advertisement


MDAC First Listen (part 00101011)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am concerned by talks of the FDac Lite.. Its a high risk of adding to project confuzzlement and moving timescales (in the wrong direction) again.
Get the detox done and delivered, then get the Full FDac done and delivered.. Then do the FDac Lite. The Lite can serve as a nice distraction when you are building/testing/delivering the FDac.
Complete the FDac and get it delivered, then start on the next project.

I stand by you on this, its clearly a work of passion, so it takes as long as it takes but adding another side project is a worry.
 
John
FWC for me.
Just to say that whilst I would of course like the FDAC as soon as possible I fully appreciate that you are working as hard as is physically possible and I wouldn't dream of asking any more of you. So it's a simple philosophical decision for me; I want the FDAC therefore I will wait until you are able to complete it. Furthermore I will wait with good grace because you can't do anymore than you are already doing.
Ian
 
timola said:
I'm concerned that John is feeling undue stress on this project.:(

I believe that even though the development stage has consumed more than 2x the time John allowed in his initial costings we have not paid/contributed to this increased cost for John.

The new design and spec are now much higher as a result, which I for one appreciate greatly...the delays were worth it! (the Detox was born in between and no paternity leave was taken :)).

Personally I wouldn't mind if the development cost on both projects were now increased as required by John so that cost issues (e.g. Detox prototype PCB costs) are fully covered by all the co-investors and not just John.

The Detox may be helping John with bridging finance, although even the development time for this and subsequently the spec has increased....the development cost has not.

I want John to enjoy his work and feel fully supported both financially and morally on this fantastic project/adventure which is so exciting (for me at least :D).

I personally want to wait to get the FWC-FDAC-L3 and if there was a voluntary way to pay/donate further to this project or John's drink-fridge supplies I would be only too happy to contribute...do others here agree?:)

I don't know of any other talented designer who is so committed to looking after his fans and offering so much IP for so little.
Click to expand...

Stick your name down for a second unit... ;)
 
adamdea said:
The most important thing is to not wait for the FWC any longer. Every time another thing arrives which isn't going to delay things further, things get delayed further. The project is at least 5/6 months off completion. Is it my imagination or is it always about that length of time from completion?

I think we have reached a point where the most important thing is to fix a schedule and stick to it: anything which has to be changed to stick to the schedule gets changed. Can we write in blood that the Fdac will be out by end April? I don't want to sound whingey, but honestly I think that unless actually sticking to schedule becomes a priority this project is never going to complete. In that context the lite option doesn't sound like a way of accelerating anything. I can see that it might allow some sort of parachute if people want to bail out.

You have always said that the dac would not have all of the dsp/ FPGA features worked out at the time of issue, so software design should not hold things up.

I understand the genius can't be rushed, but I also can't see the point in the worlds best dac that doesn't exist.
Click to expand...



I was going to write a lengthy reply, but adamdea sums up my position.

With the greatest of respect john, every time some new element or design change gets introduced the timescales inevitably shift. It really is time to fix the spec and concentrate on delivery. I hope that doesn't come across as whingy, and I do appreciate the creative process but.............


Last time the spec changed to the fdac I commented on how I wondered if the rest of the world was starting to overtake this project. Well this dropped into my mailbox yesterday. Not making any comment on how good it is, but for those that want it, a DAC with phono in, MQA, dsd, linking multiple units etc.

https://mytekdigital.com/preorder/
 
(1) I understand the concern that John is over-stretching the development funds to cover more than an extra year's deadline extension. But bear in mind that the 20 VFET payments will offset some of John's costs, and perhaps also the Detox payments will have helped John's finances some. A "lite" FDAC is not an option unless it can be software updated with the use of a computer. A "lite" FDAC will come down like a "cocktease" (pardon my French).
(2) Technological progress may well be trying to play catch up with John's one man band development team (well, two man band - Dominik is also onboard + mini-DSP). The longer John is at this, the bigger the chance that someone will be able to emulate (some of) John's work and create a similarly spec'ed DAC. We can't judge that until the FDAC is a concrete reality. Here's to hoping that John wins that race.
 
iansr said:
John
FWC for me.
Just to say that whilst I would of course like the FDAC as soon as possible I fully appreciate that you are working as hard as is physically possible and I wouldn't dream of asking any more of you. So it's a simple philosophical decision for me; I want the FDAC therefore I will wait until you are able to complete it. Furthermore I will wait with good grace because you can't do anymore than you are already doing.
Ian
Click to expand...

