[rodentmacbeastie]

I remember one of youTP guys saying that one should use the internal volume on the Buffalo where at all possible. Would a Jacob's Ladder be better or are these internal ones just as good? I am sure that you two have also had some time with the Opus and the Buffalo with the IVY, any impressios yet?

 

[Beefy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rodentmacbeastie /img/forum/go_quote.gif Would a Jacob's Ladder be better

HEH!

 

[glt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ White /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you mean from the Ballsie you are correct. Ballsie will cancel the common mode voltage at the single ended outputs even with no output caps on the opus. The balanced output however will have a common mode offset voltage of 2.5V.Some So if you plan on doing SE only from Ballsie that's the way to do it for best sound. Cheers! Russ

Russ/Brian,

Is 2.5V offset detrimental to a PGA-2320? I just got the new OPUS and want to try it without the caps. My amp is balanced and already has DC blocking capacitors. Thanks

 

[akione]

The trouble with living on this side of the pond is you get up and find you've missed an interesting discussion.

Looks like I started something.....

Just for information, my setup is now dual-mono opus (8740) with ASRC. I then have in-line 0.1% 18R resistors for load-balancing duty and these are fed via input selector (Balanced Darwin) and volume (Balanced J/Tree) to a customised IVY. It's built with precision resistors (0.1%) to give a small gain on the balanced stage. It's this that drives my 'phones direct. The Unbalanced part is as normal, with 2kR resistors. There are no capacitors needed anywhere, except for filtering on the IVY.

On balanced headphones (HD580), this config is superb and betters the original Ballsie output by a very large margin. The biggest difference came when I put the 18R resistors in, in place of the 47R ones I had in previously. I also had to play around with the IVY resistors and filter caps a bit, too, till I found the best combo from what I had available.

For anyone with balanced wired phones, I highly recommend that you try the IVY with a little gain (I use 1.8k input and 3.01k feedback resistors), it sounds very smooth and detailed. Of course, as Russ said, the big advantage with this approach is that no caps are needed, and you still have 0v offset.

This is crrently my favorite headphone amp out of: CKKIII, Beta22! (was 3-ch currently wired as 2-ch), a JLH designed 'Chiara' clone, and a balanced Jisbo buffer (I suspect this could be best with low impedance phones) . I also think it betters the Stax 2050 in everything but Bass.( The bass on the Stax when driven direct from the Opus is really something!). I'm currently starting a MMax build, but don't really expect miracles

I thought I'd better clear this up, as a comparison of 8740/8741/Buffolo might not be a case of simple substitution but might well depend a great deal on the rest of the system it's built into. As I said earlier the Buffolo will have to be VERY special to better this IMO. YMMV, of course.

Happy building everyone.

 

[Beefy]

Interesting observations akione!

Quote:

Originally Posted by akione /img/forum/go_quote.gif I thought I'd better clear this up, as a comparison of 8740/8741/Buffolo might not be a case of simple substitution but might well depend a great deal on the rest of the system it's built into. As I said earlier the Buffolo will have to be VERY special to better this IMO. YMMV, of course.

From everything that I have read, I'm starting to get the impression that the differences between the digital component of these DACs is all very much of a muchness. It is the analogue section where things are make-or-break.

For example, the 8741 apparently sounds better than the 8740 and is probably due to improved analogue filtering. Buffalo sounds great, but needed IVY to be tweaked substantially. Your own observations that small changes to IVY makes it sound much better.........

 

[akione]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beefy /img/forum/go_quote.gif Interesting observations akione! From everything that I have read, I'm starting to get the impression that the differences between the digital component of these DACs is all very much of a muchness. It is the analogue section where things are make-or-break. For example, the 8741 apparently sounds better than the 8740 and is probably due to improved analogue filtering. Buffalo sounds great, but needed IVY to be tweaked substantially. Your own observations that small changes to IVY makes it sound much better.........

Thanks Beefy. Exactly my point.

edit: just to expand ...... The point I'm trying to get across, is that perhaps we shouldn't be too hasty to change. Just swapping for a Buffolo/8741 without attention to everything else could result in something worse than the original was capable of. The Buffolo is probably better out-of-the-box, but when the surrounding components are optimised, then the differences may not be that great.

 

[penger]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ White /img/forum/go_quote.gif Don't get me wrong. The Ballsie sounds great. Haiku is a pure I/V stage. It cannot drive a low impedance like headphones without a buffer. I am putting the finishing touches on the IVY manual which will answer the connection questions.

So what advantages exist in using the Haiku over the IVY?

 

[regal]

Your statement holds true for all DAC's and CDP's. The perfect zerofeedback class A analog stage is the holy grail of digital music.

 

[Cauhtemoc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beefy From everything that I have read, I'm starting to get the impression that the differences between the digital component of these DACs is all very much of a muchness. It is the analogue section where things are make-or-break. For example, the 8741 apparently sounds better than the 8740 and is probably due to improved analogue filtering. Buffalo sounds great, but needed IVY to be tweaked substantially. Your own observations that small changes to IVY makes it sound much better.........

That's pretty much spot on; implementation is everything. Russ does a good job, though he still has a few things to learn.

 

[Russ White]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cauhtemoc /img/forum/go_quote.gif Russ does a good job, though he still has a few things to learn.

I certainly hope so, or this just won't be any fun anymore.

Cheers!
Russ

 

[fierce_freak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beefy /img/forum/go_quote.gif For example, the 8741 apparently sounds better than the 8740 and is probably due to improved analogue filtering. Buffalo sounds great, but needed IVY to be tweaked substantially. Your own observations that small changes to IVY makes it sound much better.........

My comparison was Dual WM8740 Opus with Metronome and Ballsie versus a Buffalo with sound taken directly from the buffalo board (no IVY). I do certainly agree that a simple swap of one board to the other in the same setup is not sufficient.

 

[TimJo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ White /img/forum/go_quote.gif There are at least four technical advantages of the IVY. And one for the Ballsie. IVY advantages 1) IVY is super symmetrical which helps to cancel out 2nd order harmonics while maintaining very low THD across the spectrum. 2) Greater output current capability for driving headphones (up to 100ma or so). 3) Better balanced dual mono setup (requires one IVY for each mono Opus) 4) its designed to be DC coupled, so no coupling caps while still providing zero offset at both balanced and SE outputs. This helps to deliver nice clean bass and removes phase issues at low freqs. Ballsie has high input impedance and allows for dual mono with just one Ballsie (though technically you can do this with IVY too). Cheers! Russ

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ White /img/forum/go_quote.gif Don't get me wrong. The Ballsie sounds great. I am putting the finishing touches on the IVY manual which will answer the connection questions.

So I am holding off ordering a line stage until I get a better understanding of using the Ballise vs. the IVY for single-ended output.

The most obvious question I have is when reading the description of the IVY, it provides I/V conversion, but the Opus is a voltage output DAC. What am I missing here?

Also, any idea when the manual for the IVY will be available?

 

[fault151]

Russ= Can the IVY owrk the opposite way? What i mean is, can it convert unbalanced signal to balanced?

 

[Russ White]

Yes it can.

Just tie -In to GND. Then input your signal to +IN and GND.

 

[fault151]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ White /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yes it can. Just tie -In to GND. Then input your signal to +IN and GND.

So will it operate well as a line stage for a b22? Wouls i need to use some sort of power supply with it? I don't really know much about them at the minute. This is what i was going to use as a line stage. link

Is your IVY more suited to the b22 or the other one?

Thanks for your help!