|
|
Post by rod on Mar 13, 2014 20:31:44 GMT -5
Hey Rod, I am very happy with my XDA-2! I use it to decode files from my Squeezebox and two channel music from my Oppo, but mostly for my Squeezebox. It was a bargain and fit in my upgrade plans better than the more expensive but righteous DC-1. So that choice was one of where to spend money when more than preferring the XDA-2 over the DC-1. Can't wait to hear about your upgrade and how it is working for you. Trey I will post my comment after the setup for my new additional emo gear... |
|
|
|
Post by rod on Mar 19, 2014 15:09:04 GMT -5
DC1 is awesome in sound quality. It is really a huge difference maker in my system. I am contemplating to sell my XDA 2 which is just 31 days old from today based on the shipping date... I wish I had DC 1 first so that I would have no any problem disposing this XDA 2....
|
|
|
|
Post by rod on Mar 20, 2014 21:07:23 GMT -5
Did any DC 1 owner change the headphone bass boot jumper setting as stated in the manual? I read it in the manual and it said that to be able to boost the bass for headphone use , you must switch the jumper toward the end panel... Do we really have to do it or just leave it flat because it does not make any difference in the first place... What do you think, folks?
|
|
|
|
Post by sahmen on Mar 20, 2014 21:30:40 GMT -5
Did any DC 1 owner change the headphone bass boot jumper setting as stated in the manual? I read it in the manual and it said that to be able to boost the bass for headphone use , you must switch the jumper toward the end panel... Do we really have to do it or just leave it flat because it does not make any difference in the first place... What do you think, folks? Actually, it comes with the bass already boosted by default, if I'm reading the manual correctly. You're directed to mess with the jumper only if you want to eliminate the boost in order to get a flat response. This is what the manual says: "Note: By default, the headphone output of the Stealth DC-1 will have a very
slight boost applied to the low bass (about 2 dB @ 20 Hz). This “bump” is
common with many headphone amplifiers and headphone outputs, and is
intended to compensate for the slight loss in very low bass encountered with
many headphones. If you prefer an absolutely flat headphone response, you
may eliminate the bump by moving two internal jumpers. (See details in the
Hardware Configuration section.)". That is on page 9 of the manual. |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Mar 20, 2014 21:56:55 GMT -5
Did any DC 1 owner change the headphone bass boot jumper setting as stated in the manual? I read it in the manual and it said that to be able to boost the bass for headphone use , you must switch the jumper toward the end panel... Do we really have to do it or just leave it flat because it does not make any difference in the first place... What do you think, folks? I could be mistaken but I thought the manual says the default is bass boost and to flatten it out you have to change the jumper. That's how I remember it (but my memory, she's not so good..). |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Mar 21, 2014 3:10:58 GMT -5
Did any DC 1 owner change the headphone bass boot jumper setting as stated in the manual? I read it in the manual and it said that to be able to boost the bass for headphone use , you must switch the jumper toward the end panel... Do we really have to do it or just leave it flat because it does not make any difference in the first place... What do you think, folks? The default is the bass boost. I tried it and personally I think the default is a better choice. I was never inclined to test it "flat". |
|
|
|
Post by rod on Mar 21, 2014 6:58:05 GMT -5
You are all right. I completely misunderstood the manual, hahaha... And The good news is someone like you never ceases to help somebody like me with any issues pertaining to any emo gear. You are really appreciated. To be honest with you, you are as great as the technicians from the Emotiva CO.,, Keep up the good work and plz don't get tired of sharing your thoughts because we need you BIG TIME...
|
|
|
|
Post by rod on Mar 21, 2014 7:45:25 GMT -5
I have another question here regarding SRC on DC 1. First of all, please pardon my ignorance. I only want to max out my system that's why I always ask questions in this forum...
Advanced ASRC (asynchronous sample rate converter) reduces jitter, yet
preserves original sample rate. The advanced ASRC implementation in the DC-1
eliminates jitter on all inputs (not just USB), yet lets you hear your music unaltered -
at its original sample rate.
I copied this paragraph from DC 1 manual this morning. What does it mean and should I turn it on or off?
PS. Actually I didn't know that the knob could be pressed in order to get the main menu till this morning when my English bulldog bumped her huge head against the knob that resulted to DC 1 being turned on even without using the remote control. I was completely shocked when I saw it on at first. So I decided to turn on my computer just to go back the DC manual and I found that paragraph above... Her being playful helped me discover the DC setup... haha...
