[derbigpr]

Quote:

No you should not boost it to 100% as you will experience the effects of a built in limiter if you do & they are quite disconcerting to say the least
 boosting to 100% actually is boosting the signal by about 12db over the level of what was recorded digitally & if it is anywhere nearclipping in the original you will for sure be riding that limiter pretty hard. If you get something that was recorded very soft as in averaging 20db down from max value then yuou could boost it somwhat over 76% in order to get it sufficiently loud if it is otherwise too soft with the volume control all the way up but otherwise leave it at 76%.
 

So if I send my signals out of the card into an amplifier trough RCA,  its better to keep the mixer level at 76% and increase the main volume control to 100%, than to have the mixer levels at 100%, and have the main volume at, say 50%.  I always thought I experienced distortion when going above 50% with main volume control in driver interface...I don't know why, might be placebo because the knob gets into the "red area".
 

 

[Audioexcels]

Quote:

Pardon my ignorance, but with digital your going to bypass the entire reason the ST/x is priced as it is?
 
I do know the STX has more jitter then the ST, and that it can be relatively easily bettered by using a Audio GD clock/crystal (not sure of the exact term)
Will this effect the digital outputs? Since jitter is a problem even with SPDIF.
 
I think this is the most relevant question to be answered in regards to Audioexcels needs.

Exactly.  It doesn't seem to make much sense in needing to spend the extra money for an ST/x or other similar quality card when I won't even use the majority of the features, but the digital path is indeed something that in theory, has a lot of jitter via coax, so that nicer clock in the ST is said to make a difference to some, but others as already spoken, say there is no difference.  I'm interested in a finite answer to this sound card or any other for the matter that has exceptional jitter control or just exceptional sound via coax only.

 

[ROBSCIX]

Quote:

Exactly.  It doesn't seem to make much sense in needing to spend the extra money for an ST/x or other similar quality card when I won't even use the majority of the features, but the digital path is indeed something that in theory, has a lot of jitter via coax, so that nicer clock in the ST is said to make a difference to some, but others as already spoken, say there is no difference.  I'm interested in a finite answer to this sound card or any other for the matter that has exceptional jitter control or just exceptional sound via coax only.

Soundcards generally will only offer so much quality for digital as their primary function is analog output.  However, why are you just assuming they will have
high amounts of jitter?
If you are looking for something with very precise digital output, look at devices like the Hi-Face, Teralink X2, FSA Bravo...etc
That's the way I would go, unless you are looking to send DSP effects to your DAC over S/Pdif.
 

 

[Audioexcels]

Quote:

Soundcards generally will only offer so much quality for digital as their primary function is analog output.  However, why are you just assuming they will have
high amounts of jitter?
If you are looking for something with very precise digital output, look at devices like the Hi-Face, Teralink X2, FSA Bravo...etc
That's the way I would go, unless you are looking to send DSP effects to your DAC over S/Pdif.
 

I need to do more testing with the Hiface, but even a cheap who knows how bad or good the dvd's coax easily beat it in early testing, but sounded more similar when I tested further.  I get a modified Hiface this week so that will be the next test.  I've also had the Audiophilleo AP2 in the setup but it was way too aggressive sounding.  I'm simply thinking USB converters may not be the way to go vs. sound cards???  A friend even swapped out his AP2 for a Xonar ST, but he uses the ST's analog in spite he did say the digital out has excellent sound too.

 

[WiR3D]

TBH i rate if you have the cash to spend Just get the ST.
 
OR if you have the time, get either one and do the Audio GD mod, that should kill all the jitter, some1 here did it, it looks relatively simple.
Hell i would even go so far so to say, just get any sound card and do the Audio GD mod and you should be good to go, since the only weakness we have managed to identify (with my limited knowledge) is jitter.

 

[ROBSCIX]

Quote:

I need to do more testing with the Hiface, but even a cheap who knows how bad or good the dvd's coax easily beat it in early testing, but sounded more similar when I tested further.  I get a modified Hiface this week so that will be the next test.  I've also had the Audiophilleo AP2 in the setup but it was way too aggressive sounding.  I'm simply thinking USB converters may not be the way to go vs. sound cards???  A friend even swapped out his AP2 for a Xonar ST, but he uses the ST's analog in spite he did say the digital out has excellent sound too.

Not sure why you find that with the hiface, I found them to have excellent S/Pdif quality.  Are you using the proper/latest drivers? There was some talk of certain HiFace units being of higher quality then others.
 
