Jump to content
IGNORED

TEAC NT-505 NT505 Worth Waiting for ?


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

It's in japanese, who can translate?

https://teac.jp/jp/support/news/5386

 

I heard there are plans for roon ready?

My main curiousity is what DAC chipset it will use, and if there is any improvements on clock or galvanic isolation or other notable features that it has over NT503.

 

I think this is what i will get!

 

 

Hmmh, DAC chip is said right there:

AKM's AK4497...

 

So now it'll support PCM up to 768k and DSD up to DSD512. So double rates compared to NT-503.

 

Signalyst - Developer of HQPlayer

Pulse & Fidelity - Software Defined Amplifiers

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Ron Scubadiver said:

AK chips are widely used in pro audio gear, especially their A to D converter.  Note that all DA chips have numerous implementation options.  Quality of power supply, USB input and analogue output make a big difference.

 

I personally am Not interested in any usb interface,  interested in "non-use" of any usb (wink)

Link to comment
27 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

It's in japanese, who can translate?

If you use Chrome, just right click on that page and select Translate to English.

There are more feature details available on this page https://teac.jp/jp/support/news/5386

If you are interested in the BULK PET USB technology developed by Interface, see https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&u=https://www.itf.co.jp/prod/audio_solution/bulk-pet&prev=search

 

I'd love to hear what @Wavelength thinks about BULK PET.

 

Pareto Audio AMD 7700 Server --> Berkeley Alpha USB --> Jeff Rowland Aeris --> Jeff Rowland 625 S2 --> Focal Utopia 3 Diablos with 2 x Focal Electra SW 1000 BE subs

 

i7-6700K/Windows 10  --> EVGA Nu Audio Card --> Focal CMS50's 

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, rickca said:

If you use Chrome, just right click on that page and select Translate to English.

There are more feature details available on this page https://teac.jp/jp/support/news/5386

If you are interested in the BULK PET USB technology developed by Interface, see https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&u=https://www.itf.co.jp/prod/audio_solution/bulk-pet&prev=search

 

 

Thanks...i use firefox by default but i just opened in chrome.

Yes, apears "plans" of supporting ROON and MQA, Tidal Qobuz (none of which besides "maybe roon") are of interest to me.

 

Seems like the player support and new chip no advances in clock or power are listed that i see...I guess they feel, their noise isolation, clock and power are sufficient for this price point already since no new advances.  The nt503 stated they do not allow any usb noise in from pc (no noise quesitonable, but that is what they market), and since i will use network interface anyway, that is not of any consequence to me anyway.  The only thing is all the recent talk about need for lps and clocks and this doesn't see to address those issues...hmmm....

 

I wish that if power is so important that products llike these would at least have the option of external power supply.

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, rickca said:

If you are interested in the BULK PET USB technology developed by Interface, see https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&u=https://www.itf.co.jp/prod/audio_solution/bulk-pet&prev=search

 

Sounds similar to the first generation M2Tech hiFace, RigiSystems USBPAL (used on the Mytek Stereo192-DSD and Manhattan DACs) and exaSound.

 

If the full DAC capability is not available through USB Audio Class, there will be some challenges on Mac and Linux. Depending on how tight-lipped they are on the protocol, there will be problems interfacing that with Linux (someone being able to develop a driver for it). And that means problems with various devices from Sonore, Auralic, etc, etc...

 

Signalyst - Developer of HQPlayer

Pulse & Fidelity - Software Defined Amplifiers

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

i want to use it for network, not usb...what's funny

 

Features say "DSD 5.6 MHz, PCM 192 kHz / 24 bit compatible network streaming support". Typically the challenge with these devices is that they put something too light on the network side.

 

"By using each DAC in monaural mode, we acquired a high S / N value and upgraded it to a high-spec machine that also made possible native playback (when used as a USB DAC) of DSD 22.5 MHz and PCM 768 kHz / 32 bits."

 

Of course if that is sufficient for you it's all fine!

Signalyst - Developer of HQPlayer

Pulse & Fidelity - Software Defined Amplifiers

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

Features say "DSD 5.6 MHz, PCM 192 kHz / 24 bit compatible network streaming support". Typically the challenge with these devices is that they put something too light on the network side.

