MDAC First Listen (part 00100001)
- Thread starter stellablues
- Start date
- Status
JohnW
pfm member
But what about the people who doesn't need a streamer?
No hq psu for them?
No problem, if we have the chassis / design its no problem to just offer the HQ PSU, sans streamer.
fred sonnen
pfm Member
congratiolation for your decision!
To split the DAC from the Streamer, was my thoughts a few days ago also.
The most importand reason from my point of view is point 5.
Where did you get all these new MDAC houses from? My unterstanding was, that it is not so easy to get the salvages mdac's today.
Perhaps you can now think about the streamer CPU / Board again. With intel you are much more flexibel regarding the sowtware and there features.
If the mdac2 is the DAC and master clock, is it posible to integrate the MTRN with the streamer? You want to offer a CD drive anyway within the streamer. And a third box just for the CD-Transport?
regards
f.s.
Can't see any benefit having an intel processoer on the streamer. I definitely don't want windows on it.
If you want Intel just buy a NUC.
I actually just bought a NUC with i5 processoer for the sole purpose to run LMS on it. I used the Vortexbox distribution. which has LMS 7.8 build with the DSD pluging.
I tested that DSD over PCM worked using a SB Touch connected to a Chord HUGO.
Now LMS it is very stable and super responsive on web interface or iPeng.
Before I ran it on NAS with dual core Atom on it.
And this is using the SB Touch as the streamer and it's CPU is much slower than the microSom which John intend to use.
JohnW
pfm member
We have our own tooling for the a compatible chassis for the MDAC (in China) - but I'm reluctant to deal with Chinese quality control issues - I'm getting too old, frustrated and short tempered to deal with there constant "untruths" and BS, while always ending up paying for any problems out of my own pocket.
The MDAC2 rear panel is relativity simple, and not needing to worry about its cosmetic finish too much (being on the rear of the unit) - eases matters.
I'm intended to keep it nice and simple, I like the original plan of the MicroSom module - As far as I'm concerned Microsoft has lost the plot since Vista (XP was there last decent OS) - I have no intention of supporting the "WINTEL" consortium. With the cheap prices of notebooks, there's NO need to recreate an Intel machine.
If we do release the streamer as an external box, then it will include an optical drive - which will also operate as a CD transport.
JohnW
pfm member
Crossed posts, I totally agree!
I would absolutely love this!!!
JohnW
pfm member
John,
Please give it another thought, thank you.
I personally would vote for moving the bluetooth/custom wireless dongle to the streamer section as they make more logical sense there (plus the RF interference generated would be ~ "normal" wifi).
Please note that I'm not trying to say "leave the DAC featureless", the separate digital board in the MDAC may certainly become useful if you decide to move to USB3.0 in the future (or something similar).
Looking forward to MDAC2,
Jiri
Is it really necessary to use the miniature variant? This will effectively break out-of-the-box compatibility with the little "standardization" there's for balanced headphones. I would - for example - much rather have a full sized 5W XLR for headphones, with the ADC inputs being miniXLR in place of the AV bypass (which was the original proposal - AV bypass *OR* balanced headphones).
Please give it another thought, thank you.
I'd still prefer something more DIY-friendly, but I can understand the space requirements. Will it be possible to get the connector separately from ebay/amazon/rscomponents?
May I ask how these differ from the HDMI-like bus? Are these just for "control" (volume, etc.) with the HDMI-like bus carrying SPDIF, clock, etc.?
I've been saying (writing) it for some time, that I would prefer the MDAC to stay a DAC above all.
I personally would vote for moving the bluetooth/custom wireless dongle to the streamer section as they make more logical sense there (plus the RF interference generated would be ~ "normal" wifi).
Please note that I'm not trying to say "leave the DAC featureless", the separate digital board in the MDAC may certainly become useful if you decide to move to USB3.0 in the future (or something similar).
Looking forward to MDAC2,
Jiri
JohnW
pfm member
The ADC inputs are now already Mini XLR - AV Bypass and ADC inputs are two different functions, however but I don't see there relation to the Balanced headphone output?
The problem with the full size XLR is its height - I cannot mount connectors on the digital board in the area above the headphone XLR - which happens to be dead centre of the product.
I don't see the problem with the Mini XLR as you made up your own cable - so is it not easy to change the connectors?
You can buy a suitable cable from Amazon (I will also be able to provide them), but I'm not sure what ideas you have for the port - its going to be rather specialised (LVDS based signalling).
The HDMI Bus is a very high speed interface, we have not defined the interface yet, however its connected directly to the FPGA so can be defined the physical port on the fly via a simple firmware update
The 3.5mm "Bus" is just for low speed command traffic traffic such as commands between the power-amps and MDAC2.
