Hi Kinsei, this was not a test it remains an irritation. In post #135 I posted a file which is a zipped MP3 recorded with my cell phone from what one hears on the speakers. This appears on both an HP machine and a Dell using two different audio cards, an X-fi and Xonar. I was hoping that an external DAC may not exhibit this noise but does.
Everyone mistakenly think that I blame the DAC - not at all its specifications are impeccable. it is a resistive ladder, a passive device. Theoretically it has no distortion and noisefloor is virtually kTBRF and insignificant, what I hear is not insignificant.
The problem lies with the peripheral devices connected to it. This makes it difficult to choose the worlds best DAC subjectively because I don't believe one can.
Everyone mistakenly think that I blame the DAC - not at all its specifications are impeccable. it is a resistive ladder, a passive device. Theoretically it has no distortion and noisefloor is virtually kTBRF and insignificant, what I hear is not insignificant.
The problem lies with the peripheral devices connected to it. This makes it difficult to choose the worlds best DAC subjectively because I don't believe one can.
Last edited:
Does the noise from your mouse actually come out of the speakers or out of somewhere else? I had this problem myself and it was something else whining inside the computer when I moved my mouse.
Hi 5th element, this zipped file is recording at the speaker. It is not affected by the PC volume control, in other words it is always there. The noise from the Dell is slightly different than the HP but disc activity noise is louder on the HP.
I have first noticed it when I hooked my headphone amp to my PC because it became amplified I have heard it, I cannot get rid of it now.
Prior to the headphone amp I probably subconsciously filtered the noise and blocked it but once I knew about it, I can hear it all the time.
Obviously when masked by music it is not that concerning but once you know it is there you tend to subconsciously focus on it.
One can compare this to when you discovered that little rattle in your new Bentley each time you go over a tiny bump and you now drive over bumps just so you can get super agitated with this car.
I have first noticed it when I hooked my headphone amp to my PC because it became amplified I have heard it, I cannot get rid of it now.
Prior to the headphone amp I probably subconsciously filtered the noise and blocked it but once I knew about it, I can hear it all the time.
Obviously when masked by music it is not that concerning but once you know it is there you tend to subconsciously focus on it.
One can compare this to when you discovered that little rattle in your new Bentley each time you go over a tiny bump and you now drive over bumps just so you can get super agitated with this car.
Last edited:
Hey Nico
Trying to be helpful but I only skimmed the previous 19 pages (forgive me if this is covered)
Had a PCM2706 DAC to mess with, had noise when mouse moved. Switched from Bus Power to external 6V and suddenly no (extra) noise.
Horrid DAC though the kit I had has no output filtering and I had to take headphones off in less than 5 minutes!! which I think may be the point 🙂
Andy
Trying to be helpful but I only skimmed the previous 19 pages (forgive me if this is covered)
Had a PCM2706 DAC to mess with, had noise when mouse moved. Switched from Bus Power to external 6V and suddenly no (extra) noise.
Horrid DAC though the kit I had has no output filtering and I had to take headphones off in less than 5 minutes!! which I think may be the point 🙂
Andy
Andrew,
Exactly... It is not necessarily DAC it is usually the peripheral stuff that is badly designed not for audio. So can one choose the best DAC in the world unless the rest of the equipment you own measures up to "the best in the world"
Exactly... It is not necessarily DAC it is usually the peripheral stuff that is badly designed not for audio. So can one choose the best DAC in the world unless the rest of the equipment you own measures up to "the best in the world"
Last edited:
You can ad this to the R2R Ladder Multibit list, can it also do DSD?
Thrax Maximinus - Universal DSP controlled discrete resistor ladder 32bit/384kHz audio DAC
Cheers George
Thrax Maximinus - Universal DSP controlled discrete resistor ladder 32bit/384kHz audio DAC
Cheers George
Incidentally Schitt now has a 3rd DAC in its multibit stable, the Bifrost multibit ($599). Its using another not-for-audio DAC chip, AD5547 which is a 16bit R2R (not pure R2R, has segmentation at the top end) with parallel input.
Looks like it can do DSD (It can also handle the DSD signal (via the DoP protocol). Whatever that is?
