The ultra built in dac doesn’t satisfy your discriminating ear? For casual listeners yes it would suffice but for hardcore audiophile want better.
My Ultra tests
- Thread starter onlyoneme
- Start date
And you post this why?!? I posted in reply to a specific question. Gratuitous posts only waste space.
Why? I post because I can. Waste of space if you cant or don’t know how to answer.
hoohoohoo
Active member
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2024
- Messages
- 186
I just come here for the DAC fights 
Back on theme, there's a thread on the ES9038Q2M Sabre DAC:
www.audiosciencereview.com
Back on theme, there's a thread on the ES9038Q2M Sabre DAC:
Review and Measurements of AUDIOPHONICS DAC I-Sabre ES9038Q2M
This is a review and detailed measurements of the AUDIOPHONICS DAC I-Sabre ES9038Q2M Raspberry Pi DAC. This was kindly sent to me near a year ago by Audiophonics. The DAC I-Sabre ES9038Q2M cost 129 Euros from Audiophonics direct. I don't know if anyone sells it cheaper or not. Edit: US price...
www.audiosciencereview.com
This has the same dac chip as Ultra, and uses the cheaper but good opa1642 ( ultra uses more expensive 4 pieces of opa1611 , same as dmp a6 master ) :
www.audiosciencereview.com
Eversolo DMP-A6 Streamer Review
This is a review and detailed measurements of the Eversolo DMP-A6 Streamer and balanced DAC. It was sent to me by the company. I don't have the price but see it on sale for US $850. The DMP-A6 design is absolutely gorgeous. A large, high contrast LCD allows it to show realistic visualizations...
www.audiosciencereview.com
Last edited:
Signposted to this thread from one on noisy phono inputs on the Ultra, read first 12 pages and tried wading through the subjective v objective debate, and couldn't see an explanation or solution to the specific problem I have, but would I be right in summarising the thread as follows? :
- Someone did some measurements on the Ultra
- Some of those measurements were interpreted as sub optimal
- Some debate about whether those suboptimal data points are significantly audible
Has there been a concensus and if so what is the conclusion? Is the Ultra fine or flawed?
I don't wish to open up more debate on the topic of science, but just to say that in order to engineer medicines or aircraft, we have to agree a method by which we agree on the interpretation of our measurement data, because it's not an exact process. Engineering relies on understanding and managing the uncertainty of your data sets. You don't certify aircraft parts by taking one measurement in a non-accredited laboratory.
- Someone did some measurements on the Ultra
- Some of those measurements were interpreted as sub optimal
- Some debate about whether those suboptimal data points are significantly audible
Has there been a concensus and if so what is the conclusion? Is the Ultra fine or flawed?
I don't wish to open up more debate on the topic of science, but just to say that in order to engineer medicines or aircraft, we have to agree a method by which we agree on the interpretation of our measurement data, because it's not an exact process. Engineering relies on understanding and managing the uncertainty of your data sets. You don't certify aircraft parts by taking one measurement in a non-accredited laboratory.
there is one thing that is always interesting... it is the observation in relative value, see in constant conditions... here it is the case... just to shed some light on the situation.... ;-)
:
Post in thread 'My Ultra tests' https://forum.wiimhome.com/threads/my-ultra-tests.3964/post-66688
Post in thread 'My Ultra tests' https://forum.wiimhome.com/threads/my-ultra-tests.3964/post-66721
etc
normally wiim is a class2 ;-)
ps the methodologies used here. we were correlated with for example for example the approach of armim on asr and ap554 on at least 3 previous wiim products
and we are not in certification schemes but at least to identify problems...it has already been on plus and amp...the efforts of the person were very useful to everyone at the time
:
Post in thread 'My Ultra tests' https://forum.wiimhome.com/threads/my-ultra-tests.3964/post-66688
Post in thread 'My Ultra tests' https://forum.wiimhome.com/threads/my-ultra-tests.3964/post-66721
etc
normally wiim is a class2 ;-)
ps the methodologies used here. we were correlated with for example for example the approach of armim on asr and ap554 on at least 3 previous wiim products
and we are not in certification schemes but at least to identify problems...it has already been on plus and amp...the efforts of the person were very useful to everyone at the time
Last edited:
Steve Woodhouse
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2023
- Messages
- 1,277
You’ll probably never find a consensus. At the moment, the only professional measurements (AFAIA) are Erin’s, which are limited, but suggest transparency.
