[CSMR]

Yes. I've looked up the dacs in the 1212m and the 203.2 and 205.2.
The 1212m uses the CS4398.
The Entechs use the CS4329.
Can't find data for the 4329 but the 4390 is an upgrade:
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-19764338.html
And the 4398 a newer chip with much better specs:
http://www.cirrus.com/en/products/pro/detail/P1023.html
So 4398>>4390>4329.
(Power supply, opamps, etc. are important factors too but the measured output of the 1212m is better than the advertised specs of the 4390 and 4329.)

It was a well made device with parts well chosen I am sure from what was available at the time but DAC technology has moved on since then. The guy designing for audio alchemy is now in charge of ciaudio and I am sure his current dac is top notch. (I just looked up the chip he uses and it's this one:
http://focus.ti.com/docs/prod/folder...t/pcm1794.html)

 

[nichifanlema]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSMR Yes. I've looked up the dacs in the 1212m and the 203.2 and 205.2. The 1212m uses the CS4398. The Entechs use the CS4329. Can't find data for the 4329 but the 4390 is an upgrade: http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-19764338.html And the 4398 a newer chip with much better specs: http://www.cirrus.com/en/products/pro/detail/P1023.html So 4398>>4390>4329. (Power supply, opamps, etc. are important factors too but the measured output of the 1212m is better than the advertised specs of the 4390 and 4329.) It was a well made device with parts well chosen I am sure from what was available at the time but DAC technology has moved on since then. The guy designing for audio alchemy is now in charge of ciaudio and I am sure his current dac is top notch. (I just looked up the chip he uses and it's this one: http://focus.ti.com/docs/prod/folder...t/pcm1794.html)

Yeah well if you don't think Entech is good enought for you, then don't use it.

 

[CSMR]

Er, thanks for your advice.

 

[kramer5150]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSMR Yes. I've looked up the dacs in the 1212m and the 203.2 and 205.2. The 1212m uses the CS4398. The Entechs use the CS4329. Can't find data for the 4329 but the 4390 is an upgrade: http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-19764338.html And the 4398 a newer chip with much better specs: http://www.cirrus.com/en/products/pro/detail/P1023.html So 4398>>4390>4329. (Power supply, opamps, etc. are important factors too but the measured output of the 1212m is better than the advertised specs of the 4390 and 4329.) It was a well made device with parts well chosen I am sure from what was available at the time but DAC technology has moved on since then. The guy designing for audio alchemy is now in charge of ciaudio and I am sure his current dac is top notch. (I just looked up the chip he uses and it's this one: http://focus.ti.com/docs/prod/folder...t/pcm1794.html)

I've heard the CS4329 is a "ho-hum" DAC... notthing spectacular, yet not all together terrible.

Is the CS4398 a drop-in replacement for the CS4329 ? Might make for a nice little mod.

thanks

 

[uofmtiger]

Quote:

(Power supply, opamps, etc. are important factors too but the measured output of the 1212m is better than the advertised specs of the 4390 and 4329.)

Internal construction is clean and Spartan with five voltage regulators, metal film resistors throughout, and polypropylene and polystyrene coupling and filter caps. Active ICs are the Crystal Semiconductor 4329 DAC with integral digital filter, the Crystal 8412 digital audio receiver and a Burr-Brown op-amp as audio output driver and low-pass filter.
http://www.proaudioreview.com/august99/Entech-web.shtml

Like you mentioned, there are other factors that are important. The low jitter circuitry is one of the main reasons to use it with a sound card.

 

[CSMR]

kramer: I'm no expert and can't help you there I'm afraid.
uofmtiger: yes; my point was that you won't do better than the official DAC chip specs even with everything else perfect (or else the manufacturer is underselling itself) and the 1212m actual output measures better than the official output of the dac chip. Qualification: how well it does might be PC dependent though.

 

[uofmtiger]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSMR kramer: I'm no expert and can't help you there I'm afraid. uofmtiger: yes; my point was that you won't do better than the official DAC chip specs even with everything else perfect (or else the manufacturer is underselling itself) and the 1212m actual output measures better than the official output of the dac chip. Qualification: how well it does might be PC dependent though.

What I was saying is that while the DAC may be better in the 1212m, if it is not implemented as well, it might not match up to an older DAC in a perfect environment. In other words, if I put a 2006 Porche engine in a Yugo, the car may not hold up next to a 2003 Porche engine in a Porche. Would that apply to DACs or does it matter if the DAC is implemented properly into the entire design?

 

[CSMR]

Oh yes the whole thing is important. I just pointed out that I took that into account.

 

[Iron_Dreamer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kramer5150 Is the CS4398 a drop-in replacement for the CS4329 ? Might make for a nice little mod.

Only if you like soldering and desoldering TINY, TINY little traces packed tightly together.

 

[pbirkett]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kramer5150 I've heard the CS4329 is a "ho-hum" DAC... notthing spectacular, yet not all together terrible. Is the CS4398 a drop-in replacement for the CS4329 ? Might make for a nice little mod. thanks

When i last heard the entech DAC, TBH it wasnt anything special, but it wasnt that bad either. It sounded almost exactly like a TAG DAC20 (same as an Audiolab if anyones heard one of those) so not a bad performance, but its character IMO could best be described as bland.

Personally though, these days I am biased towards the old Philips TDA1541A

 

[Jbucla2005]

I also just bought one for use with my HD-650's/MG Head OTL rig. I will post my results when it arrives.

 

[MdRex]

I just ordered one off Amazon... don't let my parents know though... at least not yet...