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Mar 21, 2014 7:52:05 GMT -5
I have another question here regarding SRC on DC 1. First of all, please pardon my ignorance. I only want to max out my system that's why I always ask questions in this forum... Advanced ASRC (asynchronous sample rate converter) reduces jitter, yet preserves original sample rate. The advanced ASRC implementation in the DC-1 eliminates jitter on all inputs (not just USB), yet lets you hear your music unaltered - at its original sample rate. I copied this paragraph from DC 1 manual this morning. What does it mean and should I turn it on or off? PS. Actually I didn't know that the knob could be pressed in order to get the main menu till this morning when my English bulldog bumped her huge head against the knob that resulted to DC 1 being turned on even without using the remote control. I was completely shocked when I saw it on at first. So I decided to turn on my computer just to go back the DC manual and I found that paragraph above... Her being playful helped me discover the DC setup... haha... Leave it turned on. I tested both and found in my setup there wasn't a significant difference. But the ASRC reduces jitter which is timing errors and since it didn't seem to hurt the sound when I tried it, I would recommend leaving it on. |
|
|
|
Post by sahmen on Mar 21, 2014 7:55:18 GMT -5
What does it mean? ==> It seems to me that you have answered that question very well in the preceding paragraph. Personally, I lack the expertise to explain what the removal of jitter does to the sound quality, or how it is done, but I do know that it is "good" for your music. On or off? ==> I prefer to have the ASRC"on". Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
Post by rod on Mar 21, 2014 8:01:13 GMT -5
I have another question here regarding SRC on DC 1. First of all, please pardon my ignorance. I only want to max out my system that's why I always ask questions in this forum... Advanced ASRC (asynchronous sample rate converter) reduces jitter, yet preserves original sample rate. The advanced ASRC implementation in the DC-1 eliminates jitter on all inputs (not just USB), yet lets you hear your music unaltered - at its original sample rate. I copied this paragraph from DC 1 manual this morning. What does it mean and should I turn it on or off? PS. Actually I didn't know that the knob could be pressed in order to get the main menu till this morning when my English bulldog bumped her huge head against the knob that resulted to DC 1 being turned on even without using the remote control. I was completely shocked when I saw it on at first. So I decided to turn on my computer just to go back the DC manual and I found that paragraph above... Her being playful helped me discover the DC setup... haha... Leave it turned on. I tested both and found in my setup there wasn't a significant difference. But the ASRC reduces jitter which is timing errors and since it didn't seem to hurt the sound when I tried it, I would recommend leaving it on. Thank you for quick response.... I am going to do it now... |
|
|
|
Post by rod on Mar 21, 2014 8:02:51 GMT -5
What does it mean? ==> It seems to me that you have answered that question very well in the preceding paragraph. Personally, I lack the expertise to explain what the removal of jitter does to the sound quality, or how it is done, but I do know that it is "good" for your music. On or off? ==> I prefer to have the ASRC"on". Hope this helps. Thank you for your time. I will do it now and see what will happen later... |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Mar 21, 2014 8:09:59 GMT -5
Oh you were confused as to what it means.
Okay. There is a thing called jitter. And think of it like you are cold and you jitter or shake a bit. If you do that a lost everything looks blurred to you as you are shaking so much. And that's basically what happens.
The digital signal 1's and 0's arrive to the DC-1 from the ERC-1 exactly as it was trasnmitted (hopefully).
So for instance:
11011 on the CD transmitted by the ERC-1 is recieved by the DC-1 as 11011. So it's the same.
But the difference is exactly what time it was recieved. For instance the second 1 may arrive just a tiny fraction of a second later than it was supposed to. Or it may arrive slightly earlier. This is jitter.
If it gets really bad, the sound may feel a little more "diffused" or ill defined.
But the truth is..... it takes a LOT of jitter to make the sound feel that way. So even relatively high levels of jitter tend to make little practical difference to the audible sound.
Regardless of this....the ASRC circuit in the dc-1 basically receives and rearranges the 11011 to the correct time it was supposed to be eliminating most of the timing error or jitter. This is a good thing. But it likely makes very little difference in real life. How it does it is a mystery to me.
The DC-1 is superior to the XDA-2 in its ASRC jitter correction because of this thing.
In the XDA-2 when the jitter correction is turned on, the XDA-2 will resample (change) the 11011 into a different sampling rate.
CD's have a sampling rate of 44.1 Khz. The XDA-2 will take this data and change it to 96 khz.
Also if you have high resolution files on your computer of say 192 khz, the XDA-2 ASRC will downsample the 192 khz to 96 khz essentially losing half the information in the process.
Now the good news is that the sampling rate is so high that losing this information isn't a massive problem in terms of what you actually hear. But it is not as ideal as what the DC-1 does.
The DC-1....does not resample the 11011 into a different sampling rate. It reduces the jitter without messing with the sampling rate .... on that ASRC circuit. So a 11011 from a 44.1Khz CD will have reduced jitter an produce a 11011 data at 44.1 Khz. A 11011 from a 192 khz high resolution music file will have reduced jitter and produce a 11011 data at 192khz.
