Matrix Mini-i Balanced DAC+HP amp
Apr 30, 2011 at 5:45 PM Post #721 of 1,055

Soulrider4ever compared the xda1 to the matrix mini i here;
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/528635/emotiva-xda-1-vs-matrix-mini-i
 
PA
Quote:
Looks like it's my next DAC. 
biggrin.gif
 The design is just superb, hope it sounds as good as it's looks.



 
 
Apr 30, 2011 at 6:03 PM Post #722 of 1,055
Your post made me curious as to just how "balanced" my Behringer EP2000 amplifier is. While I couldn't find the circuit diagram of the EP2000, I did find one for its, um, "twin"
wink.gif
the QSC RMX 1450 amplifier. In that diagram, looking at just one channel at the XLR input, the +ve signal is fed into the +V input of an NE5532 opamp, and the -ve signal is fed into the -V input of the same NE5532 opamp. The signal is combined within the opamp then sent to the power amp section. I'm no expert, but that looks like a pretty clean balanced setup. Is it that corners were cut by using an opamp to combine the signal? How does that compare to your RSA balanced amp?
 
 
PA
 
 
 
Quote:
 
 
A single ended amp amplifies one signal in one amplifier. Single-ended could be referred to the amp's circuit topology or just to the headphone connection.
 
A balanced amp takes two out of phase/opposite signals from the source one goes + when the other goes - and amplifies them in two amplifiers and puts them together in the output transformer or at the headphone.
Some amps that people called balanced are actually push-pull amps. A push pull amp takes the single ended input and puts it into a phase inverter that makes two out of phase/balanced signals that are amplified in two amplifiers
and put back together in the output transformer and comes out single ended.
 
Sorry sunneebear but your explanation is not entirely correct. If you use the XLR connectors to a balanced amp you will only get a balanced signal not unbalanced. The reason balanced amps tend to sound better is because you are actually using two amps to amplify the sound which is why they are mostly expensive. Balanced amps that sell cheap are generally cutting corners somewhere and are not very good.



 
 
Apr 30, 2011 at 10:01 PM Post #723 of 1,055
 

Quote:
Soulrider4ever compared the xda1 to the matrix mini i here;
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/528635/emotiva-xda-1-vs-matrix-mini-i
 
PA


 



 
Thanks. I did a little research after Grokit mentioned the XDA-1. Someone else is selling a fully upgraded Promitheus DAC for a little more than the XDA so I'm looking into that as well.
 
Quote:
Your post made me curious as to just how "balanced" my Behringer EP2000 amplifier is. While I couldn't find the circuit diagram of the EP2000, I did find one for its, um, "twin"
wink.gif
the QSC RMX 1450 amplifier. In that diagram, looking at just one channel at the XLR input, the +ve signal is fed into the +V input of an NE5532 opamp, and the -ve signal is fed into the -V input of the same NE5532 opamp. The signal is combined within the opamp then sent to the power amp section. I'm no expert, but that looks like a pretty clean balanced setup. Is it that corners were cut by using an opamp to combine the signal? How does that compare to your RSA balanced amp?
 
 
PA
 
 
 


 


That looks like a pretty balanced setup to me. The Apache uses interchangeable OPAMPs as well. What I really meant by cutting corners is that manufacturers may use cheap parts that would hurt SQ rather than the topology of the circuit. To give you an idea, most quality DIY amps cost a minimum of $1500 just in parts alone(B22 and EHHA). Factor in labor charges and you can suddenly see why they are so expensive.
 
 
May 2, 2011 at 10:04 PM Post #724 of 1,055
I was just looking carefully at the specs of the new matrix vs the old. The new matrix seems to have lost approximately 10db in SNR and dynamic range. I know you shouldn't completely live by the numbers, but still. What's that about?
 
PA
 
May 3, 2011 at 9:34 AM Post #725 of 1,055
After reading 48 pages of this thread, I decided to order the new version and it is on its way.
 
Then I read this post and it is a bit unsettling.  What's the deal?
 
Quote:
I was just looking carefully at the specs of the new matrix vs the old. The new matrix seems to have lost approximately 10db in SNR and dynamic range. I know you shouldn't completely live by the numbers, but still. What's that about?
 
PA



 
 
May 3, 2011 at 11:20 AM Post #727 of 1,055
My guess is that they revised the specs but not the unit itself.
 
May 7, 2011 at 5:50 AM Post #728 of 1,055
Hi
 
Which chip used in Matrix mini (new vwrsion)  for volume control ?
--------------
Now I think about new DAC,   Zero 09, MAtrix mini-i or HLLY SMK-III .
 
But I want good headphone amp + good volume control, Alps or good chip such as pga2311/cs3310.
 
May 9, 2011 at 10:53 AM Post #729 of 1,055
NewClassD regulators installed. Here's my mini review:
 
 I've been itching to upgrade my matrix for a while now. The Mini I VA2 is not available for now,and I look longingly at the Anedio D1 thread. Should I make the jump? It's a $1270 jump. Quite expensive. And the way that everyone has been waxing poetic about the D1 hasn't made it easy:) During these musings, however, which have lasted several weeks, I also looked at matrix upgrades. I decided to give the NewClassD regulators a go. Gwikse brought them to our attention in post #427 of this thread. He also gave us detailed upgrade PICs. Thank you gwikse! Also many thanks to T.IIZUKA for detailed pictures of the mini internal circuits.

