Hi, just noticed a typo in the spec sheet for the Varèse:
Er, shouldn’t that be Minimum load?! 
Same in the specs for all the other products btw, can’t believe I haven’t noticed it before!
It is correct. The lower the load, the harder the output amps will work. The maximum load of 600 Ohm is what they can handle, not lower. So it is the maximum driving load.
1 Like
This is very odd. Load is specified in terms of resistance, not the driving amount. Therefore, it should be a minimum load of 600 ohms.
The lower the ohms, the higher the load. The maximum load is the minimum ohms it is capable to drive.
I know what you’re saying, but it is backwards. You would say the maximum load is 5mA or something. Which nobody would know what that is. So you specify it in ohms, which is the minimum amount the driving force can handle.
Erno is right, Maximum load is the correct terminology.
600Ω is a demanding load for the analogue output drivers. Higher impedances are less demanding loads. An open circuit is no load.
2 Likes
Then I guess the problem is just my pedantic mind that cannot accept the cognitive dissonance of describing something as increasing when the unit we are measuring it in is decreasing. “More difficult load”, “more challenging load” but not “increasing load”.
Anyway if nobody else has a problem with it then the problem is clearly in my mind.
Just for clarification - "Maximum Load is correct - it just seems wrong (as you’ve all been discussing).
I shall go sit back in my corner again and await someone giving me a kick again… 
Thanks Phil. I’ll do the same.
Violence is not condoned on this forum, against @Phil, @struts001, or otherwise!
; )
Well, just to take you out of your corner. 
If I read it right, there is an incongruency on the spec sheet regarding supported sample rates.
In the input section the maximum sample rate (even for sub) is dsd128. But in the sample rate section, the maximum sample rate is dsd512.
How is the dac running dad256/512 if the maximum the inputs support is dsd128? Unless you are already planning for an upgrade of the user interface (that is where I imagine the digital inputs will be located)…
That DSD128 limitation is specifically for the USB and Dual AES inputs (with IO module fitted). DSD256/512 is obviously supported over the Ethernet streaming interface, and via upsampling.
So, no, it’s not an error in the spec sheet.
It could be. But I don’t see this sample rate listed on the rj45 input spec. And to list sample rate support that is achieved via internal upsampling is not industry standard. Sample rate is always referenced to the file being fed to the dac.
And it is not usual the rj45 to support higher sample rates then usb 2.0. I don’t know of any example.
Sorry I don’t follow, what industry standard? AFAIK, it’s common practices for vendors who support upsampling capability within their platforms to explicitly call the rate that the platform can upsample to. Thats quite normal.
As for the Ethernet port, I’m sue we can expect it’s a standard Gigabit Ethernet port which will easily support pretty much any PCM/DSD rate in common use today (including as mentioned during the Varèse launch DSD256/DSD512). I’m sure full details will be forthcoming.
The additional spec thats interesting is the “Native DSD” part, that’s new for dCS. All previous external DSD support was via DoP, even over Ethernet. But DSD256/512 are not efficient wrapped in DoP, so it’s not surprising they’re supposed natively.
1 Like
Hi Jose,
I see that Anup has beaten me to it but yes, he is correct … the Varese system which, without the legacy IO module, has Ethernet connectivity and supports DSD256 and DSD512 playback over the network input.
Adding the legacy IO module adds AES inputs which can handle a maximum of DSD128 - the limit for DOP over Dual AES.
I hope that helps.
Yes. That helps a lot. Maybe you should consider including this information on the spec sheet. Just for the sake of completion. Cheers!
I honestly don’t remember of any example of this kind (listing the internal upsampling in the supported sample rate list). Do you know of any?
Take your pick. They ALL provide specifications of upsample rates;
Please, don’t get me wrong, but I believe I am failing to communicate my point and this whole conversation is going nowhere.
I just wanted to point out a possible contradiction or, at the very least, room to improve varese’s data sheet.
Anyway, I will make my last comment.
Of the three devices you listed, none are dacs. They are all upsamplers, or digital-to-digital converters. Nonetheless:
About the chord m-scaler:
First, it is not a dac. It is similar to dcs upsampler. Second, see on the left side of the manual, pag 22, that the input sample rates are listed, and separated from the output sample rates. They do not get mixed up
On denafrips Gaia, it is also not a dac. Nevertheless, the same input and output sample rates are listed.
On esoteric, I don’t read Japanese, but Incan see the inputs sample rates listed on the second page of the file you listed.
So, my point stands: I have never seen a dac that specifies its internal oversampling rates as supported sample rates.
Peace.
The dCS Varèse, just like the Vivaldi, is a system. It’s not a DAC. The current “spec sheet” talks about the system, not the DAC.