advertisement


MDAC First Listen (part 00101000)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Project roadmap

Before presenting the planned project schedule, it is important to stress that any timeframes given are only our best estimates and cannot be relied upon completely. We are undertaking development of the very best DAC possible and that is the primary goal which necessarily takes precedence to meeting any self-inflicted deadlines. After all what good is a DAC delivered on time, but knowingly crippled? That said, let’s look at the milestones and projected timeframes and the related installment payment schedule.


Keywords: Knowingly crippled.

It's also about time John made a profit - the life blood of life itself.

It's very misleading to write that project roadmap is same as the contract to which we are all effectively signed. Project roadmap is what it says. It includes predefined measurable milestones to get the project finish (usually in scheduled time).

I would say that "signed contract" instead in this case covers project original design goals, planned features, specifications, estimated costs provided, planned stages, planned payments steps and projected time schedule.
 
The project drifted from the initial promise (an improved MDAC) both in features, cost and time (I don't trust the Fusion DAC being ready by the end of the year). Not everyone joined for the mighty quest of the perfect DAC. I'm sure a child can understand that too.

From a development schedule there is no difference between smaller MDAC based boards or FWC.

FWC has the benefit that the miniDSP team will design the from panel and create the UI so removing this from Dominiks workload.

Analogue PCB is targeted to go into production October.
 
Can I just check one thing - I have a buyer for my silver (donor) MDAC (I'd keep my L2 Toy for the second system). Before I sell it, can I confirm that the FWC will definitely happen? I don't want to sell and find out that the FWC is then canned, leaving me having to source another MDAC......

John,

FWC will happen (even if its via miniDSP), if you want the best DAC sell your silver MDAC.

The more I come to terms with the possibilities of the FWC and how I've compromised the design to squeeze it into the MDAC chassis - then FWC just makes even more sense.

The original aim of this project was to design a much improved MDAC - the best DAC I could design at a reasonable price. I'm NOT prepared to compromise 4 years of work just to squeeze the design into an unsuitable enclosure - it simply does not make sense. Why would anyone want a lessor unit - is the small footprint more important then sound quality and features?

If the vote goes for the MDAC chassis - then I'll build the "second rate unit" wash my hands of it and concentrate on the FWC version for the future - second best is not good enough for me!

The primary goal is for the best sound DAC for the money - NOT that its has to be squeezed into a small chassis - for me its simply about the sound quality.

I'm sorry for the "Fork in the road" at such a late stage, but the possibility of a FWC has only recently became a practical reality.

When I look at how the design can be improved by removing the size limitations then I have no choice... I really struggled to squeeze the design onto the PCB area available and sadly compromised performance to this end.

The Analogue board will be in production towards the end of October the extra space the FWC affords allows me allows me to add a much improved local PSU section (and many other small details) - without the size limitation these sections can be quickly reworked and designed "as I would have liked".

My priority is to meet the October deadline if we are to start shipping towards the end of this year.

We have internally discussed splitting the "At Cost" payments into two installments - the first for the Analogue board, and the balance once the Digital PCB hits production thus reducing the financial burden.

Even Audiolab have gone for a full width case for there soon to be launched MDAC+ design - there are just too many limitations in such a small chassis.
 
John,
For what it's worth I vote 100% for FWC. Even if it so happens it costs more and takes longer; this is HiFi we hang our hat entirely on quality.
Chris.

Chris,

The FWC will not impact timescales, there will be a increase in cost (less then GBP300) less then your MDAC can be sold for :)

Yes, sound quality above all else (at an affordable price) should be the primary goal :)

I kinda when that direction when I sacrificed Dynamic range for sound quality by using MOSFET's in the input stage.....
 
It's a very well made unit.....rather expensive though!

I should point out in the context of this debate that its more expensive then the FWC with its internal HQ PSU and IPS touch panel display and thats the point, the FWC just makes sense, ignoring its extra features and the extra digital I/O I can now add.
 
I know it's a bit sideways question, but: what about the remote? Any plans to keep the old MDAC remote working? Any plans to use a (much) more extended one or are most of the features going to be touchscreen only?

I know some people wanted to have some remote functions customized, would a generic mapping tool for certain predefined actions (ie. switch inputs / switch relays on outputs / ..) bind-able onto any button be a reasonable goal? The IR "learning" thing, but in reverse - MDAC2 learning the remote. Or is it too far fetched?

The same actions could be also bound on the touchscreen on some "home screen". I can see myself using the "switch headphones/speakers" button quite often.

There was also some talk about some apple remotes or something, is that a thing to be considered?

Thanks,
Jiri
 
Hi John,
I was away for a week. I am sorry that I may have missed your message. Is there still a chance that you have a look at my MDAC? Thanks!
 
I voted "No" on the poll, but after reading up on everything have changed my mind, I would consider a FWC.
 
I know it's a bit sideways question, but: what about the remote? Any plans to keep the old MDAC remote working? Any plans to use a (much) more extended one or are most of the features going to be touchscreen only?

Yes the current MDAC remote will be supported, but the fullwidth chassis will be supplied with a new remote handset so that the MDAC can be sold complete to recoup the extra cost of the FWC.

I know some people wanted to have some remote functions customized, would a generic mapping tool for certain predefined actions (ie. switch inputs / switch relays on outputs / ..) bind-able onto any button be a reasonable goal? The IR "learning" thing, but in reverse - MDAC2 learning the remote. Or is it too far fetched?

