Introducing Olympus & Olympus I/O - A new perspective on modern music playback

For those who just started reading up on Olympus, Olympus I/O, and XDMI, please note that all information in this thread has been summarized in a single PDF document that can be downloaded from the Taiko Website.

https://taikoaudio.com/taiko-2020/taiko-audio-downloads

The document is frequently updated.

Scroll down to the 'XDMI, Olympus Music Server, Olympus I/O' section and click 'XDMI, Olympus, Olympus I/O Product Introduction & FAQ' to download the latest version.

Good morning WBF!​

We are introducing the culmination of close to 4 years of research and development. As a bona fide IT/tech nerd with a passion for music, I have always been intrigued by the potential of leveraging the most modern of technologies in order to create a better music playback experience. This, amongst others, led to the creation of our popular, perhaps even revolutionary, Extreme music server 5 years ago, which we have been steadily improving and updating with new technologies throughout its life cycle. Today I feel we can safely claim it's holding its ground against the onslaught of new server releases from other companies, and we are committed to keep improving it for years to come.

We are introducing a new server model called the Olympus. Hierarchically, it positions itself above the Extreme. It does provide quite a different music experience than the Extreme, or any other server I've heard, for that matter. Conventional audiophile descriptions such as sound staging, dynamics, color palette, etc, fall short to describe this difference. It does not sound digital or analog, I would be inclined to describe it as coming closer to the intended (or unintended) performance of the recording engineer.

Committed to keeping the Extreme as current as possible, we are introducing a second product called the Olympus I/O. This is an external upgrade to the Extreme containing a significant part of the Olympus technology, allowing it to come near, though not entirely at, Olympus performance levels. The Olympus I/O can even be added to the Olympus itself to elevate its performance even further, though not as dramatic an uplift as adding it to the Extreme. Consider it the proverbial "cherry on top".

 

The big question now is whether we start addressing Emile as Zeus

That does have a better ring to it then Mr. Waffle.

 

… well all I know is that Olympus Mons is the heighest mountain on Mars and with approx. 22-26 km in peak nearly 3x the height of Mount Everest.

For me this mean Emile is quite confident in his latest creation.

I do agree. I am interested in how many of you who purchased the Olympus are giving up their external DAC's for the XDMI analogue board. None of us has heard the sound from the internal DAC but reading all of Emile's posts since the announcement suggests to me he is playing it tight to the hip and that this DAC will rise to the occasion and be quite competitive. This again shows that we are learning a new paradigm.It seems many are going solely with the XDMI analogue. Im betting they will be extremely happy with their decision. I wish there was a way to fit a tube or 2 on that XDMI analogue board

 

I do agree. I am interested in how many of you who purchased the Olympus are giving up their external DAC's for the XDMI analogue board. None of us has heard the sound from the internal DAC but reading all of Emile's posts since the announcement suggests to me he is playing it tight to the hip and that this DAC will rise to the occasion and be quite competitive. This again shows that we are learning a new paradigm.It seems many are going solely with the XDMI analogue. Im betting they will be extremely happy with their decision. I wish there was a way to fit a tube or 2 on that XDMI analogue board

TBD, based on sound of the XDMI analogue . . .

 

AES/EBU is just an optional output module.. It’s technical deficiencies are intrinsic to its design. This has little to nothing to do with XDMI beyond it being a highly compatible interface allowing early adopters to hear what it can do with their own DACs, and compare it to direct analogue out or USB.

I’ll quote some of my posts for context.

Aa far as I can see (please correct me if I am wrong) this limited AES/EBU optional output module is the only way to connect the Olympus using XDMI digitally to a DAC. The technical limitations make this channel subjectively not predictable most of the time and extremely colored in my opinion. Can I ask why you currently seem to prefer it to your top USB ?

In a digital interface system the source and destination device clocks should be synchronised, aka there needs to be a master clock.

Ideally the DAC’s clock should be the system's clock master as jitter is most significant where digital signals are converted to analogue. Timing is most critical here as samples should be reconstructed at the right moment in time. This is something proprietary interfaces like MSB’s Pro ISL do, the DAC clock is the master and provides the clock for the source.

AES/EBU and SPDIF are self clocking, the source is the master clock, the clock signal is embedded in the datastream. This is not ideal. So a lot of high-end dacs use a buffer (reclocker) to isolate the embedded signal clock from the DAC clock.

Yes, it is why I asked for the clocks.

An alternative to using a buffer/reclocker is to use an external master clock to provide a clock to both source and signal. This will need to be supported by both source and DAC, they will both need to have an external clock input.

Yes, it is the choice of dCS stacks and many professional system, for example. Are you considering such option as a supreme alternative? A dual AES/EBU line, as used by dCS and others would pass DXD.

 

I do agree. I am interested in how many of you who purchased the Olympus are giving up their external DAC's for the XDMI analogue board.

Being what I feel is a rather youngish audiophile age at below 40, I didn’t have the funds yet to invest in a SOTA DAC. So for me the new XDMI board sounds like a perfect solution.

