# KECES PCM2702 USB DAC



## Cankin

Looks like another inexpensive but well built DAC. Specs and RMAA Test are posted here

 anyone knows how to read these graphs please comment


----------



## gz76

I know it's only aesthetic, but I'd rather not have a website url etched into the acrylic!

 Wow, only $175USD plus shipping.


----------



## mrarroyo

It sure looks interesting. I wonder who will be the first one to get one.


----------



## gz76

I'd give it a bash if I had need for a low-end USB DAC... but I don't!


----------



## Cankin

I think I'll be ordering one in few weeks


----------



## fordgtlover

It looks nice, but isn't the PCM2702 a low end chip these days. 

 Surely for this much trouble they could build a mid range DAC and charge a few bucks more.

 Oh. and I agree about the URL on the case - ugly.


----------



## Cankin

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fordgtlover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It looks nice, but isn't the PCM2702 a low end chip these days. 

 Surely for this much trouble they could build a mid range DAC and charge a few bucks more.

 Oh. and I agree about the URL on the case - ugly._

 

You can find the same chip in Cantate but I've read that the dac chip itself isn't the the most important factor which affects SQ but the design as a whole

 How about this?





 KECES DA-131 SPDIF DAC


----------



## redwires

I believe I might be one of the first ones to have one on Head-Fi. I've had mine for a bit over a year now (I have an earlier rev).

 My setup is KECES PCM2702 -> M3 -> ATH-A900.
 I've also used it with my NAD speaker amp.
 It's well-built and sounds great. I've been thinking about getting their non-USB DAC as well.


----------



## redwires

If anyone in Vancouver would like to listen to what it sounds like, I may be able to meet up somewhere with you. But I have modded some parts of the DAC.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gz76* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I know it's only aesthetic, but I'd rather not have a website url etched into the acrylic!

 Wow, only $175USD plus shipping._

 

Well, I'm the guy selling it on Ebay, if you would like, a plain top cover can be used instead, no additional charge for that. But do check with us for stock availability if anyone wants it that way.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gz76* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'd give it a bash if I had need for a low-end USB DAC... but I don't!_

 

I would not call this an low end unit, if you consider it low end because of the price, well I guess it was my fault in trying to keep the final selling price low.


 PCM2702 itself is a chip that had often been underestimated, the performance of it is just waiting to be tapped if the circuit supporting the DAC was properly done. Not too long ago people were selling a full sized unit USB DAC with tube output stage for over 1.5K USD. The DAC they used? PCM2702.

 I'm not saying this is the same as that, it isn't. However, I believe most would be surprised by how good this unit will sound. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 This unit will need about 2 weeks of run-in time for everything to mature a bit, after that, it slows down as it mature.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fordgtlover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It looks nice, but isn't the PCM2702 a low end chip these days. 

 Surely for this much trouble they could build a mid range DAC and charge a few bucks more.

 Oh. and I agree about the URL on the case - ugly._

 

PCM2702 was used due to it's SpAct capability, and in the PCM270x and 290x family, it is the one with the best analog output performance.

 The case as I said above, have a plain clear top that is available upon request, but will need to confirm availability first.

 Please check out our DA-131 as well, as it is one of our first unit to have the new enclosure design.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Cankin* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You can find the same chip in Cantate but I've read that the dac chip itself isn't the the most important factor which affects SQ but the design as a whole

 How about this?





 KECES DA-131 SPDIF DAC_

 


 Our packing box for this is suppose to arrive on Thursday or Friday, and this unit is head and shoulders above our USB DAC (well, it have to be...).

 Please let me know what would you like to know about this DAC, and I'll do my best in answering them


----------



## TheShaman

Love the looks of DA-131!

 Give us some spec love!


----------



## mrarroyo

I prefer the clear look.


----------



## gz76

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Maniac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I would not call this an low end unit, if you consider it low end because of the price, well I guess it was my fault in trying to keep the final selling price low._

 

Yeah, sorry... poor choice of words on my behalf. I don't mean to denigrate a product I haven't heard! I guess I meant it more from a price point of view (the price is excellent), but can see how some might assume I mean sound quality.


----------



## gz76

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Maniac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well, I'm the guy selling it on Ebay, if you would like, a plain top cover can be used instead, no additional charge for that. But do check with us for stock availability if anyone wants it that way._

 

Yeah, personally I prefer a plain top so it's nice that you offer the option. I'll keep it in mind if I ever decide to purchase one.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *TheShaman* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Love the looks of DA-131!

 Give us some spec love! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



_

 

Alright, here's a condensed version of the RMAA test result, please note that this is tested with EMU's 1212M, it can only get better with better testing equiptments, as we are regularly hitting the max on our test setup 

 Well, here's the "picturized" version of the test summary 






 I prefer to look at the 20~20KHz frequency response, as I feel it is more demanding in a good way, anything beyond that would be nice, but not really required 
 The 20~20KHz frequency response is -0.09, + 0.01 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 There was an earlier version of this DAC that use Crystal's CS8414 for receiving, the designer felt that there is no difficulty in switching to CS8416, and he would be getting 192KHz receiving capability as a bonus, thus he switched to the newer receiver IC on this version.

 The DAC used is BurrBrown's PCM1793, with its balanced voltage output, the signal is sent to the OP stage (Currently using OPA604, but it is in a socket, and you can change that to any other FET input/single OP that is pin compatible) that basically cancel out the DC bias from the DAC without using any capacitor coupling. 

 Each device on the board have their own power supply regulator, CS8416 have one, PCM1793 have two, and the LPF/OP stage have their own +/- supply on a separate transformer winding even.


 Anything you guys would like to know?


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gz76* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yeah, sorry... poor choice of words on my behalf. I don't mean to denigrate a product I haven't heard! I guess I meant it more from a price point of view (the price is excellent), but can see how some might assume I mean sound quality._

 

Hey, no worries 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Thanks for your comments too. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 From a personal point of view, I would like to hear about what our product didn't do well, and knowing where it didn't do well means that I can figure out a way to fix that and make it even better. IMHO, only people who cared enough would comment on what to improve, and I appreciate every word of it.


----------



## Cankin

How do both DACs compare to each other?

 Will there be a USB version of DA-131 coming out?


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Cankin* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_How do both DACs compare to each other?

 Will there be a USB version of DA-131 coming out?_

 

It would be hard to compare since the digital source feeding both DAC are not going to be the same, but it wouldn't be hard for DA-131 to win in almost every department, and with a different output style, DA-131 have the advantage of direct coupling instead of USB DAC's capacitor coupling. The major effect of this difference would be more details and better low end power/control as well as mid and upper end details.

 USB DAC's upgrade is also in the plan, but with the upgrade, the price will not stay at the current level either. For those looking for a bargain, the current USB DAC is a good buy.


 We believe that the spec of the future USB DAC will not be too far off from the current test results, since it is mostly limited by the sample size and sample rate this chip can handle. But the spec and how will that be done is still not been finalized yet.


----------



## Kees

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Maniac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Alright, here's a condensed version of the RMAA test result, please note that this is tested with EMU's 1212M, it can only get better with better testing equiptments, as we are regularly hitting the max on our test setup 

 Well, here's the "picturized" version of the test summary 






 I prefer to look at the 20~20KHz frequency response, as I feel it is more demanding in a good way, anything beyond that would be nice, but not really required 
 The 20~20KHz frequency response is -0.09, + 0.01 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 There was an earlier version of this DAC that use Crystal's CS8414 for receiving, the designer felt that there is no difficulty in switching to CS8416, and he would be getting 192KHz receiving capability as a bonus, thus he switched to the newer receiver IC on this version.

 The DAC used is BurrBrown's PCM1793, with its balanced voltage output, the signal is sent to the OP stage (Currently using OPA604, but it is in a socket, and you can change that to any other FET input/single OP that is pin compatible) that basically cancel out the DC bias from the DAC without using any capacitor coupling. 

 Each device on the board have their own power supply regulator, CS8416 have one, PCM1793 have two, and the LPF/OP stage have their own +/- supply on a separate transformer winding even.


