Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/7/2009(UTC)
Posts: 13
|
Hi Russ,when do you plan to have the OTTO & B32S available again?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration, Customer
Joined: 10/24/2006(UTC)
Posts: 2,868
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Thanks: 2 times
Was thanked: 141 time(s) in 134 post(s)
|
The Buffalo is undergoing a redesign, and we are going back to having the I/V stage on separate boards, to accommodate more customization. We plan on also releasing the IVY-II (B32's I/V stage) modules as well as a discrete I/V module, sort of Counterpoint II. We are considering a balanced tube-based I/V module as well, but we shall see on that one.
As for the OTTO, we were thinking of not re-ordering, but there seems to be more demand for it than we thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/7/2009(UTC)
Posts: 13
|
That's good news for the B32, but not so good new for the OTTO if you stick to the original plan  Edited by user Friday, October 30, 2009 5:43:31 PM(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/10/2009(UTC)
Posts: 299
Location: Italy
|
The OTTO is good for many things, but a bit to big in my opinion. An important use of an "OTTO" type switch is to switch between SPDIF (TTL level) and DSD/I2S inputs for the Buffalo. I have made a simpler circuit to do this using two 4PDT signal relays to attain the same 2:1 switching but with way shorter signal path and form factor. NicMac attached the following image(s):  MyOtto2.jpg (91kb) downloaded 252 time(s).You cannot view/download attachments. Try to login or register.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/10/2009(UTC)
Posts: 299
Location: Italy
|
Actually, it would be nice if this "otto" function was build into the MUX module 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration, Customer
Joined: 10/24/2006(UTC)
Posts: 2,868
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Thanks: 2 times
Was thanked: 141 time(s) in 134 post(s)
|
The size of the OTTO was chosen to be stackable with our other modules. We originally prototyped with two G6K DPDT relays, but opted for the single 4PDT in order to avoid the possibility of having the contacts switch at slightly different times.
For just switching 4 digital lines, we could easily switch to digital logic chips, which is what we were considering. This would mean, however, that you could not switch analog audio signals, which many seem to want to do.
I think there may be two products in the making for this, but we need to think it through.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/10/2009(UTC)
Posts: 299
Location: Italy
|
Brian,
I agree, but I still think that the MUX module could and should be made differently. The reasons being:
1) I have the understanding that there is no advantage of interfacing the B32S and the MUX via I2S as the Buffalo is so great in dealing with SPDIF that a conversion to I2S might actually be undesirable. You guys have never expressed a clear opinion in this respect, but reading between the lines I understand that a SPDIF connection between the MUX and BUffalo is actually the better way (different story with the Opus and COD clearly).
2) A major strength of the Buffalo is that it takes just about any type of digital signal. The MUX in its current form does not as it cannot route DSD/I2S signals. IMO the mux should be able to act as a hub for all the signal types that the Buffalo can take. The OTTO may have other uses in the analog domain but that is a different story.
A few fast questions:
Will I be able to use my current Counterpoint boards with the yet to come Buffalo32S v2? I spend a lot of work on these.........
What is the current draw from a Counterpoint?
Thanks and keep up the good work.
Nic
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 5/9/2008(UTC)
Posts: 62
|
NicMac wrote:I have the understanding that there is no advantage of interfacing the B32S and the MUX via I2S as the Buffalo is so great in dealing with SPDIF that a conversion to I2S might actually be undesirable. I have found exactly the opposite. SPDIF into the Buffalo is serviceable but far from ideal in my build, and I have seen many others whose lock/pop problems have been solved by connecting an external SPDIF-to-I2S receiver. Edited by user Saturday, October 31, 2009 6:39:15 PM(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/11/2009(UTC)
Posts: 70
Location: Greece
|
Brian Donegan wrote:I think there may be two products in the making for this, but we need to think it through. Please do! :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration, Customer
Joined: 10/24/2006(UTC)
Posts: 2,868
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Thanks: 2 times
Was thanked: 141 time(s) in 134 post(s)
|
NicMac wrote:Brian,
I agree, but I still think that the MUX module could and should be made differently. The reasons being:
1) I have the understanding that there is no advantage of interfacing the B32S and the MUX via I2S as the Buffalo is so great in dealing with SPDIF that a conversion to I2S might actually be undesirable. You guys have never expressed a clear opinion in this respect, but reading between the lines I understand that a SPDIF connection between the MUX and BUffalo is actually the better way (different story with the Opus and COD clearly).
2) A major strength of the Buffalo is that it takes just about any type of digital signal. The MUX in its current form does not as it cannot route DSD/I2S signals. IMO the mux should be able to act as a hub for all the signal types that the Buffalo can take. The OTTO may have other uses in the analog domain but that is a different story.
A few fast questions:
Will I be able to use my current Counterpoint boards with the yet to come Buffalo32S v2? I spend a lot of work on these.........
What is the current draw from a Counterpoint?
Thanks and keep up the good work.
Nic I understand what you are saying, but this is why it is called the "S/PDIF MUX." :) We are thinking about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 11/10/2008(UTC)
Posts: 137
Location: New York City
Thanks: 1 times
|
So there will be no more Buffalo/IVY on the same board?
How much of a sacrifice in SQ will there be with the output stage on a separate board?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
