ODAC, el DAC USB diseñado por NwAvGuy

AVAILABILITY: I’m not involved with the manufacturing, sales, or, for that matter, receiving any profit. So you need to contact one or more of the following if you want an ODAC. Last I heard, they’re still hoping to ship some before the end of the month:

• YoYoDyne Consulting ODAC Announcement (Canada)


• JDS Labs ODAC Announcement (USA)


• Epiphany Acoustics ODAC Announcement (UK)


• Head-N-HiFi ODAC Announcement (Switzerland)


• Audio Poutine ODAC Source (Canada Facebook Page)

Well, I’ve logged a good 10+ hours with the ODAC, and I must say I’m quite impressed and satisfied. This is coming from someone who owned a Nuforce Icon UDAC II. The UDAC II is absolute garbage compared to the ODAC. The UDAC II has a very high jitter level and a serious problem playing back music bit perfect. I listen to everything from a portable HDD, so I now only get jitter from the HDD spinning up for the first time. With the ODAC, everything is in its right place in the soundstage. I can now actually notice tape hiss, surface noise, clicks, pops, etc on all sorts of mediums. Separation between instruments is most impressive. I can now notice a lot more of the little things in an album.

I decided on the O2+ODAC combo because I don’t think I’ll be upgrading this dac anytime soon. I figured getting the integrated amplifier would be best because if anything, I might upgrade headphones somewhere on down the road. For $300, this is the literally the best bang for your buck.

Specifications

Input
USB (USB 1.1, 2.0 compatible)
USB DAC: USB 1.1, 2.0 compatible. USB native bit rate: 32, 44.1, 48, and 96 kHz, 24-bit
Maximum sampling rate: 96kHz
Resolution: 24-bits

Output
Analog RCA Output = 2Vrms
Dynamic Range: 90dB
S/N Ratio: 98dB
THD+N 0.05%
Digital Output: coaxial RCA 75-ohm
Headphone output jack
Power output: 80mW x 2 @ 16-Ohm
Headphone impedance 16-300 Ohm

Frequency Response
20-20kHz

Power
USB Bus Powered, 80 mA/5V
Maximum power consumption: 500mW

Dimensions
68x38x21mm

Included Accessories
USB cable (1 meter)

Yesterday I luckily received two ODACs from the first batch. ODAC is a small DAC unit developed by nwavguy, for details ask google please. Its relatively small, relatively cheap and there are a couple of audiophiles out there to critize nwavguys concept of objective audio system development driven by measures and blind tests.

So I was very curious how this litte thing will finally make up in my chain. Having some problems to connect it to my debian linux mpd player, its not easy but this is my dummyness, not odacs. Should be simple to get an UAC1 usb audio tool running on mpd, should be ….

After roundabout an hour I had it working on 24/96. I just had another hour for some first listening impressions, switching between my DIY Wolfson 8741 dac which works like a charm and the odac.

A Pink Floyd bluray, the actual Warren Zevon rip by D***** and the very actual test file from A******* new Fireface made the sonic test szenario. Surprisingly I had not too much differences in the beginning. The odac works like a charm too, it is even a bit louder as Wolfson, seems nwavguy met the 2V level at 0dB very correct. I had to do some level adaptions to get serious impressions. And yes, the odac has a little bit more dynamics, a little little bit but there it is. More clarity … more dynamics … sounds damn good.

I was biased, as developer of the wolfson I surely was. But the odac has a little bit more, no doubt. Having a tear in my eye, seems that I have to say byebye to a beloved hobby item, my Wolfson.

Friends … altho I didn’t had time for more comparisons – a blind test would be fine to confirm this “little wonder” – it is surely not worse then my wolfson and this is a great thing for a $100 device. I spent more then 5 times of that for the wolfson. This seems to be a bang for the buck.

I currently have two units that I am doing comparisons with HRT Streamer II+


and Bitfrost.