 

"By using each DAC in monaural mode, we acquired a high S / N value and upgraded it to a high-spec machine that also made possible native playback (when used as a USB DAC) of DSD 22.5 MHz and PCM 768 kHz / 32 bits."

 

Of course if that is sufficient for you it's all fine!

Miska, I highly respect your opinion..probably more than anyone else on this board (regardless of your players gui-wink)...

 

But can you clarify what you are saying here in greater detail?  I am not following what you are saying?  What do you mean by they put something "too light" on the network side.  I am having difficulty understanding what is important with the transfer of bits via ethernet, especially in comparison to usb?   

 

Also sentence 2, wher eyou say when using dac in monaural mode..... isn't that done whether usb or ethernet? 

Are you saying that you believe the usb interface would have superior SQ to enet?

 

It has always been my experience that ethernet sounds better than usb regardless of dac.

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

But can you clarify what you are saying here in greater detail?  I am not following what you are saying?  What do you mean by they put something "too light" on the network side.  I am having difficulty understanding what is important with the transfer of bits via ethernet, especially in comparison to usb?   

 

Also sentence 2, wher eyou say when using dac in monaural mode..... isn't that done whether usb or ethernet? 

Are you saying that you believe the usb interface would have superior SQ to enet?

 

What I mean is that they (many manufacturers) tend put some light weight ("cheap") computer module as a network interface implementation. That in turn imposes limits on the resolution that can be used over the network. Not necessarily because of CPU power limitations, but because of limitations of the I2S interface implementation. Like here they list that 768/32 PCM and DSD512 is only available over USB. Network interface is limited to 192/24 PCM and DSD128.

 

That reference to monoaural mode means that it has two DAC chips, each AK4497 is a stereo DAC. But these better DAC chip models have option to be used as a mono DAC by combining the two DACs together. Usually in such way that output is balanced, each DAC channel producing one polarity of the differential signal. This increases SNR of the DAC. So both L and R channels has it's own DAC chip running in this single channel mono mode (instead of one chip running in stereo mode).

 

Signalyst - Developer of HQPlayer

Pulse & Fidelity - Software Defined Amplifiers

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

What I mean is that they (many manufacturers) tend put some light weight ("cheap") computer module as a network interface implementation. That in turn imposes limits on the resolution that can be used over the network. Not necessarily because of CPU power limitations, but because of limitations of the I2S interface implementation. Like here they list that 768/32 PCM and DSD512 is only available over USB. Network interface is limited to 192/24 PCM and DSD128.

 

That reference to monoaural mode means that it has two DAC chips, each AK4497 is a stereo DAC. But these better DAC chip models have option to be used as a mono DAC by combining the two DACs together. Usually in such way that output is balanced, each DAC channel producing one polarity of the differential signal. This increases SNR of the DAC. So both L and R channels has it's own DAC chip running in this single channel mono mode (instead of one chip running in stereo mode).

 

 

Ok, thanks for clarification....yea, my source files are mostly 5.6mhz (DSD128), and i prefer native to upsampling, so the 5.6mhz over ENET is what i want...thanks for clarification....If i do buy it (if nothing comes out sooner sounding more promising), then i will certainly try the usb, but my gut tells me from past experience that the 5.6mhz source files will sound better via ENET than USB.

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

What I mean is that they (many manufacturers) tend put some light weight ("cheap") computer module as a network interface implementation. That in turn imposes limits on the resolution that can be used over the network. Not necessarily because of CPU power limitations, but because of limitations of the I2S interface implementation. Like here they list that 768/32 PCM and DSD512 is only available over USB. Network interface is limited to 192/24 PCM and DSD128.

 

That reference to monoaural mode means that it has two DAC chips, each AK4497 is a stereo DAC. But these better DAC chip models have option to be used as a mono DAC by combining the two DACs together. Usually in such way that output is balanced, each DAC channel producing one polarity of the differential signal. This increases SNR of the DAC. So both L and R channels has it's own DAC chip running in this single channel mono mode (instead of one chip running in stereo mode).