 Anything you guys would like to know? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

I am very tempted to try the DA-131 in my computer setup in combination with my M-audio transit.
 There is just one detail you don't mention on your website: what are the dimensions of the case?


----------



## Cankin

I'm using M-Audio transit too, but I found that it isn't quiet enough (maybe my computer power supply sucks)....
 so, I'm worry that SQ from

 M-Audio transit --> DA-131 

 won't be better than

 USB --> PCM2702 USB DAC


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Kees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I am very tempted to try the DA-131 in my computer setup in combination with my M-audio transit.
 There is just one detail you don't mention on your website: what are the dimensions of the case?_

 

The dimention is
 215mm wide
 205mm deep
 80mm tall

 This is just off the top of my head, but it should be within 10mm.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Cankin* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm using M-Audio transit too, but I found that it isn't quiet enough (maybe my computer power supply sucks)....
 so, I'm worry that SQ from

 M-Audio transit --> DA-131 

 won't be better than

 USB --> PCM2702 USB DAC_

 

Well, I can't say much about M-Audio's transit, as I have never tried it. However, I think this comes down to your future plans, if there are any need for a SPDIF DAC or are you planning on upgrading your Transit, then DA-131 is the way to go.

 If you do no think you will need a SPDIF DAC anytime soon, then USB DAC is the clean and neat way to go about it.


----------



## emericanchaos

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Maniac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well, I can't say much about M-Audio's transit, as I have never tried it. However, I think this comes down to your future plans, if there are any need for a SPDIF DAC or are you planning on upgrading your Transit, then DA-131 is the way to go.

 If you do no think you will need a SPDIF DAC anytime soon, then USB DAC is the clean and neat way to go about it. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

what's the benefit of running this off of a firewire or usb soundcard and then amping it versus just putting the soundcard to the amp?


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *emericanchaos* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_what's the benefit of running this off of a firewire or usb soundcard and then amping it versus just putting the soundcard to the amp?_

 

It is easier to get cleaner power when you don't have to source it from the computer.

 That is one of the reason that our USB DAC only use the USB 5V for detecting the presence of USB connection and nothing else. The power used are all coming from the transformer and regulation circuit in the DAC itself.






 We actually tried to use USB's 5V, just for kicks... and that was not something we are about to repeat again.  It is not impossible to get good sound without using external power supply, but it requires a massive effort that it would be more worthwhile to spend the effort on external power supply.


----------



## emericanchaos

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Maniac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It is easier to get cleaner power when you don't have to source it from the computer.

 That is one of the reason that our USB DAC only use the USB 5V for detecting the presence of USB connection and nothing else. The power used are all coming from the transformer and regulation circuit in the DAC itself._

 

let's cut to the point then.

 how is this better than what i already have?
http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_u...Solo-main.html


----------



## Maniac

I have not used M-Audio's product before, thus I cannot make an honest comparison of the two.

 Anyone interested in comparing the two units?


----------



## boggle

Hi there maniac, your product sounds interesting. Here in Melbourne where I live there is a bunch of tweakers called Burson Audio who make discrete op amps: http://www.bursonaudio.com/Burson_HDAM_Module.htm

 How do you think these would go in the output stage of your SPDIF dac? Maybe we could set up some sort of test - it adds a bit to the price but it looks to my inexperienced eye like the case for your unit might be able to accomodate them.

 Incidently, what is the output impedence of your dac?


----------



## TGGoos

Just ordered one.......
 Will let you guys know when it's here and if it is everything I hope it is.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *boggle* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Hi there maniac, your product sounds interesting. Here in Melbourne where I live there is a bunch of tweakers called Burson Audio who make discrete op amps: http://www.bursonaudio.com/Burson_HDAM_Module.htm

 How do you think these would go in the output stage of your SPDIF dac? Maybe we could set up some sort of test - it adds a bit to the price but it looks to my inexperienced eye like the case for your unit might be able to accomodate them.

 Incidently, what is the output impedence of your dac?_

 

Burson's product have been interested me for a while, but I never had the chance to try them. I'd love to hear people's comment on how it compares to the current crop of OP amps. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 One issue that always concerns me with discrete parts is the device matching. IC OP amps don't need that because they could get naturally matched devices by careful design and being all on the same die. which is why National Semi's been announcing a bunch of insanely high performance OP Amps.

 With that said, I am not trying to say that Burson's stuff is good or bad, but just something to keep in mind when considering discrete parts. I personally would love to see some kind of comparison between Burson's discrete op-amps and some of today's more advanced IC OP amps. Both measurement and listening test are important to me, as the device is for someone to enjoy, but measurement can sometimes pick up where people might have missed at first glance. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 At first glance tho, I worry if it will fit into the case of DA-131, since it does not have a very tall case, you might want to double check with the actual unit in hand. from calculation, it will give you about 45mm of room... which might be a tight squeeze.


 The output impedance is about 200 Ohm, very lot output impedance courtesy of BurrBrown's OP


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *TGGoos* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Just ordered one.......
 Will let you guys know when it's here and if it is everything I hope it is._

 

I was just wondering about that, order received, and will ship it ASAP (as soon as we get a proper power plug adapter tomorrow, we will ship it. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 )


----------



## TGGoos

That's good news, any idea on shipping times?


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *TGGoos* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That's good news, any idea on shipping times?_

 

We use international EMS shipping, which is almost as fast as Fedex/UPS but costs a lot less. It should arrive in about 3~4 days after shipping.


----------



## Clutz

Maniac: If you're selling wears, and discussing the products at Head-Fi then you need to get a Member of the Trade account.


----------



## Maniac

Well, message sent to ask about the trade status...


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *TGGoos* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That's good news, any idea on shipping times?_

 

A huge typhoon hit us on friday and caused a delay in sending out the parcel, it will be sent on Monday


----------



## TGGoos

It arrived today 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




, in fine condition.
 Hooked it up with my own power cable, in stat of the one supplied with the converter plug. 

 Instant recognition in XP. 
 First impression is that it sounds good, a lot better then my old Hercules Game Theater. Not as sweet as my cd-player, but I’ll give it some time.
 I'll try to write a more complete report after I had some time to lissen
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 to it more.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *TGGoos* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It arrived today 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




, in fine condition.
 Hooked it up with my own power cable, in stat of the one supplied with the converter plug. 

 Instant recognition in XP. 
 First impression is that it sounds good, a lot better then my old Hercules Game Theater. Not as sweet as my cd-player, but I’ll give it some time.
 I'll try to write a more complete report after I had some time to lissen
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 to it more._

 

Do remember to play it at max volume in XP (XP's volume setup will automatically default to 1/2 volume, which degrades sound quality).

 Turn in up and you will feel it "open up" instantly.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Cankin* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Home: M-Audio Transit > KECES DA-131 DAC > CIAUDIO VHP-2 > HD650_

 

Cankin, how do you like your new DA-131 in your home setup? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 didn't notice that you have changed your sig before.


----------



## Cankin

Still burning in my DA-131, impression is coming next week


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Cankin* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Still burning in my DA-131, impression is coming next week 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	







_

 

I'd love to hear how you feel about it


----------



## infinitesymphony

Same here... Cankin, you should start the official KECES DA-131 thread in the Dedicated Source Components sub-forum.


----------



## Cankin

You mean here?? lol


----------



## fordgtlover

Why is the opa2604 such a popular opamp for USB DACs?

 Tangent suggests that the opa2604 is similar to the opa2132, which is certainly not one of my favourites.


----------



## fordgtlover

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fordgtlover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It looks nice, but isn't the PCM2702 a low end chip these days. 

 Surely for this much trouble they could build a mid range DAC and charge a few bucks more.

 Oh. and I agree about the URL on the case - ugly._

 

Sorry. I didn't mean to be rude about the case. It's a very nice looking device, and looks very cool with the clear perspex case.

 I am seriously considering buying one.

 Cheers


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fordgtlover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Why is the opa2604 such a popular opamp for USB DACs?

