[sky176]

Is the Pace Car 2 mode 4 just an upgrade version of the off-ramp 3?
It looks like they are using very similar technologies. What's their differents in term of their design?

Thank you

[audioengr]

Is the Pace Car 2 mode 4 just an upgrade version of the off-ramp 3?
It looks like they are using very similar technologies. What's their differents in term of their design?

Thank you

The Pace-Car USB and the new Off-Ramp 4 both use 192 async USB modules.  The Pace-Car has galvanic isolation for the I2S output, the Off-Ramp 4 does not.  They both have isolation for the S/PDIF output.

The Off-Ramp 3 uses 24/96 adaptive USB mode, requiring no special driver.  Just because it is older technology does not make it less intersting.  I will be offering the Off-Ramp 3 at a steep discount when the Off-Ramp 4 starts shipping.

The Off-Ramp 3 was recently used in a DAC shootout in Colo.  It was added to the W4S DAC (S/PDIF cable) and according to the club members it made it sing.  Evidently better than the 192 async input.  They said this brought the W4S into competition with the Weiss 202.

Steve N.

[sky176]

So I wonder does the Off-Ramp 3 have galvanic isolation through the FIFO for the S/PIDF output? or Off-Ramp 3 has no FIFO buffer at all?

I am curious about the technologies involved in the Off-Ramp 3 since there is not much info on the official website about it.

I use only USB and SPDIF and listen to 44.1 and 96 files only.

To be honest, with the USB interface, should I except the Off-Ramp 3 be able to compete with the general $2k+ CD transporters? Or you expect the Pace car 2 to be the right one to do this?

[Brucemck]

To be honest, with the USB interface, should I except the Off-Ramp 3 be able to compete with the general $2k+ CD transporters? Or you expect the Pace car 2 to be the right one who do this?

My original Off-Ramp 1 beat a Meridian 800 transport.  It sounded better and had a far better user interface.  The newer Off-Ramps have improved upon that state, so IMO the answer is an unequivocal "Yes!"

[sky176]

Senior Brucemck, What kind of clock and connection did you use in the shootout with the Meridian 800? Did all the listeners agreed with your statement as you know general people, including me, sometimes having bias for some reasons.

[Brucemck]

Original post referencing my original standard Off Ramp:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=34176.0

My ingoing bias was that the Off Ramp would be good, but wouldn't approach an expensive Class A rated transport with extensive dejittering and upsampling capabilities.  I was surprised, to say the least, with the performance.

My new Off Ramp, with both an Ultra Clock and a stiff BPT battery supply, is markedly better than the unit referenced in my prior post.  That new unit, without any upsampling, into Meridians new 861v6 is stunning.

[audioengr]

So I wonder does the Off-Ramp 3 have galvanic isolation through the FIFO for the S/PIDF output? or Off-Ramp 3 has no FIFO buffer at all?

The Off-Ramp 3 and 4 both have isolation through the S/PDIF and AES outputs, but not the I2S output.  They both have buffering, but not a FIFO.

I am curious about the technologies involved in the Off-Ramp 3 since there is not much info on the official website about it.

It uses the TAS1020 in Adaptive mode for USB interface.  The circuits achieve very low jitter, even though this is a PLL application.

To be honest, with the USB interface, should I accept the Off-Ramp 3 be able to compete with the general $2k+ CD transports? Or you expect the Pace car 2 to be the right one to do this?

The Off-Ramp 3 is better than a lot of transports, and beats most of them with an Ultraclock installed.  This is what Steven Stone of TAS uses.

The Off-Ramp 4 and Pace-Car both achieve even lower jitter.

Steve N.