Setup: MMINI >iTunes AIFF>Bitperfect 1.0.3>ODAC>Cambridge Audio amp>Fritz Carbon 7s
Music tested: 16/44, 24/44, 24/48, 24/88, 24/96, 24/192

My first impressions:

* Extremely quiet background, no noise that I can detect in my Fritz Carbon 7′s connected via a custom modded Cambridge Audio 640 amplifier. Please note this amp has very little left from the original Cambridge Audio but this an incredible fast and neutral amplifier that has been challenging $1500+ amps playfully (this is opinion from several audiophile friends of mine but again this is custom so I cannot prove it to you via specs).

* Instruments separation is best among three DACs, you can hear every instruments but not in the X-ray type fashion where it is analytical and cold, however if recording is cold it will come out as cold, just to be clear.

* Stage, I am learning more about it, but in my opinion Sabre chips are all prone to mashing the stage into a pile, I have heard several of Sabre based including modded OPPO 83 player and dynamics and clarity is great but stage is not very clear, placements are hard to tell. I think Bitfrost does a better job of placing the musicians, but ODAC only has 6 hours on it while Bitfrost is 100+ hours.

* Dynamics and tonality this is where I like what ODAC reproduces, no coloring whatsoever, recordings come alive, and frankly Katie Melua’s “Piece by Piece” on ODAC is just way above both HRT and Bitfrost, IMO no comparison, balanced and quiet this 16/44 Redbook is really well produced and ODAC just plays every bit of it and does not lose anything or add anything, to me this is what is important. HRT sounds “dark” lacks clarity in the top, Bitfrost again in my opinion is simply “thin” and uninvolving…

Sound Signature:

Very Dynamic sound, not laid back, lots of attack, typical ESS Sabre sound signature but without any coloration (e.g. DX100)

Lots of details, true to source Soundstage

Crystal Clear Clarity/Transparency and Instruments sound really real.

No Coloration detected, Pretty much neutral

As compared to the Xonar DX’s Crystal DAC, this DAC has tons more details and clarity, but at the expense of really exposing bad recordings.

This is also the first time I have heard in the Eagles Hotel California, when the audience is claping, there is noticible echo from the background. Bass impact from the drums are really visceral, and when the audience cheer away, I feel as if I am ACTUALLY at the concert itself.

I find that the ODAC is better than DX100′s sound signature(v1.0 FW), also beats my Centrance Dacport in every category except the “forgiving” department.

Cons:

Very Unforgiving to badly recorded music (What you record is what you get). Not suitable for listening to youtube songs (IMHO).

Dacport still sounds more forgiving/analogue, ODAC is the opposite where everything is presented to you with strong attack.

No Out of box ASIO Driver

88Khz Frequency not supported

Conclusion:

Is this a game changing DAC? Yes in my opinion. This is probably my final DAC. No more thinking of new DAC upgrades.

But I don’t think this DAC is for everyone. Those who prefer a more laid back sound, do not consider this as it’s pretty aggressive sounding.

Source:

Ulilith Player > WASAPI > Jds Labs ODAC > Isimple Interconnect Cable > Jdslabs O2 Amp > Fischer Audio FA-003

Music:

Chesky The Ultimate Demostration Disc, Eagles Hotel California

…I can understand where dqwong’s comments on the ODAC being reference. Amazingly, in many aspects, the ODAC does stand shoulder to shoulder with the DX100’s ESS9018 Sabre DAC. There are areas the ODAC edges out the Sabre DAC, while the latter performs better in others.

Clarity

The ODAC brings about incredibly crystal clear sound. Across all 9 albums, the ODAC delivers the music more clearly than the DX100. The range of clarity differs and IMO is the mark of the recording quality itself.

Eg. The plucking of guitar strings in Jessie Cook’s Matisse the Cat, has a clear definition, over the similar track on the DX100. The finger snapping in Michael Jackson’s Rock with You, starts off more apparent on the ODAC, though this is more subtle to discern. The cheering (and screaming) crowd in Yanni LIVE albums and Take That Concert albums, are significantly more apparent on the ODAC. Like dqwong’s assessment, it’s really like you’re in the concert itself.

Even when swapping between JH13pro and Heir 8.A, given the warmer nature of the latter, the added clarity shines in every track, some more apparent, some harder to find.

Though this clarity comes at a cost, especially for recordings that have been “tweaked” to make certain aspects shine.

