[music_man]

to future proof look at 11.2mhz! actually it runs the ps1000(low impedance) nicely. there is much better but it is by no means unpleasant. the musical fidelity combo is pretty good. that is good stuff. it is also a lot more money. so that just goes to show what I was saying but not so much in regard to that combo. try it with return policy. the dacmagic is crummy. Cambridge makes nice stuff but I think that is their lower line. like the 840av2 is easily worth the money. the new 851 is a step backwards but still a bargain.

 

[music_man]

I just got this thing to recognize and lock to a dsd512 signal! it was pretty complicated so I can't really explain it. apparently it is capable of that. I guess that is pretty future proof for the time being. simply because of that sampling rate the sound is amazing even if it is not the last word in dacs. now I know someone will say it can't do that but I have verified it is. it is displaying 5.6 because that is what is in the display firmware. I measured the signal and it locked onto it. otherwise there would be an error. it does not down sample. plus there was a drastic difference in sound quality. you need a pretty hefty computer do this. before anyone doubts it keep in mind the sabre 9018 does not make mention of it but does. so why not the 1795. just a nice trick.
 
 
I think I got too excited. it is synced with the signal but I do not think it is decoding that. sorry I jumped the gun.

 

[koiloco]

  I just got this thing to recognize and lock to a dsd512 signal! it was pretty complicated so I can't really explain it. apparently it is capable of that. I guess that is pretty future proof for the time being. simply because of that sampling rate the sound is amazing even if it is not the last word in dacs. now I know someone will say it can't do that but I have verified it is. it is displaying 5.6 because that is what is in the display firmware. I measured the signal and it locked onto it. otherwise there would be an error. it does not down sample. plus there was a drastic difference in sound quality. you need a pretty hefty computer do this. before anyone doubts it keep in mind the sabre 9018 does not make mention of it but does. so why not the 1795. just a nice trick.
 
 
I think I got too excited. it is synced with the signal but I do not think it is decoding that. sorry I jumped the gun.

 You sir haven't stopped amazing me.  Do share the general steps if possible.  I am very curious. 

 

[Stonephace]

OK. This is one of those very esoteric technical questions...
 
I'm using JRiver MC19 to send my 16/44.1 PCM FLACs to the UD-501 using MC19's 2XDSD native option.
 
I think that it sounds better using than plain old PCM.
 
With my (very noisy) i7 PC, I can use the minimum buffering option. With my (very quiet) i3 laptop, I have to set the buffering at 250ms. That's the only change I need to make to maintain smooth playback between the two.
 
I'm pretty sure that I can't hear any difference between the two buffering settings, but I'm interested to know whether changing the buffering setting should/could/would make a difference to the SQ?

 

[music_man]

I wrote my own asio driver for it. I kind of doubt it is working but I think I heard a difference. the 9018 is not supposed to be capable of 8x either but it is. perhaps they were going to have a future version of the software or the dac or who knows. it did accept the signal with no error after I got the driver down. the display says 5.6 because that is all that is in the display mini driver file. editing embedded is not even worth it to me but I could make it say my name if I wished. I can't share the software because it might be an exploit that is against teacs tos. 
 
the lowest buffer possible should sound best. it is not the cpu. an i3 can do it. it is your interface. in this case usb. it depends on your mainboards usb interpolator. it's easy though. just go as low as you can as it does not skip or lock up. I also feel upsampling to dsd sounds better. I don't know why people with higher end stuff hate it. just make changes with your volume down! digital noise will wreck speakers in an instant at very high volume.

 

[derbigpr]

Anyone here who has experience with UD-501 and Asus Xonar Essence One Muses edition ?

 

[TJ Max]

Anyone here who has experience with UD-501 and Asus Xonar Essence One Muses edition ?

 
Later in the week I'll have a UD-501 and a Essence One (non-Muses) to play with. Does Muses really make a big difference?

 

[music_man]

I made mods. I added better regulation to the power supply's. changed opamps to ti. oil filled caps on balanced output/buffer. now, this is a giant killer. the sound is off the chain. cost me about $200 of parts. there are services that will do this if you can't. I highly recommend doing this if you don't have more than 10 grand to spend on a dac. modded ones sell for like $1,600-$2,000. I feel that would be better spent than just buying a $2,000 dac absolutely. the opa2107 series sound a lot better than the muses imo. the other changes probably did not make as much difference as the op amps. I can't say since I did it all at once. it is not even close to burned in yet either. there is a little harshness that I am sure will go away. still big improvement over stock which was already commendable for the $849.

 

[derbigpr]

Later in the week I'll have a UD-501 and a Essence One (non-Muses) to play with. Does Muses really make a big difference?

Apparently its in a different league.

 

[TJ Max]

A question to Archimago, or one anyone with the experience. In the Archimago's measurements for PCM it shows a High Frequency roll off with the Digital Filter turned off. I just got my UD-501 today and I noticed that there is also a Upconverter option that I assume works in harmony with the Digital Filter. So I was wondering if there was any difference in the HF roll off depending on whether or not the Upconverter was On or Off? I'm curious because I read with the Xonar Essence One there is a roll off when the upconverter is enabled, but not when it's turned off. Since the UD-501 and Essence One use the same PCM1795 chipset might they function similarly.
And why is it that with the filtering off there is a roll off? Shouldn't it be the opposite? Sharp and Slow should have the roll off.

 

[music_man]

guts of $24,000 esoteric d-02. look vaguely familiar? well, made in japan and it does sound better   actually it is completely different but i see what they drew upon perhaps. still, I am just saying......
 
 
I just wanted you all to know. if you do 3 hours(skilled) and $450 of mods to this thing it will compete with $10k dacs. or if you have $1,600 to spend get a modded one. you have no warranty but you could not do better for that money. you change the op amps,better caps on the output filter,and good power regulators.
 
 

 

[music_man]

I was wondering if anyone else modded theirs and what they did. I see on other forums a lot of people modded theirs but I don't know what they did. mine is good enough for me. easily beats benchmark and mytek stock. of course people have modded those too. probably in or above pwd mkii territory now.

 

[koiloco]

^ can you post some links or info on modding the TEAC?  I won't do it right now but it's always fun reading about mod before hand.  Thx.

 

[xored]

Take a look at these sites, u may have to google translate as they are in Chinese I think:
 
http://www.hiendy.com/hififorum/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=56817
http://www.hiendy.com/hififorum/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=56788

 

[TJ Max]

Some geeks just like to tinker with stuff for bragging rights; "I did it! I'm Cool!" If you're not happy with the sound then just buy a better DAC. Otherwise you might wind up with a $850 brick with a void warranty.