Previously introduced a lot of digital interface, there are hydra Z, QA730U, Athena, Athena SE, ifi interface, mouse interface 2, QA661 can also be barely counted as an interface, interested friends can search for my previous single drying station. Many friends may not know what the digital interface is. You can take a look at my previous posts on Athena and Mouse. There is an introduction. It's just personal understanding. It's not necessarily correct. Please correct me.
This time we will introduce weiss's int204 and Geshide U12's two digital interfaces, one high-end and one low-end. Come from expensive.
One. Weiss INT204
Int204 is currently the best civilian digital interface (not 8xr this special equipment), weiss produced. As the king of civil digital interfaces, natural prices cannot be vague. The interface is priced around 1w. This is a stand-up product that I received with 4040, and it is considered a Chinese cabbage.
If you think that an interface is over, it's not. There is also a linear power supply PSU101, which is about 1W.
This thing is so expensive. What's so special about it? Let's take a look at the appearance.
If you look from the outside, I'm afraid that this thing will disappoint you. 1W dollars, in exchange for such a tin box, the shell is quite thin. . .
Not only looks inconspicuous in appearance, but also insignificant. This product is not much larger than a 5-inch cell phone.
The front is relatively simple, the left is a row of lights, indicating the code rate and power status. There are two switches in the middle to adjust the DSD conversion rate. On the far right is a power switch.
The two switches in the middle have come a long way. Weiss204 is so expensive, in fact, a large part of its algorithm. It supports DSD-PCM conversion on the hardware and can convert the incoming DSD bitstream into PCM bitstream output. This is useful for decoders that do not support DSD, especially high-end decoders. For example nv4000, Forssell MDAC2, Schitt YGG, Metrum Pavane, Aqua La Scala, Prism Sound DA2. The left side of these two switches is the bit rate and the right side is the bit depth, which can be selected according to their own needs. If the decoder supports a high bit rate, 176.4/24 is naturally a better choice, and if it does not support a high bit rate, the general decoder can also support the 88.2/24 specification. If even 88.2/16 does not support it, then what is the era of ancient artifacts, there is no need to buy int204, or first change the decoder for it. . .
Int204 on the back of the interface is not much, the left is the power access, wide voltage, 6-9V. Close to the power port is the USB port, and then to the right are the BNC, RCA coaxial output and AES / EBU output interface. Unfortunately, 204 does not have an I2S interface. Compared with the traditional interface, if the decoding supports I2S, the transmission effect will be significantly better.
The power supply that comes with it is a transformer and it is relatively shabby. Compared with corded and wound batteries, this item sounds soft and not clean enough.
Due to the same wide voltage range, which is a voltage range of 6-9V, the int204 can be used with the cord and wound batteries provided for Pearl 2, which is very convenient. This voltage is more convenient, you can use a very affordable 6V8A winding battery, affordable, the effect is significantly better than a few hundred dollars of line power, the sound is much cleaner. Compared with some of the more expensive lines, the difference is mainly in the sound field is slightly smaller, the dynamic density is slightly worse, but the sound is still a little cleaner. However, compared to the 2k block price difference, I still honestly use the battery. . .
For hydraz, the two are more subtle.
The first is the price aspect. Both are external power supply effects will be better, 204 because it is 6-9v wide voltage, you can use some cost-effective winding battery, and hydraZ is 5V fixed voltage, can only use linear power, but also have to be Some of the more expensive, it will lead to a reduction in the difference between the two. Another problem with hydraz is that it has been discontinued, it has very little inventory, and it has a small amount of inventory. It is not a good idea to buy new or used.
The second is quality and tuning. Compared to the hydraz, the 204 has a higher density, better high-frequency extension, and a more cohesive low-frequency, better texture of the instrument. Hydraz also has its own advantages, its voice is more relaxed, the simulation is more concentrated, although the 204's quality is higher, but it sounds easy to appear tired, and hydraz to listen to some.
The third is the functional aspect. Hydraz has more than 204 I2S, optical fiber and clock interfaces, and the interface accounts for a certain amount of money. However, int204 has a high-quality DSD hardware conversion function, pull back one city.
The fourth is the volume. The volume of hydraz itself is not small and the line power is greater. The 204 is equipped with a battery, which saves a lot of space. Like my tight space, or 204 is more friendly.
Overall, the sound quality is slightly better than the 204, but the hydrazine is a little more comfortable and cheaper. Which one to choose depends on your preferences. When you reach this level, you don't need people to recommend it. To be honest, individuals actually prefer hydraz, but because they can't get it, they can only engage in 204. . . .
2. Geshide U12
Just talked about expensive, the following chat with a cheap, song poetry U12 digital interface.
The official price of this product is 750, used 400 to block, the price can be described as relatively low.
Appearance, there is a more dense atmosphere of diy, brushed aluminum shell.
The front is a brushed aluminum housing with a small display. The four big screws are a bit conspicuous and unsightly. . .
The front display can show the bit rate, U12 supports code rates from 44.1 to 384, dsd64-256. D64 is currently displayed, indicating that the dsd64 file is being played.
From the left to the right, the back is the power jack, AES output, RCA coaxial output, I2S output, optical fiber output, and USB input. In the low-end interface, the interface is very rich. Pearl does not have RAC coaxial, 730U does not have BNC and AES, all very troublesome. U12 is the only low-end interface with I2S that I have seen so far.
Open the lid to show the interior. U12's interior is fairly neat, using the Xmos-U8 chip, which is harder to understand in the low-end interface. However, the use of cattle and crystal oscillators is not considered good, and it is bound to limit the sound. Of course, considering the price, the cost control can be understood. The machine can adjust 110V or 220V from the inside, and the design is more conscience.
Because of the built-in power supply, and the inability to use external power supply, it limits the space for tossing and saves money in a sense. However, on the other hand, the built-in power supply is not a good shield, the second can not replace the linear power supply, it also cut off the way to improve the sound quality. Personally feel like a 204 or 730U, with a small transformer will be better.
For the digital interface of this price, the best contrast is to stop production for a long time, the price of Pearl 2 is relatively cheap.
Thanks to its internal power supply, the Cedar U12 is a bit larger than the Pearl 2, but it can still be a relatively compact interface.
In terms of sound quality, due to the use of the xmos-U8 chip, the U12 is decent and the overall quality is slightly better than that of most low-cost decoders. The face of USB-powered nude pearls, the quality is still stronger. However, U12 has a problem, that is, the overall sound is a bit mixed, low-frequency is also relatively scattered, it does not seem particularly clean, personally think that its crystal and power supply should be back this pot. In the face of a pearl 2 with a twisted battery, the U12 has a slight advantage in low-frequency sensitivity, but it is basically suppressed. In particular, the battery-powered pearl sounds too clean.
However, U12 has a big advantage, that is, it has an I2S interface. When connected to the song A20H, the use of I2S interface is significantly better than aes and coaxial, after using I2S, U12 sound appears to be condensed, and the sense of line is also better, but the problem of mixing this is still not too fundamentally improved.
In general, U12 is worth the money, after all, the price is cheap, with the decoding of Ge Shide's own home, whether it is the interface or the tuning has advantages. But if it is to add another three or four thousand to the interface, the individual is still the devaluation QA730U, and if it can receive a little pearl of cabbage is not bad. U12 is not recommended because it cannot use external power supply.
The end of this single drying, thanks for watching.