 Tangent suggests that the opa2604 is similar to the opa2132, which is certainly not one of my favourites._

 

Because they offer a fair performance while not costing too much. Due to everyone's taste being different in one way or another, it would not be easy to select a high performance that will be loved by everyone.

 Instead, something like OPA604 (or 2604) is used to provide a fair performance, and let users to use it as is, or pluck it out and put something better in. Either way, 604 works quite well, and there's isn't much money wasted if you want to swap it out for something else.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *fordgtlover* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Sorry. I didn't mean to be rude about the case. It's a very nice looking device, and looks very cool with the clear perspex case.

 I am seriously considering buying one.

 Cheers_

 

Don't worry man, no offence taken. We are always open to input about our products. If you don't like the look of USB DAC, please take a look at our DA-131 and let us know what you feel about it.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *TGGoos* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Just ordered one.......
 Will let you guys know when it's here and if it is everything I hope it is._

 

Any updates?


----------



## gz76

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Maniac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Any updates? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

hehehe. If you're that keen, why don't you send me one and I'll write a solicited review!


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gz76* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_hehehe. If you're that keen, why don't you send me one and I'll write a solicited review!










_

 






 well, our review units is actually being prepped, but it won't be ready until sometime in November.

 I'd like to get input from the actual users of the unit as well, so I can have a better idea of what everyone would like and prefer.


----------



## zyxwvutsr

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Maniac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Don't worry man, no offence taken. We are always open to input about our products. If you don't like the look of USB DAC, please take a look at our DA-131 and let us know what you feel about it._

 

The casing on the DA-131 is much more professional looking. The color on the clear cover of the USB DAC does not match well with the other portion of the casing.


----------



## Calihan

What do you mean the units are being prepped? Wouldn't you just take one that is already made and use that? If you don't mind me asking, how are you prepping them?


----------



## oicdn

He's burning them in. He's making sure the demo unit is fully burned in and the sound is done evolving.

 Should be pretty sweet


----------



## infinitesymphony

Whoa, review units? Sweet.


----------



## Maniac

We will have that DA-131 ready for review first, the USB DAC will come later. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Most users who have gotten USB DAC so far seems quite happy about it, I'm hoping maybe one or two of them will share their delights while we prep the review units.


----------



## oicdn

Yay!


----------



## MrJoshua

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Maniac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Because they offer a fair performance while not costing too much. Due to everyone's taste being different in one way or another, it would not be easy to select a high performance that will be loved by everyone.

 Instead, something like OPA604 (or 2604) is used to provide a fair performance, and let users to use it as is, or pluck it out and put something better in. Either way, 604 works quite well, and there's isn't much money wasted if you want to swap it out for something else._

 

Can you offer any suggestions for other Opamps that I can try rolling when I receive my Keces PCM2702?


----------



## Maniac

Yes, the "guaranteed to sound good OP amp" is listed below, but YYMV due to everyone's liking is slightly different.

 Analog Device:
 AD8610 (need adapter board)

 BurrBrown/Ti
 OPA627BP/BM (The costlier one usually sounds better in this case)

 National
 LME49710

 All three are very good bets, but I'd try LME49710 myself. Not only is it a lot more affordable, it is also one of the latest OP from National that is designed from the start with audio in mind.


----------



## MrJoshua

Thanks! I'll try to get hold of an LME49710


----------



## MrJoshua

Just ordered some samples, so hopefully my order will be accepted.


----------



## redwires

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MrJoshua* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Thanks! I'll try to get hold of an LME49710 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

I hope you meant a pair since it uses one for each output channel.


----------



## MrJoshua

I've requested 4, just in case 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Thanks though!


----------



## Maniac

Here's a mod report from Japan, if anyone who reads Japanese, this may be interesting. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




http://www.gjmda.com/


----------



## infinitesymphony

It's November... Review units shouldn't be far off.


----------



## patgod

Any more impressions on this DAC? I've been looking at this unit on ebay, but just haven't seen enough reviews yet. What other dacs could this be compared to? The fubar II is somewhat in the same price range. I'm wondering if this beats out that dac?


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *patgod* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Any more impressions on this DAC? I've been looking at this unit on ebay, but just haven't seen enough reviews yet. What other dacs could this be compared to? The fubar II is somewhat in the same price range. I'm wondering if this beats out that dac?_

 

Fubar and this DAC is designed for different purposes with different trade off. KECES aims purely at those who don't shift their gears around a lot, thus with the heavier enclosure, heavier power cable, and basically just massive when compared to Fubar. Where Fubar is more aimed at the market where the user may require the unit to sound nice as well as easy to move.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *infinitesymphony* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It's November... Review units shouldn't be far off. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Well... With December around, it is even closer...


----------



## Maniac

Well, after much waiting, the new version of USB DAC is now finally available. We finally have some cleaner photos now, please check below. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 The front:




 Back:




 Inside view:




 Same great attention to detail:





 The purpose of the revision (well, we gotta give ourselves a good reason for doing something, don't we?) is to update the styling to on par with DA-131. We can safely say that of the people we asked, more than 70% prefer the newer styling to the older USB DAC.

 Styling aside, we feel that it is about time to update some popular "mods" to our new DA-151.


 *Independent oscillator, DAC no longer have to generate its own clock, thus reducing the internal noises. If anyone is willing to try, I suspect TentXO would make it sound even better, but I'm not sure if Tent is selling 12MHz XOs.

 *Fully isolated oscillator power, preventing noise from being dumped into DAC's power supply. (not possible if you use DAC + crystal to generate its own clock)

 *National's new LME49710 OP-Amp (Replacing OPA604AP), a stellar choice for performance. We have not seen anything in the price range, or 10 times the price to perform much better than what this puppy can do, nuff said.

 *Some other minor modifications that are helping the DAC to perform better.


 And the result we got is fully in line with what we had expected and plus a little more.

 *Sound staging and the location of the instruments now sounded much better, bigger sound stage with more precise location of instruments can now be easily heard. (Believe it or not, this is actually the effect of jitter reduction.)

 *More transparent, increased detail and clarity, we are not talking about just a little increase, this improves the performance a fair bit. This is partly from the new National OP-Amp and the improved clock.

 *Then general feel is that it is now less laid back and even more neutral sounding.


 I have not got the time of putting it on eBay yet, but if anyone's interested, the price is now $230 + $45 shipping (The unit is now much heavier, and double boxed packaging also increase the weight quite a bit.). The original USB DAC is still on eBay, but it will be removed in a couple days due to stock being quite low now (4 unit since I last checked).

 For people who are interested in getting a pair of OPA604 when getting DA-151, an extra pair of OPA604 will only be $6 USD when purchased with DA-151.

 As I had previously promised that there will be some forum discount, any DA-151/DA-131 ordered in December will now receive a $10 discount on shipping. (per unit, ordering more than one unit's shipping is a bit more complicated, please ask before ordering.)


----------



## Maniac

And oh, the review unit will be sent out this month.


----------



## pdennis

Maniac,

 I'm interested in the Keces DACs. My source is a Macbook Pro, which means that I have the option of optical or USB out. I've seen comments from a number of quarters (including you yourself, I think) suggesting that optical isn't ideal, so I guess I'm wondering how you think the 131 (restricted to optical input only) stacks up to the new 151.


----------



## Maniac

Personally, I feel that when using a computer source, DA-151 would be a logical choice, no matter if you are using a Mac or PC. Since most computer requires troublesome setup and hardware for high quality digital output. In addition, almost any DAC will basically have a hand tied behind its back if you use optical input. It is not the optimal way of running digital signal to your DAC in terms of signal quality. Manufacturers loves them because they now don't have to worry about a 2~3MHz + other noise antenna sticking out their product (This is what coax output looks like when they send their product for testing).

 The simple answer is as follows:


 For computers users that listens to 16bit, 32/44.1/48KHz sounds (If you only listens to CD, watches DVD video, then you are...), then DA-151 would be the best choice in terms of sound quality.


