[ALRAINBOW]

Do you think it will work or I am dilutions I even think it might
Al

 

[Crashem]

 
All SABRE dac chips are relatively inexpensive. So are its competitors. A commercial DAC component uses off the shelf dac chips because the application notes supplied by their manufacturers make it easy to design and assemble a DAC. One can even order complete dac assemblies requiring minimal support from surrounding regulation and power supplies.

 
I guess that is somewhat true in the same way the Hugo uses even more inexpensive chips which you pointed out in an earlier post was a silly way to measure value (which I agree with).  Now, there is using cheap parts that effect sound (cough some high end manufacturers) and there is using parts that are relatively cheap to the overall cost.  The latter is almost always true with well designed equipment as the IP is what brings the value.

 

[AGB100]

  All the comparison of one dac to this dac. While not so easy and yet it is, if you listen to very much live music, compare the sound and intensity to the overall feeling of live music. Which comes closer? I tend to listen to sounds, all sorts of sounds. Hear the sounds of live acoustical and mentally take notes.  Why compare reproduced to reproduced when you are trying to compare to real? Compare each to real and then how do they stack up?

Jamato8 - you are entirely correct. As such, just for information purposes, I am a musician and too, I do compare to live music as a frequent quest of Itzhak Perlman and his wife Toby and others from the Julliard School at Lincoln Center. As a sidebar, I grew up from the crib listening to my older sis being taught by a Bartok protege, so I was very privileged having experienced that environment.
 
I hear not only live music often, but at different venues and rooms. Accordingly, when I say A is better than B, I refer to the sound of the live. When B has more heft and body than the live, it is distorted and hyper real.
 
Now I make that subjective decision, to reach a conclusion, based on live sound and having spent time listening to the live and also in recording studios. There is the fly in the ointment however.
 
What we hear on recordings is not live. It is recorded. How we hear with a biological ear is not how a microphone hears with its electro-mechanical receptors. There is a vast difference. The mic might be able to capture the entire hearing range, but its ability to capture the space in its correct relationship to how we hear, is compromised greatly.
 
In order to determine accuracy, we have one means (unless you can propose another). That is the line feed from the mics to the monitors and recording gear. The monitors may compromise several speakers and headphones. The recordist has the opportunity to hear the live musicians at the mic position (I've done that lots of times.)
 
Accordingly, the recording engineer has access to the live, the mic feed, and the replay of what he captured.
 
He can determine which technique, which equipment, which kind - analog or digital recording - sounds "real."
 
Meaning closest to the line feed.

 

[AGB100]

   
Some android phones are ahead of Apple just like before.  Apple products still can just play 16/48 while certain Android phones support much higher resolution.  What you are seeing is a third party (Onkyo) has made a separate app to stream DSD natively by avoiding what the Apple device's DAC and software.  The current ability by Apple devices to avoid its own capabilities doesn't mean it is ahead of Android as natively there are many Android devices that are much more capable than Apple.  On the Android, it shouldn't be difficult for an app to ignore the device's DAC (as Android puts less barriers up) and stream out bits (DSD or otherwise) natively to outside DAC as many Android phones have the correct hardware to do so.  Someone will update their Android music player to include DSD soon as there are Android music players that currently avoid the device's DAC and stream bits natively to outside DACs.
 
I think are seeing the Apple currently ahead of the Android in what it is currently able to do with outside hardware/software for two reasons.  One, Apple has larger base of users using it as music player given Apple's lead time and history as a music player.  Android's fragmented market means an app producer has to worry about the fact that a native DSD streaming feature would only work on certain Android devices etc.  Android and more recent Apple product users seem to be using streaming services such as Spotify or music in the cloud storage more than anything else.  Makes it hard for us "dinosaurs" who want our music pure and in high rez.  However, in spite of all that, I think you will see an Android app do so in near future.

 
Native apps, when well written, will always beat net apps. I think it is a good idea to write native apps that threads with net apps treating them like RFCs, the same can be done by net apps which can call native apps. Problem is though iPhone Obj-C can write native apps and net apps, Android can only write net apps. Another problem with Android is because it is Java based, it has no hardware control. Obj-C also prevents direct hardware access but it can link in with hardware access C routines wrapped by a user class. Java lacks such power which is often needed.
iPhone OS has the power for programmers to exploit hardware whereas Android doesn't. When programmers start wiring the iPhone to myriads of external hardware Android can only sit there and watch as iPhone takes the smartphone to areas undreamed of.

 

[Clemmaster]

I think there's bug on Head-f: why are we seeing AGB100 and Crashem MPs on the main thread?
 

 

[AGB100]

   
I guess that is somewhat true in the same way the Hugo uses even more inexpensive chips which you pointed out in an earlier post was a silly way to measure value (which I agree with).  Now, there is using cheap parts that effect sound (cough some high end manufacturers) and there is using parts that are relatively cheap to the overall cost.  The latter is almost always true with well designed equipment as the IP is what brings the value.