Possible, but a question of software priorities...

The same actions could be also bound on the touchscreen on some "home screen". I can see myself using the "switch headphones/speakers" button quite often.

Actually there is a physical spare "Function" button on the FWC front panel that can be software assigned by the user, I had in mind the following assignable functions:-

CD Eject

Balanced headphone select

6.3mm Headphone select

Mute

You get the idea.....

There was also some talk about some apple remotes or something, is that a thing to be considered?

Yep - we can support the apple handset, in fact it might be the best option for the FWC...
 
I voted "No" on the poll, but after reading up on everything have changed my mind, I would consider a FWC.

Don't worry, I'll post an official poll here once we firmed up the pricing and extra features etc.

I suspect there has been some double voting as already 140 votes have been counted yet we only have around 200 members, and some are Slave unit owners...
 
Hi John,
I was away for a week. I am sorry that I may have missed your message. Is there still a chance that you have a look at my MDAC? Thanks!

Alavan,

I did reply to your post but theres been so much recent traffic that I'm sure you missed it.

I'll arrange IAG China to send you a 230V ac PSU to you directly in Beijing.
 
While I'm in 'parliamentary recess'....I read the above article and found it rather interesting, the comments were scathing too. Seems Chinese manufacturing may be facing a crisis....cheap labour is their only advantage, but advances in western innovation and robotic manufacture may put paid to that too.

I can see why you said a while ago that you would order about 10% excess of the cases/parts you required....I guess the quality control in China is such that you will need to bin about 10% of the delivered product.

The original MDAC I believe is fully manufactured in China....I wonder how good the quality control was on the units produced...(luckily mine was excellent).....I guess it must depend on the company used. From my experience (not with China) the first small order is delivered to high quality but it's the second or larger order that suffers badly....but I guess you are more than fully aware of these issues.

Made in Czech Republic would add kudos and value!

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/china-knocked-off-range-rover-135006250.html

How can the Chinese government allow this?

For the PFM Fusion Dac production I'll personally build and test each unit here in HK, not looking forward to being away from Renata and the Pups for so long, but its my personal guarantee of quality :)
 
John,

FWC will happen (even if its via miniDSP), if you want the best DAC sell your silver MDAC.

The more I come to terms with the possibilities of the FWC and how I've compromised the design to squeeze it into the MDAC chassis - then FWC just makes even more sense.

The original aim of this project was to design a much improved MDAC - the best DAC I could design at a reasonable price. I'm NOT prepared to compromise 4 years of work just to squeeze the design into an unsuitable enclosure - it simply does not make sense. Why would anyone want a lessor unit - is the small footprint more important then sound quality and features?

If the vote goes for the MDAC chassis - then I'll build the "second rate unit" wash my hands of it and concentrate on the FWC version for the future - second best is not good enough for me!

The primary goal is for the best sound DAC for the money - NOT that its has to be squeezed into a small chassis - for me its simply about the sound quality.

I'm sorry for the "Fork in the road" at such a late stage, but the possibility of a FWC has only recently became a practical reality.

When I look at how the design can be improved by removing the size limitations then I have no choice... I really struggled to squeeze the design onto the PCB area available and sadly compromised performance to this end.

The Analogue board will be in production towards the end of October the extra space the FWC affords allows me allows me to add a much improved local PSU section (and many other small details) - without the size limitation these sections can be quickly reworked and designed "as I would have liked".

My priority is to meet the October deadline if we are to start shipping towards the end of this year.

We have internally discussed splitting the "At Cost" payments into two installments - the first for the Analogue board, and the balance once the Digital PCB hits production thus reducing the financial burden.

Even Audiolab have gone for a full width case for there soon to be launched MDAC+ design - there are just too many limitations in such a small chassis.

FWC it is then! :cool:

Some questions come into mind:
1. Does this mean we can still connect up to 3 slaves AND have sufficient digital inputs?
2. Can we get front panel headphone connectors or both front and rear?
3. You did mention a single pcb option earlier. Do we all get L3 (ADC) now?
 
For the PFM Fusion Dac production I'll personally build and test each unit here in HK, not looking forward to being away from Renata and the Pups for so long, but its my personal guarantee of quality :)

Have you taken account custom dutys and value-added taxes which add costs to project participants if you start delivering packages from HK to EU countries?
 
Woah, just came back after one month of vacation. What can I say...:

2) I would like to also bring up an issue with the British pound being 30-35% more expensive than 2 years ago compared to EUR/SEK/DKK. Those not living in the UK pay far more for those extras to the project.

+1 This is one issue i've pointed out in my latest post. I'm in for MDAC FWC and VFET amp but the costs raises due to the EUR/GBP rates. Isn't it possible to pay using EUR ?

Best regards
P.S.:
1 - This thread is moving so far that i can't find the cases projected designs
2 - Do you plan to make easy to install the CDP inside of the FWC so one could do it on DIY basis ? What could be the extra cost for the CDP option ?
 
Have you taken account custom dutys and value-added taxes which add costs to project participants if you start delivering packages from HK to EU countries?

Yes, we are considering the Duties - even if I shipped from Czech Rep, I'd have to pay duties somewhere along the line.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top