[jasonl]

I recall that the problem facing Sehn82 was corrupted DSD file.
In some cases, the older foobar works for some people.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2u0vbbudd3y3if9/foobar.rar?dl=0
The folder contents 0.6.5 version and works fine for us.
 
So far we have not discovered problem with the uDSD driver. 

 

[RelayerCR]

Thank you for the info, I hope I'll have time to try again.

So far I got a Cambridge Audio 851D for my main system. This device, used as DAC and as headphone amp is far beyond the little uDSD, and it's better than most DACs I've tried (at any price). The comparison makes no sense at all, because of the difference of prices: $200 vs $1800 (however I got it for $800).

I DID NO GET ANY SUPPORT FROM NUPRIME, so they lost a client. Actually, before buying the Cambridge 851D I was thinking in one of the nuprime dacs (DAC-9 or DAC-10) as an upgrade for my 3 years old Parasound Zdac. However I'm not interested in Nuprime any more.

 

[jasonl]

I regrettably say that we are unable to provide close support of helping potential customers to debug their system with Foobar. All our products work with Foobar and customers using Foobar have posted helpful guides on audiocircle.com. 

 

[wietschebehr]

Hi All,
 
Just had a go at setting up DSD playback on FooBar2000 with my brand new NuPrime uDSD. 
 
I must say, it was a mission. But eventually got it to work. Here is my system setup and the settings that worked for me.
 

• Windows 10 Pro 64-bit, Anniversary update
• NuPrime uDSD DriverSetup v6.55 installed
• Foobar v1.3.12 installed
• Foobar Components installed: foo_input_sacd-0.9.11; foo_out_asio
• Installed the ASIO Proxy. Eventually UNINSTALLED this as it is not needed, and with all the guides followed on various forums, advising to do this step, I could not get it to work anyway.
• Under Foobar Preferences:
  • Playback: Output: >> Device set as DSD : ASIO : NuPrime ASIO Driver
  • Playback: Output: >> Output format set as 24-bit
  • Playback: Output: ASIO: >> Just have the NuPrime ASIO Driver Listed
  • Playback: Output: ASIO: >> I selected the tick box for "Use 64-bit ASIO drivers", works without this as well.
  • Tools: SACD: >> Output Mode set to DSD
  • Tools: SACD: >> PCM Samplerate set to 352800
  • Tools: SACD: >> Preferable Area set to Stereo
• Play a DSD file. You can find a sample file on this page to test: https://www.oppodigital.com/hra/dsd-by-davidelias.aspx
• When the file starts playing the little blue light on the NuPrime uDSD face jumps from PCM to DSD, and sweet DSD sounds fill your ears. What happens after this, I guess varies.. 

 
Hope this helps someone. Comments welcome.
 
Cheers,
W

 

[Armaegis]

Thanks very much for the writeup and herculean effort. Much appreciated!

 

[wietschebehr]

Pleasure!

 

[Jye75]

I like this method as it removes one thing in the chain (ASIOProxy) that maybe causing issues. The downside would be losing the ability to upsample flac to DSD (for those who want it anyway

).

 

[Haiz85]

guys, sorry for resurrecting this thread, i need an input, currently i have Onkyo Wavio SE 200 LTD, and i found this nuprime is really interesting as per discussion above, would it be worth switching?

 

[Robster1958]

and 8 years later.......I opened an old box from moving, and in addition to a Playstation3, out pops a white box with this little unit. For a self-powered DAC/amp, I am super impressed. They don't make 'em like this anymore!! This thing is smooth and has surprising punch.

I like it better than the little iBasso dongle and even more than the Burson Playmate2. Maybe it's merely because this NuPrime is fully burned in (I remember using it on a desktop system for lots of hours). Now I buy stuff and don't have enough patience. I declare the sound too harsh and etching, and buy something else.

 

[jasonl]

Nuprime still has 4 uDSD and some Hi-mDAC (sounded just as good as uDSD) in stocks. email sales@nuprimeaudio.com with your address for a group buy special deal.

