ESS ES9008/9018 Sabre dac

[leo]

I think they are chosen because of their "low" 20uV noise. Anagram chooses the same on their DAC EV board, you have a choice of shunts, e.g. Paul's, or of no regs....

regards Andre

I'd love to try bats at some stage , for now I'm very happy with the results from the shunt regs

BTW please keep us updated Andre, its nice to see the alternatives to poplular regulation types

[leo]

Bloody hell! this thing is starting to sound real damn good

[Dan Giovanni]

Hello Leo,

I'd be interested in hearing about your experiences with other regulators. Also, do you have any idea how much of the improvement of the new Buffalo is down to the 32 bit chip?

Dan

[leo]

Hi Dan,

A range of the usual three pin types LM317/337, LT317/337 etc
ALW super regs, PFM flea, Audiocom super reg, Teddy reg , Burson discrete, Paul Hynes series and shunt

I tried most different options with the first Buffalo

TBH My hotrodded Buffalo gave the Buffalo32s using external lm317/337 regulated based supplies a very hard time in a lot of area's although to be fair the Buffalo32s is better than what the standard Buffalo was (going by memory)

The design of the Buffalo32s is certainly better than the old version, XO, regulation , passive components etc
Its hard to say how much is down to the ES9018 regarding improvement, ideally they would have to compared using the same board

[Audiocom AV]

Hi Dan,

A range of the usual three pin types LM317/337, LT317/337 etc
ALW super regs, PFM flea, Audiocom super reg, Teddy reg , Burson discrete, Paul Hynes series and shunt

Hi Leo

Which version of the Audiocom Super-regulator did you try, 1, 2, or 3?

The last version 3 is totally different to version 2, which in turn was different to version 1.

[leo]

Hi Leo

Which version of the Audiocom Super-regulator did you try, 1, 2, or 3?

The last version 3 is totally different to version 2, which in turn was different to version 1.

Hi Mark,

It was version 1(I just noticed your now on version 3)

Leo

[Audiocom AV]

Hi Mark,

It was version 1(I just noticed your now on version 3)

Leo

Hi Leo

OK.

Well version 1 was a stab in the right direction but version 3 is superior in every respect. As well as using a very low noise reference and gain amplifier, the reference is post filtered and the output bootstrapped. The clever start up means that a 5V reg will operate from 5.5V.

[leo]

Hi Leo

OK.

Well version 1 was a stab in the right direction but version 3 is superior in every respect. As well as using a very low noise reference and gain amplifier, the reference is post filtered and the output bootstrapped. The clever start up means that a 5V reg will operate from 5.5V.

Thanks for the info Mark, another one to try out sometime
Being able to operate from such a small voltage drop is quite handy indeed

Regards,
Leo

[jkeny]

A range of the usual three pin types LM317/337, LT317/337 etc ALW super regs, PFM flea, Audiocom super reg, Teddy reg , Burson discrete, Paul Hynes series and shunt

Wow, that's a fair selection of regs with a lot of well regarded ones in there - just missing the battery option as per Rolls

TBH My hotrodded Buffalo gave the Buffalo32s using external lm317/337 regulated based supplies a very hard time in a lot of area's although to be fair the Buffalo32s is better than what the standard Buffalo was (going by memory)

Just shows how sensitive these digital circuits are to PS quality!

The design of the Buffalo32s is certainly better than the old version, XO, regulation , passive components etc
Its hard to say how much is down to the ES9018 regarding improvement, ideally they would have to compared using the same board

Dan (Spartacus) is doing just that - replacing a ES9008 with ES9018 on a mark 1 Buffalo - his impressions should be interesting!

[Dan Giovanni]

Hi Dan,

A range of the usual three pin types LM317/337, LT317/337 etc
ALW super regs, PFM flea, Audiocom super reg, Teddy reg , Burson discrete, Paul Hynes series and shunt

I tried most different options with the first Buffalo

TBH My hotrodded Buffalo gave the Buffalo32s using external lm317/337 regulated based supplies a very hard time in a lot of area's although to be fair the Buffalo32s is better than what the standard Buffalo was (going by memory)

The design of the Buffalo32s is certainly better than the old version, XO, regulation , passive components etc
Its hard to say how much is down to the ES9018 regarding improvement, ideally they would have to compared using the same board

Thanks for the reply Leo. Like you I've found the Buffalo to be very responsive to power supply improvements. For the analogue side, I'm currently using a discrete regulator by Greg Ball, pre-regulated by something of my own design. I'm interested in the PH shunts, but am pretty satisfied with what I have at the moment. Perhaps later when I'm bored. Haven't done much to the digital supplies (got rid of those LM317s) ....not sure how much there is to be gained there.

As JKeny says, I've got a ESS9018, and just need to send my DAC off to get the swap done by someone with the tools. The trouble is having to put up with on-board sound via my PC while the Buffalo is away...... will report in when I finally get off my rear.