Jump to content

Keith_W system


Recommended Posts



12 hours ago, ghost4man said:

My suggestion is that you go to @Gonefishing999 - Peter Keenan - his place and sit down and have a listen to system that

will surprise you which coincidentally relies upon a minidsp.

@Keith_W PM me if want to hear my system.

I am currently refitting @ghost4man minidsp 8x8 with a minisharc 4x8 output with Curryman dacs Minidsp web page.

The minisharc is a build you own dsp .

I2s & Spdif inputs & 4 I2s outputs so gives a lot of options.

 

Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Peter. At the moment I interface with the NADAC via its Ravenna interface, i.e. RJ45 network, and the RME via USB. The RME's USB interface is capable of receiving 8 channels of digital input. The AP's one isn't ... for the moment. 

 

As for the MiniDSP, I used to own one - so I know what it sounds like and what it is capable of. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Peter, the output from the computer is either RJ45 network cable (i.e. Ethernet) using the Ravenna protocol and into the NADAC, or 8 channel USB into the RME. 

 

The current configuration is in the second post in the first page. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said in my post, there is no way for me to connect to it at the moment, which is why it is off my shopping list. IF David finds a way, perhaps by using an 8 channel USB module, then I would very strongly consider it. But before I buy one it has to beat the NADAC in a head to head shootout. I am sure it won't be that difficult. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, gonefishing999 said:

@Keith_W

I don't understand why you are looking at the ultimate preamp?

It does not have LAN connection , how were you planing on connecting to it?

 

Peter

Jeez, thanks a lot Peter. Do you want to kill off anymore prospective sales for me in favour of the imports ?

 

Makes you wonder why anyone would want to attempt any kind of hi-tech product development in this country because you are doomed before you have even started here. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Just now, gonefishing999 said:

@Tranquility Bass

 

I don't see what I have said could affect your sales as you don't have LAN input and of hand I think their would not be many dac's with Lan input

plus you don't have 8 balanced outputs.

 

Peter

 

No it doesn't have a LAN input and not many do but it does have 8 balanced outputs so I don't know where you got that from ?

 

P1040273.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Michael Hope
[mention=148687]Tranquility Bass[/mention]
 
I don't see what I have said could affect your sales as you don't have LAN input and of hand I think their would not be many dac's with Lan input
plus you don't have 8 balanced outputs.
 
Peter
 
Thats the trouble right there. People making comments and passing judgment without even knowing what they are talking about. If you are going to have a say at least get your facts maybe 50% right.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/12/2018 at 8:58 AM, gonefishing999 said:

@Keith_W PM me if want to hear my system.

I am currently refitting @ghost4man minidsp 8x8 with a minisharc 4x8 output with Curryman dacs Minidsp web page.

The minisharc is a build you own dsp .

I2s & Spdif inputs & 4 I2s outputs so gives a lot of options.

 

Peter

BTW how do you implement the volume control and does it have a balanced output ?

 

cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't think that my thread would turn into a bad episode of the Jerry Springer show. I would appreciate it if you carry on your MiniDSP discussion elsewhere, so that I don't have to read it. It is off topic, and I am not interested. 
Kind of have to agree here. It seems you are receiving a lot of negativity where you have to defends your choices to the public.

Kind of the risk that comes along with a public forum.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



To be honest, it's because it seemed like a good idea at the time. I have owned an SACD player since the very early days of DSD - I bought my first SACD player in 2001, only 2 years after it came out. Time and time again I heard the difference between SACD and plain CD. Despite what the naysayers say, I still think there is a difference. 

 

When it came to changing my system from analog active to a full DSP based setup, I did not want to lose DSD capability. After all, I already had an awesome SACD player (Playback Designs MPS-5), and to go back to PCM seemed like a backwards step.

 

So it was with great excitement that I discovered HQPlayer. Here was a player capable of accepting DSD input, performing the convolution in DSD with no conversion to PCM (albeit at high CPU overhead), and pass DSD out. This meant that the DSD files would be created in the studio directly from analog, be sent through the chain, and then into the DAC in DSD with no format changes whatsoever. There was something about that idea that I found quite appealing. 

 

The reality of it is: 

- the machine I have is nowhere near powerful enough to do the job, and it was the "best" CPU at the time I built it. 

- a more powerful machine would inflate lots of things - more heat, therefore more cooling, therefore more noise (or more complexity), and more cost. 

- the difference in sound between DSD and PCM pales in comparison to the difference between a well designed filter and a poorly designed one. If you imagine the difference in sound between one amplifier and another, this is ten times that. It's almost the difference in sound between one speaker and another.

