Looking at it, it seems there are either 2 dac chips total each with 16 bit, or 2 chips that together get you to 16 bit. It seems unclear unless you know more about it. Panasonic used a bunch of chips, and it varies a lot per model/tier. I haven’t seen one specifically mention AD but they did use some Philips chips too. One place listed it as a 1-bit chip too. Tldr: who knows 
3 Likes
Yeah, I’ve seen a few sellers list it as one bit. I’m guessing the manual would be more accurate.
1 Like
I don’t know anything specific about that model.
Given it’s not on any of the usual list of CD players from that period, I’d guess it’s not highly regarded.
From the period it’s probably one of the 16bit / 4x OS DAC chips, some of those were quite good.
The problem is circa 1988 most of the transports were junk.
In the very early days of CD circa 1984, CD players were considered prestige items, and were premium priced, and there was virtually no way to software correct an error, so many of those transports were massively over engineered, the Phillips CDM-1 transport used in a number of different CD platers is built like a tank and still held in very high regard.
Only a few years later CD players were becoming commodity and the focus was moving from transports that reduced errors to cheap transports and error correction in software because it was cheaper.
5 Likes
Yeah, like I said it’s nothing special. It sounds pretty good though and I was just curious as to what the actual DAC was.
2 Likes
Some searches indicate it uses a MITSUMI branded PCM56P DAC chip, and it’s made by Texas Instruments.
https://www.mouser.sg/ProductDetail/Texas-Instruments/PCM56P?qs=wgAEGBTxy7mln00u306fxQ%3D%3D
2 Likes
Thanks!
That’s very helpful. Reading the TI description it’s states:
“This converter is completely self-contained with a
stable, low noise, internal zener voltage reference;
high speed current switches; a resistor ladder net-
work; and a fast settling, low noise output operational
amplifier all on a single monolithic chipset”
3 Likes
Is it true the Innous Phoenix USB reclocker and Innous gear in general lean slightly towards the warmer weightier side of things which is the opposite of Ideon stuff?
No, there is nothing “warm” leaning or “weighty” reference anything I own and operate from Innuos, not their original ZenithMK3, Pulse, or PhoenixNet. I have listened to the USB regen unit, the Pulsar, and whatever their ridiculously expensive 2 piece streamers are called and none of the systems I listened to them w/ nor did any of the owners, refer to any character added or not by the Innuos pieces ever as warm or weighty.
From personal experience over the past few years with my own Innuos pieces I feel secure in saying that no sort of “warmth” or any particular coloration that could be referred to in any way as affecting the sound in this manner was ever detected. The streamers have always been quiet and never added any computer related weird noises in my experience. They have outperformed my laptop and Pi streaming units in presenting the signal with no computer noise, offering excellent blackness to the background, allowing for space and depth to be enhanced and they have handled my music services well. The Innuos sense software itself seems to offer maximum resolution over my ROON software and this along with/ all I say is a very personal and subjective opinion based n what I think I can hear in a variety of my own systems.
Hope my words and opinions help in whatever info you were looking for via experienced opinions 
3 Likes
Thank you so much.
1 Like
So, I’m wishing to fully exploit the capabilities of my current, primary chain.
FLAC / WAV / Qobuz > Sonore UltraRendu > SU-6 > Cyan 2 > THR-1 > Moondrop Cosmo
From what I have read (and from Golden Sound’s review), the Cyan 2 really benefits from upstream oversampling. I know that I need a streamer to really harness power of upstream oversampling but had a false start with that useless SMSL N100. I purchased a Sonore UltraRendu with Uptone LPS-1 and an AQ Forest ethernet cable last night. My intention is to utilise software oversampling.
Roon is the preferred option for most as I understand it. I purchased the UltraRendu as it can act as an NAA for HQ Player - what I think is my likely next step. However, I am trying to keep my cost down. This is why I have bought a Cyan 2 instead of a Spring 3, TT2/M-Scaler, etc., and it feels like I’m loosing the battle if I have to stack a Roon subscription on top of a Qobuz subscription AND THEN also purchase HQ Player.
My questions:
Is the oversampling in Roon good?
Is the oversampling in HQ Player significantly better than Roon (will I yield the benefits on my current primary chain)?
Have I taken a step backwards getting an UltraRendu with it being electrically connected to my network switch and thus, my gaming PC? What would be the best way to utilise the UltraRendu - with a wireless adapter? Or will my SU-6 do a good enough job of electrically isolating my chain from any potential noise?
