Taking orders :)

xcortes · 189145

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Doc B.

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 9649
    • Bottlehead
Reply #210 on: November 24, 2013, 07:02:55 AM
We have discussed the notion of a version with tube outputs and Nixie display. It would be very expensive.

Dan "Doc B." Schmalle
President For Life
Bottlehead Corp.


Offline mcandmar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 1599
  • Not all engineers are civil
Reply #211 on: November 24, 2013, 07:48:42 AM
There is NO output stage! That is one of the reasons I like this DAC chip so much, it was designed to drive an output directly, no extra active stages and NO coupling caps! The output from the DAC chip goes through one resistor, the output of which has a cap to ground, this is the final analog filter for the DAC, that is IT.

Ahh so its an ODAC in a wooden box.    ...joke :P

I certainly cant wait for you guys to show off the finished product, really curious to see the PCB's and what chips are in there.  I already have an IOU from Santa in the bank..

Nixie tubes idea made my laugh, i have a bunch of Nixie tube alarm clocks in my ebay watch list that i cant get out of my mind.  Expensive, but very cool looking..

M.McCandless


Offline Chris

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
    • Posts: 671
Reply #212 on: November 24, 2013, 08:01:40 AM
If I am mistaken... and I usually am here :)... I read that DOC said that tubes DIDNT make the DAC sound any better...  So, this is of course a great thing because the end result will be simpler and CHEAPER... Who cannot love that... IF you want a tube output stage..?? I just learned, ADD a quickie...... Brilliant as hell because the quickie is what???? wait for it.... Battery powered as well... haha superb.....



Offline Hank Murrow

  • Full Member
  • ***
    • Posts: 221
  • Potter loving music and tubes....
    • Hank Murrow's World of Ceramics
Reply #213 on: November 24, 2013, 11:27:40 AM
Someday in the future I'll build a Soul sister with MQ transformers at the input (B7 10k:10k Ni) and output (B7 8k:600 Co) and a pair of Co SR45s for which I have most parts. 'Cause contrary to my main system philosophy, for digital I think the mo' transformers the better to tame the digital beast.

Dear Xavier; You won't regret building the Soul Sister you have in mind. My PB-built version is wonderful whether driving the BH 2A3 amp and Blumensteins, or directly driving my HD 600's Cardas-cabled. I too have Mike's cobalt B7's but with IAG Sowter/Shallco transformer volume controls at the inputs. Vinyl is still my favorite source, and since PB built my custom Eros, I am re-acquainting myself with a large collection of mint discs.

Cheers, Hank in Eugene






Offline John Swenson

  • Full Member
  • ***
    • Posts: 114
Reply #214 on: November 24, 2013, 12:30:36 PM
The DAC has three inputs. S/PDIF coax, S/PDIF optical and USB. They are all just as good as the other. (there might be very slight differences, but they will be small).

So anything that can output S/PDIF or any computer whose USB port can be used for UAC2 audio will work.  What is going to sound BEST, I don't know at this point. I have put a TON of effort into making this as immune to outside influences as possible, so I expect that it will very good on just about anything without needing the extreme source tweaking that many other DACs require to achieve their best.

But nothing is perfect so you probably will be able to make it sound better with some sources than others, but at hi point I have no idea what that will be. The way I have done this is so much different than most other DACs that there is nothing else out there that can be used to make an educated guess at this.

Right now there are just two out there (mine and Docs), and I have not nearly enough time to actually try it with lots of different sources and computer combinations. I don't think Doc has done too much of this either. So it's really going to have to wait until lots of them get out into your hands and you guys can start doing some testing on this.

Currently I'm either using a Squeezebox Touch (S/PDIF coax or USB) or a wandboard running Community Squeeze software (squeezebox emulation) via USB. To me these sound identical.

This design is rather unusual in that it has both an extremely good S/PDIF input AND and extremely good USB input. In most DACs that have both types of inputs, one or the other will be significantly better sounding than the other.

John S.


John Swenson
DAC designer
Well Tempered Record player -> Seduction
Moded Squeezebox->DIY DAC
BDT preamp->813 monster SE amp
DIY "Bazooka" Lowther speakers


Offline Jim R.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 2194
  • Blind Bottlehead
Reply #215 on: November 24, 2013, 02:15:08 PM
To Sam -- that means you can probably ddump the noisy PC and replace it with a single, fanless one board computer like an Alix or Cubox I, control it from an iPod/Pad/Phone and just run a usb cable to the bh dac and move thee pc to another room and use it as a fileserver. Or continue to use the PC until you want to use DSD when it becomes available.

No need, as John says, for a souped up mac mini or such to get stellar performance. Though I will hold on to mine until I can verify for myself that the alix or whatever can do as well as my over the top mac mini.

HTH,

Jim

Jim Rebman -- recovering audiophile

Equitech balanced power; uRendu, USB processor -> Musette DAC -> 5670 tube buffer -> Finale Audio F138 FFX -> Cain and Cain Abbys near-field).

s.e.x. 2.1 under construction.  Want list: Stereomour II

All ICs homemade (speaker and power next)


Offline johnsonad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 1670
Reply #216 on: November 25, 2013, 03:32:45 AM
Jim,

I really like that idea! I'll shoot you an email off line with questions on how to accomplish it.