 For stereo racks/CD Transports users, or have computer with high quality digital output device (Say EMU1212M, RME HDSP9632, etc), DA-131 would be the way to go. If you just have to have 24bit/192KHz ability, I suppose DA-131 is the only viable option as well.


----------



## infinitesymphony

Is the DA-151 the revision for what was previously called the PCM2702? If so, I agree, the styling updates look good.

 Such a clean board layout, too (aesthetically speaking)... That's always nice to see.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *infinitesymphony* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Is the DA-151 the revision for what was previously called the PCM2702? If so, I agree, the styling updates look good.

 Such a clean board layout, too (aesthetically speaking)... That's always nice to see. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Yeah, previously it really have no model name to speak of, thus the problem of not sure what to call it.  I usually just call it USB DAC.


----------



## infinitesymphony

Also, I imagine that the switch to LME49710 op-amps contributes to the more neutral sound quality versus the laid-back character of the Burr-Browns. Everyone seems to be enjoying the LM4562 / LME49710. It certainly sounded very good in my CMoy--it was one of the most neutral-sounding op-amps I've tried.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *infinitesymphony* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Also, I imagine that the switch to LME49710 op-amps contributes to the more neutral sound quality versus the laid-back character of the Burr-Browns. Everyone seems to be enjoying the LM4562 / LME49710. It certainly sounded very good in my CMoy--it was one of the most neutral-sounding op-amps I've tried._

 

Indeed, we believe the clock upgrade improved the sound stage while OP upgrade improved the "neutralness" of the sound.

 We felt it is quite a nice improvement over the previous setup, and thus a good time to introduce the revamped styling with the new electronics setup.


----------



## Operandi

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Maniac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Personally, I feel that when using a computer source, DA-151 would be a logical choice, no matter if you are using a Mac or PC. Since most computer requires troublesome setup and hardware for high quality digital output. In addition, almost any DAC will basically have a hand tied behind its back if you use optical input. It is not the optimal way of running digital signal to your DAC in terms of signal quality._

 

I'm going going to purchasing a DAC soon and the Keces units have my interest. Thanks for complicating things 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




.

 Can you elaborate on why USB is preferred a bit more? I would assume it is because USB by default has built in error checking but thats really more of an educated guess than anything else.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Operandi* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I'm going going to purchasing a DAC soon and the Keces units have my interest. Thanks for complicating things 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




.

 Can you elaborate on why USB is preferred a bit more? I would assume it is because USB by default has built in error checking but thats really more of an educated guess than anything else._

 

Well, complicated problem sometimes have elegant solutions. eg: Buy'em all... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 Regarding why I suggest USB over SPDIF for computer users, there are several reasons, I'll just list them in random orders. Ones with # mark means that they potentially can open those cans of worms that everyone loves. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 *# USB signal is NOT associated to a "playback" clock, and thus does not have the problem of clock recovery and the associated jitter that comes with it. In another words, the playback rate is not slaved to the USB clock, and it lessens the PC's damaging effect of interference.

 *# Most cheap SPDIF source from your computer is not well driven, nor properly tuned. This can create some rather sloppy square waves in the eyes of a SPDIF receiver. This can be a major jitter inducer, and greatly affecting the sonic quality of the DAC.

 * Most high quality SPDIF source from your computer is quite complicated to setup (Just ask anyone with RME or EMU sound cards, they are nowhere even close to being plug and play), and for people who only listen to CDs and watch DVD movies, there really is no need for higher bit rate and sample rates.


 Of course, if you already have a high quality SPDIF source, or plan to get one really soon. Then by all means get DA-131. Do remember that optical source is really not an optimum way of sending digital data (for people who want to send signal over a few clicks of cable, I'll suggest optical then.), coax cables works much, much better.

 However, if you are unsure about the extra spending on a rather expensive sound card with SPDIF being the only feature used. Then I'd suggest dropping the plan for the sound card and going with DA-151 directly.


----------



## davve

No reviews on the KECES DA-151 yet? looks like a great deal!


----------



## Dual

Im still waiting for my DA-151 and Little Dot MKV to arrive. If im lucky it might be here tomorrow.


----------



## Dual

Guess what, the DA-151 arrived this morning! Unfortunately my Little Dot MKV is stuck in customs until christmas is over, so I can't really test this out right now. I would like to thank David aka Maniac for his excellent service and kickass product. Anyway here are some quick snap shots of the Keces DA-151 USB DAC. Enjoy! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 Size comparison with my Denon AH-D2000 and iBasso D1





 DA-151 naked





 Naked - Close up





 Holy crap! The DA-151 has active camouflage!?


----------



## enjoiflobees

Hey Dual nice pictures!!! I hope I get mine within the next couple of days also.


----------



## Maniac

Well, damn. That's some nicer photos than what we got here. I'm really pushing hard to get some nicer looking photos than the ones we had. Afterall, we are showing product photos, not screen shots of some CSI episode that involves DA-151.


----------



## teNtiOn

Nice pic!! Anyway Keces DA-151 USB DAC and iBasso D1 which sound better on your D2000?


----------



## enjoiflobees

I just received my DA-151. I am really happy. The product looks even better in person. This is such an increase of quality compared to using headphone out of the computer. Maybe one of these days ill give some detailed feedback and comparison to my D-25 and iMod. For now though believe me when I say it was well worth it.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *enjoiflobees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I just received my DA-151. I am really happy. The product looks even better in person. This is such an increase of quality compared to using headphone out of the computer. Maybe one of these days ill give some detailed feedback and comparison to my D-25 and iMod. For now though believe me when I say it was well worth it._

 

Thanks for the kind comments 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 Seeing that you own a Little Dot III, I have some suggestion that you can try on it to improve the sound massively.

 If you are not willing to mod too too much, you can try to find the Russian tube 4P1L (TDSL Tube data [4P1L (4П1Л)]) and it is a direct (and much better) replacement for the Chinese 4P1S tube. The one I got is made by Svetlana (Winged C mark, with OTK printed on glass), and it just sound much better than the original, clarity, detail, naturalness, you name it, it just does it better than the tube originally came with LD III.

 Some of the later "PLUS" model have Mullard "driving" tubes, but the one I got is using some "Nanking" tube factory's tube that does not sound very good either. Thus I bypassed that driver tube and have it go directly from pot to the power amp tube. That helped a lot, and rewired the pre out directly out of the pot, which seems to work better than the output from either the transformer or the tube.


 It's worth a try, and you'd never go back to the original tubes. I sold mine to a friend locally, and he tried on the Chinese tube once and never dare to put it on again. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 Glowing 4P1L





 From Russia with tune




 A bit dirty with storage/age/possibly waterlogged at some stage, but worked quite damn well on my LD III


----------



## Maniac

Updated with new photos, this is now lookin' a lot better! Background of the photo hastily removed, so pardon the jaggedness. (I used paint in Windows... don't have much stuff installed on this computer. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 )

 The front:




 Back:





 Enjoy.


----------



## enjoiflobees

Thanks for the advice for the mkIII. I am not sure if ill ever actually do anything with it but if I do, ill try some of those things.
 I remember you saying to having my output on my computer to be at max to obtain best sound. What about for itunes? Should I max that also?


----------



## MaZa

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *enjoiflobees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Thanks for the advice for the mkIII. I am not sure if ill ever actually do anything with it but if I do, ill try some of those things.
 I remember you saying to having my output on my computer to be at max to obtain best sound. What about for itunes? Should I max that also?_

 


 Those tubes he recommended are for LD III, NOT MKIII, they wont fit. Ld III is older model, MkIII uses EF95 or EF92 (and equivalents/compatible alternatives) depending on jumper setting.


