Off Ramp 5?

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 21291 times.

tuberock

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 5
Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #40 on: 18 Jan 2012, 06:12 pm »
Here is the answer for Off-Ramp 4 and 5:

"alas no, but it's not necessary as we get bit-perfect operation in the
standard mode."

Steve N.
It's not necessary. Just like it's not necessary to get a offramp 5 if you have a asynchronous usb DAC. It shouldn't matter. But the reality is, it does matter! These improvement's in sound quality makes us audiophiles willing to spend an outrageous $2000 dollars + on a spidif converter. However their is a LOT more going on to create music in the digital realm than just bit perfect. Digital is just digital right?  :scratch: lThis is one of the reason people pay for players like Pure Music and Amarra. When itunes(Mac) is bit perfect and free. Audiophiles want the best sound they can afford. Science has not caught up with a lot of the audiophile world. To conclusively prove things one way or another. A lot of time it's as simple as it "sounds" better or doesn't. By using integer mode, which eliminates the conversion of the computers core audio and sends a direct signal in the DAC's language, just sounds better.

With that stated I'm still VERY interested in the Offramp 5 and what it has to offer. 

Integer mode offramp 6  :wink:

audioengr

Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #41 on: 18 Jan 2012, 06:58 pm »
It's not necessary. Just like it's not necessary to get a offramp 5 if you have a asynchronous usb DAC. It shouldn't matter. But the reality is, it does matter! These improvement's in sound quality makes us audiophiles willing to spend an outrageous $2000 dollars + on a spidif converter. However their is a LOT more going on to create music in the digital realm than just bit perfect. Digital is just digital right?  :scratch: lThis is one of the reason people pay for players like Pure Music and Amarra. When itunes(Mac) is bit perfect and free. Audiophiles want the best sound they can afford. Science has not caught up with a lot of the audiophile world. To conclusively prove things one way or another. A lot of time it's as simple as it "sounds" better or doesn't. By using integer mode, which eliminates the conversion of the computers core audio and sends a direct signal in the DAC's language, just sounds better.

With that stated I'm still VERY interested in the Offramp 5 and what it has to offer. 

Integer mode offramp 6  :wink:

I think one of the reasons that Integer mode evidently makes a difference in some cases is that some USB interfaces and drivers may not be bit perfect real-time.  It is difficult to tell this by doing static data compares.  I frankly dont trust the native drivers in OS's.

An advantage is that this may be another way to avoid Core Audio without using KS or WASAPI.  Even if this were the case, I still woudl not use WMP for my player.  I find Kernel Streaming to work just fine.  It has been verified by Microsoft Engineers to work well with my converters and provide bit-perfect data. 

Just like FLAC.  Data compares shows that its bit-perfect, but when you play back real-time, it mucks up the sound quality.

Steve N.

tuberock

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 5
Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #42 on: 18 Jan 2012, 09:24 pm »
I think one of the reasons that Integer mode evidently makes a difference in some cases is that some USB interfaces and drivers may not be bit perfect real-time.  It is difficult to tell this by doing static data compares.  I frankly don't trust the native drivers in OS's.

An advantage is that this may be another way to avoid Core Audio without using KS or WASAPI.  Even if this were the case, I still would not use WMP for my player.  I find Kernel Streaming to work just fine.  It has been verified by Microsoft Engineers to work well with my converters and provide bit-perfect data. 

Just like FLAC.  Data compares shows that its bit-perfect, but when you play back real-time, it mucks up the sound quality.

Steve N.

I respect your opinion Steve.
It seems that your trying to downplay the effects of integer mode though. Their is a lot more issues with pc players not being bit perfect vs mac. So a player should be at a MINIMUM bit perfect. That's why most audiophiles using pc's, kernel stream. However I find it very unlikely players such as itunes(mac), pure music, Amarra and others like these, don't play bit perfect. Test have shown they do this just fine live in real time.