Well said Ian. I'm waiting for the FWC also.

John has a pretty unenviable task in trying to satisfy everyone... it's simply not possible to please everyone all of the time.

Whilst I don't really want FDAC Lite, due to it being another distraction, FDAC will certainly benefit from such a development.

Cheers,
Bruce
 
iansr said:
John
FWC for me.
Just to say that whilst I would of course like the FDAC as soon as possible I fully appreciate that you are working as hard as is physically possible and I wouldn't dream of asking any more of you. So it's a simple philosophical decision for me; I want the FDAC therefore I will wait until you are able to complete it. Furthermore I will wait with good grace because you can't do anymore than you are already doing.
Ian
Click to expand...

These are my feelings entirely (FWC with slotloader). I will just have to be patient...
 
LarsS said:
Agree, my only interest is the FWC FDAC.

There's been maybe to many detours in the project already. I'd suggest us all solely supporting and focusing on the FWC FDAC.

/Lars
Click to expand...

Me too. I feel any Detox, VFET amps, FDAC lite, and all these posts take John away from his FDAC work and just delays the FWC FDAC. Its sounds like the Detox is essentially done so that should make our existing MDACs sound a bit better until the FWC FDAC is done. Let's set a realistic goal of ...???? 6/2016...???? and if we are early that'll be nice and when there are distractions and more add-on's, which there will be, we can still get delivery on time. John, I appreciate your exhaustive work, but I'll really appreciate it when I'm listening to it in my music room. When that occurs, I would just like a realistic time frame so I don't have unrealistic expectations. I don't care if it's 4, 6, or 8 months. But let's set a firm FWC FDAC goal and reach it.
 
The Detox has acted as learning curve for USB input design for the Fdac, it also gives john a relatively safe dry run with cnc cases. It'll also be a money spinner long term. The Fdac lite really is a necessary step in proving the full Fdac design and the production capabilities of John's vendors. Neither of them are lost time, you simply can't work on one project for so long without going mad, these are necessary steps, not distractions.
 
Hi John,
Don't take my comment the wrong way but I believe we need to achieve a compromise. I'm sure the fdac would benefit from the vfets, fdac lite and also from any of your future projects experience. However we need to do a compromise and try to fix the delayed schedule otherwise I think you will have more people wanting to leave the project and unhappy. I know you spent the last years with this baby and you want it to be as perfect as possible.
Instead of adding another project to enable you to test the analogue why dont you take more time and just do it on the fdac project. Dont feel the pressure and take another month or so as I believe another project will just cause delays even if it seams simple as you know from your experience.
Having said this fully support whatever your decision is but would love to receive the fdac a and vfets and start listening to it.
 
Here's the FDAC Analogue PCB (based on reworking the MDAC2 PCB) - its VERY early days for the respin, I'm working on the redesign of the left channel ATM, just as a warning the design progress will not be as rapid as was with the Detox PCB due to its Analogue "Complex" nature so don't be too disappointed with any apparent "slow" progress :(

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/86116171/FDAC Analogue Spin II A01ax.jpg

When I look back at the detox project is was good to see how the PCB progressed from the early days.... (But its was a much simpler design so it progress rapidly...)
 
