[dvse]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EliasGwinn /img/forum/go_quote.gif When you say "local buffer", do you mean the buffer in the USB receiver chip in the USB device?

Yes, buffer in the USB receiver.

 

[Dougr33]

Is anyone feeding their Dac1 with the usb from a 'netbook'.. I'm thinking of getting a Dell Mini9, as they're dead quiet (fanless with SSD), run Foobar2000 or such, and having a NAS stuck in the closet. Wondering if the netbook would be up to delivering bit perfect that way (would a usb drive attached to it be too much work for the processor)? Thanks for any thoughts.

 

[Scrith]

Ayre has posted a white paper on their new asynchronous DAC.

 

[Quaddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dougr33 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Is anyone feeding their Dac1 with the usb from a 'netbook'.. I'm thinking of getting a Dell Mini9, as they're dead quiet (fanless with SSD), run Foobar2000 or such, and having a NAS stuck in the closet. Wondering if the netbook would be up to delivering bit perfect that way (would a usb drive attached to it be too much work for the processor)? Thanks for any thoughts.

be fine. i had the dac1 pre hooked up to an asus ssd netbook - nothing different about it really.

 

[lyricalmoments]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EliasGwinn /img/forum/go_quote.gif Try this: ITunes-QuickTime for Mac - Setup Guide - Benchmark Let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks, Elias

Thanks Elias for the link

 

[Techbadger]

As a new owner of a Dac1 Pre I have only 2 questions:

1. Are there any plans for a black version (or at least black front plates that I can swap out to), all the rest of my gear is black, just want a match. I mean I chose function over form but would like both.

2. On my system, I am planning to output my HTPC through Digital 75ohm coax because I wish to play Reference Recordings 176.4k Wav files and if I read this thread correctly I can only get as high as 96k though the USB. Is there a better way?

Beyond that, astounding good player!

Thanks all!

 

[infinitesymphony]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Techbadger /img/forum/go_quote.gif 2. On my system, I am planning to output my HTPC through Digital 75ohm coax because I wish to play Reference Recordings 176.4k Wav files and if I read this thread correctly I can only get as high as 96k though the USB. Is there a better way?

Any cheap sound card that has bit-perfect digital output via coaxial/optical and supports 24-bit/192kHz will work. Your onboard audio might even work; many current motherboards support Intel's HD Audio spec and have coaxial digital outputs.

 

[Techbadger]

They Symph,

My sound card is an HT Omega Claro+ based on a C-Media 8788 chipset.

There doesn't seem to be a "bit perfect" driver for the card yet but I suspect there will be since its lesser chipset antecedents have had open driver with "bit perfect" capabilities.

I suspect my new Dac1 pre will decode the wav files music better than my sound cards DACs ever would, which is why I would prefer using it.

Time will tell I guess...

 

[EliasGwinn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Techbadger /img/forum/go_quote.gif They Symph, My sound card is an HT Omega Claro+ based on a C-Media 8788 chipset. There doesn't seem to be a "bit perfect" driver for the card yet but I suspect there will be since its lesser chipset antecedents have had open driver with "bit perfect" capabilities. I suspect my new Dac1 pre will decode the wav files music better than my sound cards DACs ever would, which is why I would prefer using it. Time will tell I guess...

Hello Techbadger!

With regards to the DAC1 PRE faceplate, we don't have any new announcements regarding new features or products. Sorry...

Regarding 174 and/or 192 kHz playback from an HTPC, you will need a sound card that has bit-transparent digital output at these resolutions. The only one we know of that does bit-transparent digital output is the Lynx AES16. Its not cheap...$600 or so.

Keep in touch...let me know how it goes.

Thanks,
Elias

 

[EliasGwinn]

Mazz,

With regards to the ASRC in Benchmark converters, you mentioned that you weren't sure about the merits of our solution, beyond jitter attenuation.

The short answer is this: the filter in the ASRC chip is much better then the filter in the DAC chip, and the filter in the DAC chip works best at 110 kHz. So, we filter with the ASRC chip and re-sample at 110 kHz to relieve the DAC chip.

The loooonnnggg answer:

DAC chips have built-in low-pass filters to filter all info above Nyquist. But DAC chips are asked to perform too many tasks at once. It is unreasonable to expect a single chip to be both an excellent DAC with an excellent analog output and ALSO have an excellent digital filter. Manufacturing IC's is a task full of tradeoffs. Analog performance vs. digital performance in a chip is a tradeoff is the major tradeoff in a DAC chip.

Consequently, the digital low-pass filters in DAC chips have serious limitations. They have the filter cutoff frequency exactly at Nyquist. The reason the filters are built this way is because it requires significantly less DSP to filter at Nyquist. Its a trade-off for higher d-to-a performance. Having the filter exactly at Nyquist poses some major problems: it filters some of the audio info below Nyquist and, more critically, doesn't filter all of the audio above Nyquist. This latter condition will result in digital aliasing.

So, with the ASRC, we have excellent filtering via the DSP-powerhouse AD1896 and get rid of jitter, aliasing, and relieve the low-quality filtering of the DAC chip. The sample-rate conversion (ASRC) has THD artifacts well below the threshold of hearing (less then -133 dBFS). This is an easy tradeoff!

Thanks,
Elias

 

[Scrith]

Here's an interesting white paper on Ayre's experience with digital filters.

 

[Techbadger]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EliasGwinn /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hello Techbadger! Regarding 174 and/or 192 kHz playback from an HTPC, you will need a sound card that has bit-transparent digital output at these resolutions. The only one we know of that does bit-transparent digital output is the Lynx AES16. Its not cheap...$600 or so. Thanks, Elias

Actually you can get bit perfect down to 25 bucks. I found a bit perfect path using Foobar2000 and a couple plug-ins. About $175 total cost.

Sounds fantastic!

 

[daio78]

.

 

[daio78]

Hello everyone !
I ve just received my dac1 pre 3 days ago and I have to say it sounds rather nice
I'm still waiting for him to warm up a bit more before doing test against my current configuration !

I was just wondering what could be the best transport that can be used ?
I have right now an HTPC that is dedicated to HC with an emu1616m connected directly to a power amp (rotel 1077) and I'm in the process of switching from a 5 channels system to a 2 channels one if improvement is really worth.

And I was wondering if changing the transport could improve the sounds ? I was thinking about a SB3, an EEEPC (when they ll release one with a touch screen) , Airport express, AppleTVor any other slimdevice without DD....

Have people here tried those configurations ? PC, EEEPC , SB3, Airport, AppleTV ? USB or Toslink ?

Furthermore I've read the best configuration is to avoid resampling in the player (foobar or other) and let the DAC do the resampling ? Can anyone confirm that there is no need to resample in Foobar ? (Even at 110 Khz ?)

Thanks in advance for the replies !

PS : It s nice to see staff from Benchmark so active on the forums

 

[EliasGwinn]

daio78,

I would recommend using the USB port of any computer or the optical output of a Mac computer. I would avoid the Airport express or Apple TV, just because they are limited to 48 kHz, 16-bits. I would also avoid the digital outputs from soundcards (except the built-in digital output on Macs), as some of them will affect the audio.

With regards to sample-rate conversion, it is unnecessary, and it will not provide any sonic benefits to you.

Thanks,
Elias