----------



## Dzjudz

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *enjoiflobees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Thanks for the advice for the mkIII. I am not sure if ill ever actually do anything with it but if I do, ill try some of those things.
 I remember you saying to having my output on my computer to be at max to obtain best sound. What about for itunes? Should I max that also?_

 

Yes, max everything.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MaZa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Those tubes he recommended are for LD III, NOT MKIII, they wont fit. Ld III is older model, MkIII uses EF95 or EF92 (and equivalents/compatible alternatives) depending on jumper setting._

 

Actually they will, since I'm talking about the power tube, which is the metal based octal tube in the back. The tube in the front I bypass them completely, since I felt the circuit there is more or less a buffer circuit that does not improve the sonic quality of sound. Bypassing them reduced a bit of gain (maybe it did have some gain, maybe), and the veil on the sound got lifted quite dramatically.

 According to manufacturer, LDIII is the older model, while LDIII+ is the one with EF series of driving tube, while the power tube remained the same. 4P1S Chinese made directly heated tube or 4P1L Russian made one will both work fine, since 4P1S from what I can gather is a Chinese copy of 4P1L...


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Dzjudz* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes, max everything._

 

Indeed. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Tho I personally prefers Foobar 2000


----------



## Bozz_Keren

@Dual
 please give us some impressions on DA-151 and maybe little comparo against D1, i think Maniac also eager to know


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Bozz_Keren* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_@Dual
 please give us some impressions on DA-151 and maybe little comparo against D1, i think Maniac also eager to know 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Hey hey, no mind readings... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Anyways, I'm really eager to know how our stuff stacks up against other products in the market. Since there's just a lot of other offerings that it would be hard for us to source and compare them all. (Not to mention if we posted such comparisons, it is usually taken as infomericals and with a fair pinch of salt. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 )


 Well, it seems that most people are out there somewhere, skiing (north hemisphere) or sunbathing (south hemisphere), and it gets kinda quiet lately 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 Have fun everyone, Merry Christmas.


----------



## MaZa

Quote:


 The tube in the front I bypass them completely, since I felt the circuit there is more or less a buffer circuit that does not improve the sonic quality of sound. Bypassing them reduced a bit of gain (maybe it did have some gain, maybe), and the veil on the sound got lifted quite dramatically. 
 


 But then whats the point in having tube amplifier? Its the tube buffering that gives the tube-amp harmonic distortion.


----------



## MaZa

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Maniac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Actually they will, since I'm talking about the power tube, which is the metal based octal tube in the back. The tube in the front I bypass them completely, since I felt the circuit there is more or less a buffer circuit that does not improve the sonic quality of sound. Bypassing them reduced a bit of gain (maybe it did have some gain, maybe), and the veil on the sound got lifted quite dramatically.

 According to manufacturer, LDIII is the older model, while LDIII+ is the one with EF series of driving tube, while the power tube remained the same. 4P1S Chinese made directly heated tube or 4P1L Russian made one will both work fine, since 4P1S from what I can gather is a Chinese copy of 4P1L..._

 


 And Little Dot MkIII uses 6H6PI as powertube, not 4P1L. Are you sure we are talking about same amplifier? III and III+ are totally different from *Mk[/]III.

Viewing a thread - A New Member of The MK Family: LD MK III

 vs.

Little-Tube.com Ð¡²»µã3+


 MK serie is completely new line from Little Dot, they have nothing to do with earlier I-III serie.*


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MaZa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And Little Dot MkIII uses 6H6PI as powertube, not 4P1L. Are you sure we are talking about same amplifier? III and III+ are totally different from *Mk[/]III.*_*
*
*


Ah, sorry. My mistake, I missed the "MK" in his signature. MK series seems interesting, but haven't had the chance of trying it out.


 Regarding to the tube buffering, IMHO I totally agree that tube buffering is for the pleasant distortion that it produces. But in my original LDIII (not MK), the buffering tube is distorting it so much that clarity and detail are basically all gone. I had another tube buffered tube amp before that, and it uses 6DJ8/6922 for buffering, and it never had that kind of veiling and "fog" in the sound. In that tube buffer, I have tried Amperex (orange globe, IIRC) and it is quite sweet and mellow, while Siemens CCA is clean, detailed and just a bit of tube flavor.


 Ah well, sorry for the confusion.*


----------



## MaZa

No matter, DA-131 arrived safely and working flawlessly. Nice little source, and good sound. Now, to some opamp switching...


----------



## davve

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MaZa* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No matter, DA-131 arrived safely and working flawlessly. Nice little source, and good sound. Now, to some opamp switching... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 


 PHOTOS PLEASE!!! ..sorry 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 how are the sound? i have heard that the OPA604 sounds laid back?


----------



## Cankin

You need a review like this?

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f7/kec...review-264379/


----------



## MaZa

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *davve* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_PHOTOS PLEASE!!! ..sorry 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 how are the sound? i have heard that the OPA604 sounds laid back?_

 



 A little, though the DAC isnt burnt in. I did quick listening, but thats all. I already rolled LME49710 in. Bit better, but still bit laidback DAC. When I plug my stuff directly to X-Fi, the sound is very in-your-face and dry. Keces is more laidback and sweeter, much more noticeable soundstage in front-back depth and details are better too I think, atleast it sounds much less congested and more free-sounding.

 Not most impactive, but its still brand new. Little bit of burn-in and we'll see how the sound changes, if it changes.


  Quote:


 You need a review like this?

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f7/kec...review-264379/ 
 

Readed it already, thanks.


----------



## infinitesymphony

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Maniac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And oh, the review unit will be sent out this month. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Where is it headed first?


----------



## davve

An update here wouldn't hurt


----------



## pdennis

Maniac mentioned the possibility of a TentXO mod if a 12 MHz clock was available from them. Just thought I'd point out to him and anyone considering mods: on his DDDAC 2000 site, Doede Douma lists kits with 12 MHz TentXO clock which is (I think) used with a PCM2707.


----------



## tamtam

What will be better SQ wise -

 Laptop - DA151 - PreAmp - Amp
 Ipod 5.5 - Docking Station - Preamp -Amp

 Thanks


----------



## infinitesymphony

iPod 5.5 versus DA-151? Almost definitely the DA-151. External DACs have the advantage of using higher-quality parts that wouldn't fit inside an iPod.


----------



## tamtam

Thanks!


----------



## enjoiflobees

We'll I am loving my DA 151. And because I love it so much and it looks so damn good sitting on top of my Sig 30 (with 30.2 mods), I figured I'd post a couple of pictures.


----------



## Dual

Looks awesome enjo. The Sig 30 is huge!


----------



## enjoiflobees

In comparison to the DAC it is. But in terms of a regular speaker amp it is pretty small.


----------



## Bozz_Keren

can u give some review from your DA-151?


----------



## natnut

How does it compare to the Citypulse USB DAC which is about US$200 more expensive. Some people have criticised the use of the Burr Brown PCM2702 DAC in the DA-151.

 What are the drawbacks of using the Burr Brown PCM2702?


----------



## natnut

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *enjoiflobees* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_We'll I am loving my DA 151. And because I love it so much and it looks so damn good sitting on top of my Sig 30 (with 30.2 mods), I figured I'd post a couple of pictures.









_

 

Hi.

 After the burn in period, can you comment on how you find the sound quality of the DA-151?


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *natnut* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_How does it compare to the Citypulse USB DAC which is about US$200 more expensive. Some people have criticised the use of the Burr Brown PCM2702 DAC in the DA-151.

 What are the drawbacks of using the Burr Brown PCM2702?_

 

DA-151 uses PCM2702 with the understanding of its limitation and also its advantage. We know that the DAC core used in PCM2702 is not the top of the line DAC core. It's not even close, but top of the line DAC cores are often cranky and have quite a temper if it is not handled properly. To do it properly is not easy nor cheap, and the cost will quickly stack up and out of the range of that DA-151 is priced for.


 I feel that we tuned DA-151 to achieve the best C/P ratio, and would love to hear how it stacks up to other similar products in the market.


----------



## qman5

Just ordered the DA-151 off ebay. Looking forward to hearing it.


----------



## riverrat

Maniac, I am a newby on head-fi and trying to understand options for a PC based music source. I checked it out on eBay, and the KECES 151 sounds like a fine option.