 

 

On another note, have you any experience with the SOTM or SONORE, and do you think the ENET intfc on them would offer any substantial SQ difference over the TEAC (regarding 5.6mhz source files and no need for ROON)? (DAC PORTION EXCLUDED)

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

On another note, have you any experience with the SOTM or SONORE, and do you think the ENET intfc on them would offer any substantial SQ difference over the TEAC? (DAC PORTION EXCLUDED)

 

I have Sonore's microRendu. And bunch of other hardware I use as NAA for HQPlayer.

 

Result is heavily DAC dependent, I have not tried microRendu with the TEAC DACs I have (UD-501 and NT-503). But I'm using only USB input of the NT-503 (from NUC running Debian Linux and HQPlayer Embedded), mostly because in my opinion running it at constant DSD256 provides performance improvement.

 

Signalyst - Developer of HQPlayer

Pulse & Fidelity - Software Defined Amplifiers

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

I have Sonore's microRendu. And bunch of other hardware I use as NAA for HQPlayer.

 

Result is heavily DAC dependent, I have not tried microRendu with the TEAC DACs I have (UD-501 and NT-503). But I'm using only USB input of the NT-503 (from NUC running Debian Linux and HQPlayer Embedded), mostly because in my opinion running it at constant DSD256 provides performance improvement.

 

 

If you haven't tried the sonore with your TEAC dacs, and say the result is heavy dac dependent, what dacs have you tried with?  I know you also have your TEACS and DIY dac...what others?

 

And to clarify, in your opinion, what is your best SQ setup?  and is it substantially better than the NT503?

 

I truly highly regard your opinion....

 

I am currently considering NT505, Lumin D1/D2, and SOTM ULTRA (with unk dac)...but all of these were on basis of my belief that ENET sounds better than USb.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, beerandmusic said:

If you haven't tried the sonore with your TEAC dacs, and say the result is heavy dac dependent, what dacs have you tried with?  I know you also have your TEACS and DIY dac...what others?

 

And to clarify, in your opinion, what is your best SQ setup?  and is it substantially better than the NT503?

 

I truly highly regard your opinion....

 

I am currently considering NT505, Lumin D1/D2, and SOTM ULTRA (with unk dac)...but all of these were on basis of my belief that ENET sounds better than USb.

 

There is a non-complete list of DACs on my web page under "Recommended components". There are things missing from that list like Mytek Stereo192-DSD DAC, Schiit Loki (the DSD-only DAC), Metrum Musette, Chord Mojo, Meridian Explorer2, M2Tech hiFace DAC, etc. Plus boards like HifiBerry DAC+ Pro and my DIY things.

 

I have tried microRendu mostly with iFi DACs (Nano/Micro/iDAC2), Resonessence Labs HERUS and some others I cannot remember now.

 

I don't really want to advertise any single DAC or setup as best. And you probably use the DACs in a different way (no external upsampling). So my impressions are not directly applicable. Networking solves isolation problems that USB interfaces tend to have and makes usage more flexible; WiFi, access from multiple computers, etc. But still the actual DAC matters even more. So all the bits and pieces need to fit together.

 

You could also add Merging NADAC and Auralic Altair to the list?

Signalyst - Developer of HQPlayer

Pulse & Fidelity - Software Defined Amplifiers

Link to comment
33 minutes ago, Miska said:

 

I have tried microRendu mostly with iFi DACs (Nano/Micro/iDAC2)

 

I don't really want to advertise any single DAC or setup as best.

 

 

Wow, sounds like you have tried quite a few dacs, probably as many as me (grin).  I am not surprised you don't want to advertise what you like best...probably same reasons I don't like to.  Too much debate, for little discernable differences...

 

Reading between the lines

--- You either prefer using TEAC USB DSD256 (upsampling all to dsd 256 w/hqplayer)  or Sonore w/IFI Micro (using naa)

I am mostly curious which you think sounds better between these two....

 

I am guessing by your statement: "Networking solves isolation problems that USB interfaces tend to have" that you prefer the rendu with the micro.

 


 

 

 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...