Rjpcardoso said:
Hi John,
Don't take my comment the wrong way but I believe we need to achieve a compromise. I'm sure the fdac would benefit from the vfets, fdac lite and also from any of your future projects experience. However we need to do a compromise and try to fix the delayed schedule otherwise I think you will have more people wanting to leave the project and unhappy. I know you spent the last years with this baby and you want it to be as perfect as possible.
Instead of adding another project to enable you to test the analogue why dont you take more time and just do it on the fdac project. Dont feel the pressure and take another month or so as I believe another project will just cause delays even if it seams simple as you know from your experience.
Having said this fully support whatever your decision is but would love to receive the fdac a and vfets and start listening to it.
Click to expand...

+1
I´m also for FWC FDAC. Take the time you need for the development, but please don´t start another project again.
 
sq225917 said:
The Fdac lite really is a necessary step in proving the full Fdac design and the production capabilities of John's vendors. these are necessary steps, not distractions.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree, the Fdac lite would 'prove' the all important analogue section, for tweaking with Vishay resistors for the ultimate Fdac.

It would also satisfy, a quicker time frame and through use of simpler case reduce costs.

I think many of our group embarked upon this project expecting a superior Mdac product using a new drop in board at a cost of £ 6/700 however the ever increasing feature set of the Fdac has resulted in a completely new 'ultimate' product but at a cost of C. £ 1500 maybe more.

This increase will have alienated some who do not have the luxury of an endless budget.

Size is also an issue for some, I wonder whether the analogue board would fit an Mdac size case with the PSU and digital sections in another ?

As a one man band myself, I know exactly the pressures of working alone against time/cost deadlines, so I can fully sympathise with John.
 
JohnW said:
I'd like to thank everyone who have stood by the project for there continued support. I feel the pressure as I'm aware how late I'm with the project but I work 16/7 and its hard to convey how much effort I've put into the development of this design, it has been my life now for over 4 years - a true labour of love!
Click to expand...

John,

I'm with timola (2 days back) on this. Even though I'm as impatient as anyone (and given that this won't arrive before I'm in my 80th year I have more reason than most to be impatient...) I'm surprised, and sorry for you, that you are getting flak on the timing.

Most if not all of us who subscribed originally expected the timescale to be flexible, even when it was 'just' the MDAC2. Given the change to FDAC, with the big increase in complication, it's entirely reasonable that you should find it difficult to give a precise timeline for the project. There was an overwhelming majority for that change, and we have to stick with the consequences.

For the record, I was tempted by the Lite version because of the smaller footprint, but having thought about it, I agree with almost everybody above that although you may need to do a prototype as a development step, there really isn't much point in tidying that up for production. Even if the consequent delay to the FW version was small or zero, it would still irritate a lot of people.

I'm looking forward to that L2/CD FW version (in black)!

Bob
 
John, I've signed up for mdac evolution, a project that turn out into a new DAC whatever name it will have at the end. That's the one I'm interested.
I'm looking forward to consider other projects from you, but not before this one is complete.

But please remember that time is our most valuable resource. It is limited and irreplaceable.

Michael
 
Mikas said:
But please remember that time is our most valuable resource. It is limited and irreplaceable.

Michael
Click to expand...

Michael,

So well said, as I become older I realise how precious time is, its simply priceless! - its also why I think "4 years of my life has gone into this project"...
 
Bob L said:
I agree with almost everybody above that although you may need to do a prototype as a development step, there really isn't much point in tidying that up for production. Even if the consequent delay to the FW version was small or zero, it would still irritate a lot of people.
Click to expand...

Its been good to read the comments :)

As you say we need an "FDAC Lite" type PCB for internal development and testing so I'll most likely spin a board just for internal use (we need an Analogue board "Test Jig" for the production line and as Misterdog mentions I need to "prove the all important analogue section for tweaking the Vishay resistors for the ultimate Fdac."

So the current thinking is that we will have an internal engineering FDAC Lite but it will not be released as a commercial design.
 
Personally I not interested in FDAC Lite, but if there is a cost saving compare to full version, I can see that there can be interest, maybe more from new members who just heard about John work. A little bit more information around, maybe offered it together with Audiolab mono block amplifiers from basement can help with funds and could help polishing main FDAC project, similar like Detox project.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top