Tiny DAC, Big Sound, Evolved – Stoner Acoustics UD100 / UD110 / UD120
Mar 23, 2015 at 10:20 PM Post #1,022 of 1,162
Mar 27, 2015 at 9:43 PM Post #1,024 of 1,162
I compared the UD100 to the Hifimediy £19.99 Dac also has much better sq which is what I compared it to...I used dsd 1 bit rips both from up sampled CD/SACD I think the UD100 is a good product but no volume control from your device means you'd have to use an amp between > no amp or no volume control is a nuisance.

Note ; The hifimediy DAC has volume control even from an IOS players like Hibiki.
 
Mar 27, 2015 at 10:13 PM Post #1,025 of 1,162
The Hifimediy £19.99 has much better sq which is what I compared it to... I think the UD100 isn't a good product at all don't bother with it.

ud100 was the first gen product. they have the ud110, ud110v2, and now the ud120.
 
Mar 27, 2015 at 10:35 PM Post #1,026 of 1,162
I compared the UD100 to the Hifimediy £19.99 Dac also has much better sq which is what I compared it to... I think the UD100 is a good product but no volume control from your device means you'd have to use an amp between > no amp or no volume control.

 
UD100 was released 3 years ago. IIRC, HiFimeDIY didn't even have a similar product back then (their version came out after Stoner). Also, the two practically share the same topology and most of the parts, if anything they should sound very similar if not near identical (and just about every USB DAC that use ES9023 sounds like that, as I have a few of them and they are all limited by the design of ES9023).
 
UD100 is intended as a line-out only DAC, hence no volume control. In fact, HiFimeDIY is the same design as well, but they didn't disable the software volume control. It might be more convenient that way but the high output impedance and low current output of ES9023 is never really meant to drive any headphone directly. Using it that way only mean the SQ isn't going to be as good as it can be.
 
Mar 27, 2015 at 10:41 PM Post #1,027 of 1,162
Also, the two practically share the same topology and most of the parts, if anything they should sound very similar if not near identical (and just about every USB DAC that use ES9023 sounds like that, as I have a few of them and they are all limited by the design of ES9023).


They don't sound the same dude I own both of them and there is a serious difference !
 
Mar 27, 2015 at 10:49 PM Post #1,028 of 1,162
It might be more convenient that way but the high output impedance and low current output of ES9023 is never really meant to drive any headphone directly. Using it that way only mean the SQ isn't going to be as good as it can be.


If your amp dies OTG and you need to power directly from the device not the dac that its not happening with a UD100 that was my point - they should of left the volume control intact as Hifidmediy did and some people don't use amps anyway.

I prefer ESS chips on the whole hence my interest in the UD100. Although I realise implementation is key and there's not much of that in the UD Series Dacs compared to Hifimediy 96k for example which has much more going on inside and the SQ to match.

SQ depends on more than if you use an Amp in any case. :D

PS: Personally I think Amps are annoying things to carry around bar the Fiio Fujiyamma which produces pretty low SQ But provides some sort of volume control for the UD100 seems easier on the pocket.
 
Mar 27, 2015 at 11:45 PM Post #1,029 of 1,162
UD100 is never designed with OTG in mind, so volume control would have been an afterthought.
 
You'll never find me using any ES9023 DAC without an amp, but I guess that's just me.
 
Also, beside UD100, I also have ES9023 in ODAC and iFi Audio iDAC (arguably one of the best implementation of ES9023) and to me, the DAC section sounds more or less very similar. The reason is that, there is no real analog section (*LPF / amp / buffer) on the ES9023's output as everything is integrated inside the chip. Thus there is no extra circuitry to affect the SQ and in fact one of the reason why it is so popular for awhile, because there is almost no need for any extra work on the design. So unless there is some significant defect on the digital stage, "implementation" really does not play a vital part on ES9023's sound. I actually took the time to measure UD100, ODAC and iDAC, and the RMAA result pretty much is identical. So I have my doubt on whether HiFimeDIY could have done anything differently, especially since I have see its internal picture online. Maybe I'll pick one up and see for myself.
 
Mar 28, 2015 at 12:31 AM Post #1,030 of 1,162
So Coieos what you affectively saying is they are audio clones of each other there is no difference ?

I'd suggest you do listen to one against the UD100 they sound very different don't worry my hearing is good and I
did A/B them.

I also apreciate your comments but comparing grouping the ifi with the UD100 is a bit like comparing a Halide Dac HD to a UD120 when the only thing they got in common would be a usb tail.