Interesting you hear all these differences in digital sources, when some suggest it is just "1's and 0's"!    This idea is something people have to hear for themselves or they just think all S/Pdif is the same which is the furthest thing from the truth.
 
It is up to you which way you want to go, The ST does have a cleaner clock thanks to the addition of the IIRC - CS2000 chip.  This cleaner timing should also affect the digital side since the timing on the board is cleaner all around. 
 
I would suggest just doing what you are doing, keep testing devices until you find one you like.  It is nice to have the features of the soundcard but these cards have alot of muscle for just S/Pdif usage.
 
 

 

[WiR3D]

Well said ROBSCIX, I've seen you in discussions of digital audio before, you mind explaining how bad the jitter can be? Or link to an article explaining it?
 
I would think that devices would just use buffers to negate the effects of jitter, unless they pretty much stream it and directly send it for conversion...
 
mmmm well a buffer could add unwanted latency overall, and if its not big enough still suffer from jitter. My theory anyway.

 

[ROBSCIX]

Nope, don't even want to get started down that road!  It is one of those perpetual audio debates that will never end.  You just have to do your own research, testing and draw your own conclusions.  Here is an article that might help explain it a bit better in relation to audio.-> LINK
You have to understand also that there are different kinds of jitter that affect different parts of a digital system.

 

[ProjectDenz]

So I swapped the two stock opamps with 2x LME49720. I didn't like the sound at all really. Bass lost quite a bit of extension and the treble became overly harsh and aggresive. My ears came completely fatigued after 5 minutes. I tried this with all different types of cans and while darker sounding cans were not affected as much with the harsh treble, the lack of bass extension left much to be desired (talking about extension, not quantity). On the upside I believe that the mids are a little cleaner than the stocks, but the trade off is not worth it at all.
 
Switched back to the stocks and can't be happier. The bass isn't boomy as others seem to put it, unless you were using headphones with boomy bass in the first place. Although I have other opamps on the way and I will give those a shot.

 

[PurpleAngel]

Quote:

So I swapped the two stock opamps with 2x LME49720. I didn't like the sound at all really. Bass lost quite a bit of extension and the treble became overly harsh and aggresive. My ears came completely fatigued after 5 minutes. I tried this with all different types of cans and while darker sounding cans were not affected as much with the harsh treble, the lack of bass extension left much to be desired (talking about extension, not quantity). On the upside I believe that the mids are a little cleaner than the stocks, but the trade off is not worth it at all.
Switched back to the stocks and can't be happier. The bass isn't boomy as others seem to put it, unless you were using headphones with boomy bass in the first place. Although I have other opamps on the way and I will give those a shot.

Three LME49860NA, they are the same op-amp as the LME49720NAs, but with a better voltage range.
Under $20 on eBay.
 
Three AD797BR, (dual chip pre-soldered adapters) $50 on eBay.
 
Three LME49990NA. (dual chip pre-soldered adapters) $56 on eBay.
 
 

 

[WiR3D]

Quote:

So I swapped the two stock opamps with 2x LME49720. I didn't like the sound at all really. Bass lost quite a bit of extension and the treble became overly harsh and aggresive. My ears came completely fatigued after 5 minutes. I tried this with all different types of cans and while darker sounding cans were not affected as much with the harsh treble, the lack of bass extension left much to be desired (talking about extension, not quantity). On the upside I believe that the mids are a little cleaner than the stocks, but the trade off is not worth it at all.
 
Switched back to the stocks and can't be happier. The bass isn't boomy as others seem to put it, unless you were using headphones with boomy bass in the first place. Although I have other opamps on the way and I will give those a shot.

Yeah I'm one of those the bass is boomy people... Denon d2000 so its to be expected, let me know when you find a chip that cuts the harshness and the boomyness

 

[germanium]

Quote:

So if I send my signals out of the card into an amplifier trough RCA,  its better to keep the mixer level at 76% and increase the main volume control to 100%, than to have the mixer levels at 100%, and have the main volume at, say 50%.  I always thought I experienced distortion when going above 50% with main volume control in driver interface...I don't know why, might be placebo because the knob gets into the "red area".
 

