[errnst]

ok , i got my ultravox, i powered it with a plug in transformer that i cleaned up by adding some capacitors and some choke coils before i fed it's  9 volts to the ultravox..., everything worked  right away, green light shining, usb lock light flashing, back to best sound ever for my system, it seems,
 
tighter sound top to bottom, extra info at the very high end, that is a first impression, been playing music since i installed it, feels nice, before i thought there was a problem but i could not say what, that seems to have been at least partly addressed with this cool little gizmo
 
thanks wood for telling us about it

 

[Newk Yuler]

Quote:

Hey, Wood.  Ultravox works on an Off Ramp without a hitch...
 
Characteristics should be of reduced jitter.  Transparency improved and the upper mids seem to have tightened up a bit.  For example, cymbal sizzle is clearer.  I want to say it's made an improvement but I need to spend some days listening to be sure it's not placebo.  The DAC19DSP is still burning in.  I probably should have waited another week on the Ultravox, but you know how that goes.  It was too easy to put it there.

I ran this for 2 days and I couldn't take it any longer.  Little time passed after installing the Untravox and the SQ was bothering me but I left it in line to sample enough music to be certain.  The stereo sound field (image) annoyingly recessed back toward the speakers.  Reminded me somewhat of comparing the Valab's USB against the Off Ramp.  The good in my first reaction (above) can be attributed to the new DAC and anything suddenly adverse to the SQ can be attributed to the Untravox in my system.  So, for anyone Googling the terms Ultravox, ADUM4160, and Off Ramp (w/ Superclock4), here's your warning.
 
I'm glad I tried it.  The experiment was worth the effort.

 

[Wood]

Hmm, it would seem then that the Ultravox is not a  universal panacea. I am curious though Newk Yuler, did you find negative results using it without the off ramp? Ive gone backwards and forwards,  trying with and without the Musiland, and find I prefer to use the ultaravox on its own, The sq is more correctly balanced and natural to my ears then using it combined with the Musiland.
 
Noble of you to be guinea pig for other off ramp users

.

 

[errnst]

i like the ultravox, less mush, more extended highs
i experienced no loss of soundstage or imaging or channel seperation
 
i have a short cable from the ultravox to the dac and the longer cable to the computer, i figure pre isolator cable noise is going to be removed by the ultravox
 
just because the ultravox will work fine on any 7-25 volts of dc voltage, does not mean it will not benifet from clean power at about  9 volts, why 9 volts?  because it is enough to feed the regulator on the ultravox(i am assuming that is a regulator on there) but it is not so much that the regulator is working hard or getting warm,

 

[Wood]

errnst,  I also get no change in the soundstage, It leaves the sq intact, I have the feeling I am still listening to the usb source as it is, just well, yes less mush. I am also using a long, cable from the computer. At the dac end a usb a/b adapter so it plugs straight into the dac.
 
It seems though, from Newk Yuler's experience, that if you are using an off ramp, then the Ultravox may introduce more jitter, then it removes.

 

[errnst]

Quote:

It seems though, from Newk Yuler's experience, that if you are using an off ramp, then the Ultravox may introduce more jitter, then it removes.

 i would like to see what happens if Newk puts an a/b adapter at the off ramp, and a cable to the computer
 
i also don't know what kind of a power supply is attached to your ultravox Newk,  i think people recommended a 'wal mart' power supply,   i am sure it works..- and i think even cleaner power could help in this situation

 

[Newk Yuler]

Quote:

Hmm, it would seem then that the Ultravox is not a  universal panacea. I am curious though Newk Yuler, did you find negative results using it without the off ramp? Ive gone backwards and forwards,  trying with and without the Musiland, and find I prefer to use the ultaravox on its own, The sq is more correctly balanced and natural to my ears then using it combined with the Musiland.
Noble of you to be guinea pig for other off ramp users

.

I tried the Ultravox because I expected a positive affect.  I take the experience as meaning the USB circuit in the Off Ramp is completely optimized and inserting the ADUM before it upset a balance, although I still can't imagine why it would do that.  I realize I could try reworking the Ultravox such as placing it right before the Off Ramp instead of by the server, but I expect it would make little difference given the high quality of the Poiema USB cable.  I haven't tried using the Ultravox without the Off Ramp because doing anything in my rig without the Off Ramp isn't an option to me.  It's probably the single most important piece in my system and everything else is high quality, high resolution hardware with no weaknesses degrading the chain.  Removing it for Ultavox's sake is unnecessary because there have been many people who have already proved the Ultravox is beneficial to a typical, common adaptive USB input on other equipment.  I can't try the Ultravox on the Valab's USB sans the Off Ramp because it's out of line and partially disassembled.  I honestly have little incentive to work with the Valab anymore because the Audio-gd DAC19DSP trounces it for SQ.  Putting the Valab back in line is comparable to taking the Off Ramp out... there's no good reason for it now that the system has taken a big step upward, although I still need to finish the Cinemag mod sooner or later.
 
