advertisement


change afoot......

orangeart

orangeart

KJF Audio Ltd.
......well maybe.

Currently I run a buffalo 2 into hacker naps, this is fed via lorian's usb/i2s module. Very nice it all is too. However, I've always been plagued by feeling the need to go active but this can prove very expensive so wanted to pick everyone's brains with a plan.

Sell the hackernap and the buffalo to fund the purchase of

2 hypex ucd180hg module and smps for tweeters
2 hypex ucd 400 modules and smps mid/bass

1 minidsp i2s in and out minisharc xo/room correction module with umik1 usb mic and mini digi for extra spdif connection for non i2s input.

2 twisted pear opus dacs, i2s in from mini sharc balanced out to hypex modules.

In short

Usb - i2s - dsp/xo - i2s - opus dacs - balanced - ucd modules.

The front end and xo bits are both unquestionably brilliant. The hyped modules should also be the equal of the hackernap or at least within spitting distance. My only slight reservation is the opus modules which are nowhere near the incumbent buffalo. I'm thinking that the move to active and the quality of the rest of the signal chain should compensate for the lack here, while at the same time getting me a lot more fiddling functionality. Anyone here got any experience with the opus dacs? Or anything of roughly the same cost and footprint spring to mind?

As an aside, I've spoke quite a lot to hypex who because of various reasons have given me a partner account which means quite good discount on some of thier stuff.....not ncore before you ask. If anyone was thinking of going class d I can add to my order for a discount over thier webshops prices. In effect a sort of hypex GB I suppose. Let me know what you need and I'll get the prices. The most basic amp 180st should be loads better than a chip amp and is no more expensive really.

Stefan
 
It's been at the back of my mind for ages as well. I've really wanted to use a couple of buffalos, but they are expensive. Bit concerned about the opus dacs not being good enough but can maybe upgrade them in the future. Hoped folk might have had some input for alternatives here.

Stefan
 
Stefan, for value and SQ I suspect it would be difficult to beat two of these AK4399 boards configured in dual mono if you are up for a bit of DIY.
http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/710-5...0001&campid=5338728743&icep_item=230918094271
Only £40 for two! Almost went for these myself and it is only the fact that my Amanero USB interface can only configure DAC's with I2C (rather than the SPI that the AKM works on) that put a bit of a damper.
You could off course do what I am going to do which is buy two ES9018 boards from the same vendor but this is slightly more expensive at £140 for the two. :)
 
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
My personnel thoughts are you need a really stinking hot DAC before moving on, a tricked up pair of Buffaloes is one tremendous bit of kit.
 
I did take a look at those, and your boards. The beauty of the opus dacs is the lack of need for an iv stage as they are balanced natively as are the ucd amps.
 
Bemused said:
My personnel thoughts are you need a really stinking hot DAC before moving on, a tricked up pair of Buffaloes is one tremendous bit of kit.
Click to expand...

I've spent a lot of thinking that as well, however the threads you and john have been moving forward are out of my comfort zone. I could probably persuade john to trick my buffalo out for me, but that means more money an for a while at least I'm not wanting to spend more.

The outlined ideas above are roughly equivilent in cost to the used resale of the HN and Buff, so is can scratch an itch without to much outlay.

Stefan
 
The AKM4399's have inbuilt IV and are voltage out so should be able to connect straight through in balanced mode. I think this is one of the reasons this chip is not as popular with DIY community as you can't fiddle with the the IV. many people seem to think non op-amp IV sounds better than the op=amped version even though the best figures are seemingly obtained by op-amps (in sinewave testing)
 
Well i've made my first tentative steps in the right direction. I've sold the hackernap and bought a pair of UCD400 HG HXR modules with hypex's SMPS to replace it. Not sure how it'll compare, the Hackernap was a killer amp but reports are that the UCD range without HXR was better than a NCC based amp and the n-cores that replaced them seem better than the Hackernap so I'm hoping that i am on a par.

Anyway they are cute little things and are dead easy as there is nothing to DIY except the wiring.

