[wwmhf]

Agree.

Substituting the power supply of U16 is far more demanding than those devices using an external power supply or independent power supply module.

 

[Ludique]

The regulator is LT1764 and clearly those two resistors are for setting the voltage.

 

[Whitigir]

The regulator is LT1764 and clearly those two resistors are for setting the voltage.

LT1764 is pretty respectable for hi-fi PSU as well

 

[Albrecht]

No, you can just read fw version without updating. Just run software provided for fw update and will display what you have.

thank you very much!

Cheers,

 

[rafabro]

LT1764 is pretty respectable for hi-fi PSU as well

Exactly. I wouldn't change it.

 

[FredA]

right, when looking for the "first DDC", the pricepoint of the U16 is a big advantage.

when considering an upgrade of an exstings DDC like SU-1, question is how big will be to improvement even to the standard SU-1 version.

Regarding fixing the firmware, I have currently limited hope, if that will be soon. After exchanging several emails with the support, explaining the issue in detail and things done to isolated the problem, last message was, if it works with Apple system:

"If the U16 working well with Apple system,perhaps the U16 is in good condition.
And please you can change another USB port and try it again with Windows system."

So just in case someone had tried latest fw with apple, pls let me know the results.

thanks

p.s. unitl U16 fw is fixed, I will "survive", without any problems with the SU-1

They better wake up cause most people owning the u16 have issues they did not have before introducing the u16 in their setup. I had the f-1 before and no issue whatsoever.

192k works the first time out, 176k does not, and after a 176k attempt, 192k becomes garbage. There are obvious bugs in this firmware (1.4). The latest is even worst. Too bad cause all other rates play just fine. Also to be considered is most people use pcs. So the mac argument does not hold. Get back to work, Gustard! The job is incompete.

 

[darren700]

They better wake up cause most people owning the u16 have issues they did not have before introducing the u16 in their setup. I had the f-1 before and no issue whatsoever.

192k works the first time out, 176k does not, and after a 176k attempt, 192k becomes garbage. There are obvious bugs in this firmware (1.4). The latest is even worst. Too bad cause all other rates play just fine. Also to be considered is most people use pcs. So the mac argument does not hold. Get back to work, Gustard! The job is incompete.

I wonder if it would make a difference if more of us sent emails to customer support complaining of these issues? maybe only a couple people are emailing support about these issues and therefore they are underestimating the importance of getting these issues fixed?
I think it might help if all of us having these issues emailed gustard support, maybe it will kick their ass into gear fixing these problems in future firmware updates?? what is the support email? I will send them one explaining my issues. I did more testing tonight and 192khz and DSD do not sound proper at all, they work but there is pops in the sound and it sounds like bass is sucked out, like the square wave sound others were describing earlier. 176khz does not work at all.

 

[jimmychan]

Please summarize the firmware problems here.
I can send direct to Mr. Huang, the owner of Gustard.

 

[wwmhf]

So far, I like U16/firmware 1.4 better than Singxer SU-1 with the newest firmware. This comparision is based on up-sampling CD wave files to DSD256

 

[jimmychan]

U16 is definitely better than SU1. Just how is it compared to SU6?

 

[FredA]

Please summarize the firmware problems here.
I can send direct to Mr. Huang, the owner of Gustard.

1. 176/24 is played with heavy noise
2. 196/24 becomes noisy skipping from a 176/24 file

I am able to reproduce those issues on both a rpi 3b+ and a Allo Usbridge running Volumio.

 

[rafabro]

I am still using 1.4 and have zero (0!) problems. Music flows, full nirvana with any type of file resolution...

 

[darren700]

1. 176/24 is played with heavy noise
2. 196/24 becomes noisy skipping from a 176/24 file

I am able to reproduce those issues on both a rpi 3b+ and a Allo Usbridge running Volumio.

I have very similar issues with my U16, fed by SOTM SMS-200 and connected to Audio-GD R2R-7

176/24 will not play at all
192/24 plays but does not sound correct, bass sucked out and becomes worse as song progresses, and song cuts out midway

 

[allhifi]

So far, I like U16/firmware 1.4 better than Singxer SU-1 with the newest firmware. This comparision is based on up-sampling CD wave files to DSD256

Wow; that's impressive that U-16 'beats' (superior to) SU-1 Singxer (a respected Spdif Bridge). How it compares to something 250% more expensive (SU-6), is almost irrelevant -as $699. US$ is a fair chunk-of-change !

And at that price (SU-6), a missing LP/S and absent display window (i.e. Input Selected/Fs/etc.) is disappointing.