And it came from New Zealand our neighbours across the ditch.
http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&r...sznclqReaWpUrtwlIaXTtQ&bvm=bv.105039540,d.dGY
PS: After a bit more searching, I found it uses MSB's Platinum discrete R2R Ladder Multibit dac set.
Cheers george
And it came from New Zealand our neighbours across the ditch.
http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&r...sznclqReaWpUrtwlIaXTtQ&bvm=bv.105039540,d.dGY
PS: After a bit more searching, I found it uses MSB's Platinum discrete R2R Ladder Multibit dac set.
Cheers george
Last edited:
I'm not sure you can avoid a sound signature even with the best THD of a R2R DAC ! At the end change the ground layout, or some passive parts you need to make it and the analog output you hear will change as well !
It's a question of believing what is the best trade off you need at home according to me ! too much precision can be borring as well. Look at an AMR CD-77, it's tubee, there is a cap in serie at the output and it's not borring and precise enough ! Choose your poison ! For me, my money choosed for me : DIY and try the best I can in relation with this combo (DIY/monney)... the rest is lyric & music (though like all here I like also to understand why tech are involved !)
I'de really like to listen to the mollâ mollä : the dac which drop the curtain in front of our faces 😀
Nico, what is you dac today and what are the trade off your are looking for ? (I mean what you prefer if choices have to be made ?)
Last edited:
I do not have a stand-alone DAC hence my question much earlier in the thread. SY confirmed, you don't need an external DAC - and I agree with him because I do not think an external DAC is going to make any difference to the source which may be cluttered with noise, much more so than any DAC. So what is the point, it is like playing a scratched record through your Dynavector Ruby cartridge - it sounds lousy.
Today I read something that Jriver sounds better than Media Monkey or Windows Media player - now if software are making a difference in sound, what are we listening to?
I believe the reasonment : what you hear is the bad PC (to say it simple).
With a dac which isolate the gnd problem with isolator chips, Fifo buffer helped with a good phase noise clock and a not too bad dac chip : you should not hear the computer and even less the soft if it plays flat & bit perfect. For me even a 16 bits well born is enough with its poor noise floor !
Of course the outputstage adds its own color in each design, should it be R2R with different passive parts and powersupllies to let it live !
You don't mind if THD is 100 dB or 130 dB !
You can't argue just with THD... (look at my input with the R2R made here ! ).
I believe both you and SY (I suspect to love more LPs stuffs or master reccordings tapes) are wong but you need proves in the pudding to going further ! You need to find such a DAC and listen 2 different PC & Soft to understand by your own ears ! Many experienced that and they are not all into halucinations 😀.
I used to think like you 15 years ago but little by little, you see that with a good dac you don't need anymore to mess up with server W with shounted down service, or fan less stuffs or even Linux to have a better sound as there is no difference as far as the front end electronic is good enough (call it the external dac or the sota soundcard).
Your next step should be to find such a DAC in a shop or a diyer close to you. You will see the question can be rephrased : Why a PC ? It's just a more usefull remote controll and storage stuff ! that's all (if we only talk about streaming)
With a dac which isolate the gnd problem with isolator chips, Fifo buffer helped with a good phase noise clock and a not too bad dac chip : you should not hear the computer and even less the soft if it plays flat & bit perfect. For me even a 16 bits well born is enough with its poor noise floor !
Of course the outputstage adds its own color in each design, should it be R2R with different passive parts and powersupllies to let it live !
You don't mind if THD is 100 dB or 130 dB !
You can't argue just with THD... (look at my input with the R2R made here ! ).
I believe both you and SY (I suspect to love more LPs stuffs or master reccordings tapes) are wong but you need proves in the pudding to going further ! You need to find such a DAC and listen 2 different PC & Soft to understand by your own ears ! Many experienced that and they are not all into halucinations 😀.
I used to think like you 15 years ago but little by little, you see that with a good dac you don't need anymore to mess up with server W with shounted down service, or fan less stuffs or even Linux to have a better sound as there is no difference as far as the front end electronic is good enough (call it the external dac or the sota soundcard).