Taylor Swift’s vocals in Speak Now’s “Back to December” and “Enchanted” were sharp to the point of irritation. This was not the case with her debut album’s “Teardrop on my Guitar”, where her vocals were clear yet softer. I suppose to make her vocals stand out more, during the recording, some “enhancements” were added to get that effect.

In addition, after 3 hours of continuous playing with the ODAC, sharper arrangements in tracks lead to greater fatigue in listening. Switching from the JH13 pro to the Heir 8.A, improved the condition somewhat.

Colouration

While we know that almost (if not all) music gears would inherently have some form of colouration, with the ODAC, it makes the DX100 Sabre DAC’s inherent colouration, more obvious. If the ODAC were the point of reference for neutrality, the DX100 Sabre DAC would be inclined towards a darker sounding nature, more warmth and softer in vocal and instrument display.

Karen Carpenter’s Only Yesterday, sounded a tad “higher” in pitch on the ODAC versus the DX100.

You can tell from Gary Barlow’s vocal in Rule the World, when he dropped his volume subtly (perhaps controlled breathing), something that isn’t apparent and harder to find during playback in DX100, even less so when paired with the Heir 8.A.

Kimbra’s vocals although naturally has a clear tone in any condition, has added punch in clarity with the ODAC.

Soundstage

IMO, this section is more relevant to headphone description but given the ODAC being somehow able to improve the soundstage of my existing gear, makes for interesting topic. It’s subjective, perhaps placebo, and in worst case, “it’s all in my head”, but I feel the amazing delivery of the ODAC in clarity, has something to do with it. My rationale is, with greater clarity, every item in the music is projected significantly more and this likely “fools the mind” into thinking the soundstage got widened.

Yanni LIVE Concert, Rainmaker, and Gotye, Somebody That I Used to Know, both have instruments projecting further than in the DX100, lending an even greater atmosphere about those projected instrument.

Presentation

Both the DX100 Sabre DAC and ODAC, delivers on the “atmosphere” like conditions that I like to mention in my reviews. Both delivers the details, scale and oomph, you’d expect. In this section, it really boils down to preference.

If I have to put the DX100 Sabre DAC and ODAC as people, then the DX100 would be the well dressed lady in colourful designer wear, creating a very welcoming and pleasant aura about her. While the ODAC would be the straight-up power suit guy in a slick Hugo Boss business attire, powerful yet attractive presence.

Conclusion and Thoughts

The ODAC is clearly more aggressive compared to the DX100 Sabre DAC. That can be a good thing depending on what you’re listening to, and the mood you’re in. It’s probably better to go with the DX100 DAC, if you’re looking to unwind after a long and stressful day…

I had the chance to A/B today against the Xonar Essence STX (/w LME49720s) for an hour in a quiet listening environment.

I think overall the ODAC is a step up from the STX’s DAC.

ODAC is clearer sounding in the mid frequencies and lets more of the recording’s details through. As such the sense of ambience in recordings is enhanced.

I think it is a question of the brain getting used to it, but absorbing more information from the mids tends to create the illusion of lesser bass presence in terms of quantity. However, when tested with bass notes, the ODAC clearly has no deficiency. In comparison the STX sounds like the sound has more body, but it is muffled.

The ODAC’s highs are the biggest improvement over the STX. They just seem more realistic on good acoustic recordings - clear, extended and with remarkable resolution. In contrast the STX is harsh and sibilant at times.

I wouldn’t say the STX sounds bad, but the ODAC seems to offer better fidelity. The differences weren’t night and day, but obvious enough to be clearly noticed in a short listening session.

I also noticed that the ODAC did produce a high-pitched noise when connected to a switched off desktop PC. Strangely this doesn’t happen when connected to my laptop.

The DAC is a simple two-chip affair, with a Tenor TE7022L controller fronting the ESS ES9023 DAC and integrated line driver. A couple of voltage regulators, the clock oscillator, and an eeprom chip round out the principle component list.

I compared it with my Onkyo SE-200PCI sound card. This 24/192 (115dB S/N A-weighted, 0.003% THD 0dB 1kHz) PCI card sells for about $15,000 yen and is based on the VIA Envy24HT and Wolfson WM8740.