 

All that I have learnt really makes me wonder whether DSD is really all that important in the scheme of things. Attempting to go full DSD was part of my "final 1%" philosophy. Since I already have most of the chain in place, I may as well keep going. But if I knew then what I know now, I would have settled for PCM. It's easier. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Tranquility Bass said:

Jeez, thanks a lot Peter. Do you want to kill off anymore prospective sales for me in favour of the imports ?

Mr Bass - you just keep designing away!

 

Keith makes up his own mind, with no regard for what anyone says.  Well done Keith!

 

1 hour ago, Keith_W said:

When it came to changing my system from analog active to a full DSP based setup, I did not want to lose DSD capability. After all, I already had an awesome SACD player (Playback Designs MPS-5), and to go back to PCM seemed like a backwards step.

 

So it was with great excitement that I discovered HQPlayer. Here was a player capable of accepting DSD input, performing the convolution in DSD with no conversion to PCM (albeit at high CPU overhead), and pass DSD out. This meant that the DSD files would be created in the studio directly from analog, be sent through the chain, and then into the DAC in DSD with no format changes whatsoever. There was something about that idea that I found quite appealing.

And I agree here entirely too!  Why would you trade down to PCM from a DSD file.

That just sounds crazy to me.  Lets keep the DSD file as a DSD file, umolested to the DAC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Michael Hope said:

Thats the trouble right there. People making comments and passing judgment without even knowing what they are talking about. If you are going to have a say at least get your facts maybe 50% right.

Now lets see if I know what I'm talking about.

It does not have 8 balanced outputs because the Dac that TB is using is single end only.

He could have used ess 9018 or 9038 both of these are full differential balanced dacs.

By the way how am I passing judgement when I am merely asking KW why look at this dac if it doesn't have the input he needs?

I wanted a new dac and it had to have I2s input so why would I look at dacs without that input.

I like the fact that TB has included I2s input.

 

Peter

Edited by gonefishing999
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Tranquility Bass said:

No it doesn't have a LAN input and not many do but it does have 8 balanced outputs so I don't know where you got that from ?

Now lets see if I know what I'm talking about.

It does not have 8 balanced outputs because the Dac that TB is using is single end only.

He could have used ess 9018 or 9038 both of these are full differential balanced dacs.

By the way how am I passing judgement when I am merely asking KW why look at this dac if it doesn't have the input he needs?

I wanted a new dac and it had to have I2s input so why would I look at dacs without that input.

I like the fact that TB has included I2s input.

As you know the Minidsp Curryman dac has the same ess 9028 dac that you are using the reason I chose the Curryman dac it has JFET output

and not OPamps as your dac.

Please don't take this as a criticism merely my preference, I could have used more expensive full differential  balanced I2s dacs  for @ghost4man if he wanted to pay for this.

 

Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites



The pcm versus dsd thing is over rated. If implemented correctly both can sound spectacular. 

Having gone down the dsd path I also concur it can become unnecessarily complicated. However, can be amazing.

With a purpose built 1 bit conversion dac there is no processing in the dac itself. All dsp/filters/modulators are done in software - you can make it sound like whatever you want. I can choose filters and dsp settings that sound like vinyl-tubes-harbeth or like msb-magico. This is similar to what the PsAudio ds dac does, and why the sound changes with all there software updates.

If Keith doesnt have the processing power in his custom pc what chance does these chips in a dac have? Hence the move to pc based audio.

 

No more changing carts, amps,cables etc. to tune the sound. Now its all done in software.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gonefishing999 said:

Now lets see if I know what I'm talking about.

It does not have 8 balanced outputs because the Dac that TB is using is single end only.

He could have used ess 9018 or 9038 both of these are full differential balanced dacs.

By the way how am I passing judgement when I am merely asking KW why look at this dac if it doesn't have the input he needs?

I wanted a new dac and it had to have I2s input so why would I look at dacs without that input.

I like the fact that TB has included I2s input.

As you know the Minidsp Curryman dac has the same ess 9028 dac that you are using the reason I chose the Curryman dac it has JFET output

and not OPamps as your dac.

Please don't take this as a criticism merely my preference, I could have used more expensive full differential  balanced I2s dacs  for @ghost4man if he wanted to pay for this.

 

Peter

Please get the story right Peter !

 

The Ultimate Preamp uses the ES9028PRO which is the successor to the ES9018S. It is pin compatible with the ES9018S and ES9038 dacs. It has a balanced output for all 8 channels. I use the same IV converter stage  as stipulated by the ESSTech reference design which provides both single ended and balanced outputs. And I also use LM4562 opamps as one of the opamps recommended by ESSTech which is not a cheap part either.