Emile spoke about the younger generation (probably 20-40y) often preferring a headphone centered setup. I‘m not one of those. But a top notch competitive preamp function would definitely be more than welcome. … and a Waffle maker with XLR outputs.

 

I am planning on using the analog outs of the I/0 XDMI with the O. I will compare it of course to many DACs but my bet is that with the O and the I/O XDMI as well as XDMS/NSM that it will be nirvana sonics. Heck, I'm totally content with XDMS/NSM now. I love the simplicity of the analog outs into the preamp. Looking forward as we all are.

 

I do agree. I am interested in how many of you who purchased the Olympus are giving up their external DAC's for the XDMI analogue board. None of us has heard the sound from the internal DAC but reading all of Emile's posts since the announcement suggests to me he is playing it tight to the hip and that this DAC will rise to the occasion and be quite competitive. This again shows that we are learning a new paradigm.It seems many are going solely with the XDMI analogue. Im betting they will be extremely happy with their decision. I wish there was a way to fit a tube or 2 on that XDMI analogue board

That’s where you’re tube preamp can come into play ( perhaps).

I have the Aries Cerat Ithaca dac — a 350 lb tour d’ force. Will the Oly Analog compete? If so, I’m confident it will be the way to go as it will undoubtedly just keep getting better over time.

 

I placed my order to upgrade to an Olympus XDMI quickly. It seems to me like a good deal, since I was expecting just the BPS to cost the price of an Extreme. I was happy to hear that I reached out in the very first day.

Regarding the analog outputs, I will be waiting for a digital volume control, since I don't use a preamp, connecting the DAC directly to my CH M10.

 

I do agree. I am interested in how many of you who purchased the Olympus are giving up their external DAC's for the XDMI analogue board. None of us has heard the sound from the internal DAC but reading all of Emile's posts since the announcement suggests to me he is playing it tight to the hip and that this DAC will rise to the occasion and be quite competitive. This again shows that we are learning a new paradigm.It seems many are going solely with the XDMI analogue. Im betting they will be extremely happy with their decision. I wish there was a way to fit a tube or 2 on that XDMI analogue board

one factor that clearly benefits the xdmi analog board versus the aes/ebu output to an external dac is the clean battery power that the internal analog board utilizes.

@taiko--i would hope that others (e.g. dac manufacturers, etc) would be interested in licensing your battery technology (mini-bps perhaps?)
i'd be very interested in hearing what a taiko battery powered TotalDAC would sound like.

 

one factor that clearly benefits the xdmi analog board versus the aes/ebu output to an external dac is the clean battery power that the internal analog board utilizes.

@taiko--i would hope that others (e.g. dac manufacturers, etc) would be interested in licensing your battery technology (mini-bps perhaps?)
i'd be very interested in hearing what a taiko battery powered TotalDAC would sound like.

Marty

check you PM's

 

I hope your fingers and hands are in better shape than mine...

Given the number of injuries, they are still operating well.

One frostbite and six pulley ruptures.

But I'm still climbing 8a. Not bad considering my age.

 

I do agree. I am interested in how many of you who purchased the Olympus are giving up their external DAC's for the XDMI analogue board. None of us has heard the sound from the internal DAC but reading all of Emile's posts since the announcement suggests to me he is playing it tight to the hip and that this DAC will rise to the occasion and be quite competitive. This again shows that we are learning a new paradigm.It seems many are going solely with the XDMI analogue. Im betting they will be extremely happy with their decision. I wish there was a way to fit a tube or 2 on that XDMI analogue board

No way to answer that until I hear them side by side. At a minimum I will be able to hear the Horizon via USB vs the XDMI analog in real time. I will also listen to the XDMI AES/EBU and compare it to what I remember hearing with the XDMI analog.

I would be surprised if anyone is going to sell their DAC until they have been able to hear the XDMI analog. It isn't just a matter of what sounds "better." It is more about preference since many of us have a tubed DAC. The solid state Olympus DAC will certainly sound different, if not better.

 

No way to answer that until I hear them side by side. At a minimum I will be able to hear the Horizon via USB vs the XDMI analog in real time. I will also listen to the XDMI AES/EBU and compare it to what I remember hearing with the XDMI analog.

I would be surprised if anyone is going to sell their DAC until they have been able to hear the XDMI analog. It isn't just a matter of what sounds "better." It is more about preference since many of us have a tubed DAC. The solid state Olympus DAC will certainly sound different, if not better.

Exactly so . . .

 

I have to tell you that the suspense here is killing me because Im betting this will rock a few ships

 

i am betting on team Lampizator to create the ultimate XDMI interface handshake bw the Extreme and the Horizon…. at least that is my hope

 

i am betting on team Lampizator to create the ultimate XDMI interface handshake bw the Extreme and the Horizon…. at least that is my hope

We'll make it happen

 

We have all been doing this a very long time, some longer than others. I'm digesting all of it in a positive way. Yes with the initial announcement it created consternation. My system NOW has never sounded this good nor any other systems I have ever had. It's only going to get better! How exciting is that! I'm not beating myself up as to this DAC or that DAC! We have some brilliant people leading this, Emile, Lukasz, and all the other DAC players involved understand all the potential scenarios in place here. I suspect this will take its own course and fall into place as it all comes to fruition. We all should be very grateful that we have the means to even be involved with this...