I'm listening to 16bit 44.1kHz .wav (CD rips), though VLC [sample rate converter set to sinc, best quality, resampling quality 8]. Windows 8 release preview [default format 24/192 (onkyo), 24/96 (odac)]. Line out though Oyaide PA-02TR interconnects to the Sapphire headphone amp, and Sennheiser HD-600s.

**

So, I was planning on writing up a big 'ol review with my impressions, but, well... there's not really a lot of point. I can't very well sugar coat this: the odac is not very pleasant to listen to. It's thin and hard-edged, with a headache-inducing digital sheen that frankly I haven't experienced since the early gen CD players of the 1980's.

About the only positive spin I can manage is to point out that it sounds better than the NuForce udac, which was simply distorted and noisy. The odac is at least clean and clear sounding.

Unfortunately it's also sterile and cold where it should be musical and involving.

**

I did a re-test, playing with the sample rates and bit depths, 16/44, 24/96 on both Onkyo and odac. Although I generally prefer the upsampled output, the difference is relatively small. I stand by what I wrote above.

While the odac has an admirably low noise floor, good stereo reproduction, and clean, accurate (to a point) sound, there is a slight "shouty" quality, a tendency to harden up on intense passages, that suggests insufficient power reserves. I also can't shake the feeling that something is not right in the ultrasonic band. High frequency transients are brittle to the point of being physically unpleasant. It's not something you can easily spot unless you have a good reference to compare to - you might be tempted otherwise to think the track was recorded that way - but I suspect the long term effect, listener fatigue, will become obvious to most people sooner rather than later.

**

Finally, I enabled the motherboard audio (Gigabyte GA-970A-D3, Realtek ALC889) [HD audio, set to 24/192 in Win8] and listened with my HD600s plugged directly into the front headphone jack on the PC. Onboard audio has come a long was since the bad old days of AC'97. The sound is broadly similar to the Onkyo/Sapphire signal chain. Same tonal balance, same overall presentation. In direct comparison, the bass is slightly rubbery, the stereo image is weaker and less precise, and it's missing that last extra measure of control, depth, and detail resolution. It's surprisingly, impressively close though. It takes me some seconds of careful listening to figure out which is which.

Switching between the onboard audio and Onkyo/Sapphire, it's quickly obvious that I'm listening to the same data - I hear the same things in the same way. With the odac, it might just as well have been a remastered track, the presentation is that different.

I am therefore tempted to conclude that its the odac that has issues. Could be a layout or configuration miss, could be, I suppose, that that's the way the ES9023 sounds. Either way it's not really my cup of tea.

**

Perhaps I should give the odac time to break in? I didn't think of that, since there were no electrolytics on the board (caps are all tantalum or ceramic SMT). Worth a shot anyway - I'll give it 24h of decoding white noise and see if there is any difference.

**

No. That didn't help. It seems to have opened out a little, but the fundamentals remain unchanged: Admirably clean sound, but flat and synthetic.

**

Ugh. Far too much time spent on this! On to other things...

Appendix

1. Info on the SE-200PCI (Japanese), with measurements: here.


2. I uploaded the Rightmark results for the odac and Onkyo (Odac and Onkyo Comparison.zip). Identical results, both limited by the ADC (of the Onkyo) used for recording the signal rather than the DAC performance. In other words both DACs are as good or better than the result shown.

Stoner Acoustics is a fairly new start up by a DIY’er that has been pretty active in the local (Malaysia) audiophile community. By no mean his first project, the UD100 is however his first commercial product under the new company and it is aimed to deliver maximum bang for the buck sound quality with a minimalistic design for US$49 / RM138

spec

TI PCM2706 (USB receiver) + ESS Sabre ES9023 (DAC)
Bit depth / Sampling Rate (max): 16bit / 48kHz
Output: 2Vrms line-out via 3.5mm stereo plug


ES9023


PCM2706

Build Quality

Okay, there is no housing on this tiny USB DAC. It would seem the production isn’t large enough to call for a plastic injection mold to be made (those things can be very expensive). Otherwise, the USB DAC is very well made. All the soldering points look to be quite solid.

For the worrying type, a simple heat shrink seem to suffice to shield the components from dust and direct moisture. If you are the handy DIY type, you can get a $1 TF card reader from eBay, take the inner out, drill a hole on the side and fit the USB DAC into it (see pictures blow).

