[.Sup]

I wonder what's better - this or Buffalo Sabre

 

[The Monkey]

The chipses are important, I agree. But the implementation and execution are even more important. Seems like most manufacturers forgot that for about 20 years and are now just starting to get it again. Seems like Audio-gd gets it.

 

[SoupRKnowva]

Quote:

Originally Posted by regal /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'll bet they're still losing money on them. Very expensive process. Another interesting thing about the PCM1704 is that when they brought it back it had to comply with the new ROS regs, so they took the lead out. I swear the old ones with the lead sound better. I've heard others comment the same sentiments. I had a DAC that was built with the old chips, then I blew up one and replaced it with the new one (both K grade) and the one channel with the old chip sounded better.

haha, so i guess music hates the environment is what you're trying to say?

Quote:

Originally Posted by .Sup /img/forum/go_quote.gif I wonder what's better - this or Buffalo Sabre

Im wondering the same thing, though its the ESS sabre chip. I dont believe the sabre is a sigma delta chip?

 

[regal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoupRKnowva /img/forum/go_quote.gif haha, so i guess music hates the environment is what you're trying to say? Im wondering the same thing, though its the ESS sabre chip. I dont believe the sabre is a sigma delta chip?

As much as ESS tries to hide the fact it is still a S-D chip.

 

[SoupRKnowva]

Quote:

Originally Posted by regal /img/forum/go_quote.gif As much as ESS tries to hide the fact it is still a S-D chip.

those trixy SOB's

 

[IPodPJ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by regal /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'll bet they're still losing money on them. Very expensive process. Another interesting thing about the PCM1704 is that when they brought it back it had to comply with the new ROS regs, so they took the lead out. I swear the old ones with the lead sound better. I've heard others comment the same sentiments. I had a DAC that was built with the old chips, then I blew up one and replaced it with the new one (both K grade) and the one channel with the old chip sounded better.

The chip designers will tell you no two DAC chips with high specs like these will sound different and they are all perfectly flat within the range of human hearing. It is all in the implementation and the output stage. I'm not sure whether I believe this, but I'm not willing to rule it out either. So lead or no lead, I think that's stretching the truth of what you can hear.

What other parts were replaced? You had many hours of operation on the one channel whereas the other was new.

I know there are 3 different levels of this chip. There is the PCM1704, the PCM1704U and the PCM1704U-K. Supposedly the K version is made to tighter standards, but who really knows. It could all be marketing. I'm not sure what else if anything separates the chips.

I wouldn't mind seeing them make a 24/192 R-2R DAC, but currently most computer based transports can't support that anyway.

 

[IPodPJ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by .Sup /img/forum/go_quote.gif I wonder what's better - this or Buffalo Sabre

Well I heard the Buffalo32 at the last meet with a Beta22. You can't even compare it to the Ref1. The Ref1 beats it hands down. However it was running through USB which lacks in SQ compared to S/PDIF, but from previous experience I know what would open up in the sound had it been running via coax or optical, and in my opinion it still wouldn't come close to the SQ of the Ref1.

Maybe if the ESS was running in dual mono (which can be done if someone designed a PCB for it that way) it would sound better, but there is no implementation thusfar like that.

 

[atothex]

How long was the Ref1 the best DAC of all time? About a year?

These Audio-gd guys sure work hard. New products comin out like clockwork... makes each new announcement that much less interesting.

 

[regal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by atothex /img/forum/go_quote.gif How long was the Ref1 the best DAC of all time? About a year? These Audio-gd guys sure work hard. New products comin out like clockwork... makes each new announcement that much less interesting.

In the orient they practice something called CI, its a tough concept for most Americans

 

[IPodPJ]

Who said the Ref1 was the best DAC of all time? It may be the best some of us have ever heard, but there are so many DACs out there for ridiculous amounts of money that we haven't heard that could be better. The Ref1 was/is without a doubt the best DAC for the money every made in my opinion, and I'm sure the Ref7 will be too.

 

[atothex]

Quote:

Originally Posted by regal /img/forum/go_quote.gif In the orient they practice something called CI, its a tough concept for most Americans

What's CI?

Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Who said the Ref1 was the best DAC of all time?

I guess I just did.

 

[IPodPJ]

Yeah, what's CI? Chinese innovation?

 

[Currawong]

The Ref 7 was only made, as far as I know, because people kept bugging Kingwa about a DAC with more than just S/PDIF inputs. The Chinese market seems not to care about AES etc.

I wouldn't write off the Sabre 32 just because it's not R2R. I gather it has some pretty interesting technology built in to it and is very capable.

 

[IPodPJ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong /img/forum/go_quote.gif I wouldn't write off the Sabre 32 just because it's not R2R. I gather it has some pretty interesting technology built in to it and is very capable.

I'm sure someone could make a very nice DAC with it. The Buffalo32 didn't leave me impressed though.

 

[SoupRKnowva]

Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm sure someone could make a very nice DAC with it. The Buffalo32 didn't leave me impressed though.

yeah im sure a dual differential design utilizing 8 of them in mono mode would sound pretty good

maybe we'll get lucky and Ti will design us just such a DAC...