I'm using the excellent U-12 ($150 US$!) with AQ Carbon USB (1.5m) -and AQ 'Chocolate' HDMi i2S Out) and it sounds spectacular ! (Tried the AQ 'Vodka' HDMi -for i2S duties and it was a terrible 'match')

(My digital is powered by a separate (8-AC Outlet) 800W Balanced Power Supply/Transformer,while Pre/Power on a 1.2KVa BPS/T; essential for extracting high-resolution performance from a hi-fi.
The improvements in clarity, dynamics, resolution, signal speed/articulation; musicality, is considerable. )

I suspect the U-16 may be 'clearly' superior (to the U-12?
I'll order one is someone can provide a decent comparison compared to U-12, or SU-1 Singxer. Without question I'll order another AQ Chocolate' for i2S duty.

(BTW, a recent DH Labs USB cable (1.5m) purchase simply annihilated a 3m WW Starlight 7 USB -that although "rich/analog" sounding is ultimately deeply veiled/colored in comparison.
If speed, resolution/articulation -accuracy- is preferred, the DH Labs USB or AQ 'Carbon' wold be recommended.
Currently, I've evaluating the AQ 'Coffee' (0.75m) USB -with near 100-hours logged, it's proving disappointing.)

The U-12 -with Carbon USB/Chocolate i2S- sounds much, much better. (Don't bother with Shunyata (Venom) USB if 'speed/resolution' is desired -it is one of the worst I've heard.)

I remain and continue to be mightily impressed with computer audio (via a simple SBC 'player' no less) -and Internet Radio !
The days of crappy sounding 128-320 kb/s streams is over, and nothing short of impressive -when transmitted using the best, current "Converters/Compression Algorithms".

I can't wait to store my CD's on a various Hard-Drives/SS Drives (WAV of course) -and listen in this manner. Today's 'digital' can be brilliant !

Sooooo .... if anyone has some interesting 'insight' into the U-16 Gustard, please share -it would be appreciated. Thx,
(Standard 'performance'/ Fs is all that is of interest to me with the U-16; DoP, DSD matters not.)

Thanks in advance,

pj

 

[allhifi]

+1 on the smoother comment (compared to modded SU-1 using Uptone LPS-1)

So far (I have only been listening to the U16 seriously a couple days), I think U16's inner resolution and layering in the midrange bands is amazing, I have already had quite a few moments just shocked on the additional midrange information the U16 can pull out of the recording. Also the U16 bass overall quality seems to be superior to the SU-1.

As of now, with only about 50 hours break-in time, the U16 seems not so "airy" (or maybe described as not so "grainy") in the highs yet.. ultimate soundstage depth and width seems maybe 90% of the SU-1, but I made some software adjustments (changed the AO OS processing filters from 4A to 4D) which expanded the image somewhat. My high-frequency hearing starts dropping off around 12K, so that may be cause for this observation.

I am using the U16 feeding (via i2s - 0.5M Silversonic HDMI cable) an Audio-GD NOS7 DAC (both powered by HE-350). In my case the U16 was definitely an upgrade over the stock SU-1 (w/HE-350). Comparison to a modded SU-1 may be more dependent on personal preference and associated equipment, but if my initial observations are correct, it would be hard for someone to give up the U16 midrange, bass and darker background attributes once they have been experienced.

+1 on the smoother comment (compared to modded SU-1 using Uptone LPS-1)

So far (I have only been listening to the U16 seriously a couple days), I think U16's inner resolution and layering in the midrange bands is amazing, I have already had quite a few moments just shocked on the additional midrange information the U16 can pull out of the recording. Also the U16 bass overall quality seems to be superior to the SU-1.

As of now, with only about 50 hours break-in time, the U16 seems not so "airy" (or maybe described as not so "grainy") in the highs yet.. ultimate soundstage depth and width seems maybe 90% of the SU-1, but I made some software adjustments (changed the AO OS processing filters from 4A to 4D) which expanded the image somewhat. My high-frequency hearing starts dropping off around 12K, so that may be cause for this observation.

I am using the U16 feeding (via i2s - 0.5M Silversonic HDMI cable) an Audio-GD NOS7 DAC (both powered by HE-350). In my case the U16 was definitely an upgrade over the stock SU-1 (w/HE-350). Comparison to a modded SU-1 may be more dependent on personal preference and associated equipment, but if my initial observations are correct, it would be hard for someone to give up the U16 midrange, bass and darker background attributes once they have been experienced.

Hi Motberg: I just asked/posted a reply/question about the U-16 regarding the very thing you speak-of (and that was of interest to me), namely, SQ:

" I think U16's inner resolution and layering in the midrange bands is amazing, I have already had quite a few moments just shocked on the additional midrange information the U16 can pull out of the recording.

THAT"S precisely the SQ 'descriptors' of interest to me; precision mid-band resolution/layering ! Count me in. (BTW, better than U-12 ?)

Regarding: " ....Also the U16 bass overall quality seems to be superior to the SU-1." -How would you qualify 'superior' ?

Many thanks,

peter