Note that UD100 is just a USB DAC without any amp section, so you will need to supply your own amp if you want to use it. It doesn’t support Windows volume control as well, so it will be wise not to plug your headphone into its 3.5mm directly.

Sound Quality

At first, I am a bit skeptical about the overall SQ of the UD100. I can understand it could be better than most of the PCM270x+WM8740 variance that I own, based on my ownership of the ODAC and the experience of the ESS Sabre chip. However, given its miniature size and what seems to be the missing of many components, I really thought this is just going to be an obvious step-down from the ODAC. Well, I was wrong.

The first thing I did when I received the UD100 is to measure it via RMAA. The setup is as followed: PC -> USD BAC -> O2 -> Behringer UCA222 (USB Isolated). Since UD100 only supports sampling rate of 16/48 max due to its USB receiver, both UD100 and ODAC are measured under 16/44.1 condition. As UD100 doesn’t support software volume control, I have to put the O2 in between the DAC and the UCA222. It shouldn’t affect the comparison though, since whatever effect it might have will be applied to both DAC, and I am only interested in the difference between the DAC. Surprisingly, the result is so close that the tiny bit of difference are either within a dB or two of each other or well under 0.1%. In fact, UD100 measured just a tiny bit better in most case, plus a slightly flatter and more extended frequency response over 18kHz. On a separated test, I also confirmed UD100, like ODAC, is outputting 2Vrms on its line-out that is default of the ESS chip.

As far as subjective listening goes, I compared both UD100 and ODAC feeding to O2 and a couple of IEM. All and all, I have a hard time trying to find a difference between the two USB DAC. Whatever difference I think I have heard is too small to say in certainty that they are not just in my brain. They are both clean, neutral with a good soundstage. At time, I can tell UD100 sounds just a little more crisp on certain instruments or ODAC gives just a little lusher detail, but they aren’t night and day. I think the reality is, it would have been even tougher to actually tell the two USB DAC apart during a blind listening. It that a good thing? I supposed so. I like my ODAC from JDS Labs. It is very well built and sounds great for the price. But for 1/3 of the price and almost just as good a sound, I can’t fault UD100 at all. Once I housed it in a $1 mod’ed TF card reader case, it looks and functions almost perfectly.


ODAC (top) vs. UD100 (bottom)

Verdict

UD100 truly exceeds my expectation on how good a tiny sized USB DAC can sound. It is the poor-man’s ODAC, so to speak. While it doesn’t support 24/96 like the ODAC, it shouldn’t matter to those who don’t have any HD music files. For those who are looking for either big bang for the buck or just something simple to feed into your amp, I couldn’t recommend this tiny USB DAC enough.

A thank to Stoner Acoustics for the UD100 sample.

Initial Impressions
Here are my initial impressions of the EHP-O2D:

-Powerful amp
-Well built
-Beautiful design
-Quick switching between low and high gain
-Very simple plug and play into PC
-ODAC works marvellously
-Drives my Denon AH-D2000′s very well
-With no music playing, HDD can be heard on the PC (whilst connected via USB)
-Clear representation of the music – Transparent sounding
-Clean and lean bass response
-Bulky (white) power adapter
-Works on my Samsung Galaxy S 3 GT-I9300 as a USB DAC (needs power though), and thus by-passes the audio 3.5mm jack of the SGS3

Overall the EHP-O2D is extremely impressive. For the very affordable price of sub £200 for both a DAC and AMP, it seems to be the perfect solution for people like me who want a desktop headphone amp, that produces a very clear and transparent reproduction.

I’ve been very much enjoying the amp, and so far it puts my Asus Xonar D1 > Logitech Z-5500 > Denon AH-D2000 to shame. My desktop headphone rig is currently using the EHP-O2D, directly being connected via USB, and being used directly via “output” to my Denon’s. I can finally enjoy music at home, through my PC, for late night listening, or audio analysis/reviewing – whereas beforehand I would have to use my SGS3 for a more “truer” sound.

