advertisement


MDAC first listen (part XIII)

Status
Not open for further replies.

fusion5

on the dark side of hifi...
Maybe there really is a downside to this upgrade. Bad recordings sound even worse :rolleyes:
 
Hi Peter,

Hopefully you found the "Spare" crystal in the packaging... Just so you don't throw it out...

John

Hi John, yes i've got it. Not thrown away. Thanks. Just been listening to MDAC after breaking it in over last 24h or so. First impresions are - I'ts a totaly different animal.
More detail, more space and cohesion to the whole presentation. Bass slightly better controlled and faster if a tad lighter. Pretty much what others commented before me. Definetely like it.:D
I suspect more is to come as I noticed before caps continued to break in for about a week or two.

Great upgrade John, and thanks, I'ts a hell of a lot of work you have done on it.

Peter
 
Yes, I prefer the SQ.

Why not try it and see/hear for yourself?

But the only difference according to the wiki is:

A.06: "menu option Phase Select does it's business by inverting data before it hits the DAC chip as opposed to flipping the phase ahead of DAC array"

Does the inclusion of this option really change the sound quality? Or is it the particular setting? I'm using 0 phase. Is A.05 equivalent to 180 setting? Is that the difference?

- Richard.
 
Is that compared side by side with an unmodded M-DAC or from memory? :confused:



Hi John, yes i've got it. Not thrown away. Thanks. Just been listening to MDAC after breaking it in over last 24h or so. First impresions are - I'ts a totaly different animal.
More detail, more space and cohesion to the whole presentation. Bass slightly better controlled and faster if a tad lighter. Pretty much what others commented before me. Definetely like it.:D
I suspect more is to come as I noticed before caps continued to break in for about a week or two.

Great upgrade John, and thanks, I'ts a hell of a lot of work you have done on it.

Peter
 
Memory only. We will be comparing our units with Misterdog on Saturday next week, he has unmodified MDAC.

Cheers

Peter
 
But the only difference according to the wiki is:

A.06: "menu option Phase Select does it's business by inverting data before it hits the DAC chip as opposed to flipping the phase ahead of DAC array"

Does the inclusion of this option really change the sound quality? Or is it the particular setting? I'm using 0 phase. Is A.05 equivalent to 180 setting? Is that the difference?

- Richard.

Hi Richard

As per John/Dom ''OK here's the latest release A0.6

http://db.tt/jL7G2Bxo

The "Phase select" Menu option selects between the "apparent" Sound quality variations of A0.4 / A0.5 :-

A0.4 0 Deg
A0.5 180 Deg

Note: the SQ effects are due to second order processing of the Digital data on the DAC die (Processing 1's instead of 0's), and not related to the "Absolute Phase" of the audio system.

Also clarified the descriptions used for the Menu option "Default input source upon power up option"

If you are happy with A.06, 180 deg setting, then fine. Enjoy the music.

It takes less than 30seconds to change FW versions and try it for yourself, but it's not compulsory.
 
Sorry, can anyone explain the difference between using 0db volume and turning of the volumecontrol
I thought it should sound the same - thank you
 
I'm using A06 @ 0 degree. I didn't notice any difference between A06 and 0.96. Of course, I don't have two M-DAC's to compare both versions head to head.
 
Sorry, can anyone explain the difference between using 0db volume and turning of the volumecontrol
I thought it should sound the same - thank you

There is no difference.

Edit: If you're using a seperate preamp "volume control off" protects you from accidentally changing the volume setting. That's about it.
 
I've got a question about oversampling. My player software, audirvana, allow oversampling to *2(4/8) of the original sample rate. For that purpose it uses iZotope decoding library.
Do you think it's better to send 44.1 or 88.2 (oversampled) to the DAC ?
What could be the advantages and drawbacks ?

Best regards,
 
I'm using A06 @ 0 degree. I didn't notice any difference between A06 and 0.96. Of course, I don't have two M-DAC's to compare both versions head to head.

I tried again. I think 0.90 is still better. This can also be caused by the listening conditions. I listen in a small (3.5 x 4.5) room on the principle of near-field listening. The distance is about 2 meters. The Speakers: ProAc monitors on high stands. Filter: Optimal Transient DD.
 
I've got a question about oversampling. My player software, audirvana, allow oversampling to *2(4/8) of the original sample rate. For that purpose it uses iZotope decoding library.
Do you think it's better to send 44.1 or 88.2 (oversampled) to the DAC ?
What could be the advantages and drawbacks ?

Best regards,

The ESS Sabre32 ES9018 already incorporates very sophisticated upsampling. Unless your upsampling algorithm is very good, sending an unchanged bitperfect signal is the way to go.
 
I tried again. I think 0.90 is still better. This can also be caused by the listening conditions. I listen in a small (3.5 x 4.5) room on the principle of near-field listening. The distance is about 2 meters. The Speakers: ProAc monitors on high stands. Filter: Optimal Transient DD.

My listening situation is pretty much identical. Have you tried v0.05? I found the bass better, and set to O.Spectrum, full suppression and normal phase is how I've left the FW at the moment. Before I was using 0.90 and definitely preferred that to the latest v0.08..
 
Yes that was my conclusion too but i only tried to compare using my headphones,
when i was using my Maudio firewire audiophile soundcard upsampling gave bests results but the Maudio could not suffer the comparison with any "good" hifi DAC.
 
The ESS Sabre32 ES9018 already incorporates very sophisticated upsampling. Unless your upsampling algorithm is very good, sending an unchanged bitperfect signal is the way to go.

+1 just give it the 'raw' data and the M-DAC will do the rest...:)
 
My listening situation is pretty much identical. Have you tried v0.05? I found the bass better, and set to O.Spectrum, full suppression and normal phase is how I've left the FW at the moment. Before I was using 0.90 and definitely preferred that to the latest v0.08..

Indeed, the bass was better, but IMO the position of the instruments in a classical orchestra was worse. What were your settings in 0.90?
 
Memory only. We will be comparing our units with Misterdog on Saturday next week, he has unmodified MDAC.

Cheers

Peter

Thanks for the clarification Peter. Still, you have some uncanny auditory memory ;). Please report back your findings when you compare your unit to Misterdog's. Cheers
 
Indeed, the bass was better, but IMO the position of the instruments in a classical orchestra was worse. What were your settings in 0.90?

Nominal freq., OT XD; full suppression. It was, I think, airier, more delicate, such that I can well understand your comment about the position of instruments, but the bass in v.05 does add that bit more bite to the overall sound, esp. when allied with O. Spectrum. Perhaps it's now verging on the too clinical, but with my Spendor SA1-s, this seems to work. No doubt, I'll change it back later today... Best.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top