Most of the amateur measurements done which show measured issues are ones which either suggest transparency or close.
Does there always have to be consensus or one conclusion? I have my own, others have theirs.
The first 2 images in this thread compare waveforms over the digital coax output.
This was a game changer for me as with the Wiim Ultra I finally have stereo when using 192khz/24bit. With the Wiim Pro only 1 channel worked.
I think this is one more point for: what matters for one setup does not reflect others setups.
Background:
I'm using the Wiims as streamers only going digitally to active speakers powered by Hypex Fusion PlateAmps. 1 PlateAmp is the master the other one is daisy chained. The daisy chained has no sound at all with the Wiim Pro and 192khz/24bit
When I bought the Wiim Pro in April 2023 everything worked, I set the highest allowed frame rate just because I could and the test signal played fine. This regressed at some point and it took me quite a while to understand what was wrong as there are not many songs with 192khz on Qobuz. Why do I only hear sound from one speaker with Fragile from Sting?? After I understood what is happening I dialed down the max resolution to 92khz. I can easily repo this 10/10 with the test signals.
My brother has the same setup and the same problems so this is not a one-off but an incompabilty between the coax signal of the Pro and Hypex.
This was a game changer for me as with the Wiim Ultra I finally have stereo when using 192khz/24bit. With the Wiim Pro only 1 channel worked.
I think this is one more point for: what matters for one setup does not reflect others setups.
Background:
I'm using the Wiims as streamers only going digitally to active speakers powered by Hypex Fusion PlateAmps. 1 PlateAmp is the master the other one is daisy chained. The daisy chained has no sound at all with the Wiim Pro and 192khz/24bit
When I bought the Wiim Pro in April 2023 everything worked, I set the highest allowed frame rate just because I could and the test signal played fine. This regressed at some point and it took me quite a while to understand what was wrong as there are not many songs with 192khz on Qobuz. Why do I only hear sound from one speaker with Fragile from Sting?? After I understood what is happening I dialed down the max resolution to 92khz. I can easily repo this 10/10 with the test signals.
My brother has the same setup and the same problems so this is not a one-off but an incompabilty between the coax signal of the Pro and Hypex.
Well no, but then that means you're still in the world of subjective opinion on interpreting the data.
It's not unusual in the world of standards for it to take a long time to put in place, because it requires consensus across the regulatory bodies that will implement it, otherwise it's of no use to anyone.
I'll be using the Ultra as a full digital preamp outputting the in built DAC into power amps. Tbh I don't feel the need to measure anything as it sounds perfectly enjoyable, but although being able to distinguish good from not good, I recognised some years ago music is entertainment, not certifying safety critical components so not going to get too hung up and anxious about best in class SINAD etc.
An Ultra + Fosi (or similar) plus dbr62s is one hell of a system for very little relative cash, we've really never had it so good!
Last edited:
One point that was mentioned multiple times here is that its impossible to make meassurements that can generalized to all enviroments out there and this is especially true for my setup. Hard to enjoy sound coming only from 1 speaker.
But maybe it's still transparent because there is no audible difference between 96 khz and 192 khz ...
But maybe it's still transparent because there is no audible difference between 96 khz and 192 khz ...
A measurement, if carried out seriously and professionally will objectively describe a certain characteristic of the device under test (DUT) under defined and fully specified preconditions. It is valid if it can be reproduced by others under the same boundary conditions. Nowadays, many very reliable measurements can be taken by hobbyist with limited, but still noteworthy effort.
The problem is not that music was different from measuring signals in some mysterious way. The problem is not with measurements not telling the truth.
The problems (and there are many) are (mostly) still the same as they used to be from the early days of electroacoustics.
In the end for us as consumers, it makes little sense to buy a device you know you don't like how it sounds (unless you have that nagging fear in a far away corner of your brain that you might simply be wrong). But it also makes no sense to deliberately buy stuff with known bad measurements and try to find "synergies" between technically bad components.
The problem is not that music was different from measuring signals in some mysterious way. The problem is not with measurements not telling the truth.
