Is it mono or am I missing something?

Quote:
Is it mono or am I missing something?

I'm going to guess that it's a USB->S/PDIF adapter. Very cool.

Quote:
I'm going to guess that it's a USB->S/PDIF adapter. Very cool.

It is. Sorry, just my slightly warped SoH getting the better of me. Aside anything else it hardly looks like there is room for two ICs (USB receiver chip and DAC) in there!

Quote:
Aside anything else it hardly looks like there is room for two ICs (USB receiver chip and DAC) in there!

Why would a USB->S/PDIF adapter need a DAC?

It wouldn't, that's the whole point. Freako started the whole thing by inadvertantly mistitling the thread "the worlds smallest DAC" whereupon I facetiously remarked that it might be mono. It also struck me that it would be almost impossible to make a USB DAC that small with exsiting chipsets. And if one could it would certainly not be 'very cool'; the output stage would generate heat and plastic is not a great material for making heatsinks.

It is actually possible to make a dac with a mini stereo jack for an output..and make it exactly that size. How good it would sound is another matter, but it is most definitely possible to do so. So, the identical casework and a USB to mini-stereo jack DAC? Yes, can do.

Quote:
It is actually possible to make a dac with a mini stereo jack for an output..and make it exactly that size.

Of course it is - using any one-chip solution like the 2706. Sorry, what I meant to say was that it would (afaik) be impossible to make a hi rez-capable USB DAC that small, since none of the one-chip USB DACs I'm aware of can handle Fs > 48kHz. Now I bet you're going to prove me wrong there too!

Quote:

Quote:
It is actually possible to make a dac with a mini stereo jack for an output..and make it exactly that size.

Of course it is - using any one-chip solution like the 2706. Sorry, what I meant to say was that it would (afaik) be impossible to make a hi rez-capable USB DAC that small, since none of the one-chip USB DACs I'm aware of can handle Fs > 48kHz. Now I bet you're going to prove me wrong there too!

The best way to look into that is to head over to the texas instruments website and do a DAC search. It might be possible to do exactly that, and find one. There are other DAC manufacturers, of course.

The 2704/5/6/7 are all limited to 48kHz, I'm sure of that. As you say there are no doubt other manufacturers but I have to say I am not aware of any off-hand; TI seem to have a lock on the market as far as I can see. Bottom line is I am sill waiting to see a USB DAC chip that supports Fs > 48kHz.

The limitation is not in the USB spec so I assume it is in the native Mac and Windows device drivers. TI's stance appears to be to serve existing demand rather than push the envelope. I am sure they will come out with a hi rez-capable chip when product management decides the volume is there.

I can always ask the specific man from TI this specific question, a man who would know the answer to that..but he may not be able to tell me as that might represent too sensitive a bit of business information.

The whole thing was just a misunderstanding arising from a weak joke. Save your favors with the TI rep!

I would think that my Echo Indigo IO 2496 card is one of the smallest ADDAs on the market in that it uses the CardBus Type II slot. I think it is up to $225 now, but still a bargain and none of the USB problems and does full 2496. HD tracks sound great to me out of it. Object in mirror are larger than they appear. Couldn't find a smaller one.

Quote:
The whole thing was just a misunderstanding arising from a weak joke. Save your favors with the TI rep!

It isn't a TI rep, it's the designer (or direct involvement of the designs) of the given chips that would be surrounding in the question. So my answer would be surrounding the chips that may not be available for at least a year, if they are in the design phase, which as you might imagine, is very sensitive corporate information. So I would not expect to receive an answer, unless introduction of such things was a given truth (a reality and impossible to stop the timed roll-out, and impossible to hide from the competition) and was close in time, with respects to public introduction.

Quote:

Quote:
The whole thing was just a misunderstanding arising from a weak joke. Save your favors with the TI rep!

It isn't a TI rep, it's the designer (or direct involvement of the designs) of the given chips that would be surrounding in the question. So my answer would be surrounding the chips that may not be available for at least a year, if they are in the design phase, which as you might imagine, is very sensitive corporate information. So I would not expect to receive an answer, unless introduction of such things was a given truth (a reality and impossible to stop the timed roll-out, and impossible to hide from the competition) and was close in time, with respects to public introduction.

KEN, it isnt that important. He and Keld were just joking around.... so, dont bother.

as an aside.

the 48 Fs is a limitation of the USB 1.0 protocol. the usb 2.0 allows for all the higher sampling rates, but I dont know of any with that standard..

well, let me take that back...

the ayre qb-9 is..

but it has seperate chips for the USB interface and conversion..

Quote:
the 48 Fs is a limitation of the USB 1.0 protocol. the usb 2.0 allows for all the higher sampling rates...

I don't think that's right nc. Although the maximum raw data transfer rate of USB 2.0 is increased compared to 1.x (480Mbit/s vs 12Mbit/s iirc), the range of supported audio sampling frequencies is defined by the USB Device Class Definition for Audio Devices which hasn't been revised since 1998 (i.e. two years before the USB 2.0 standard was adopted). See

I stand corrected. Thanks for the info, struts.