 
There is no problem with the best DAC chips. It is just that they do have technical limitations that a well designed FPGA as used in the Hugo, surpass. That limitation is easy to hear, let's say in the Halide and Benchmark, and Audiostream seems not to have noticed.
 
Exactly how cheap can a complete SABRE dac component be retail? How about $60?
 
HiFimeDIY Sabre U2 Asynchronous USB DAC
 
Audiostream will likely rate it Class B along with the Halide, but just a notch above Hugo.

 

[ted_b]

The direct stream is chip less like the Hugo
I think it's a choice made not something that has to be

Al

Al, not to be pedantic but the only DAC I know of that is chipless is the Lampi DSD-only DAC (analog filters only).  The Hugo and the Directstream use FPGA, which is a chip, just a programmable one (i.e roll your own code).  The Lampi chipless design did not work in my system cuz my amps are not dc coupled (one of their design features, which adds to their revelations IMHO) and the Lampi sent such dc offset down the analog cables that it shut down my amps violently (I tried 3 different models from Lukasz).  But what I was able to hear was quite promising.  Just not for my system. 

 

[AGB100]

  I think there's bug on Head-f: why are we seeing AGB100 and Crashem MPs on the main thread?
 

Dear Headphonius Supremus. I just looked in the mirror and what stared back at me looks very much like Franz Kafka's nightmare magnified. This is what happens to a man who found himself on vacation with too much time on his hands. I don't know what Crashem looks like, but i warn him not to look in the mirror or experience a fate like this writer.
 
I f%^&*n hate vacations!
 
In fact, so much so, that I put the song on repeat listening to Kate Nash's ********.
 
I'm not sure at whom she's directing her words.
 
 
And it is amazing! You see the stars above? I did not put that in. Those stars appeared in place of the Kate Nash song I have no other way to convey to readers without writing out the title. What to do?

 

[ALRAINBOW]

Al, not to be pedantic but the only DAC I know of that is chipless is the Lampi DSD-only DAC (analog filters only). 

What I meant was no I the shelf chip as in wofson or
Sabre. Sorry as I may when it sounds good my audio vocabulary is really substandard
And my explanations sometimes I am the only one who understands
It. Lamp. Sorry.
Al

 

[zachchen1996]

Anyone have a KGSSHV that they would like to trade for my HUGO?

 

[Racy]

Before I repeat my answer to another gent on this thread, possibly I was a reviewer of high end audio gear before Lavorgna purchased his first high end system. Second, I mean no disrespect to anyone here or at his site. My answer however is unwavering:

"OK, let's take it once again, from another angle. Audiostream rated the HUGO in the same class as the $450 Halide. Does that tell you anything? I mean, anything at all? And the Benchmark. Does that say anything at all? Can you now take anything they say seriously? You can?

Maybe, YOU, can. I don't."

If you actually believe that the Hugo is in the same class or design sophistication and has more or less the same sound quality as the Halide, I guess we can simply drop praising the first, for it certainly deserves no praise. In fact, given that classification, it deserves no listen but only a FOR SALE ad at Audiogon.

Given that I wholly do not agree with Lavorgna's ratings - which are plain wrong from the get go - I will go on listening to the Hugo while he can go on listening to the Halide and Benchmark with more or less the same satisfaction.

I don't always disagree with him, but in this case I think he's way off the mark! I think it says a lot that he gushingly enthused over the Auralic Vega, which in my opinion is impressive on the first few listens, but has an artificial exaggerated sound. And grates in the long term! But was lukewarm regarding the Hugo which is so natural and musical in it's presentation!

 

[pytter]

Subscribed to this thread a week or so ago and made the mistake of ticking the "immediate update" box

 
Besides a full inbox and feeling like I know quite a few of you very well by now, you have also managed to convince me that I really need a £1400 portable DAC. 
 
I hope you all feel proud of yourselves....

 

[nOtEcH]

Sorry, noob here when it comes to digital music but how does the iPhone store DSD music? I thot iTunes quality music was limited to lossy files or at best WAV? Appreciate the guidance..

Hi, and welcome!
You can upload DSD files to a capable app directly (Onkyo HF Player).
You could also make your own ALAC files (Apple lossless) with DSD embedded inside. Using ALAC you can also do wireless streaming bit perfect with apps like 8Player.

 

[jamato8]

Feeding the Hugo with the DX90 using DSD, which output to 24/88 via coax, but still, wow, what a sound. Johannes Brahms, a quintet. Very natural, the cello, so nice and rich, violins, sweet and beautiful harmonics. Wonderful bass foundation and the sound is in front of me using the TH900. 

 

[nOtEcH]

Subscribed to this thread a week or so ago and made the mistake of ticking the "immediate update" box :basshead:

Besides a full inbox and feeling like I know quite a few of you very well by now, you have also managed to convince me that I really need a £1400 portable DAC. 

I hope you all feel proud of yourselves....

I am very sorry for you! Actually.. I'm not.. you will have a great time with your Hugo, and for a very long time.
You will not be dissapointed. And I guess you will thank us for convincing you, and Chord and Rob for putting this great little fellow on the market.