I use it for converting DSD to PCM for the TotalDAC, IMO it’s as good as everything except possibly the best offline processes.
Having said that HQPlayer does exactly one thing, and to be honest it’s failing if it can’t best a product like Roon in that regard.
FWIW, I played with HQPlayer for a while and never really liked what it did. Or perhaps didn’t think the hassle was worth the end result.
I assume you don’t like NOS on the Holo DAC’s? so your looking for a win with improved oversampling I’d temper your expectations, better up sampling filters do make a difference, but IMO they weren’t night and day (unless your comparing to NOS).
I’d be very wary of spending a ton of money just to do the experiment.
2 Likes
Thank you for the reply. I am in large part gambling on those (particularly Golden Sound) who say that Cyan 2 goes from good to great (as punches 2x above it’s in terms of detail, staging, image separation, etc.) with upstream oversampling.
My only criticism of Cyan 2 (I love everything else about it) is stage depth. Having just come from a Comet+, Ares II 12th and a Pontus II, they all do depth/layering well. If I could get even a little better depth/layering from Cyan 2, that’d be me done.
At least if you are satisfied with Roon’s oversampling, I am more confident that I won’t have to get HQ Player. Getting into Roon isn’t too much of an expense. Once happy with Roon, I’d commit past a monthly subscription.
I probably should’ve just kept my Comet+ but that was six months ago when I decided to go all portable, in error… Still, my primary chain otherwise sounds amazing. And if I hadn’t sold all my desktop gear I wouldn’t have discovered the Moondrop Cosmo 
Currently listening to ‘Long Way Runaround’ by Yes - loving that bass guitar.
3 Likes
I’d work out how many years you need to subscribe for before the lifetime sub is a win, and whether you think you’ll still be using it in that time frame before jumping into a lifetime subscription.
Personally I still do month to month, it’s also a bit more developer friendly.
2 Likes
There are some cases where a DAC is native DSD and in those instances upsampling PCM to DSD has helped.
My Lumin A1 streamer with a Wolfson WM8741 DAC chip was designed to upsample to DSD, I use Roon to do the upsampling and so the streamer doesn’t have to do the processing and thus less CPU noise. In that one case I could hear an improvement.
As @Polygonhell I wouldn’t expect upsampling to change the world, but it does help in certain situations. In my experience it’s never made a large impact if I noticed it at all when upsampling just for the hell of it, like changing 16/44 to 24/88 or something like that. It can have an unintended effect if you have the upsampling being done at the destination where the additional CPU use may generate more noise.
Play with things but ultimately do what sounds best to you.
I know many people swear by HQ player and Diretta? Direzza (sp?) but I’ve just always found enough contentment in optimizing gear, power, implementation etc. I’m sure sure there are benefits, but it’s just exhausting having more to worry about. Would love to at some point have a listen to someones system that can show the benefits to me, and that may be hook enough for me. But haven’t gotten there yet.
Moral of the sotry is, upsampling further from the endpoint meaning at the source can be better than upsampling at the endpoint, but use cases may differ.
That’s why $75K server/streamers exist right?
4 Likes
Here’s a possibly odd question, but here goes:
I upgraded my source (Mac) today from a 2017 27 inch iMac which was stuck on some older software (both Mac OS and Apple Music) to a new Mac Studio M4 Max, and I swear it sounds better. I’m using the latest versions of Apple Music/Lossless Switcher (lossless always) and Qobuz. Nothing else in my chain is changed, still to Yggy OG A2 via Unison USB. I think it sounds smoother, with greater detail and soundstage, and lower noise floor perhaps. Less hash, if that makes any sense.
Am I hallucinating, or could new source actually sound better somehow? I know different streamers/DDCs can sound better, but computer?.. Any thoughts?
2 Likes
The harder a CPU needs to work, the more noise it will generate. When moving to a new machine it has to work less so also less noise. I’ve achieved similar result by lowering the clock frequency on my streamer.
3 Likes
As said it’s all about noise. Some DAC’s are better than others at dealing with it.
New laptop could simply be better shielded, have a better low power mode etc etc.
On some PC’s you can hear the difference based on which USB port you plug into on the back.
4 Likes
So, I am now DACless and eager to complete my chain.
My chain:
DAP > SU-6 > ?DAC? > Kinki THR-1 > Moondrop Cosmo
I realise that there aren’t many that here that are familiar with either the THR-1 or Cosmo so asking about DAC pairings will only yield general advice. With this in mind, I started to dig around SA and reread articles and threads; Mon’s excellent DAC comparison and it’s accompanying thread, the Shit List, etc., and I’m struggling to pull the trigger on a DAC because the two I have in my cross hairs are both pricey pieces, but more than that, I want to be done and complete my system with my next move.