 

On the other hand the Curryman DAC that you are talking about uses the ES9023 DAC (a 16 pin device) which only has single ended outputs and built in IV converter. It was really designed for mobile devices and in comparison is a low cost device. According to the website the whole Curryman DAC board costs $40 USD which is less than the cost of one ES9028PRO chip !

 

cheers

 

 

Edited by Tranquility Bass
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Michael Hope
Now lets see if I know what I'm talking about.
It does not have 8 balanced outputs because the Dac that TB is using is single end only.
He could have used ess 9018 or 9038 both of these are full differential balanced dacs.
By the way how am I passing judgement when I am merely asking KW why look at this dac if it doesn't have the input he needs?
I wanted a new dac and it had to have I2s input so why would I look at dacs without that input.
I like the fact that TB has included I2s input.
As you know the Minidsp Curryman dac has the same ess 9028 dac that you are using the reason I chose the Curryman dac it has JFET output
and not OPamps as your dac.
Please don't take this as a criticism merely my preference, I could have used more expensive full differential  balanced I2s dacs  for [mention=154008]ghost4man[/mention] if he wanted to pay for this.
 
Peter
TBass does know what he is talking about. You need to stop spreading mistruths about his product. Clearly after reading TB's reply you have posted comments which are lies about his product and its components. YOU could have gone to the ESS website and found out the information for yourself that the 9018, 9028, 9038 are all balanced outputs and pin compatible. I suspect you wrote what you did to peddle an inferior product.

If you have someting to say about the Ultimate Preamp then have the courtesy to take it from Keiths thread and put your incorrect comments on the Ultimate thread where they can be properly discussed and then discarded for the mistruths you are spreading.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, gonefishing999 said:

By the way how am I passing judgement when I am merely asking KW why look at this dac if it doesn't have the input he needs?

The products you've alluded to barely have the sample rate he needs... let's all ease up and get back to focusing on the OP's needs. Would contend that of all things suggested on this thread the Ultimate Pre is closest to the OP's requirements, which are quite broad and deep. 

 

1 hour ago, AudioGeek said:

The pcm versus dsd thing is over rated. If implemented correctly both can sound spectacular. 

Having gone down the dsd path I also concur it can become unnecessarily complicated. However, can be amazing.

 

Can be... though guess it really depends on what you're using for a DAC, no? Some modern D-S DAC designs actually implement a few bits worth of conversion then oversample that, so they're not really R2R and not completely single-bit designs either. Whatever you throw at a DAC at some point there's going to be some conversion from from whatever you sent it to a format the DAC can actually convert to analogy; there's no real magic, just what works best for whatever you've got. If it's going to end up PCM then having a PC do the conversion... at least you 'own' that process and have some control over the output. As for filter applications etc... all easier in PCM IMO. You could convert both ways if output format is important (DSD>PCM>DSD) for filtering etc. I'm with @Keith_W on this - high-rate PCM doesn't give away anything to DSD, and even if the DAC is 'more suited' one way or another acoustic behaviours and calibrations are going to be (far) more significant. 

 

Still think a 2/8 DSP system will do this just fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keith,

Without taking any sides as I cant comment from actual experience for using all of the mentioned devices, I would look at where your

system is at and then determine where the issue(s) are.

I had a conversation with Bill Mclean ( Magnepan distributor here in Australia) who made a very intelligent remark how a lot of

audiophiles need to be mindful that what they are building is a "system".

Its the system as a whole which needs to be looked at.

Presumably there are no mechanical/electrical issues with the speakers - tick.

Presumably amplifiers have more than sufficient power to meet the needs of the system - tick.

 

Merging+ Nadac - My impression is that your confidence in the DAC is not all that good? But I question whether

this is justified as it is a very highly rated whose reputation precedes itself.

If we move further back then we get into the PC and the software.

Do you think there might be an issue here?

The AP does tick a lot of very good boxes. I dont want to say any more than that because I havent heard it but looking

at it, it looks the goods and I dont want to appear biased in any way. Not for any product.

 

I can say that I have witnessed the DEQX and Minidsp to stunning effect.

 

There are people out there that are having resounding success with both the DEQX, minidsp  and the AP.

Which one is best I think is really not necessary at the minute.

I think before you move forward you need to identify what the actual problem is in your system and then address that.

Have you overestimated the value of DSD and in particular the way it is coupled with HQ Player?

 

I have had the opportunity to hear quite a few systems and I honestly cant speak highly enough of Redbook CDs. They do the 

job in spades and I am not convinced that this merry go round of 64/128/256/512 DSD necessarily brings about a better result

simply because the numbers go up.

Makes for a nice sales pitch but what about the end result?

 

My gut feeling is - and I have gone through your thread - that your problems lie before the DAC.

Just my two bobs worth mate. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...
To Top