i mean fully open hardware as in - fully documented (electrical diagrams, exact components used, copyleft firmware/drivers, no binary-blobs and if possible non-patented or extremly reduced) much like how L5 is going to be in 3-5 years once they get their investment back.
@reC
Now that I know what you mean by open-hardware when it comes to DAC/amps this raises another question. Is it because they could collect data or anything else, passed through?
Could be my ignorance but I have never heard of any DAC/amp doing that. Also it is not common practice in that industry to be open about schematics, circuitry components used, just in general terms as you may be aware of. I have seen some detailed information over the years and I do know companies that I would trust giving out the required information you mentioned.
Should we really be concerned when using DAC/amp brand/model X or Y? If so, would that be hypothetical or is there some sort of evidence/suspicion pointing at DAC/amp manufacturers or their suppliers when it comes to security?
it’s not about suspicion i’m just all in for everything to be open-hardware/free-software for the public consumption. as a base rule. not becasue of a potential police state happening or already BEEING.
this link was given above > https://www.henryaudio.com/open-source.php
dedicated DAC/AMPs are allready expensive so they might just as well be open-hardware.
again it’s not about security/privacy directly it’s about software/hardware freedom (the user is in control)
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
A program is free software if the program’s users have the four essential freedoms:
1.The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).
2.The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
3.The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help others (freedom 2).
4.The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
A program is free software if it gives users adequately all of these freedoms. Otherwise, it is nonfree. While we can distinguish various nonfree distribution schemes in terms of how far they fall short of being free, we consider them all equally unethical.
it also ties in with sustainability and environment friendliness and in general living a “green(er)” life
2 Likes
Thanks again for clarifying.
John Seaber (JDS Labs, US) and Martin Young (IMS electronics, NZ) come to mind, this might just be up their alley.
Also could be very interesting for boutique manufacturers like Vorzüge aiming at customers in a niche market like Purism and similar philosophy. Adding a DAC to their line-up and constantly improving with the help of an open source community could make way for them to grow and have their excellent products sell to a broader audience. Being an extremely happy Vorzüge amp owner I’d buy a Vorzüge DAC/amp unseen when they’d decide to make one.
I agree it would be ideal to have more manufacturers making open hardware and have it available at an affordable price. A downside of any open hardware is the relatively large footprint which makes it less attractive stacking such a unit with a phone. Other highly portable (USB-C) solutions, for instance the Audioquest Dragonfly, are made with surgical precision in the Far East to keep it tiny and cheap as possible.
1 Like
problem is true Hi-Fidelity Audio gear is a niche market (proprietary or not). quality audo gear is also expensive and the current DRM(ed) digital streaming options don’t make it any less easy on us Audiophiles. you can still get proper CDs or Vinyls and it’s not common enough to see teenagers or young people going out of-their-way to search for these.
it would be awesome if Purism would at some point offer a DRM free music collection in a Hi-Fi format like FLAC as a digital alternative to the online iMusicThing. for me the preferance is Classical, Movie Soundtrack and Original-Game-SoundTrack.
1 Like
FYI, last week I have been in contact with xDuoo about their upcoming XD-05 PLUS DAC/amp (see earlier comment re specs).
I explained the open-hardware and software concept and given them some examples of how this concept can actually contribute to our common goals. xDuoo have responded they will be looking at this option. Will report back.
3 Likes
Short update regarding Xduoo XD-05 PLUS and new to be announced XD-05 PRO edition can be found in edit 2 here. This will give the company some extra time to seriously consider the open hardware and software.
1 Like
I actually took the audiophile test and could not only distinguish 128kpbs from 320kbps from Flac lossless , I was actually able to correctly list them in order by sound .
I have really sensitive ears . Im one of not many people that can hear 60,000khz .
3 Likes
you’re a bat not a “people” then 
just like a military-jet pilot only for sound 
2 Likes
I’m sorry, but this is really hard to believe. What tests did you perform to find this out?
2 Likes
could you please open up another thread and link to that one ?
Idk. I don’t wanna have a thread not related to L5 and Purism products. Would rather delete the post if it creates issues. And maybe just DM the biggest audiophile enthusiasts here 
Seriously, it doesn’t mage sense to me
neither do i 
but there is a lot of that going around these days …
1 Like
Right, to even play a 60 kHz signal (even though he said 60,000 kHz) you’d need something more like an ultrasonic transducer than what is generally thought of as a speaker.
1 Like
i think he meant to say it was hz instead wrote by mistake khz … but yeah tens of thousands kilohertz is unreal 
1 Like
one was multiple choice in random order by format 128kbs 320 and flac lossless and I had a 85% success rate and only got the first 2 wrong once I figured out what exactly I was listening for I got 100% from the 3rd on to the end.
And the 60k khz I listened to a pure 60k tone and correctly called the initiation and termination of the tone several times with my eyes closed soley by sound .
To be honest both tests I mean the variant from even 128kbs to lossless was incredibly not noticeable I had to really concentrate to hear the lac of compression of FLAC
And the 60khz tone Again the difference between that sound and nothing as it went too high was .0000000001% I actually heard it above the ambient tinitus frequency .
And It cut out at 70khz as I tried to call the initiation and termination of the tone but it just bled into nothing . I think I may have heard it but I couldnt be sure and I certainly couldnt call the start and stop . Whether this was due to the super tweeters lack of ability to reproduce the 70khz tone reaching its threshold or my limit to what I can hear I dont know . But I was using a studio monitor allegedly capable of 60k khz and I did call the start stop several times with no warning or time scale to start listening .
I am an anomaly with my hearing . its incredibly sensitive . My dead zone is about I dunno 12-18k khz as that is the ambient resident tinitus frequency that is present all the time.
2 Likes