![IMG_20190919_000824[1].jpg](https://cdn.head-fi.org/a/10355221.jpg)
Did you try to cycle the modes. X20 should be gsd
Gustard U16 - the first USB Interface featuring ESS USB chip
- Thread starter mtoc
- Start date
Did you try to cycle the modes. X20 should be gsd
MrCypruz
100+ Head-Fier
I’ve been A/B testing the 3 FW versions (1.61, 1.61 NFB and 1.77) since they were shared last night (Thank you for that!). As I shared previously I’ve not experienced any pop/click issues at various sample rates on both my Windows 10 PC and Mac Mini server so I’ll limit myself in sharing my impressions on the SQ since stability/functionality were never an issue for me. In a nutshell v1.61 beats the two new FWs and the 1.77 is the worst of the 3.
V1.61
Presents more detail, deeper and wider soundstage, perfect smoothness on the highs without sounding veiled, we’ll textured and detailed bass, vocals are chesty and airy without any sibilance on the ssss. This FW version makes the U16 the most musical and best sounding USB interface I’ve used to date.
V1.61 NFB
To avoid repetition I will just say that this version is between the other two and closer to the original 1.61.
V1.77
Oh man, what a disappointment. I believe that the low end frequencies were the most affected ones by this FW version. The bass is loose, not detailed nor textured. Vocals become a tad sibilant at times (there must be some bias here), the soundstage maintains the size but loses depth and I’m not sure what the highs are doing as I get so distracted and frustrated by the poor bass quality and by the fact that this version was released a month ago and Gustard seems to have ignored the SQ aspect of it.
For reference, the tests were conducted using the following rigs and the results were similar:
Mac Mini server as Roon Core —> U16 (Holo config) —> Holo Spring DAC (via I2S) —> SPL Phonitor X pre-amp —> SPL Performer s800 power amp —> Interface Box —> RAAL-requisite SR1a
Mac Mini server as Roon Core —> U16 (Holo config) —> Holo Spring DAC (via I2S) —> SPL Phonitor X HeadAmp —> Focal Utopia
Mac Mini server as Roon Core —> U16 (Holo config) —> RME ADI-2 Pro FS DAC (via AES) —> KGSSHV Carbon —> Stax 009S
V1.61
Presents more detail, deeper and wider soundstage, perfect smoothness on the highs without sounding veiled, we’ll textured and detailed bass, vocals are chesty and airy without any sibilance on the ssss. This FW version makes the U16 the most musical and best sounding USB interface I’ve used to date.
V1.61 NFB
To avoid repetition I will just say that this version is between the other two and closer to the original 1.61.
V1.77
Oh man, what a disappointment. I believe that the low end frequencies were the most affected ones by this FW version. The bass is loose, not detailed nor textured. Vocals become a tad sibilant at times (there must be some bias here), the soundstage maintains the size but loses depth and I’m not sure what the highs are doing as I get so distracted and frustrated by the poor bass quality and by the fact that this version was released a month ago and Gustard seems to have ignored the SQ aspect of it.
For reference, the tests were conducted using the following rigs and the results were similar:
Mac Mini server as Roon Core —> U16 (Holo config) —> Holo Spring DAC (via I2S) —> SPL Phonitor X pre-amp —> SPL Performer s800 power amp —> Interface Box —> RAAL-requisite SR1a
Mac Mini server as Roon Core —> U16 (Holo config) —> Holo Spring DAC (via I2S) —> SPL Phonitor X HeadAmp —> Focal Utopia
Mac Mini server as Roon Core —> U16 (Holo config) —> RME ADI-2 Pro FS DAC (via AES) —> KGSSHV Carbon —> Stax 009S
wwmhf
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2004
- Posts
- 1,290
- Likes
- 241
Yes, I did cycle the modes, they are all swapped when v1.61 NFB firmware is used.
For those who have owned/tested XSPDIF2 & U16, what would your preference be? The USB 3.0 input is very appealing on the X2...
MrCypruz
100+ Head-Fier
Yes. Link below https://www.kitsunehifi.com/product/springdacgreen/
MrCypruz
100+ Head-Fier
I own the SPDIF and it’s no contest for the U16 for SQ. It beats the U16 when it comes to the overall reliability/stable operation.
