I will keep my attention on your progressings.
I must say, I am really satisfied with my own DAC (so far!). I have built, about two years ago, the Doede Douma Dac DDDac version two. The same one Leifcristensen has. Mine is USB and battery-powered.
The reason I am looking around is, I can only play-back 44/16 files.
Since I am a llifetime-liverecording enthausiast and and do my recordings (orchestral and choir) ,for the last eight years or so on hard-disk 96/32, I need a really good way of playing back those files as well without the need rebuilding them to 44/16, as you will understand.
The things I am using now for that matter are the prodigy HD2 soundcard(intern), or the M-audio USB(extern).
I am looking for a better solution!
But......since it's all DIY and hobbying, for the sake of good musical audio reproduction, low cost investments are always a preference!
Hi Ed,
Although I gave some implied answer by describing the Buffalo experience, here is a response from some other angles :
I think we are all seeking for 100% natural playback through speakers. Possibly 99,99% of people may think this will never be possible because of various indirect reasons like "the room", "the speaker", "our ears", and any other IMHO *not* legitimate reason not to try.
I do, and I do that since I got myself the combination of an NOS DAC and (very) high resolution speakers, a few years ago. I took the hurdle of leaving "getting rid of disturbing things" and plunged in the pond of "how to get it more real". It is my assumption that 99,99% of people (not necessarily the same as the beforementioned) are still struggling with the "getting rid of the disturbances".
What I tried to express about the Buffalo (but did not spend too many words on in the end) is that it is so easy to see how the Buffalo will fit into "a" system. BUT this is related to how difficult that is for the NOS DAC.
With the Buffalo nothing seems critical, and the music flows to you as -indeed- vinyl would back in my old (ehh, young) days. I have things in mind like
- when the amp is not 100% it is not problem; the Buffalo will make it sing anyway;
- when the resolution of the speaker (or tweeter) isn't all that much, no problem; the Buffalo will get to you anyway;
- when you are not a critical listener, the Buffalo will be way better opposed to whatever it was you had ...
... when you had an oversampling DAC ...
To put the above into the perspective I felt all the time at listening to the Buffalo, each and every second springs to my mind how much more difficult it is for the non-oversampling DAC to perform;
You may recall the earlier days of the NOS DAC, where known people (a "Garmt" springs to my mind for our area) tend to be so sure that NOS was nice, as long as the whole orchestra didn't start to play together. Things get wild and rough and "difficult".
It is this what I got rid of a few years ago, and it is exactly this what I heard back through the Buffalo as being no problem at all (which says something about my gotting rid of it ... uhm), and ... it is more of a problem with the NOS1.
Since I haven't been used to an OS DAC for a few years, the step "back" to that is bigger as how I recall the stepping from it back then;
Strangely enough the Buffalo even emphasizes the OS character, and I mean far more than my Fireface which I now and then used for testing 24/96/192. Thus, the Fireface is poor on all fronts, but I never perceived the OS principle form it so much, apart from synths being uninteresting.
If I would try to put things in a negative perspective for the Buffalo, I would say : this makes a mess of it all the best way possible.
But my context is not negative, and I really want to say something like : it is able to cohere all the different voices and things so that all is smooth and more smooth. As a bonus there's loads of detail as well.
And my objective expression would be : but smooth = smeared. Smeared at all the levels. The lack of dynamics (remember, compared to NOS) contributes to that. No, it is not the other way around, because the process itsels (heavy oversampling) just implies smearing. Or smoothing if you like. And *then* the dynamics have gone.
Dynamics is a technical matter, and it don't think it is a fact than you need them. It is a dimension yes, but by itself a dangerous one if your system is not up to it. E.g. when the speaker can't follow you end up with distortion because of it. So it depends ...
But :
Without the speed of transients, it is sheer impossible to mimic cymbals in the most natural way. Cymbals as *the* example for me to achieve in the most natural way the pas few years, and where I reached a limit at some stage. Or better : XxHighEnd seemed to have reached the limit, and I imagine an earlier version to be better at it than the current one. But has it ?
In fact the Buffalo -as a good OS DAC- shows what is happening really :
Where XXHighEnd can hardly deal with more than jitter influence at the source side (and a little more), the OS DAC brings you back into the world of disturbances. The cymbals are just gray again. Not really distortion like, but just gray. Nothing much different from vinyl I'd say.
In *my* case another type of "disturbing" entered my life : my brain fighting with the instruments not being recognized anymore. Try to imagine this : without the knowledge of this being possible, no problem (no matter a live performance tells you different), but with the knowledge it disturbs all over.
I am fairly sure that anyone being used to an OS DAC in the first place, would not be disturbed by this. Like gray cymbals are common, and the best to achieve as long as no distortion is heard.
Now back to the NOS1 ...
Besides the bass I raved about throughout in this topic, I now rave the same about the cymbals;
I have loads of recordings from which I would swear the whole of the performance can't be bettered. Including the cymbals and all the variants of it.
I told it earlier, now it comes to be that brushes (on a snare) are more difficult than enything else. Before (with my old NOS DAC) they already got out of the noise (two years ago I was listening with my ears in the speaker to find out what noise I heard), but only being a so loud(er) noise that it couldn't be noise itself, and you could regocnize that brushes were going on. So, that was one "disturbance" less. Today ? hmm ... like every bassis is suddenly plunking the strings by 5cm, all those Jazz idiots seem to prefer brushes over sticks. Yes, they are up front now ... that loud.
But they are not good enough. Too less colour opposed to reality. Too much "noise".
The latter might be an example of what may happen with the NOS DAC. It puts every instrument in itself, with the consequence it must be good. If it is not good enough, but the instrument is profoundly there anyway, you have a problem. A relative problem of course, and maybe I am the only one having it (possibly stribing too much for perfection).
When I say I have loads of recordings which just mimic reality, I must add to that that I also now have loads of recordings that shout;
Most people (if not all but me) would say that this is a bad recording. Maybe so, but my experience tells me that when an album doesn't sound good, it is the equipment (the software player being "equipment" just the same) doing it to you. It happened so many times, and I just know I am right in this.
It very well can be so that the NOS1 runs me into limits of my system. And it can be;
A long time ago I measured my old DAC for squares with the scope, and I don't recall anything so beautifully remaining a square as I showed a few posts back. This was merely like the 3000Hz picture of the Buffalo, but then at 20KHz. So, the NOS1 should be much "sharper";
Besides the more fragile detail (like hearing the feedback of a cymbal onto the stick) this creates a "force" in the mid area which currently comes to me a standing waves in that area, 95% certainly incurred by my horn speakers and the internal resonance. With XXHighEnd tweaks this happened before, and a trumpet started to be able to resonate the horn, and perceived the sound of the horn. This too was just more square sound, and the voice of Mark Knopfler could do it too.
The latter again is an example of something which would never be incurred by the Buffalo (hence ESS Sabre chip). Never.
So ... all 'n all you see that NOS (and certainly the NOS1) is way way way more live like and natural when the rest of your system coorporates. But if your system does not, you run into problems much quicker with NOS.
For me, right now, this means that I must try tweaking with XXHighEnd first. I never did that so far, and just used the old settings. Wasn't of any use so far either, because just yesterday I closed the case the NOS1 is in, and all should sound like ... well, intended.
Peter