I think the volume matters was a lack of foresight perhaps ''if'' as you say the Hifimediy was released after the UD100 prehaps they had the foresight although it was designed as an android device & works on my iPhone no probs as does the UD100..
 
Mar 28, 2015 at 6:23 AM Post #1,031 of 1,162
So Coieos what you affectively saying is they are audio clones of each other there is no difference ?

I'd suggest you do listen to one against the UD100 they sound very different don't worry my hearing is good and I
did A/B them.

I also apreciate your comments but comparing grouping the ifi with the UD100 is a bit like comparing a Halide Dac HD to a UD120 when the only thing they got in common would be a usb tail.

I think the volume matters was a lack of foresight perhaps ''if'' as you say the Hifimediy was released after the UD100 prehaps they had the foresight although it was designed as an android device & works on my iPhone no probs as does the UD100..

 
Maybe not identical clone, but the concept and implementation are very similar between UD100 and HiFimeDIY. ODAC and iDAC are more complicated implementation than UD100 and HiFimeDIY, but the difference isn't on the DAC section, but on the USB receiver as well as power filtering that do not have a direct SQ effect on ES9023 (assuming the user's PC USB implementation is decent). There is nothing magical about USB DAC implementation if you know how to look at the PCB to figure out each parts' job. Measurement also helps.
 
Regardless, I did remember talking about the disabling of volume control with UD100 maker. As I said, he never intended UD100 to driver any headphone directly but purely acts as a source. There are good reason to disable the volume control as well. As I have mentioned, ES9023's high impedance (around 500ohm, last I measured) will not give dampening to any headphone you use (unless your headphone is around 4K ohm or so). The low current output means the DAC will be stressed as well. Most importantly, the use of PCM2706 as USB receiver means it is limited to 16bit max. By using software volume control, you will reduce the digital resolution of the music. Given ES9023 outputs about 2Vrms normally and most headphone needs only around 0.1~0.2V to sound loud enough, you could be looking at a reduction of 5~6 bits. That means instead of listening to a 16 bit music, you are instead listening to a 10~11 bits music and taking a hit on SQ. Thus the reason why he chose not to enable the digital volume control. It is the same reason that he allows digital volume control on UD110, as the USB receiver is 32 bits and doesn't suffer any lost of digital resolution that will affect the SQ.
 
Anyway, just order an HiFimeDIY USB DAC and we will see how it goes. Should be here within 2 weeks.
 
Mar 28, 2015 at 10:08 AM Post #1,032 of 1,162
I understand that there are issues of volume and resolution loss of digital SQ- the reason why an external amp is better than using digital volume control from a device.

I think he achieved seemingly better resolution as you said by disabling the volume control - that's why there is an audible difference as well and they don't sound the same.I have done this with 2020 Tripath amps which are instead controlled with a pre amp or external passive volume control instead so thinking about it yes you are right on one hand.

Be more interesting to hear your comments on Hifimediy audible differences Vs those of the UD100. I still maintain that their are substantial differences & probably because they are different dacs by design and their will be differences in build & design giving us choice.
 
Mar 28, 2015 at 11:47 AM Post #1,033 of 1,162
Hi Clie, thanks for the recommendation, i went to try the iFi Ican v2 eater with the UD120 it was in deed very exciting. but then i tried the Bravo audio v2 which was even more exciting lol surprising it was a pretty good pair with a m50X with fio cable :) 
 
-Tight bass
-alittle warm not overly clear :)
-tube rolling would be fun 
-cost efficient!
 
overall im happy with it burning in!
 
Mar 29, 2015 at 1:22 AM Post #1,034 of 1,162
I had a UD120, but it doesn't play nice with my laptop. Was considering a HiFiME 9018D, but that would be $128 shipped. Any other DACs under $100 you'd recommend anyone? the UD120, Dragonfly 1.2, HiFiME Sabre U2, and idk what else, all use a ES9023 DAC. The 9018D has a sabre ESS9018 as you'd expect. Idk about the sound quality difference though. 
 
Mar 29, 2015 at 1:25 AM Post #1,035 of 1,162
  I had a UD120, but it doesn't play nice with my laptop. Was considering a HiFiME 9018D, but that would be $128 shipped. Any other DACs under $100 you'd recommend anyone? the UD120, Dragonfly 1.2, HiFiME Sabre U2, and idk what else, all use a ES9023 DAC. The 9018D has a sabre ESS9018 as you'd expect. Idk about the sound quality difference though. 

fulla & modi are under $100. are you only looking for a portable dac?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top