It is a $100 upgrade for a $300 DAC. Is it worth it? Hmmmmm......

After installing mine I  don't listen to the unit for the 1st couple of songs. I played Densens demagic . While it was playing I thought "it doesn't look like much has changed." from what I was hearing.

So I sat down and selected my 1st track to give a critical listen: Eryka Budhu's AD2000 from the Mama's Gun album. Erykah's music tends to have oodles of low end bass, which I like:) It has to be pure, though. No EQ, and iTunes is set to deliver bit perfect volume max at 100% to the DAC. Erykah's vocals were nicely improved....more clear. She was more there, there.  A curtain was removed and you could see her more clearly. This track pans her main vocal from left to right to left often throughtout the song. With these new regulators, the panning was significantly easier to follow. I got a bit dizzy because her image was moving so distinctly. When the bassline came in the change really made itself apparent. More heft with a little bit of growl, too. I LIKE IT!

I played many other tracks long into the night....went to sleep at 3AM!! I was out of control:)

Another track which brought the change to my full attention was AC/DC's Shoot to Thrill. That song was playing in Iron Man 2 when Iron Man made a splash entrance jumping out of a plane. Before, with the original regulators the track played and the bass was driving. Now, it's driving. The bassline used to play along with the guitars. Now, the guitars are s-c-r-e-a-m-i-n-g and the bassline is hard charging along like a freight train. In the middle of the track when the music calms down, the guitars and bass go silent as the keyboards and drum beat along in an enthusiastic rhythm. With the new regulators that keyboard session is more lively and I can almost "see" the drummers foot hitting the drum. He's wearing a pair of Addidas lol:) Those newclassd regulators changed my Mini I from Driving Miss Daisy to Driving the Indy 500:)

If you look at the graphs from the NewclassD website of their regulator verses the OEM regulators, you can see that the biggest improvement is in the bass region. I definitely heard it. And even though I felt it mostly in the bass, the improvements were everywhere.


On a slightly different note, one of the Matrix's minor criticisms is a lack of inner detail. The new regulators improved clarity. I love dynamic soundtracks from movies. I don't have surround, though, just stereo 2.0 with a pair of Cambridge Soundworks Tower II floorstanders. They can produce bass down to the 30 Hz region with authority. One of my favorite movie soundtracks to show off dynamics is Tom Cruise's Valkyrie. Of course there is the war scene at the beginning of the movie. The gun blasts are fantastically powerful. But, better still I feel is the scene where Tom and his family flee to hide in their basement as bombs drop in their neighborhood. The dynamics are much richer. The 1st bomb goes off and it sounds like it is about a hundred feet away. The next bomb goes off and it is even further away. The chandelier jingles gently from the vibration. That gentle jingle serves as a nice contrast to the eery silence that has fallen as the family nervously waits. Then, from out of nowhere another bomb. This one was very near and that blast was immense. It shook the foundation of the house. Tom's house shook, and so did mine:) With the original regulators the far away bombs weren't as far away and the black silence that was gently interrupted by the shaking chandelier was not as dark. Of course the original regulators shook the house with the bomb blasts before. But now, when playing that scene with the new regulators, the jingle of the chandelier was more distinct and realistic. The chandelier jingle also came out of a darker silence. When that big bomb hit nearby, the new regulators delivered that immense blast with more authority.


So, is it worth putting $100 worth of regulators in this $300 DAC? I say an emphatic Yes.

Bass has more slam.
Micro detail has improved.  You get deeper into inner space of a recording.
Vocals are more clear.
Treble is better defined....sharper.


I feel that it changed my $300 DAC to a $500 DAC.


Realizing that I completed a somewhat dfificult task of soldering those regulators (the 3 soldering points for the regulators are so close together I was so afraid I'd short out the unit), I see that replacing a bunch of capacitors will be as easy as pie. That's next:)
 
PA
 
May 10, 2011 at 1:48 PM Post #730 of 1,055
I were wondering if you guys could help me. Had my Matrix mini-i for, well too long and it has just been gathering dust since.
 
Connected it to my Marantz AV7005 and were hoping to use it with my Denon D5000 but I can't get it to work. Don't know if it is any configuration I have to do on my Pre-amp, read the manual a couple of times but can't figure it out. So would really appreciate if anyone could solve my problem.
 
I have connected the Matrix with an optical cable to the "opt output" on the Marantz. Also switched the Matrix to optical.
 
May 10, 2011 at 2:11 PM Post #732 of 1,055
There is no optical output from the Mini-i, its only digital output is coax/rca. The optical port on the rear of the Mini-i is an input:

You want to use the Mini-i's spdif out, so check if your Marantz has a coaxial digital audio input. If it does you should be all set with an rca coax cable like this one.
 
If you want to compare the Mini-i DAC with the Marantz DAC, just make an analog connection.
 
May 10, 2011 at 3:23 PM Post #734 of 1,055
Hi
 
My matrix dac came yesterday. I ordered mine from ebay with a free tamp. Couldn't listen to Matrix because my digital interconnect cables didn't arrive yet.
 
One question is it possible to use my Logitech remote with the dac. Dont know which IR codes to use
 
 
 
 
 
May 10, 2011 at 3:48 PM Post #735 of 1,055
Thank you so much for the ridiculously fast answer! Asked at alot of other forums and emailed both marantz and dealers of the Matrix mini-i for a couple of months and.... I'm speechless.
 
Will test this tomorrow.
 
Again, thanks for the help!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top