 The Benchmark DAC1 (admittedly a much more expensive product) website says that "....Windows® 2000 and XP have a digital mixer called 'Kmixer'. All audio streams must go through Kmixer to reach native USB audio devices. The performance of Kmixer is critical to native USB audio....under the wrong conditions, Kmixer can do a great deal of damage...Kmixer's sample-rate-conversion is of very poor quality (under XP and 2000) and must be avoided."

 Can you tell me how the KECES 151 deals with this issue? Also, I understand that USB DACs are prone to clicking and popping due to variation in the data stream. How does the KECES 151 deal with this?

 Thank you for helping educate me!


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *riverrat* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Maniac, I am a newby on head-fi and trying to understand options for a PC based music source. I checked it out on eBay, and the KECES 151 sounds like a fine option.

 The Benchmark DAC1 (admittedly a much more expensive product) website says that "....Windows® 2000 and XP have a digital mixer called 'Kmixer'. All audio streams must go through Kmixer to reach native USB audio devices. The performance of Kmixer is critical to native USB audio....under the wrong conditions, Kmixer can do a great deal of damage...Kmixer's sample-rate-conversion is of very poor quality (under XP and 2000) and must be avoided."

 Can you tell me how the KECES 151 deals with this issue? Also, I understand that USB DACs are prone to clicking and popping due to variation in the data stream. How does the KECES 151 deal with this?

 Thank you for helping educate me!_

 

Thanks Riverrat,

 I feel that not only the sample rate conversion is doing a great deal of damage to sound, but also the volume control. Since it simply trim off the digital audio data to reduce output volume, thus it is critical that the volume (Master volume, WAVE output volume and your playback software's volume) are set at 100% at all times. Windows for some reason defaults all USB devices at 50% volume when you plug it in, and will automatically reset it to 50% again and again if you remove the USB cable or power down DA-151 while Windows is running. (You can keep DA-151 on all the time, it will not do any harm, and it does not consume much more than a wall wart type power supply.)

 Regarding the sample rate conversion, as long as you are playing files that have sample rate of 32/44.1/48KHz, there will be no sample rate conversion. For people who used Foobar 2000 and SSRC to resample music to 48KHz (for most sound cards, this is the best setting, but not needed anymore with DA-151), this option needs to be turned off, as it both saves your processor time and improves the sound quality as well. Since DA-151 plays 44.1KHz sound natively, it does not need SSRC in the Foobar 2000 to prevent Kmixer from resampling the audio data.

 The above may sound a little confusing, but let me put it this way.

 With AC97, to make audio mixing easier, they decided that all sound should be resampled to 48KHz before sent to the driver, and with sample rate identical all the way, digital mixing is easy. Some simple calculation is all you need.

 However, they went pretty cheap on the sample rate converter and does it the worst possible way. Not only do they convert the sample rate, but also distort the sound. Now, some smart guys came up with the idea that "If we use really high quality converter that converts music from 44.1 to 48KHz without much loss, the sample rate converter on either the sound card or the driver will not be able to do any harm to it. Since it is simple 1 to 1 conversion, the data would not be changed at all.", and the rest is history.

 When it comes to USB based devices like DA-151, it happens that the standard driver in Windows will not force it to work in 48KHz mode. Instead it will use the available mode on the DAC and simply playback without sample rate conversion. Which is why SSRC and similar functions in Foobar 2000 or other players are no longer needed, since Windows is no longer converting it to a different sample rate.


 I have not personally test sample rate other than 48 and 44.1KHz, since I really don't have any recordings in other sample rates. However, since 88.1, 96, 176.2 and 192KHz all could be easily sampled down to 48 or 44.1KHz without much damage to the sound, I really have no idea on what the result would be like if such sample rate is used. (since those higher sample rate are not supported by PCM2702 chip, Windows will be forced to convert if there is to be any sound at all.)


 Ah well, I hope the stuff I wrote above is not too confusing or getting too carried away. 


 Now on the topic of getting carried away, well the click and pop problem actually is usually caused by lousy USB host controllers. Computer 4 years or older, and using non-intel chipsets might have this problem from time to time, and could cause clicks and pops from time to time. The cure is pretty simple, usually an USB hub or a USB PCI card that uses quality chipset like NEC will cure the problem. The cost of the cure is not much either, since either product are easily available almost anywhere for less than $30 USD.

 On the topic of computer preferences, no, it is not that I like Intel CPUs, but I do like their chipsets better.


----------



## bunbut

Is there any comparision between the KECES USB vs. others USB DACs about the same price range? maybe the Constantine USB?...
 It would be great if someone can do a shootout between these USB DACs.

 Thanks


----------



## riverrat

Thank you for the detailed reply Maniac.

 I plan to play FLAC files. Not sure what sample rate these are.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *riverrat* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Thank you for the detailed reply Maniac.

 I plan to play FLAC files. Not sure what sample rate these are._

 

Just play them as-is at max volume with no SSRC. The rest will be taken care of by windows and Foobar.


----------



## wquiles

Maniac,

 Great reply - lots of good information. Thanks much!

 Will


----------



## qman5

Just got my DA-151 in today. A massive upgrade over my Audigy 2 ZS. Bass is a lot more clean and punchy. Detail is enhanced and the soundstage is great.

 The setup is DA-151 --> Original Master --> HD650


----------



## oicdn

My test unit is at the 100 hour mark of burn in since I got it on Monday. The SQ has pretty much leveled off and I think the changes from here on out will only be subtle, subtle. My Xin reference and SMIV are on the way, this way I can get a more definitive characteristic of it's sound signature by having different amps to compare. But I'll tell you in comparison to the wonderful DAC in the D1 (when rolled), it's SIGNIFICANTLY better. Also much better than the Entech 203 and 205's I've heard. I don't really have any other DACs to compare it to than an Indigo DJ, which I can say is bettered by the Keces.


----------



## wquiles

Does anyone who owns the KECES can comment on how it compares to the Opus DAC and the 0404 USB that get great reviews here in the forums?


----------



## oicdn

I had a brief encounter with an EMU 0404 and it sounds drier and flatter. Not necessarily neutral, but in direct comparison with the Indigo DJ, which I think has the FLATTEST most neutral sig, didn't sound QUITE as good. Something was off, but it's very comparable to the Indigo DJ line-out. 

 The Keces unit adds a LITTLE warmth but lots of punch. I haven't heard an Opus....


----------



## Bozz_Keren

@Maniac
 are there any interest to create balanced USB DAC?


----------



## wquiles

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *oicdn* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I had a brief encounter with an EMU 0404 and it sounds drier and flatter. Not necessarily neutral, but in direct comparison with the Indigo DJ, which I think has the FLATTEST most neutral sig, didn't sound QUITE as good. Something was off, but it's very comparable to the Indigo DJ line-out. 

 The Keces unit adds a LITTLE warmth but lots of punch. I haven't heard an Opus...._

 

Thanks much. I know this is all very subjective, but it does help. Next Saturday we have an upcoming Head-Fi meet here where I live and I think somebody will bring an Opus DAC, so I might get lucky and try one in person soon


----------



## riverrat

The KECES sounds like just what I need to integrate a PC-based source into my system. I could use some advice on what type of computer would work best for me.

 This PC would be dedicated to audio playback in conjunction with the KECES only, and set up on a waist-level shelf in an armoire with my other components- a power amp, pre-amp, a couple of tuners and a couple of CDPs. 

 I'd like something with as small a footprint as possible, but also inexpensive. The first parameter suggests a laptop, the second suggests something like a Gateway Profile series- an "all in one" type with all the guts inside the same unit as the monitor. I'd probably buy something used or refurbished to keep the price down.

 I'm guessing RAM and processor speed aren't hugely important as long as the unit is reasonably current. Correct me if I'm wrong here...what is optimum?

 Any thoughts from you experts?


----------



## Maniac

I'm thinking about eeePC being one of the great choice for such tasks, but I do not know a friend who owned one, and thus unable to test how it works with KECES DA-151 right out of the box.


----------



## jgonino

Why not just get an imac or a mac mini? Now that is what I call small!