So my opinion is that's not the real issue. For people using computers as a source and have high end resolving systems. Better players with hog mode, memory playback and integer mode make a difference. The music is more 3 dimensional, clearer and the noise floor seems to be lower. Can science prove this either way no. Their are factors that are not fully understood. Similar to the jitter issue and other factors with spdif converters. Some scientific test show the amounts on some systems should be inaudible to make a difference. Yet it does. The debate goes on.

I believe that bit perfect is a base or a minimum effort put forth to having the best player. In my opinion, people interested in the offramp 5 are not interested in "it sounds fine". There looking to squeeze out the best sound possible from their systems. Why else spend $2000+ on a simple converter. If spending another $120 on a better player supporting integer mode, improves sound even more. Why not?

Having a player "hog" the play back minimizing the layers of things going on, improves the sound. At least that's what I clearly here in my system. By eliminating the extra conversion and using the DAC's native language (integer mode)improves the sound even further. A good analogy you can understand is how your products sound best using I2s vs spdif, it's one less conversion needed. It's still bit perfect right? It shouldn't make a difference, but it does!

My recommendation is simply try it before speculating and down playing it. After all we all want better sound. If we are all open about possible improvements. Then we can end up with better systems. Like ones with Off ramp 5's!  :thumb:

In no way am I downplaying the Offramp 5 it may be the VERY BEST! Things are always evolving and hopefully improving. Integer mode is just one more new improvement that most are unfamiliar with. That evolves computer based audio closer towards matching high end cd players.  :D

audioengr

Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #43 on: 19 Jan 2012, 02:33 am »
Tuberock - one of the comparisons that I like to do is output from a networked device driven from a PC, such as Sonos or Logitech Touch.  After reclocking these, there should be zero artifacts from core audio because its not involved at all (this is simply data), and the jitter should be low.

If the SQ from my OR5 USB converter using Kernel Streaming on a PC or Amarra on Mac is as good as these, then I believe I am not suffering from Core Audio artifacts, even when using floating point and not integer mode.  I have found this to be the case.  This is the ultimate test for SQ IMO.  Unfortunately you cannot just use WMP or iTunes without some SQ degradation, but I believe the DSP functions of volume and mixer are primarily at fault here.

The real solution is to enable an industry standard networked player software IMO.  This will enable customers to play music using any computer or pad device and the SQ will be identical from the same end-point device.  Takes the computer and the audio stack completely out of the equation.

I am currently pursuing this solution with Microsoft.  This is not something that happens in 6 months however.  It may take 2-3 years before we see anything released.  It takes years to plan and execute a Windows release.

Steve N.

topher_m

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 10
Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #44 on: 22 Jan 2012, 02:33 pm »
HI

So if I order from your website today, you are only shipping Offramp 5s, correct?
Someone asked about introductory special - are you offering any?

Thanks

DaveBSC

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 110
Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #45 on: 22 Jan 2012, 03:01 pm »
Interesting Steve, I'm definitely looking forward to what's coming down the pike. I think it's pretty much settled that USB is the way to go for getting sound from a computer, now it's up to the software. The fact that Dan Weiss added an XMOS chip and Asynch USB input to his DAC 202 solidifies the point - FireWire lost this fight.

Another area that could definitely be improved is the USB output from the source. Motherboard USB ports are grouped into hubs and shared with other devices that may be connected to the computer, which is not something you want. The SoTM USB card attempts to solve this issue, but I feel like there's room there for an even better USB card above the $300 mark. Or for those using laptops or computers without a card slot available, a high-end audiophile grade USB hub. The Vaunix Lab Brick is really the only device on the market I know of that's anything like that, but they aren't an audio focused company.

Is this an area that Empirical might be exploring in the future?

audioengr

Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #46 on: 22 Jan 2012, 05:57 pm »
HI

So if I order from your website today, you are only shipping Offramp 5s, correct?