The problems (and there are many) are (mostly) still the same as they used to be from the early days of electroacoustics.
- Know and understand the influence of your boundary conditions. What effect do deviations have on the result?
- Know and understand what linearity means and don't fall for conclusions or interpretations that are only valid for linear systems when this linearity hasn't been proven, yet.
- Know and understand that one single number characteristic of a device will never describe its behaviour completely.
- Know and understand that improvements regarding one characteristic might negatively influence another one and it might not be clear at all which one is more meaningful to the result.
In the end for us as consumers, it makes little sense to buy a device you know you don't like how it sounds (unless you have that nagging fear in a far away corner of your brain that you might simply be wrong). But it also makes no sense to deliberately buy stuff with known bad measurements and try to find "synergies" between technically bad components.
(not for you harkpabst)
my point -regaine is much more modest than all these general considerations etc.
just one of the main uses of these measurement approaches are the adjustments and diagnostics for those who know how to read them a little...and not a classification by -0.1db of sinad at 1khz (no comment) ...
the watch just a big problem of realization finalization, I imagine subcontracting, and a power supply which pollutes considerably, not pretty to see, and explains the distance with the mesureaments announced by wiim (which are coherent with what this product should be)....
after the "it won't be heard, I won't hear it, no big deal etc" "transparency...."... not my point....
it is all the more vexing for wiim that the 3rd time that this situation occurs...
shame...
( wanting to question the means of onlyoneme requires a little knowledge, not the case here for some...
ps " wink" ...the q402-403 that erin's uses for this use, are too limited for this case, and those of onlyoneme offer sufficient margin to do it "when you know how to do it" ;-) )
"au royaume des aveugles, les borgnes sont rois"...
my point -regaine is much more modest than all these general considerations etc.
just one of the main uses of these measurement approaches are the adjustments and diagnostics for those who know how to read them a little...and not a classification by -0.1db of sinad at 1khz (no comment) ...
the watch just a big problem of realization finalization, I imagine subcontracting, and a power supply which pollutes considerably, not pretty to see, and explains the distance with the mesureaments announced by wiim (which are coherent with what this product should be)....
after the "it won't be heard, I won't hear it, no big deal etc" "transparency...."... not my point....
it is all the more vexing for wiim that the 3rd time that this situation occurs...
shame...
( wanting to question the means of onlyoneme requires a little knowledge, not the case here for some...
ps " wink" ...the q402-403 that erin's uses for this use, are too limited for this case, and those of onlyoneme offer sufficient margin to do it "when you know how to do it" ;-) )
"au royaume des aveugles, les borgnes sont rois"...
Last edited:
Opinions are subjective by nature. And there is no consensus on interpreting the data, especially in terms of the audibility. One can say that high sinad makes the dut audibly transparent, another will say no way.
My tests are not ASR reviews. They are the flow of experiences I got during looking for the flaws.
Steve Woodhouse
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2023
- Messages
- 1,277
I hold to the old saying that I respect another man’s opinion over religion, but only in the same way that I respect his opinion that his wife is gorgeous and his kids are geniuses.
Let’s stick to the science. To what we know. To what’s been tested, published, and peer reviewed.
If anyone claims to have found flaws in any of this, they have as much right as anyone to challenge those in the correct, scientific way.
Making unverifiable claims that you’ve tested something, and posting that under a nom de plume on social media is not, in any way, a challenge to that science.
I’ll stick with the verifiable and verified science.
So, back to the question. There is a very rough consensus that the Ultra sounds great. That fact is a little interesting, nothing more.
When a professional objectively measures the Ultra, that’ll tell you all you need to know.
Let’s stick to the science. To what we know. To what’s been tested, published, and peer reviewed.
If anyone claims to have found flaws in any of this, they have as much right as anyone to challenge those in the correct, scientific way.
Making unverifiable claims that you’ve tested something, and posting that under a nom de plume on social media is not, in any way, a challenge to that science.
I’ll stick with the verifiable and verified science.
So, back to the question. There is a very rough consensus that the Ultra sounds great. That fact is a little interesting, nothing more.
When a professional objectively measures the Ultra, that’ll tell you all you need to know.
Last edited:
