequate, I wouldn't be so sure, as you are refering to the measurements that were affected mainly by ground loops, similar to what happened in a TotalDAC Six tests. Refer to my earlier post about ground loops during R2R11 tests here and also on the ASR forum - TotalDAC tests.

You are also seems to be completely ignorant of the fact that with a presence of high frequency noise our measuring equipment do not bring any meanful results.

There was one earthed power cable from wall, and it was connected to PC with either optical or isolated usb input (using HifimeDIY USB isolator) driving headphones directly... where is the loop exactly? You mean internal PCB/wiring ground loops in the R2R11? that would make sense.

Those measurements on ASR are one piece of evidence, they dont prove anything, they could be accurate or there could be inaccuracies.
You have no proof to say they are inaccurate, and you have not presented any evidence?

 

[motberg]

Thanks for this info. I decided to order the R2R-11 today since I didn't get a response from Soekris and it's difficult for me to shell out that amount of money right now.

I'm with you 100% on measurements not correlating to enjoyment or sound quality. I hope the audio-gd will be good enough and I'll run it into a good headamp which should help.

When I get back home maybe I'll try again to see about buying the 1421.

I am using an R2R-11 as a straight DAC also, but mine has an i2s input and using a SU-1 as a USB/i2s DDC.
Unfortunately I do not have any DIY skills, however I recently had in the same amp/speaker system a Topping D50, D70 and Gustard A20H - all of which supposedly measures better... Although each one of these 3 had some type of admirable characteristics, I prefer the R2R-11's more balanced, natural and dynamic presentation for my music preferences (prog rock, rock, some classical). The R2R-11 to me offers a less-processed sound signature compared to the others in this group of DAC's.

 

[sajunky]

There was one earthed power cable from wall, and it was connected to PC with either optical or isolated usb input (using HifimeDIY USB isolator) driving headphones directly... where is the loop exactly? You mean internal PCB/wiring ground loops in the R2R11? that would make sense.

It doesn't prove a case, USB isolator can be malfunctioning. You didn't try on optical (or Coax) port with all other ports disconnected. This is what I recommend to do in first place.

Those measurements on ASR are one piece of evidence, they dont prove anything, they could be accurate or there could be inaccuracies.
You have no proof to say they are inaccurate, and you have not presented any evidence?

Measurements with a presence of ultrasonic noise are inaccurate, as the same happens when testing any other NOS R2R DAC which has a slow roll-off (first order) LP filter.

As for a proof that R2R11 measurements on ASR are botchered, Amir gives this evidence:
Unstable DUT

Any reputable rewiever would immediately stop measuring, request manufacturer's comment or a replacement. Or at least start checking up his own equipment. It didn't happen.

Does NOT happen with S/PDIF.

 

[439598]

@sajunky
It doesn't prove a case, USB isolator can be malfunctioning. You didn't try on optical (or Coax) port with all other ports disconnected. This is what I recommend to do in first place.
I did. Again, there were no ground loops causing the bad sound

Measurements with a presence of ultrasonic noise are inaccurate, as the same happens when testing any other R2R DAC which has a slow roll-off (first order) LP filter.
So, as one example, how can the Holo Audio KTE May measure so exceptionally in NOS mode? (cant link it here)

As for a proof that R2R11 measurements on ASR are botchered, Amir gives this evidence:
Unstable DUT
I dont know what this is , you'll need to explain.

 

[sajunky]

Unstable DUT
I dont know what this is , you'll need to explain.

DUT = Device Under Tests.

 

[sajunky]

So, as one example, how can the Holo Audio KTE May measure so exceptionally in NOS mode? (cant link it here)

How you can be so sure that May is running in a pure NOS mode? I mean, no DSP pre-processing, signal decimation, noise shaping?

 

[439598]

DUT = Device Under Tests.

I meant explain how that is proof its problem with measurement equipment and not the DAC itself.

It has perfect square wave response, thats why I think it's NOS.
I dont know how noise shaping would interefere with the fact that it's NOS or OS,
but if it was being used wouldn't that only add more ultrasonic noise?

If you mean the data could be oversampled and then decimated (not sure why they would do this) how would this change the amount of ultrasonic noise on the output? it would still behave like 44.1kHz NOS data to the DAC, only it is a resampled version of the original file, right?

 

[sajunky]

I meant explain how that is proof its problem with measurement equipment and not the DAC itself.

Did I mention a TotalDAC test on ASR, didn't I? I thought you would pick it up. There is a proof of ground loops in Amir's measuring gear in other tests. The one I objected on the ASR forum was a TotalDAC test. A proof is a presence of both 50Hz and 60Hz traces on a dashboard. Only one frequency trace can be attributed to the DUT. Partially, as you need to remember that the amplitude depends on both devices forming a loop. The other one is a ground loop generated internally between Amir's gear (no DUT involved).

It has perfect square wave response, thats why I think it's NOS.
I dont know how noise shaping would interefere with the fact that it's NOS or OS,
but if it was being used wouldn't that only add more ultrasonic noise?

If you mean the data could be oversampled and then decimated (not sure why they would do this) how would this change the amount of ultrasonic noise on the output? it would still behave like 44.1kHz NOS data to the DAC, only it is a resampled version of the original file, right?

Good question. You are correct that pulse response will reveal a brick wall digital filtering, but noise shaping and other processing tricks may not. These are trade secrets and we are talking about DAC which is 10 times more expensive than R2R11.

A clue to this matter may be included in the test signals submitted by the ASR member without giving any explanation how to interprete results. This is a post with FFT plot of the Holo May: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...y-the-best-discrete-r2r-dac.10161/post-277493

44.1kHz plot has a number of distortion envelopes. The strongest one is at -80dB, the other one at -95dB (visible only from 1kHz up) is a shadow of the same frequencies and the second generation product envelope is at -110dB. Can you comment on this, please?

 

[gimmeheadroom]

Well i think i experience the same issues with DSD. I can hear low level noise artifacts, like digital jitter on low level parts of some DSD songs. As i said i cannot play DSD256 and DSD512 because foobar throws me an error. If anyone could be so kind to lead me to a proper configuration. Is DSD256 and 512 supported in the R2R 11?

What do you have in DSD256 and above?

I have a few hundred SACD rips but those are all DSD64. I was not aware of anything aside from samples from at higher DSD rates. Ordered by R2R-11 today

 

[439598]

Did I mention a TotalDAC test on ASR, didn't I? I thought you would pick it up. There is a proof of ground loops in Amir's measuring gear in other tests. The one I objected on the ASR forum was a TotalDAC test. A proof is a presence of both 50Hz and 60Hz traces on a dashboard. Only one frequency trace can be attributed to the DUT. Partially, as you need to remember that the amplitude depends on both devices forming a loop. The other one is a ground loop generated internally between Amir's gear (no DUT involved).

Good question. You are correct that pulse response will reveal a brick wall digital filtering, but noise shaping and other processing tricks may not. These are trade secrets and we are talking about DAC which is 10 times more expensive than R2R11.

A clue to this matter may be included in the test signals submitted by the ASR member without giving any explanation how to interprete results. This is a post with FFT plot of the Holo May: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...y-the-best-discrete-r2r-dac.10161/post-277493

44.1kHz plot has a number of distortion envelopes. The strongest one is at -80dB, the other one at -95dB (visible only from 1kHz up) is a shadow of the same frequencies and the second generation product envelope is at -110dB. Can you comment on this, please?

Ok, so what you trying to tell me is that the R2R11 actually measures decently but for some reason sounded really bad/distorted to me and is catastrophically affected by ground loops, more so than any other DACs, which caused it to measure terribly?

The Holo Audio measurements on ASR were made with OS, im talking about NOS measurements from another site (which stupidly cant be mentioned on headfi )
Holo Audio are advocates of NOS, I dont think there is any processing trickery going on.