Regards,

Aaron

Aaron Johnson


Offline mcandmar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 1599
  • Not all engineers are civil
Reply #217 on: November 26, 2013, 03:48:45 AM
John,

On the subject of USB interfaces and the article linked a few pages back i would interested to hear your opinion on USB isolators, specifically those built around the ADuM4160.  I have heard people claim that they are problematic in that they increase jitter. Is there any truth to that?

Thanks,

Mark

M.McCandless


Offline John Swenson

  • Full Member
  • ***
    • Posts: 114
Reply #218 on: November 26, 2013, 05:29:25 PM
First off those isolators only work with full speed DACs, thus only work with UAC1, thus are only good up to 96 sample rate.

They definitely increase the jitter of the data signals. The technology used in ADUM can add a large amount of jitter. It's one of my least favorite isolation schemes. (I much prefer the GMR isolators from NVE, I use them in the BH DAC).

How that increase in data bus jitter winds it's way into the audio signal is complicated and will be different for different implementations.

The isolation CAN cut down on noise coming across the power and ground connection to the USB host, but it's difficult to say which will be worse, the decrease in noise or increase in jitter.

John S.

John Swenson
DAC designer
Well Tempered Record player -> Seduction
Moded Squeezebox->DIY DAC
BDT preamp->813 monster SE amp
DIY "Bazooka" Lowther speakers


Offline mcandmar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 1599
  • Not all engineers are civil
Reply #219 on: November 27, 2013, 02:55:35 AM
Thanks John, informative as always, i need to re-evaluate my little isolator box solution now.

Also good to know the BH DAC will have some form of isolation built in, so no need to worry about such things in the future.

Cheers,

Mark


M.McCandless


Offline madbrayniak

  • Full Member
  • ***
    • Posts: 110
Reply #220 on: November 29, 2013, 07:01:15 AM
Question,

Will using the USB input sync the clock from the computer to the DAC? I read somewhere that this is possible and results in better sound quality.

Not entirely sure how this works though.



Offline John Swenson

  • Full Member
  • ***
    • Posts: 114
Reply #221 on: November 30, 2013, 04:58:19 AM
There are two different clock "topologies" for a DAC:

Source is master, DAC is slave
Source is slave, DAC is master

What matters is the jitter at the DAC chip (in the DAC). Having a fixed frequency clock in the DAC, right next to the DAC xhip is the best way to implement this.  You can do this when the DAC is master, it has the "master clock". USB can do this in "asynchronous mode". The BH DAC uses asynchronous mode so it can do the DAC as master. In this mode the source (usually a computer) sends the data out, but the DAC can tell it to speed up or slow down so tha average data rate matches the clock in the DAC.

There is another USB mode called adaptive, in which DAC is the slave, but the BH DAC does not use this. SOME other DACs use this mode.

The S/PDIF inputs (coax and optical) just work with the source as master and the DAC as slave. Thus the DAC has to somehow synchronize its clock to the data rate from the source. This is traditionally done with a device called a PLL, which is built in to all the S/PDIF receiver chips. PLLs have much higher jitter than a good fixed frequency clock. The BH DAC does not do it this way. It cleans up the S/PDIF signal, and sends it into an FPGA (field programmable gate array) which does the S/PDIF decoding. But the special part is a digitally controlled ultra low jitter clock. This is almost as good as the best fixed frequency clocks. The FPGA tells this clock to speed up or slow down so it is synchronized to the average data rate of the source.

The result of this is that both S/PDIF and USB produce ultra low jitter to the DAC chip. This combination of ultra low jitter from BOTH S/PDIF and USB doesn't exist in any other DAC. On other DACs one or the other will be significantly worse than the other input.

John S.

John Swenson
DAC designer
Well Tempered Record player -> Seduction
Moded Squeezebox->DIY DAC
BDT preamp->813 monster SE amp
DIY "Bazooka" Lowther speakers


Offline xcortes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
    • Posts: 997
Reply #222 on: November 30, 2013, 07:16:19 AM
Cool

Xavier Cortes


Offline madbrayniak

  • Full Member
  • ***
    • Posts: 110
Reply #223 on: December 02, 2013, 12:14:01 PM
Thanks for that detailed response John.

I am a computer guy but DACs go over my head a bit...must be all those video games.

I am looking forward to this though. I see in my head a small PC build into a Streacom case sitting next to a Bottlehead DAC and my Quickie(maybe BeePree in future?).

Only bad thing is that one thing that I MUST have is HT Bypass since I will be running my receiver through it as well to the amp. I will have to do this with a splitter I think though so that I dont waste any tube life for tv watching.

Music has to be tubes though!



Offline Paul Birkeland

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
    • Posts: 19732
Reply #224 on: December 02, 2013, 05:51:08 PM
Only bad thing is that one thing that I MUST have is HT Bypass since I will be running my receiver through it as well to the amp. I will have to do this with a splitter I think though so that I dont waste any tube life for tv watching.

You could add a switch and extra jacks to the Quickie for this.

The BeePre's larger chassis and plentiful jack field make this a bit easier. 

-PB

Paul "PB" Birkeland

Bottlehead Grunt & The Repro Man