 

[Armaegis]

Wow, as the OP of this review thread this brings back memories. I still have my uDSD; in fact I just loaned it out to a friend a couple weeks ago who needed a temporary solution when their primary dac broke.

Nuprime still has 4 uDSD and some Hi-mDAC (sounded just as good as uDSD) in stocks. email sales@nuprimeaudio.com with your address for a group buy special deal.

I'm kinda intrigued by this... I have the original mDAC as well (before the "Hi" iteration). I see the Hi-mDAC uses the CS43131 which seems to be the darling of the low-power/dongle world. One of my favourite chips is the venerable CS4398 which I think is a spiritual predecessor of the CS43131 so I wonder how similar they are.

 

[Robster1958]

Wow, as the OP of this review thread this brings back memories. I still have my uDSD; in fact I just loaned it out to a friend a couple weeks ago who needed a temporary solution when their primary dac broke.


I'm kinda intrigued by this... I have the original mDAC as well (before the "Hi" iteration). I see the Hi-mDAC uses the CS43131 which seems to be the darling of the low-power/dongle world. One of my favourite chips is the venerable CS4398 which I think is a spiritual predecessor of the CS43131 so I wonder how similar they are.

did anyone discover the actual DAC's used in uDSD? If the same as Hi-mDAC, i might buy that one for its smaller form factor.

btw, just came across this link:
uDSD

$99 well spent, imo. Armaegis: I bet your friend will "mis-place" it!!! ha

 

[Armaegis]

A very quick google turns pulls up someone mentioning that it's a Sabre ES9010K2M inside, which predates the development of the CS43131, though my fuzzy memory recalls it had much less power draw than the other flagship sabre chips that were popular at the time since this was meant for use as a more transportable device.

Good find on the clearance links, though I find it odd that the uDSD is cheaper than the Hi-mDAC.

 

[Robster1958]

A very quick google turns pulls up someone mentioning that it's a Sabre ES9010K2M inside, which predates the development of the CS43131, though my fuzzy memory recalls it had much less power draw than the other flagship sabre chips that were popular at the time since this was meant for use as a more transportable device.

Good find on the clearance links, though I find it odd that the uDSD is cheaper than the Hi-mDAC.

Now I am thoroughly confused, because in another thread about certain "signature" sounds of various DAC makers, I convinced myself that I dislike Sabre because it is harsh and clinical. Why can't we just listen to music!! I am now motivated switch out my cans which took forever decide on!

 

[Armaegis]

Now I am thoroughly confused, because in another thread about certain "signature" sounds of various DAC makers, I convinced myself that I dislike Sabre because it is harsh and clinical. Why can't we just listen to music!! I am now motivated switch out my cans which took forever decide on!

This is one of those things where the impressions you read very much depend on the age of the thread. When Sabre was new to market they were the flashy impressive numbers dac that everyone was rushing to use. However, Sabre implementation is trickier than other brands (also locked behind a lot of NDA which is a whole 'nuther ball of wax) and requires a high degree of finesse and programming skill to implement beyond the base datasheet schematics. The few companies who could do it properly were typically high end and expensive (gotta pay the designers and engineers after all) and thus not many impressions were out there. On the other end, there were a lot of "budget" audio companies who did not do it "properly" and just slapped the new chips in as per the datasheets. Even worse, every new generation of chips would get dropped in for the sake of chassing numbers without much consideration for the actual implementation itself. It was these early sabre dacs that earned it the brand the stereotype of very harsh "digital" sound.

Now over the years there have been developments made, and all the people who didn't know just copied those those who did, and the chips have been around long enough now that even those who don't know have picked up enough tricks to make it work somewhat.

Beyond all that, it bears repeating that dac chips are just a small part of the sound because the analog stage makes a big difference as well.

I've mentioned before that one of my favourite dac chips is the CS4398 which is practically ancient in the dac world, yet it is still used by Prism who manufactures some very high end pro audio dacs and also the dScope which ranks up there alongside Audio Precision for testing equipment. If the guys who build testing devices are still using a decades old dac chip rather than chasing the new shiny chips, clearly they must know something y'know?