----------



## oicdn

I've come to learn that Windows XP Media Center Edition(MCE), is the most finicky and also, least supported XP version out there. So little infact no M-Audio products work with it, and Indigo products work well, but need updated drivers and are SLIGHTLY harder to set-up due to the way this version of windows was coded.

 The Keces unit plugged right in with no issues and no hassle, and I didn't have to do anything. No program conflicts, nothing. SO in short, if it works with MCE, it'll work with any version of XP out there with no problems.

 Thus far I've loved it and recommend it to anybody out there looking for an inexpensive desktop USB DAC.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Bozz_Keren* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_@Maniac
 are there any interest to create balanced USB DAC?_

 

We are thinking about balanced output for our DAC, but wondering what would be a good price point for such a DAC?

 Since if we added balanced out, we might as well also add some other features like digital signal conditioning, USB+SPDIF universal input, even better PSU, high quality headphone output and so on. Just wondering what would be a good spot for such a DAC, and how much feature could we squeeze in within a specified budget.

 One thing tho, if we add USB+SPDIF input, it would be using another DAC chip of much higher quality than either PCM2702/1793. Proper care and attention will be taken for the supporting circuits of those chip, and thus may get a little costly.


----------



## Bozz_Keren

@Maniac
 don't worry about the increased cost, people will pay more if the DAC sounds good


----------



## jgonino

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Bozz_Keren* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_@Maniac
 don't worry about the increased cost, people will pay more if the DAC sounds good 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

x2, head-fi has some money to spend.


----------



## Maniac

Well, we'll see what we can do.


----------



## infinitesymphony

Make something similar to the Benchmark DAC1 USB, but with 2x PCM1704 per channel, and you'll have a winner.


----------



## RubyRedHead

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Maniac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_We are thinking about balanced output for our DAC, but wondering what would be a good price point for such a DAC?

 Since if we added balanced out, we might as well also add some other features like digital signal conditioning, USB+SPDIF universal input, even better PSU, high quality headphone output and so on. Just wondering what would be a good spot for such a DAC, and how much feature could we squeeze in within a specified budget.

 One thing tho, if we add USB+SPDIF input, it would be using another DAC chip of much higher quality than either PCM2702/1793. Proper care and attention will be taken for the supporting circuits of those chip, and thus may get a little costly. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Very good idea, Just what a computer user needs and nothing more, will be significantly cheaper than say a Benchmark or an Apogee?


----------



## Capunk

We need lower-cost Balanced out DAC! T_T


----------



## natnut

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Maniac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_We are thinking about balanced output for our DAC, but wondering what would be a good price point for such a DAC?

 Since if we added balanced out, we might as well also add some other features like digital signal conditioning, USB+SPDIF universal input, even better PSU, high quality headphone output and so on. Just wondering what would be a good spot for such a DAC, and how much feature could we squeeze in within a specified budget.

 One thing tho, if we add USB+SPDIF input, it would be using another DAC chip of much higher quality than either PCM2702/1793. Proper care and attention will be taken for the supporting circuits of those chip, and thus may get a little costly. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

How about offering a cost effective USB only or SPDIF only DAC that just focuses on pure SQ. 

 So build it around a high end chip but cut out unnecessary inputs/outputs in order to save money for consumers who just want to listen to the very best stereo music from their computer
 and nothing else.

 Focus on quality rather than portability so that no space contraints to compromise quality of parts used.

 Include all the tricks you can think of to reduce jitter and price it right .

 I would buy that in a heartbeat to replace my current DA-151.


----------



## wquiles

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *natnut* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_How about offering a cost effective USB only or SPDIF only DAC that just focuses on pure SQ. 

 So build it around a high end chip but cut out unnecessary inputs/outputs in order to save money for consumers who just want to listen to the very best stereo music from their computer
 and nothing else.

 Focus on quality rather than portability so that no space contraints to compromise quality of parts used.

 Include all the tricks you can think of to reduce jitter and price it right .

 I would buy that in a heartbeat to replace my current DA-151._

 

Not a bad idea, and in fact something I have been thinking about building as a DIY. From what I have read so far, a really good sounding simple system would be like the DIY modules that Twisted Pear Audio offers. The idea would be to offer a complete product with these for the non-DIY types:

 1) PCM2707 USB DAC chip using I2S to communicate to the

 2) Wolfson WM8741 or WM8740 DAC which outputs a differential audio signal

 3) and an optional simple circuit for converting the differential signal to single ended, using socketed OPAmps so that folks can use whatever OPAmps sound best to them.

 Will


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *infinitesymphony* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Make something similar to the Benchmark DAC1 USB, but with 2x PCM1704 per channel, and you'll have a winner. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 






 Holy, that alone would cost like US$100 for the DAC chips only...

 I do have something similar to the basic idea of Benchmark DAC1 in mind, but I personally do not like AD1896 ASRC way of reducing jitter. Of course, it will have both XLR and RCA output, in addition to the other regular stuff.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *wquiles* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Not a bad idea, and in fact something I have been thinking about building as a DIY. From what I have read so far, a really good sounding simple system would be like the DIY modules that Twisted Pear Audio offers. The idea would be to offer a complete product with these for the non-DIY types:

 1) PCM2707 USB DAC chip using I2S to communicate to the

 2) Wolfson WM8741 or WM8740 DAC which outputs a differential audio signal

 3) and an optional simple circuit for converting the differential signal to single ended, using socketed OPAmps so that folks can use whatever OPAmps sound best to them.

 Will_

 


 1) Well, I'm thinking about using I2S, but the problem would be that if you want to use I2S from USB in addition to I2S from SPDIF receiver, the multiplexer used to switch between two I2S input may not be as fast as it needs to be. (I'm testing that now...) Not to mention that the sound might be a little different when there's a multiplexer working as USB/SPDIF selector.

 2) I'm thinking about DAC from other than wolfson, but it will still have differential output.

 3) no need for conversion, since either positive phase or negative signal can work as single end output. As for OP-Amps, there will still be op-amps. However, I'm thinking about the advantage of using a socket or soldered directly. Since direct soldering will ensure better sonic performance than socketed, but socketed could allow user to simply have fun with their DAC. Hummm...


----------



## Bozz_Keren

how about 2 version, DIP and Soldered opamp


----------



## natnut

Any more reviews?


----------



## Stephen Lau

I just got mine yesterday, I'll write one up when I get the time


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Stephen Lau* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I just got mine yesterday, I'll write one up when I get the time 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Anything yet?


----------



## oicdn

Mine is coming soon...I've got about 600 hours on her..I got her on 1/14 and she's been burning in since...can't wait to give a review, but I promised 800 hours!!!!!


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *oicdn* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Mine is coming soon...I've got about 600 hours on her..I got her on 1/14 and she's been burning in since...can't wait to give a review, but I promised 800 hours!!!!!_

 

Way cool. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I might be off the air for a few days due to Chinese New year here, might be back just in time for the review.


----------



## MaZa

No offence, but... isnt 800 hours of burn-in a little bit blown out of proportions for mere DAC electronics burn-in time? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 But anyway, looking forward for more KECES reviews, and especially comparisons to other similar priced or costlier DACs.


----------



## oicdn

^ eh maybe, most likely and probably, but I don't want to jump the gun....what's a couple more hours????


----------



## Maniac

There will be more reviews coming, there's another reviewer with a set of DA-131 and DA-151 currently on review. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 But that will take quite a while longer due to the fact he is indeed reviewing both machine instead of one of them.


----------



## MaZa

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *oicdn* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_^ eh maybe, most likely and probably, but I don't want to jump the gun....what's a couple more hours????_

 


 The wait is just killing me, see...


----------



## riverrat

Hoping for more reviews of this unit!


----------



## btbluesky

Can't wait for someone to post some review of this great little beast. 
 Been wanting the mhdt lab Paradisea+. But at this price and such a good & simple design, I think it's great.