Correct, only OR5.  You can order from the website.

If you are doing S/PDIF, I would recommend the S/PDIF Hynes Reg

If you are doing HDMI I2S, then I recommend the HDMI I2S Hynes Reg

Quote
Someone asked about introductory special - are you offering any?

No, but the price may go up once I get all of the actual costs billed.

Steve N.

audioengr

Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #47 on: 22 Jan 2012, 06:01 pm »
Interesting Steve, I'm definitely looking forward to what's coming down the pike. I think it's pretty much settled that USB is the way to go for getting sound from a computer, now it's up to the software. The fact that Dan Weiss added an XMOS chip and Asynch USB input to his DAC 202 solidifies the point - FireWire lost this fight.

Another area that could definitely be improved is the USB output from the source. Motherboard USB ports are grouped into hubs and shared with other devices that may be connected to the computer, which is not something you want. The SoTM USB card attempts to solve this issue, but I feel like there's room there for an even better USB card above the $300 mark. Or for those using laptops or computers without a card slot available, a high-end audiophile grade USB hub. The Vaunix Lab Brick is really the only device on the market I know of that's anything like that, but they aren't an audio focused company.

Is this an area that Empirical might be exploring in the future?

Interesting.  This is definitely a weakness in the interface, the computer USB interface.

It's not something that we have done before, but certainly possible.  I'll keep it in mind.

We have a few things on our plate right now, including a less expensive DAC, the Hot-Rod, and a transformer isolator for the Overdrive, as well as launching the Bronze Overdrive Ultra.

Steve N.

eRaS

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 13
Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #48 on: 22 Jan 2012, 07:08 pm »
Hello, please forgive my ignorance, but given that the Offramp is asynchronous and utilizes its own clocks, wouldn't the Offramp be essentially independent of components upstream? 

Would there be much benefit in using the Offramp with a DAC that has a tent engineering clock, or would jitter be regenerated and introduced into the circuit? 

Thanks!

audioengr

Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #49 on: 22 Jan 2012, 07:26 pm »
Hello, please forgive my ignorance, but given that the Offramp is asynchronous and utilizes its own clocks, wouldn't the Offramp be essentially independent of components upstream?

Yes, there is no jitter added due to the signalling.

The problem is the ground path.  Common-mode noise on this path can inject noise at the OR5.  This is why I am developing the "Short-Block", a common-mode filter for USB cables.  I used this with good effect at RMAF.  I use it here always.  Look for a productized version soon.  Around $100

Quote
Would there be much benefit in using the Offramp with a DAC that has a tent engineering clock, or would jitter be regenerated and introduced into the circuit?

If the Tent clock is used in a resampler in the DAC, then yes, the jitter from the Tent will be added to the incoming signal.  The low-jitter input will still improves things though.

The best kind of DAC is the one that has no digital filtering and no resampler.

Steve N.

rogerdn

Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #50 on: 23 Jan 2012, 12:46 am »

Correct, only OR5.  You can order from the website.

If you are doing S/PDIF, I would recommend the S/PDIF Hynes Reg

If you are doing HDMI I2S, then I recommend the HDMI I2S Hynes Reg

No, but the price may go up once I get all of the actual costs billed.

Steve, I don't see the 5, the pricing is the same ?

audioengr

Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #51 on: 23 Jan 2012, 10:30 pm »
Steve, I don't see the 5, the pricing is the same ?

USB Hynes is included now, as well as a AES/EBU Hynes.

The new pricing is up.  Do a refresh.

Steve N.

rogerdn

Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #52 on: 23 Jan 2012, 11:20 pm »
USB Hynes is included now, as well as a AES/EBU Hynes.

The new pricing is up.  Do a refresh.

Steve N.