I was speaking of not setting the balance controls over 76%. otherwise you will experience limiting. If you leave the balance controls at 76% you will have full use of the volume control without limiting, in other words you can turn the volume control to 100% without limiting, just do not turn the balance control past 76% except under the following condition. If you have music that is recorded too soft where 100% volume doesn't yield sufficient voume then boost the balance controls up but only as far as needed to get sufficient volume
 
 

 

[Audioexcels]

Quote:

Not sure why you find that with the hiface, I found them to have excellent S/Pdif quality.  Are you using the proper/latest drivers? There was some talk of certain HiFace units being of higher quality then others.
 
Interesting you hear all these differences in digital sources, when some suggest it is just "1's and 0's"!    This idea is something people have to hear for themselves or they just think all S/Pdif is the same which is the furthest thing from the truth.
 
It is up to you which way you want to go, The ST does have a cleaner clock thanks to the addition of the IIRC - CS2000 chip.  This cleaner timing should also affect the digital side since the timing on the board is cleaner all around. 
 
I would suggest just doing what you are doing, keep testing devices until you find one you like.  It is nice to have the features of the soundcard but these cards have alot of muscle for just S/Pdif usage.
 
 

 
Understand what you and others say about all the muscle/guts sound cards have, but Hiface is "ok"...nothing special at all.  Other stuff has been "ok", but nothing special either.  I do think there are differences with digital sources, but end of day, I have never heard one ever "add" resolution or anything I have not heard already.  I have heard some with greater emphasis on detail so old people can hear music they never thought they heard, but just don't remember that they really did when they were younger and were listening to 20 years outdated stuff that was doing the same exact thing.  Really, I think there is something there with the source for the digital, but at the same time, I would really need a TON of different devices to truly know if I can hear an audible enough difference meaning, one that is more transparent/revealing of the information OR if all it is in the end is one has more detail (i.e. sounds like equalized treble or midrange or bass), has this type of sound stage, etc. etc.  Maybe my existing preamp+dac in one is so good that it has not revealed such grand differences, but rather very subtle ones and that even with some incredible source others claim is incredible, I still may not hear it or it may just be overly aggressive or dark or you know, detail/tonality differences.
 
Hope I am making a little sense and of course, have tried both Hiface drivers.  I think the one does have a little more of a sound closer to a cheapo DVD player while the other has a sound that is a big more bloated/bigger bass type of sound, but these differences are truly very subtle at most...nothing that would get me to say oh that is the one, etc.  I've also used the Audiophilleo 2 and it was AWEFUL sounding in my system...extreme aggressive midrange-high section that was unbearably horrid...
 
 

 

[ROBSCIX]

 
Quote:

 
Understand what you and others say about all the muscle/guts sound cards have, but Hiface is "ok"...nothing special at all.  Other stuff has been "ok", but nothing special either.  I do think there are differences with digital sources, but end of day, I have never heard one ever "add" resolution or anything I have not heard already.  I have heard some with greater emphasis on detail so old people can hear music they never thought they heard, but just don't remember that they really did when they were younger and were listening to 20 years outdated stuff that was doing the same exact thing.  Really, I think there is something there with the source for the digital, but at the same time, I would really need a TON of different devices to truly know if I can hear an audible enough difference meaning, one that is more transparent/revealing of the information OR if all it is in the end is one has more detail (i.e. sounds like equalized treble or midrange or bass), has this type of sound stage, etc. etc.  Maybe my existing preamp+dac in one is so good that it has not revealed such grand differences, but rather very subtle ones and that even with some incredible source others claim is incredible, I still may not hear it or it may just be overly aggressive or dark or you know, detail/tonality differences.
 
Hope I am making a little sense and of course, have tried both Hiface drivers.  I think the one does have a little more of a sound closer to a cheapo DVD player while the other has a sound that is a big more bloated/bigger bass type of sound, but these differences are truly very subtle at most...nothing that would get me to say oh that is the one, etc.  I've also used the Audiophilleo 2 and it was AWEFUL sounding in my system...extreme aggressive midrange-high section that was unbearably horrid...
 
 

I have heard difference in digital sources.  Your mileage may vary.
I am not really interested in arguing these points, use what you want.  I don't think I ever said these sources can add what is not there?!
A good digital source will let you hear what you have nothing more.  Anyway, this is pretty far off topic, the idea was not buying an expensive soundcard just to get a good digital source.
 

 

[Shoulon]

How do you guys narrow down on OPAMPs? Theres well over thousands of choices out there. Could I get some reference links or something possibly? like a OPAMP for noobs? lol