Watts Up...?

Jan 18, 2020 at 5:52 AM Post #1,636 of 5,075
Of course optical will stop RF noise from entering the DAC via the digital input. But if you are using a mains powered USB to optical converter, then RF noise will form a loop from the source, via USB, and back to the mains via the converter.

Noted, cheers Rob.

Fortunately there are several USB powered USB-to-TOSlink converters, capable of PCM192kHz.

A good option since optical outputs on PC's/laptops seem to be reducing.

So PSU's don't need to be added to the system with USB-to-TOSlink converters, so these issues can be avoided.
 
Jan 18, 2020 at 6:19 AM Post #1,637 of 5,075
About the Hugo 2's output stage: It's stated as being Class A. I just wanted to clarify if it was Class A all the way through to maximum power output or if it goes into Class AB at some point.



If you had DSD256 or DSD128 files and decided to convert them into PCM, do you have any suggestions as to what software and what settings to use for doing so? I'm asking as while I'm reasonably good at comprehending information about digital music, helped quite often by your posts, many aspects of DSD don't make sense to me, such as how it is possible to have varying levels of volume in music which is only 1 bit.

Yes it's Class A with a 300 ohm load at 5v RMS; but for lower impedances it will drop into class AB mode - not that that adds significant extra distortion as the benefit the Hugo 2 has (in line with TT2 and Dave) is the second order analogue noise shaper. A simple way of thinking how that works is to see an extra high gain bandwidth amp whose sole purpose is to linearise the output stage, so that when it changes to Class AB mode we get no increase in high frequency distortion.

I'm afraid I don't have any experience of software DSD conversion.

As to converting the gain of a DSD stage. So how do we attenuate regular PCM? It gets done by (assume 24 bit volume coefficient and 24 bit PCM):

Output [47:0] = PCM[23:0] * Volume coefficient [23:0]

So when we multiply two 24 bit numbers together, we get a 48 bit output. If we wish to get it back to 24 bits, then we need to truncate; and we can do that by truncating the Output after adding appropriate dither; or we can noise shape it down to 24 bits.

DSD is exactly the same process, as DSD is actually 1 bit PCM, but in this case the Output is 25 bits:

Output [24:0] = DSD[0] * Volume coefficient [23:0]

But in this case we can't use dither, we have to use another noise shaper (or calling it another way another DSD modulator) to get you back to 1 bit.

Indeed, in the early days, they promised that EQ and volume could be done in this fashion - but it was quickly discovered, that cascading DSD noise shapers together created so much distortion and noise, it wasn't viable. This isn't an issue with PCM of course - you just run at an improved bit depth internally, doing everything you need to do, then truncate/dither or noise shape at the end for the final output.

So in short DSD is simply 1 bit PCM.
 
Last edited:
Jan 18, 2020 at 7:39 AM Post #1,638 of 5,075
Noted, cheers Rob.

Fortunately there are several USB powered USB-to-TOSlink converters, capable of PCM192kHz.

A good option since optical outputs on PC's/laptops seem to be reducing.

So PSU's don't need to be added to the system with USB-to-TOSlink converters, so these issues can be avoided.

Although you might still need to consider where that usb power is coming from and if that device supplying the usb voltage is mains powered then there might still be an RF link similar to what RW was suggesting. Just because you are not plugging in an extra power supply does not mean that there isnt one.
 
Jan 18, 2020 at 7:45 AM Post #1,639 of 5,075
Although you might still need to consider where that usb power is coming from and if that device supplying the usb voltage is mains powered then there might still be an RF link similar to what RW was suggesting. Just because you are not plugging in an extra power supply does not mean that there isnt one.

Noted, but if a computer has a USB port and you are comparing with adding a USB powered USB-to-optical converter, you haven’t added an extra PSU..

Yes there is one as there was originally but you haven’t added an extra... Rob was talking about additional ground loop pathways.
 
Jan 18, 2020 at 8:02 AM Post #1,640 of 5,075
Noted, but if a computer has a USB port and you are comparing with adding a USB powered USB-to-optical converter, you haven’t added an extra PSU..

Yes there is one as there was originally but you haven’t added an extra... Rob was talking about additional ground loop pathways.

No, Rob was talking about ground loop pathways being able to defeat optical isolation. The possible ground loop pathway through the computers power supply can do that and possibly rendering your insertion of the optical break either less effective or ineffective.
 