I've been saying (writing) it for some time, that I would prefer the MDAC to stay a DAC above all.
I personally would vote for moving the bluetooth/custom wireless dongle to the streamer section as they make more logical sense there (plus the RF interference generated would be ~ "normal" wifi).
Please note that I'm not trying to say "leave the DAC featureless", the separate digital board in the MDAC may certainly become useful if you decide to move to USB3.0 in the future (or something similar).
Not everyone will wish to send the extra for the streamer - the BT and Wireless USB option where intended to be a simple painless solution to stream audio, I'm not so worried about RF levels as its a very small self contained screened module - but I'll make the final decision once I work on the digital PCB (and based upon MDAC2 owners feedback).
JohnW
pfm member
No, only available on the L2 / L3 with there advanced clock option.
JohnW
pfm member
WRT the VFET Amps, I've had a flurry of PM's asking for the price - I did mention the price in an earlier post (I'm a little embarrassed each time I'm asked , as I can really appreciate that they are expensive).
The VFET based amps are pretty costly as they are handbuilt "custom designs", I'm building them to be my reference amps during the development of MDAC2.... however so long as I can purchase the VFETs then I'm more then happy to also build them for others
The price is GBP3500 for a pair of Monoblocks (in Silver or Black), the cost is split into two payments, the first for £2300 is partially used to secure the new donor 8200MB's, VFET's & Tubes etc and the balance of £1200 would be payable once the final units are being constructed towards the end of the year in time for Christmas.
PM me if anyone wishes to reserve a pair - I'll be arranging the donor MB's this week.
The VFET based amps are pretty costly as they are handbuilt "custom designs", I'm building them to be my reference amps during the development of MDAC2.... however so long as I can purchase the VFETs then I'm more then happy to also build them for others
The price is GBP3500 for a pair of Monoblocks (in Silver or Black), the cost is split into two payments, the first for £2300 is partially used to secure the new donor 8200MB's, VFET's & Tubes etc and the balance of £1200 would be payable once the final units are being constructed towards the end of the year in time for Christmas.
PM me if anyone wishes to reserve a pair - I'll be arranging the donor MB's this week.
JohnW
pfm member
Yes, absolutely no problem, the BNC SPDIF inputs are transformer coupled so are effectively "balanced inputs".
fred sonnen
pfm Member
The unit will come with HDMI and USB ports for keyboard / Mouse etc...
Hallo John
Thanks for all your answers!
From my experience, if you like to have flash media support in a system without connected keyboard and mouse, you have much more offers within WinTel.
And if you want to have pure DSD transmission (and not DSD over PCM), my understanding is that you need WinTel also.
But if you don't like the system I have no problem with it. I will stay with my DIY streamer ;-)
If you are flexible with the ingredients (streamer, CD-Transport, HQ-PSU ) of the second MDAC housing, is it possible to offer just CD-Transport with HQ-PSU?
Didn't you say for HDMI you have to spend thousands of $ just for the licence?
regards
f.s.
Julf
Facts are our friends
Is there any disadvantages to using DoP for compatibility? It is just a data packaging convention that doesn't alter the bits in any way.
Originally Posted by Morph3R View Post
Hi John,
Since you didn't mention SMA female connector on Digital PCB I assume that both Bluetooth and Wireless USB is also moving to L4 Streaming Extension Unit? (I support this )
Also maybe we should consider of new name for this "unit" since in this development MDAC2 L4 isn't appropriate. Maybe something like MDAC2 X1 or MDAC2 SX
Cheers,
Branislav
Not sure that I like the idea of moving agreed functionality of the L3 version to what is now becoming a totally independent L4 version. If you do not want the L4 version you have lost the functionality. This constant moving of goal posts to satisfy just one or two people is a bit of a concern.
I may have been interested in the MDAC2L4 version but as a separate box probably not.
Hi John,
Since you didn't mention SMA female connector on Digital PCB I assume that both Bluetooth and Wireless USB is also moving to L4 Streaming Extension Unit? (I support this )
Also maybe we should consider of new name for this "unit" since in this development MDAC2 L4 isn't appropriate. Maybe something like MDAC2 X1 or MDAC2 SX
Cheers,
Branislav
Not sure that I like the idea of moving agreed functionality of the L3 version to what is now becoming a totally independent L4 version. If you do not want the L4 version you have lost the functionality. This constant moving of goal posts to satisfy just one or two people is a bit of a concern.
I may have been interested in the MDAC2L4 version but as a separate box probably not.
- Status