Your next step should be to find such a DAC in a shop or a diyer close to you. You will see the question can be rephrased : Why a PC ? It's just a more usefull remote controll and storage stuff ! that's all (if we only talk about streaming)
Last edited:
They sure can. If you have an "audiophile" DAC that, for example, dumps a pile of unfiltered ultrasonics into your system, it will sure sound different than a well-engineered unit. There's more than one "audiophile" DAC out there which has frequency response issues, and they will sure sound different from well-engineered ones. There's a remarkable variety of ways that incompetent designers can screw up a product, and this seems to happen most in either extremely cheap or extremely expensive units.
For sure there are a lot of expensive shity dac ! But listen to an Audial or an AMR as you like acoustic instruments, you just see it's good enough if the reccording is not crapy ! (it's not by luck I talk about two different ones : SS output & Tubes output, I mean here : both designer are good !)
why talk about those badly designed dacs?
how is that a argument to say that there's badly designed dacs? we all know that and it doesnt change the fact that good dacs do exist and do make a amazing difference. There is, in the market, very well designed dacs that totally make a tremendous difference compared to a soundcard or badly designed dacs.
if you are concern about hi-fidelity, you absolutely need a external DAC or analog playback. ideally both.
I really wonder how many DAC's you and SY have had in your system and compared before being able to have the opinion that a soundcard is good enough for hi-fi.
Last edited:
So it seems that you are talking about using laptop as the source for an external DAC? Because the laptop seems to give you garbage so you don't think external DAC is a big deal (not whether it can make any difference)?
I don't use USB DAC. Using computer I did it direct to PCI myself, and a good very silent Dell computer. But USB DAC can be handy with small laptop for travelers.
The difference made by software (which is digital) is very small, not comparable to the difference made by DACs.
As long as we are processing and transporting DIGITAL to the DAC, analog computer noise is not an issue. And up before the DAC, it is possible (tho not 100% perfect that I know of) to check if the digital processing is bit perfect or not.
But if we listen to the software (JR, MM, WMP) through internal headphone amp, it has been affected by 2 things (digital programming and analog processing)...
Update:
Check for post #1 http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/280626-worlds-best-dacs.html#post4472660
For my latest notes about each DAC tested so far (and the upcoming ones that will be tested)
Since i have a 4-way active system, i have no choice but to test per way. So far i noticed that high frequencies (tweeters) are what gives the most obvious results, even though they are crossed quite high at 4,500hz (+/- 2 octaves only).
All notes are subject to change if i find DAC(s) that are really better than the actual leader (NAD M51) which may very well happen...
To be continued!
Check for post #1 http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/280626-worlds-best-dacs.html#post4472660
For my latest notes about each DAC tested so far (and the upcoming ones that will be tested)
Since i have a 4-way active system, i have no choice but to test per way. So far i noticed that high frequencies (tweeters) are what gives the most obvious results, even though they are crossed quite high at 4,500hz (+/- 2 octaves only).
All notes are subject to change if i find DAC(s) that are really better than the actual leader (NAD M51) which may very well happen...
To be continued!
Oh, forgot to mention: i didnt test any of these DAC (so far) on my midbass or subwoofers. Only on Tweeters and Mid (so 600hz and up only)
Please take that into consideration.
Please take that into consideration.
Jon, do you have any passively xo'ed speaker that you could use for comparisons also?
I think the results are not very reliable when using a "bandwidth-limited error detector" to detect the errors, aka. using one band of the speaker. Too many things can skew the results and all the differences cannot be heard.
I have done that also myself in the past when trying out different amplifier in a active setup. All sorts of comparisons are so much more revealing and satisfying with passive xo'ed speakers, imo. They also sound simply better to my ears (compared to MiniDSP Nanodigi with the same DAC). All the electrical interaction between drivers and current drive situations in the passive crossover etc. cannot be replicated with an active setup. If you can make the speaker at least partially passive, I suggest to try it. 🙂
I think the results are not very reliable when using a "bandwidth-limited error detector" to detect the errors, aka. using one band of the speaker. Too many things can skew the results and all the differences cannot be heard.
I have done that also myself in the past when trying out different amplifier in a active setup. All sorts of comparisons are so much more revealing and satisfying with passive xo'ed speakers, imo. They also sound simply better to my ears (compared to MiniDSP Nanodigi with the same DAC). All the electrical interaction between drivers and current drive situations in the passive crossover etc. cannot be replicated with an active setup. If you can make the speaker at least partially passive, I suggest to try it. 🙂