Steve, I have a PaceCarUSB w/two ultraclocks, with a 5 w/dual turbo clocks and spdif Hynes reg, what would be the improvements in SQ and do you consider them major ? 

audioengr

Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #53 on: 24 Jan 2012, 12:05 am »
Steve, I have a PaceCarUSB w/two ultraclocks, with a 5 w/dual turbo clocks and spdif Hynes reg, what would be the improvements in SQ and do you consider them major ?

The big difference I notice is a more analog sound and tighter bass.  The imaging of the bass is much better.

You should think about doing an inexpensive upgrade to the Pace-Car at least.  A new regulator upgrade for it is available.  Only $150 for the upgrade plus shipping and fees.  I have to remove the Ultraclocks and put them back to do it, so it requires some labor.

I just listened to one of these upgraded Pace-Cars and it was quite close to the Off-Ramp.

Steve N.

rogerdn

Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #54 on: 24 Jan 2012, 01:07 am »
The big difference I notice is a more analog sound and tighter bass.  The imaging of the bass is much better.

You should think about doing an inexpensive upgrade to the Pace-Car at least.  A new regulator upgrade for it is available.  Only $150 for the upgrade plus shipping and fees.  I have to remove the Ultraclocks and put them back to do it, so it requires some labor.

I just listened to one of these upgraded Pace-Cars and it was quite close to the Off-Ramp.

Steve N.

Steve, thanks for the suggestion which is obviously much fewer $'s, I believe I will do that.

DaveBSC

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 110
Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #55 on: 24 Jan 2012, 10:30 am »
There was an interesting new OR5 competitor at CES, Stahl-tek's "A.B.C". Battery powered, outputs are RCA, BNC, AES, and I2S over HDMI, which can connect to their megabuck DACs. Price is (I think) $3.5K.

Soulution also has their 590 USB, which is bus powered (boo!) and seems to cost a lot for no apparent reason. 

Also cool: MSB's femtosecond galaxy clock. $10K!

audioengr

Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #56 on: 24 Jan 2012, 06:32 pm »
There was an interesting new OR5 competitor at CES, Stahl-tek's "A.B.C". Battery powered, outputs are RCA, BNC, AES, and I2S over HDMI, which can connect to their megabuck DACs. Price is (I think) $3.5K.

Soulution also has their 590 USB, which is bus powered (boo!) and seems to cost a lot for no apparent reason. 

Also cool: MSB's femtosecond galaxy clock. $10K!

Oh goody.  More shootouts :thumb:

Bring them on!

Steve N.

eRaS

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 13
Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #57 on: 25 Jan 2012, 02:31 am »
Oh goody.  More shootouts :thumb:

Bring them on!

Steve N.

That's the spirit! :D

I wish we'd see this attitude more often, though its clear why we don't, when there's usually a winner and a loser.

Steve; do you use an Offramp with your Overdrive DAC? While I would probably prefer separates, wouldn't an integrated unit with I2S and shorter circuits result in a better sonic outcome?

Thanks.

audioengr

Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #58 on: 25 Jan 2012, 05:46 am »
That's the spirit! :D

I wish we'd see this attitude more often, though its clear why we don't, when there's usually a winner and a loser.

Steve; do you use an Offramp with your Overdrive DAC? While I would probably prefer separates, wouldn't an integrated unit with I2S and shorter circuits result in a better sonic outcome?

Thanks.

Overdrive is better by itself.  When I only had the Ultraclock, then an Off-Ramp was needed because 2 Ultraclocks would not fit inside the Overdrive.

Now with Turboclock, 2 clocks fit inside the Overdrive.  It's I2S direct internally.

Steve N.

fado

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 277
Re: Off Ramp 5?
« Reply #59 on: 27 Jan 2012, 02:00 am »
RE:  OR5 - Reply #41 on: 18 Jan 2012, 06:58 PM

“Just like FLAC.  Data compares shows that its bit-perfect, but when you play back real-time, it mucks up the sound quality.” (Steve N.) 

I have been downloading everything in FLAC.  What do you recommend instead of FLAC?