Jan 18, 2020 at 8:05 AM Post #1,641 of 5,075
No, Rob was talking about ground loop pathways being able to defeat optical isolation. The possible ground loop pathway through the computers power supply can do that and possibly rendering your insertion of the optical break either less effective or ineffective.

That pathway was there before one added a USB-to-optical converter... so it was always a possible pathway.

Adding PSU’s to a system is probably the thing one needs to be most careful of..

Even with adding “ultra low noise” this and that, there’s no free lunch. Each added PSU adds additional potential new leakage current / RF / ground loops pathways.
 
Jan 18, 2020 at 8:11 AM Post #1,642 of 5,075
That pathway was there before one added a USB-to-optical converter... so it was always a possible pathway.

Correct but that doesn’t mean you can ignore it and think that you have inserted a full optical break just by saying that you are using a usb powered converter. Of course the only way to be sure is to use a battery but as I have said many times that for me is far too much faff for a home system.
 
Jan 18, 2020 at 8:45 AM Post #1,643 of 5,075
Too much conjecture going on here... As part of my optodx product development I put a signal/spectrum analyser on the outputs of H2/TT2 and then did all the RF measurements. Basically this peers into the DAC and let's you see what changes (signal/power) affect the RF energy and envelope. I always found that less RF measured at the output meant better sound/transparency. Hence, in my considered opinion, get your DAC off the AC mains, use a battery (ideally with ultra low noise regulator) and only use optical signal input. Any other solution is a compromise.
Oh, and one other thing, get as much distance between your DAC and digital source components. It all matters.
 
Last edited:
Jan 18, 2020 at 8:59 AM Post #1,644 of 5,075
One thing to consider is: The more discomfort you add, the less you are able to enjoy the sonic benefits. I was on the verge to get an OptoDX system, but the prospect of the inevitable battery-charging ritual has finally held me off. So the term «noncompromizing» has a conflicting quality.
 
Last edited:
Jan 18, 2020 at 9:22 AM Post #1,646 of 5,075
@JaZZ agreed and batteries are not the be all and end all and are far too much faff for me to use. Consider the top of the range Dave which achieves its performance with a built in power supply and no battery. Part of the Dave superb sound may be down to the low output impedance of its power supply as well as its very low noise. Rob has written about the process that he went through when selecting the Dave supply for its effect on sound quality.

Having listened to many systems and with many types of power supply there really does come a point where a system can sound ridiculously good without batteries. Indeed RW himself appears to reject batteries for home use and to reserve them for travelling. It really shouldn't be necessary to have to charge up batteries to use a home sound system to its fullest potential.
 
Jan 18, 2020 at 9:27 AM Post #1,647 of 5,075
@JaZZ
Look around you. Batteries everywhere and getting more capable at less cost. Soon you will succumb :)
The older I get, the more I appreciate the lapse of obligations and appointments. Most likely this won't change anymore. I will concede that your product is probably the best I could have got, but the second best is good enough for my demands and frees me from the occupation with battery charging. One more thing: Once dementia sets in, I would constantly sit there with an inoperative dual-BNC cabling system with empty batteries, waiting for the music to start playing.
 
Jan 18, 2020 at 6:51 PM Post #1,649 of 5,075
Too much conjecture going on here...

No conjecture at all. Actually you're discussing everything we have been discussing and Rob has discussed.

Every mains powered PSU added to a systems adds a potential new ground / RF / leakage current loop...

Obviously a battery that is not connected to the wall charger is not mains powered so avoids this mains RF issues...
 
Jan 19, 2020 at 3:06 AM Post #1,650 of 5,075
Hi Rob,

I have a delay question to offset all this noise talk! :)

Do you have a designed model for delay built into all of your DACs (differing with each product of course)? What I mean is that there are varying numbers of taps for each device but you use different FPGA chips to achieve that. Do your products manage to work through the tens or hundreds of thousands of taps in real time and even at the 768KHz maximum or do you build in an expected delay based on how fast the data can possibly get through the chip? I'm not suggesting delay is some kind of negative feature. I'm more curious about how well modern FPGA chips (that don't cost thousands of dollars) are able to pipeline this stuff through and at what cost. You must have to break the taps down into parallel blocks to make it fit in these little chips and they can only run so fast and at a necessary multiple of the audio data! The potential trade off sounds like an interesting topic.

I think I read the M-Scaler does have some delay because of the 1M+ taps with a separate mode to reduce the delay but how does this concept filter down through the lesser tapped products and even down to the Mojo? It's just a bit of fascinating side information that left me curious this evening.


Thanks!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top