Here are my initial impressions of the MJ2 interconnect:


-Beautifully made
-Great quality wire
-Good jacks, with no signs of problems throughout the wire (unlike other wires I’ve previously owned)
-Reproduces music very well, and brings out the mids, with no loss of sound
-Flexible enough, but not so much so that I can make it twist a full 180 degrees on it, unlike my mini 7cm Toxic Cables Interconnect (I suspect this is mainly due to the fact that this wire is long, and has a nice sheeting around it, thus rendering it less flexible – its use is made for the desk, and not on the go, another reason why I bought the 2m version of it)

Overall my initial impressions of the MJ2 cable are extremely positive, especially at the price point it comes at (around £13) – it should be a no brainer for anyone looking for a 3.5mm interconnect. Thus so far so good, and I will be testing it more and giving it more time to compare and contrast it to other interconnects I have.

A full review of both the EHP-O2D and the MJ2 cable will come at a later date, once I have fully tested (and burnt in) the equipment.

Hope you enjoyed the unboxing, pictures & the initial impressions!

Jazz escribió:Gastarse más pasta en un alimentador que en el dac duele, pero esto puede ser una buena opción. Me dejaron uno para probar con el musica ibuki y la mejora fue muy notable, también es cierto que alimentar un dac con válvula solo por usb es un poco temerario.

http://www.aqvox.de/usb-power_en.html

Saludos

Samsung Galaxy S III & Objective DAC (ODAC): 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/624102/dap-with-unamped-line-out-and-good-dac#post_8674007

Galaxy S III > digital audio stream >> 4-in-1 connection kit substituting a USB OTG cable >> ODAC >> Headstage Arrow G3 amp >> headphone 

kirkan escribió:

Jazz escribió:Gastarse más pasta en un alimentador que en el dac duele, pero esto puede ser una buena opción. Me dejaron uno para probar con el musica ibuki y la mejora fue muy notable, también es cierto que alimentar un dac con válvula solo por usb es un poco temerario.

http://www.aqvox.de/usb-power_en.html

Saludos

Que vá! nada de gastarse mucha pasta, la idea es:

Esquema conexionado usb:



Esto es fundamental para saber con que colores trabajar y cuales han de partir del ordenador y de la fuente, luego:

Algo sencillo:
Fuente estabilizada y ajustada a 5V 12,90€


O algo más elaborado:
Fuente estabilizada y ajustada a 5V con circuitería de aislamiento de los canales de datos de USB 49€


Todo ello con un trafo toroidal:
Trafo toroidal 17,90€


Luego claro está te has de gastar otros 20 o 30€ en dejarlo bien pulidito en una caja de aluminio con sus conectores, cables etc etc...

Pero creo que es bastante mejor que los 98€ que cuesta esto probablemente siendo una fuente conmutada y no lineal como las anteriores:



Saludos!!

maty escribió:Cuando investigué los amplificadores Clase T chinos el más interesante era el montado por Indeed. Lo acompañaba con:

AC90-265V Adapter 12V 5A to Tripath T Amp + Power Cord
-> http://www.ebay.es/itm/AC90-265V-Adapter-12V-5A-to-Tripath-T-Amp-Power-Cord-/290505794028?pt=Laptop_Adapters_Chargers&hash=item43a37ea1ec#ht_5048wt_1205


¿No sería más práctico buscar uno similar pero a 5V? Habría que cambiar el conector.

Jazz escribió:

Pero los que no tenemos ni idea de electrónica tenemos que tragar, o eso o encontrar un alma caritativa como Hifiliberator en el caso del Buffalo.

Saludos

maty escribió:Me han pasado el HUB USB 4 PORT PINK NETWAY POWERED BY COLORS. El transformador, muy pequeñín: 5V y 1A. En cuanto he leído el bajo amperaje, me he puesto en lo peor.

Suena con un volumen mucho más bajo, con pérdida muy apreciable en la calidad sonora. Los graves muy débiles.



No sé si es todo culpa del hub o también de más tirada de cable USB, sólo sé que ha sido un desastre.

Como me suena bien, cañonazos y campanadas de la iglesia en la Overtura 1812, no compro hub alguno. Las limitaciones con masas orquestales las provoca el tamaño de las cajas del RK7, pues un woofer de 5" 1/4 no puede con mucha masa orquestal, en mi modesto entender.