I ran the Ultravox on the 12vdc wall wart that came with the Off Ramp, plus a big ferrite choke on the wire right before the connection to the Ultravox leads.  One thing I'll try later is putting the Ultravox on a Acopian gold box linear PSU.  I've had a couple of them sitting for months with the intent of powering the Off Ramp and Tripath amps with them.  There's still several things I intend to do with my rig that I haven't done because of my day job and/or procrastination.

 

[errnst]

i think many users of this thread have stopped coming here, maybe out of awe at the recent changes, my question is...., where else can we go?

 

[rhodes54]

@ ernst: I think not much has been happening 'modification'-wise and the last pages where (almost) only spend to USB related stuff. One of the reasons I haven't been here a lot lately. It doesn't have my interest.
 
I suggest to start a seperate topic for the USB related questions and let's focus on the Chameleon in this topic.
I have been experimenting with a second Tentlabs clock and will post my results soon. I've been a bit busy lately so it all took a bit more time than I would like to.
 

 

[Bill Allen]

Rhodes - Keep us updated on the sound with your Tent Labs 12mHz clock on the input board. This clock is used for both the Wolfson Spidf receiver chip and the Tenor USB chip. Did you eliminate the USB input option on your receiver board? When using the Pace Car for Spdif input I found the DAC sounded better with the reclock board removed, curious to see if the same holds true with you.
 
On another note I received my Ultravox units today am and sorry to report but they do not work with the Pace Car USB, which uses the OEM M2Tech Hiface board for USB input. Bummer! The good news is the Utravox does work "really well" with the stock Chameleon USB input, this is not a subtle difference. (I used a 9V battery to power the Ultravox.) With  Amarra playing 44.1 WAV files I actually listened to "music" all afternoon via the stock USB input. (No reclocker board installed.) Makes me wonder what the stock Chameleon would sound like with just an upgraded 12mhz clock on the input board like Rhodes is doing above.
 
(Where is this best bang for the buck).
 
While switching over to Spdif input via the Pace Car still provided superior sound ... the difference was no longer Gulf of Mexico sized with a large oil slick. With the $45 Ultravox ASUM module on the USB input the Chameleon Dac is now a viable contender via computer audio.
 
Nice find Woody!
 
Nice job Yeo!

 

[errnst]

Quote:

I suggest to start a seperate topic for the USB related questions and let's focus on the Chameleon in this topic.
I have been experimenting with a second Tentlabs clock and will post my results soon. I've been a bit busy lately so it all took a bit more time than I would like to.
 

i hardly think that is neccassary,  there is a usb input on the chameleon, so usb talk applies here, people are always chasing any computer related talk to it's own forum, i hardly think that is a useful approach on a forum that is seeing 2 or 3 posts a day, 
 
if there is a post that you have no interest in, then bypass it,  that is what i think, sorry if you disagree, as long as the chameleon has a usb port, then usb talk applies here,
 

 

[mmerrill99]

Just to maybe close off these USB discussions - the ADUM USB isolator will NOT work on the USB in of the Hiface - I asked Marco! It will work on the I2S out though but this introduces jitter so only useful if re-clocking the I2S lines after the ADUM.
 
A lot of work for the unknown benefits of galvanic isolation - so I'm afraid it ain't a no-brainer but it still might be beneficial. I've done synchronous re-clocking of the Hiface (sending the local clock feeding the DAC back to the Hiface, in place of one of the on-board clcoks) & it sounds wonderful - I may well try the ADUM in this set-up, at some stage.

 

[sinrouge88]

Bill,
   Thanks for posting the result.
    I am interested to try the Ultravox board on my usb input. In your test, did you connect the usb output of the Ultravox to the Chemeleon usb input with an usb cable or you made a direct connection ( i.e: by soldering)? Do you think it make any difference with drirect connection via soldering?
   Can you post the link to order the Ultravox?
Thanks.

 

[Wood]

sinrouge88,
 
http://diyparadise.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=3&products_id=124

 

[errnst]

Does the ultravox not work with the hiface and the off ramp  because of the need for asynchronous information flow?    Assuming the adum/ultravox only sends traffic one way....what if you used two adums, one going each way, could that be done?