 

Aa far as I can see (please correct me if I am wrong) this limited AES/EBU optional output module is the only way to connect the Olympus using XDMI digitally to a DAC. The technical limitations make this channel subjectively not predictable most of the time and extremely colored in my opinion.

Correct. AES/EBU ( and SPDIF) is the first digital output option board we are supplying for XDMI. This is not because of it's technical properties, but because it's the industry standard for connecting CD transports and therefor fitted in virtually every commercial DAC. This allows you to use XDMI with every DAC, though "performance limited" by AES/EBU's properties.

The other option we're offering at launch is an analogue output module, this does not suffer from interface limitations, the I2S and clock lines are just centimeters long with near perfect signal integrity.

By comparing these 2 options you can get an idea of the effect the interface itself has on sound quality even though these differences are obviously subject to actual DAC/output stage performance or "colouration" / "voicing".

In a nutshell we are proposing that the interface itself is a mayor contributor to performance, and we are providing these options to proof our case. We can have endless online discussions about why, with as the best possible outcome some sort of consensus without an actual solution, so here we are now, providing you with actual hardware (and software) you can listen to and form your own opinion.

Can I ask why you currently seem to prefer it to your top USB ?

First let me be clear: I do not prefer AES/EBU over USB at all. IMHO USB is superior over AES/EBU for the following reasons:

-It supports all sample rates
-An USB interface generates the sensitive I2S inside the DAC, solving all issues surrounding timing/jitter/clocking sensitivities AES/EBU suffers from, USB interfaces allow the I2S master clock to be provided by the DAC, which is the ideal scenario, over short clock and I2S lines.

However USB has some technical properties we have discovered to be limiting performance as well, we have squeezed it for almost all it's got, and although Olympus and/or Olympus I/O outfitted with USB does improve USB performance significantly over what it currently provides now, it does not address these technical limitations, which cannot be solved as they are inherent to the USB interface.

I'm not going to expose our discoveries, but this has something to do with both the hardware and software, having to convert and/or alter bit streams multiple times before they are eventually converted to I2S. If you do not believe in this having a mayor influence I'd like to refer you to the customer feedback on the recent "NSM" update for our XDMS playback software which only handles bits in a slightly different way. Let's say this is why the "D" is in XDMI, for "Direct", bypassing quite a large number of conversion stages.

To answer your question "Can I ask why you currently seem to prefer it to your top USB ?" :

USB has an undeniable sound signature, AES/EBU also has a signature, all interfaces do. You could describe this as a "digital signature", though let me add I don't actually agree to the "digital" versus "analogue" nomenclature to describe these differences as these are usually used in a way to describe "digital" as something negative relative to "analogue". IMHO "analogue" and "digital" have their own unique types of distortion. "Digital" distortions are actually less offensive to me as some "analogue" distortions, maybe I should just say it, I genuinely don't like vinyl playback. It's just something personal.

XDMI lacks the "digital" signature we're completely used to listening to, but it also does not have any typical "analogue" colourations, hence my description is it does not sound typical "digital" nor does it sound typical "analogue". IMHO it's an evolutionary step up in digital playback fidelity rather then "just" another upgrade. That is however my opinion, we will find out if others agree in a few months.

Yes, it is the choice of dCS stacks and many professional system, for example. Are you considering such option as a supreme alternative? A dual AES/EBU line, as used by dCS and others would pass DXD.

I guess it's not a big surprise that I don't consider this to be a supreme alternative at all. For me it's trying to fix an ancient protocol, designed to be cheap for mass employment in cheap consumer level devices, in an age when there was very little knowledge and/or interest in audiophile level playback fidelity, back when 44.1KHz was considered to be a good choice, and when applying compression was common practice. Choices made nearly 40 years ago still limiting our performance today.

 

Given the number of injuries, they are still operating well.

One frostbite and six pulley ruptures.

But I'm still climbing 8a. Not bad considering my age.

WOW!!! 8a. VERY IMPRESSIVE! Good for you man, like you said keep training, once you stop your climbing days are over. My hands/fingers still operate well considering all the fractures, pins in one. Just a little gnarly looking and a little stiff...Keep it going Tom...

 

We have all been doing this a very long time, some longer than others. I'm digesting all of it in a positive way. Yes with the initial announcement it created consternation. My system NOW has never sounded this good nor any other systems I have ever had. It's only going to get better! How exciting is that! I'm not beating myself up as to this DAC or that DAC! We have some brilliant people leading this, Emile, Lukasz, and all the other DAC players involved understand all the potential scenarios in place here. I suspect this will take its own course and fall into place as it all comes to fruition. We all should be very grateful that we have the means to even be involved with this...

For sure we're already in a good place right now