IMAG0378.jpg


I have plugged them up and at the moment they make an awful racket when the buffalo is plugged into them. Need a little time to investigate but the buffalo is wired SE at the moment and the UCD is balanced and i am using a SE/BAL cable to forced the UCD into SE mode. This is a cable I've had for a long time so can't remember the pin config i used of what i made it for in the first place so that is probably the problem. Anyway the buffalo is destined to be used in balanced mode, so at the weekend i will put some balanced connectors on the back plate and connect it up properly and see what occurs:)

This is only the start of the story. My intention is to buy a couple of UCD 180 modules when funds permit to use for my tweeters and then used the 400's that i have for the mid/bass units. Cross over will be done with a traditional active XO like one of the behringer models to start with. Moving forward i'll add another buffalo (has anyone got a buffalo 2 they don't use anymore?) and get the miniDSP minisharc units for i2s XO and room correction.

So a lot to do but at least i'll have music of a good quality while i'm getting there.
 
Isn't the buffalo an 8 channel DAC? People use it in mono or stereo to maximise the quality, but there is no reason why you shouldn't use it for three or six channels.

This is on my radar too. The big problem seems to be making 6 channels of IV conversion.
 
It is but i have never heard of anybody actually doing that. If you have got any links to folk doing that i'd appreciate it.

Stefan
 
Just checked and Buffalo 2 only offers stereo or mono operation. Buffalo 3 can do 8 channel (with slightly reduced dynamic range).

Cheers,
Ed
 
I thought you were referring to the DAC chip being multi channel, which it is of course........

Yes theoretically the buff III would do what i want with the addition of another I/V stage, however as i have a buffalo II already and there are now cheaper buffalo II modules out there that probably makes the most sense. Altohugh if i wanted to do arduino control in the future i'm sure that would be easier with just the one buff.

Small steps anyway, this might take me a very very long time, by which time everything will have changed anyway.....
 
Well not really had much time for playing and listening but managed to sort out the horrendous noises it was making it just didn't like having an earth reference in the system, or strangely my otto2 i2s swich, removed both and now singing sweetly. Amp sounds completely effortless, clean, un-muddled, bass tightest I've heard. Upper midrange maybe a little grainy compared to hacker nap but on the whole more plus points than negatives..........very happy.

I'll do more indepth when I get more time.

Stefan
 
Just a few more impressions.

Firstly as excellent as the hacker nap was it had sort of 'bloom' that was quite beguiling in the midrange, it's what made it sound so musical and gave instruments a 3 dimensional quality, but in more congested passages of music made the sound stage collapse and made some modern compressed recordings un-listenable. The new amp is free of this 'bloom' as a consequence the sound stage is almost free of the speakers, it never collapses however loud and congested it gets, the instruments always stay fixed where they should be, however they don't have the same beguiling fleshed out sound the HN gave to individual instruments.

Strings are in another league altogether though, the pluck of a string on un-processed recordings really does sound like a string being plucked over the other side of the room (only much louder :))
Bass strings and bass drum hits are now much more defined, a bit like when you buy your first DAC and realize what you'd been missing.

There is a slight loss of realism over the hackernap it the decay of cymbals etc and also the PRAT is not quite as fun.

So lots of gains and some losses I'll lament, over all though it's a positive move I think and on my way to active saves me building another hackernap which is good news as that was a build and a half!!

Did i mention this thing had such an iron grip of the speakers, completely effortless, even when the drivers are jumping out of the boxes it's so loud. You can be listening at levels that don't seem too loud, and then you go to speak to the missus and realize you can't hear yourself speak!! Poor neighbors.

Oh and I've still got the input caps in place.

All in all, for the resolution freaks out there, this is hard to beat, for the rest of you, it's still hard to beat......

I honestly can't see where the n-cores improve except in the areas hightlighted.

Only cost me the pricenly sum of £530 fully build as well which is a bit of a bargain IMHO.

Stefan
 
I just noticed a couple of new products on the Hypex shop. One is pretty cool for people interested in going active with ucd power on a 2-way speaker:
https://www.hypexshop.com/DetailServlet?detailID=3400

It is a plate amp with a ADC/DSP/DAC and two 400w UCD amps. Pretty awesome really, shame they don't have a 3-way version. I can see myself getting the DLCP soon to replace my NAD M51 (room correction :)), maybe even trade my nCores for three sets of UCD if they are really that good!
 
Looks great, shame they don't do it with the hg hxr version. Also a litle more detail about the dacs used etc wouldn't go amiss.

Stefan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top