But in practical terms, none of it makes a large audible difference unless you have a problematic digital source which is reasonably rare. So nothing to worry about. Just leave the ASRC turned on.
|
|
|
|
Post by rod on Mar 21, 2014 9:01:27 GMT -5
Thank you for another wonderful explanation like this one. You always come to the rescue and your effort and time is always appreciated... You can rest assured that every single advice you share is taken cared of... Thank once again, my friend..
|
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on Mar 21, 2014 11:30:54 GMT -5
FWIW, although the DC1 and ERC3 each use the AD1955 dac chip, the DC1 uses two of them in dual differential mode, IIRC.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Mar 21, 2014 11:31:08 GMT -5
Excellent explanation...... (of course I have one or two minor things to add)  . Not only are different people more or less sensitive to hearing the effects of jitter, but it also depends to a huge degree on what you're playing. It's also one of those things that different people tend to describe differently. For example, some people find that jitter makes localization of instruments in the sound stage "more vague" - but I'm not especially sensitive to that. Personally, I am unable to hear any effect from even large amounts of jitter on vocal tracks; but I tend to notice it on tracks with metallic instruments like wire-brushes on cymbals. To me, those sound more like "actual metal" with less jitter, and a lot of jitter can make them sound more like a steam valve going "tsssss tssssss" instead of individual wires hitting metal. The effect is rather subtle, and also depends on the quality of the source recording, and on what you're listening with (I notice it a lot with my Stealth 8's, but not much at all with my AKG K240 or K271's (mid-priced headphones) Also, and important in the context of this discussion, jitter tends to be an issue with "multiple box solutions" (like a separate transport and DAC) - because the signal must be "clocked out" of the source and "clocked in" to the DAC. Single box CD players almost always use a single clock (the signal is clocked once as it passes from the "mech" to the DAC). This actually means that jitter is usually less of a factor for a well designed "all in one" unit than separates. So, in the case of the ERC-3, since the data is clocked directly to the DAC, and doesn't have to pass between boxes on cables, all that really counts is the quality of that one clock - which is quite good on the ERC-3; this is why the ERC-3 doesn't really "need" any other form of jitter reduction. The benefit of the DC-1 is that it applies jitter reduction to all the digital sources connected to it. |
|
|
|
Post by rod on Mar 21, 2014 11:40:59 GMT -5
Excellent explanation...... (of course I have one or two minor things to add) . Not only are different people more or less sensitive to hearing the effects of jitter, but it also depends to a huge degree on what you're playing. It's also one of those things that different people tend to describe differently. For example, some people find that jitter makes localization of instruments in the sound stage "more vague" - but I'm not especially sensitive to that. Personally, I am unable to hear any effect from even large amounts of jitter on vocal tracks; but I tend to notice it on tracks with metallic instruments like wire-brushes on cymbals. To me, those sound more like "actual metal" with less jitter, and a lot of jitter can make them sound more like a steam valve going "tsssss tssssss" instead of individual wires hitting metal. The effect is rather subtle, and also depends on the quality of the source recording, and on what you're listening with (I notice it a lot with my Stealth 8's, but not much at all with my AKG K240 or K271's (mid-priced headphones) Also, and important in the context of this discussion, jitter tends to be an issue with "multiple box solutions" (like a separate transport and DAC) - because the signal must be "clocked out" of the source and "clocked in" to the DAC. Single box CD players almost always use a single clock (the signal is clocked once as it passes from the "mech" to the DAC). This actually means that jitter is usually less of a factor for a well designed "all in one" unit than separates. So, in the case of the ERC-3, since the data is clocked directly to the DAC, and doesn't have to pass between boxes on cables, all that really counts is the quality of that one clock - which is quite good on the ERC-3; this is why the ERC-3 doesn't really "need" any other form of jitter reduction. The benefit of the DC-1 is that it applies jitter reduction to all the digital sources connected to it. Should ERC 3 be directly connected to XSP 1 or pass it through DC1 then dc1 to XSP 1? |
|
|
|
Post by rod on Mar 21, 2014 11:42:28 GMT -5
FWIW, although the DC1 and ERC3 each use the AD1955 dac chip, the DC1 uses two of them in dual differential mode, IIRC. I was informed that they sound the same since they both use same DACS... Am I right? |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Mar 21, 2014 12:50:16 GMT -5
FWIW, although the DC1 and ERC3 each use the AD1955 dac chip, the DC1 uses two of them in dual differential mode, IIRC. I was informed that they sound the same since they both use same DACS... Am I right? Maybe. But I doubt it. The ERC-3 uses ONE DAC. The DC-1 uses TWO DAC's. Though they are the same DAC chip, the DC-1 uses two of them. And the benefit is that using two actually improves the signal to noise ratio measurably at least on instruments if you look at the spec sheet for the DAC chips. So that reasoning means they are not the same. Whether they sound the same or not is upto the person listening. I haven't heard the ERC-3. Another reason they may not sound the same is that the DC-1 has a volume control in built into it which is a set of analog resistors on a single chip. So the sound has to pass through this chip. Here it (may or may not) get altered in some way. The ERC-3 does not have a volume control so the sound has to pass through one less piece of circuitry. Whether this makes a difference or not, I don't know. But it does mean that the circuitry is slightly different. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Mar 21, 2014 13:14:19 GMT -5
That is a huge oversimplification... There is a lot more involved in how a DAC (or CD player) sounds than the specific DAC CHIP they use. While a poor quality DAC chip can limit performance, what you hear with a high quality DAC chip depends to a large degree on the implementation (how it is used and the associated circuitry). FWIW, although the DC1 and ERC3 each use the AD1955 dac chip, the DC1 uses two of them in dual differential mode, IIRC. I was informed that they sound the same since they both use same DACS... Am I right? |
|
.