My primary target since deciding to sell my Cyan is a TT2. I previously had a TT1 when I first bought the Kinki years ago. I had that chain feeding my trusty HE-500. I loved it and, in my mind, it was a well synergised chain. Understanding that I have a preference for a quite neutral tonal balance, the TT2, with it’s neutral/neutral-bright signature, should pair well with the neutral-warm tonality of the THR-1 and feed the fairly neutral Cosmo.
The tonal balance of the Cyan 2, THR-1, Cosmo was perfect to my ear. But the Holo was too “in my face” and thus sounded quite flat depth-wise, even though it layered well. The thing that I loved most about the Cyan 2 was it’s image clarity and separation - so, so good. As I understand it, the TT2 would offer a similar enough tonal balance for my chain and at least the same level of image clarity/separation but instead do depth way better. This, and me trusting my ears from 5 years ago with the TT1, THR-1 and HE-500, has me pretty set on a TT2.
I like the flexibility of having pre-amp functionality, it has a head amp that would drive my IEMs better than my Kinki, and I love cross-feed (primarily for IEMs).
So I why aren’t I just buying one!? Well, in reading all of the past threads and articles of DAC comparisons, it got me keeping one eye open for other well-regarded DACs (tricky in my price range/being in the U.K.) and, well, I found one! A balanced Lampizator Amber 5 (actually a L4 with £1000 worth of upgrades that Lampizator state effectively makes it an Amber 5).
I have two questions that will help me make this decision. Firstly, image clarity on the Lampizator - is it going to be sharper than an Area 12th? Or even as good as/better than a Cyan 2? Secondly, warmth, there is already a slight warmth to system with the Kinki in there, and it is slight. However, I don’t wish to introduce any more warmth into my system past what an Ares 12th would deliver (I found the tonal balance on the Ares 12th to be to my liking but I would be wary about introducing more warmth than that as I find warmth/elevated mid bass collapses stage depth for me). I have heard the Amber 3 be described as “neutral-ish” but also warm-neutral. How warm are these Lampizator Ambers and can anyone speak to how I may find an Amber 5 in my chain given my above stated preferences?
1 Like
Amber 5 has the new Eleven Engine. I owned Baltic 4 and Atlantic 3 (both with Engine Eleven) and they were Neutral for me, not warm not bright, even with warm amps they still kept the signature neutralish.
If you heard BF2 OG or Yggy OG those are noticeably warmer. The new Schiit Gungnir 2 is another option and I tried that too, its a pleasing neutral smooth dynamic well extended dac, no midbass bump and no haziness\cloudiness in the stage like og bf2 and yggy og.
If you felt the Amber is too expensive, give the new Gungnir 2 a try, it sounded more refined than my yggy og and bf2 og too. Make sure if you get that to get the Forkbeard module (50$ extra), you can control the dac from your mobile, has built in eq and digital preamp too, and they work and change the sound as you wish more than the software eqs I tried (don’t like eq thought) but this being built in the dac’s circuit won’t degrade the sound like a software eq would.
1 Like
So this Lampizator is a Gen 4, Level 4 but has then been upgraded. Here’s some banter from the listing:
‘This unit was serviced and upgraded by Lampizator in 2022 (upgrade value over £1,000).
It is the fully balanced XLR version, equipped with all major digital inputs including USB Amanero, Toslink, Coaxial, and AES/EBU. The output stage capacitors were upgraded to premium Jupiter models, the same as those found in the far more expensive Golden Gate. Internal wiring is pure silver with Teflon insulation. All valves have been replaced, and I will include two additional replacement valves for peace of mind. Since the upgrade, it has seen very little use as I own several other DACs, so the new owner can be assured of plenty of life left in the tubes.
According to Lampizator, after the upgrade, this DAC performs at the level of the Amber 5 which today retails for considerably more.
Sound:
This DAC offers a rare blend of liquidity and slam. It’s engaging and far from sterile. Bass is authoritative, deep, and textured; highs are extended, airy, and full of harmonic richness. The midrange blooms with natural tonality and emotional weight. The presentation is dynamic, open, and tonally saturated, with a massive, holographic soundstage that reaches deep and wide. Most importantly, it’s one of the most musical DACs I’ve ever heard a piece that makes you want to listen for hours.’
1 Like