 Would like someone who can compare it w/ the Paradisea, and see what strenght/weakness each has. Specifically the Parasidsea's USB circuit vs the DA-151 (read in 6moon about the 2/3 gen of the PCM2702 chip has superb jitter-free performance, and different batch of TA1545/TA1545A chips have varying performance)

 As soon as I find some satisfying reviews. I'm clicking the buy-it-now button...


----------



## Bozz_Keren

have u read on oicdn review?


----------



## btbluesky

Yes I have. However since I'd be using the DA-151 in a standalone manner (w/ a tube integrated amp + bookshelf, instead of a pair of can) as I'm sure alot of people do, would like to see the DA-151 go against something more established older models from prestige shops, or a recent darling within the same price range (mhdt or modded Chinese brands), not just the D1, and Petite w/ can. I know this is head-fi, but this is the only place w/ this indepth coverage of 151.


----------



## Screamager

I would love news from someone who has also tried the Diyeden SVDAc05 (CS4398) or the Yulong DAH1 (AD1955). I would also be using it primarily with speakers.


----------



## xxsphshadowxx

Bump.

 I want to know the answer to how this DAC compares to the paradisea+ also.


----------



## falkon72

A little OT but I'm thinking about using this for a speaker setup as well. A lot of you say that you use both headphones and speakers. I can't seem to find too many headamps with line/pre-out. How do you guys consolidate this? I hope not with A/B switch or manually plugging everytime.


----------



## shomie911

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *falkon72* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_A little OT but I'm thinking about using this for a speaker setup as well. A lot of you say that you use both headphones and speakers. I can't seem to find too many headamps with line/pre-out. How do you guys consolidate this? I hope not with A/B switch or manually plugging everytime._

 

I don't really have an answer to your question but I just wanted to say I've been using the DA-151 with my home stereo rig and it's amazing how a better source can make speakers sound so much better.


----------



## infinitesymphony

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *falkon72* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_A little OT but I'm thinking about using this for a speaker setup as well. A lot of you say that you use both headphones and speakers. I can't seem to find too many headamps with line/pre-out. How do you guys consolidate this? I hope not with A/B switch or manually plugging everytime._

 

You could use two splitter y-adapters. Otherwise, you'll have to do one of the above-mentioned methods. Some DACs come with multiple outputs, but most only offer one type, so if you plan on using it for more than one rig, you'll have to pick a splitting method.


----------



## Maniac

Well, for those who are interested to do a little test, I do have a spare test sample of DA-151 floating around in USA...

 Does anyone want to give it a try and post some words on the result of the comparison?

 shipping to and from the tester is on me of course. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 There are some very simple requirements:

 *You must own a DAC that people in this thread is interested in comparing. If you got something not mentioned earlier on in the thread, do tell, maybe people are interested in comparing with that as well.

 *You will have 2 weeks to test it, if you need more time that is fine as well, but do tell me about it before the unit is shipped to you. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 *Please post a little something early on when you received the unit, and then the full story later on when you feel you are ready to do so.


 That's about it! Anyone in?


----------



## skeptic

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *btbluesky* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Can't wait for someone to post some review of this great little beast. 
 Been wanting the mhdt lab Paradisea+. But at this price and such a good & simple design, I think it's great.

 Would like someone who can compare it w/ the Paradisea, and see what strenght/weakness each has. Specifically the Parasidsea's USB circuit vs the DA-151 (read in 6moon about the 2/3 gen of the PCM2702 chip has superb jitter-free performance, and different batch of TA1545/TA1545A chips have varying performance)

 As soon as I find some satisfying reviews. I'm clicking the buy-it-now button..._

 

I'll echo this comment. I'm seriously waffling between placing an order for the KECES or picking up a Paradisea+, and I would love to see some commentary evaluating these two popular options. 

 I did stumble on a favorable comparison of the KECES 151 to a Rotel 1072 CDP this morning (a user contribution on computeraudiophile) which I thought you all might find helpful: Low cost, high impact DAC | Computer Audiophile


----------



## ccschua

yeah. Would be happy if someone can give a A/B comparisons of KECES and MHDT lab product.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ccschua* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_yeah. Would be happy if someone can give a A/B comparisons of KECES and MHDT lab product._

 

Well, I do have a few review units around, and if anyone's interested, let me know and I can have a review unit sent for comparison (for folks within North America).


----------



## shuy

any1 tried this DAC with Grados yet? comments?


----------



## Redo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *shuy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_any1 tried this DAC with Grados yet? comments?_

 


 I've used the Keces 131 extensively with Grado's, and it's a GREAT combo. I'll chime in soon, I'm giving my ears plenty of time to absorb the combo.


----------



## ccschua

I am using ZERO Dac which I find the taste not to my liking. Can I try your KECES or Paradisea for a comparisons. I would be able to post the review and help you to sell your product in Malaysia.

 do pm me.


----------



## Maniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ccschua* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I am using ZERO Dac which I find the taste not to my liking. Can I try your KECES or Paradisea for a comparisons. I would be able to post the review and help you to sell your product in Malaysia.

 do pm me._

 

Hello, the review unit is in US, thus it is not as convenient to have the reviewer ship it outside of north America at the moment. Please note that I have no association with MHDT thus I do not have any of their products.


 Thanks.


----------



## mamsterla

I received this unit about 2 weeks ago and it has been plugged in continuously since then. I listen about 3-4hrs a day at work depending on the day, so I think it has "broken-in" or maybe I have.

 My system details are:

Keces 151 DAC
Windows PC running Foobar 2000
USB-Audio ASIO driver 2.6.1
Ray Samuels Audio Emmeline "The Hornet" Headphone Amp
Shure SE530 IEM phones

 I am not really a hardcore Head-Fi person, but my work situation makes it so that I listen to music over phones for long periods each day. I have a nice 2 channel setup at home and listen to all sorts of music.

 The Keces replaces an Edirol UA-25 unit that I want to use for home room measurements. The Edirol UA-25 is not really used as a stand alone DAC, but it is a good, linear unit. It was on the dry side with good, but not spectacular bass.

 The Keces 151 improves on the Edirol in a few important ways - noise floor. This is just a very quiet unit. I hear no analog hiss at normal limits - and even turned all the way up with a paused song, it is faint hiss (and this could be the Emmeline - I do not know).

 How would I describe the sound - buttery and smooth with lots of detail and impact. This DAC makes digital sound very smooth. However at the same time, there is no smearing, loss of detail or transient impact. The SE530 are great phones for Bass, and the KECES provides plenty of oomph there. Drums really do thud and shy of the visceral feel of speakers, does a very good job - tracks like Basement Jaxx, etc always impress. The transients are also very good - snares really snap. Things that have pop in the recording really come across that way. At the same time, even with loud, busy tracks, you can hear all the details of the many tracks coming together. The character of the sound probably would fall on the warm side of neutral based on a rich midrange. The highs are clear without being piercing.

 I found with the Edirol UA-25 that long listening sessions would be fatiguing - the KECES 151 is much better in this regard. I can listen much longer without listener fatigue. In my experience this means that the highs and "digital" harshness is tamed.

 Another hint to prospective buyers is to use the ASIO driver. I tried this unit with the default USB speaker setup under Windows. After a week I decided to try ASIO drivers (I used the Edirol this way). The ASIO was just better in my opinion - clearer, fuller, better. It seemed to help with detail and impact. So I would recommend people looking at the USB-Audio driver (which I liked more than the ASIO4All one). It costs more, but I think it is worth it if you spend a lot of time on headphones.

 Hope that helps people understand this unit better - sorry I do not have 3 other units with which to compare, but one data point is better than none.


----------



## LFC_SL

Doing research atm as my old ISP "found" the router I returned to them after I pulled my poker face, so I now have £100 to put towards audio instead 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Interesting post mamsterla. I myself am running with 
 Laptop -> Edirol UA-25 -> RCA out -> RSA Tomahawk

 This is pending some kind of future where I can afford a home dac+home amp lol

 I find the Tomahawk *fixes* some of the bad qualities of the Edirol quite well; wider soundstage, bass has more impact and definition and highs are tamed

 Of course I have no other apple or orange to compare to either sound card or amp so...


----------