The SPDIF sounds too digital and dry to me when compared to the U16 which sweet and musical. Detail retrieval is at the same level for both, U16 soundstage, imaging, bass texture are better presented to my ears. I’ve heard both the SU-1 and SU-6 and as I recall, they’re more inline with the SPDIF (bear in mind that this is from memory) maybe because of the XMOS chip that the 3 share vs the ESS that is in the Gustard??!!
wwmhf
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2004
- Posts
- 1,290
- Likes
- 241
I have been using U16 with v1.77 firmware for about one hour now. Up-sampling regular wave files ripped from my CD to DSD 512 without any issues so far. Previous firmwares could not do this without pops/crackles.
Congrats! Wow. It also really goes to show how fussy u16 is on different equipments.
I am using a sotm streamer (linux based) - so may be a problem with linux compatibility
Last edited:
jimmychan
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2009
- Posts
- 372
- Likes
- 244
My findings with Roon > RPi3+ > U16 > R7 > M1 > M3
I was using V1. 4 for many months now, only problem was the LR channel swapped.
1.77 has the same problem as 1.61, lots of pops and clicks on sampling rate higher than 96K.
1.61 NFB seems has no problem so far with different sampling rates, the LR channel is correct. Now settled on this version.
Hope this help.
I was using V1. 4 for many months now, only problem was the LR channel swapped.
1.77 has the same problem as 1.61, lots of pops and clicks on sampling rate higher than 96K.
1.61 NFB seems has no problem so far with different sampling rates, the LR channel is correct. Now settled on this version.
Hope this help.
Last edited:
My system is very finnicky with LT3045's all over the place. Power delivery and having to connect and reconnect for USB recognition to my DAC (Behringer UMC404HD) is a daily thing. Perhaps the iFi usb products in my USB line have something to do with it too? Not too sure.
@MrCypruz
Could it be that the X2 although unpleasant to your ear in comparison to the U16, is actually more neutral and transparent and is providing you an accurate presentation of your source and DAC output? Do you feel like the U16 is a more accurate?
@MrCypruz
Could it be that the X2 although unpleasant to your ear in comparison to the U16, is actually more neutral and transparent and is providing you an accurate presentation of your source and DAC output? Do you feel like the U16 is a more accurate?
MrCypruz
100+ Head-Fier
@MrCypruz
Could it be that the X2 although unpleasant to your ear in comparison to the U16, is actually more neutral and transparent and is providing you an accurate presentation of your source and DAC output? Do you feel like the U16 is a more accurate?[/QUOTE]
Transparency is my main goal on this hobby but without sacrificing musicality. Present the music the way it is without sounding dry or sterile and that’s what the X2 does on my system with the referred cans. On my system I would say that both the X2 and the U16 on the same level of accuracy but the latter presents it in a smooth, sweet and effortless way. It’s like comparing the THX 789 AAA to the Phonitor X....they’re both very accurate, neutral and clean but the PX is musical and more pleasant to my ears and the only reason why I sold my 789. So yeah, accuracy is what I’m after and I just like the U16 presentation better.
For reference, I heard the U12 (U16’s little brother) and it’s clear that it has a laid back presentation with slightly recessed highs and is also no contest to the U16....but that’s just what my ears told me and I trust them.
Could it be that the X2 although unpleasant to your ear in comparison to the U16, is actually more neutral and transparent and is providing you an accurate presentation of your source and DAC output? Do you feel like the U16 is a more accurate?[/QUOTE]
Transparency is my main goal on this hobby but without sacrificing musicality. Present the music the way it is without sounding dry or sterile and that’s what the X2 does on my system with the referred cans. On my system I would say that both the X2 and the U16 on the same level of accuracy but the latter presents it in a smooth, sweet and effortless way. It’s like comparing the THX 789 AAA to the Phonitor X....they’re both very accurate, neutral and clean but the PX is musical and more pleasant to my ears and the only reason why I sold my 789. So yeah, accuracy is what I’m after and I just like the U16 presentation better.
For reference, I heard the U12 (U16’s little brother) and it’s clear that it has a laid back presentation with slightly recessed highs and is also no contest to the U16....but that’s just what my ears told me and I trust them.
Sq wise do u find it a step up v1.4?
jimmychan
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2009
- Posts
- 372
- Likes
- 244
It has some improvement on the SQ, the sound stage has more depth.
Last edited:
Thanks Jimmy- I did compare the sq of v1.4 and v1.6 - the latter is clearly better. But I had to stick to v1.4 because of stability issues with v1.6.
Mrcyprus compared v1.6 with the 2 newer firmwares and prefers v1.6 over the 2 newer ones. I’ll spend time comparing the firmwares over the weekend
Users who are viewing this thread
