il Carletto said My new I2s streamer based on Pi3 (and Moode 2.6 TR5) is finally ready. Linear psu with Belleson SPHP 10A regulator is great.Wow! Looks like a new product from Audiobyte!This is the best source for the DS I ever had
I got the HDPLEX 100W LPS a couple of days ago. It powers up my Pi 2 now. I will give Moode a try!
You are right, Holzohr !!!
Nucu uses the same case, but smaller, for his great Hydra Z.
The Hydra Z & the Black Dragon, that’s a tandem!
Hmmm… Rockna’s Wavedream NET does accept DSD128 and 32bit/384kHz PCM via ethernet. Someone should convince Nucu to create a “Hydra E(thernet)”.
I had the Hydra Z until few months ago, it’s the best usb-I2s converter I tried with my Mac Mini.
The I2s streamer based on Pi3 plays in another league 
Is this a DIY project?
I had the Hydra Z, too. Tested it with the Black Dragon and then I bought it for the DS DAC. Imho the Hydra makes much more sense together with the BD than with the DS DAC. I liked the Hydra/BD combo very much but unfortunately I didn’t like the Black Dragon as a preamp at all and for some reason, the BD didn’t work well as standalone DAC in my setup.
Well, I am happy with my Pi2/I2S streamer now. No need for the Bridge II here.
Frode, yes
Holzohr, me too 
Holzohr saidil Carletto said My new I2s streamer based on Pi3 (and Moode 2.6 TR5) is finally ready. Linear psu with Belleson SPHP 10A regulator is great.This is the best source for the DS I ever had
Wow! Looks like a new product from Audiobyte!
I got the HDPLEX 100W LPS a couple of days ago. It powers up my Pi 2 now. I will give Moode a try!
il Carletto: Was there any particular reason that you chose the MoOde player over the other players?
Moode sounds very good to me and it is stable, even the beta versions of the new 2.6.
Volumio 2 on Pi3 is not ready yet IMHO.
Got to give Rune another chance, the first time I tried it I didn’t find any I2s driver working with the DS
TarnishedEars said
Holzohr : Was there any particular reason that you chose the PiCorePlayer over the other available options?I am a Squeezebox guy for many years so the piCorePlayer with Squeezelite was the first choice. Another useful thing it is running entirely in RAM, so no harm to your SD card when you pull the power. The SD card is only needed for booting.
il Carletto !!!
Nice work !!!
In my Raspberry I2s streamer project PiCorePlayers i2s-driver was only driver that first started to work! But after shut down green light in Directstreams touchscreen stayed lit, and then all the others (like Max2plays driver) started to work.
Hope this makes any sence, but I believe that without PiCorePlayers driver I wouldn’t ever get my Raspberry streamer to work.
il Carletto said Moode sounds very good to me and it is stable, even the beta versions of the new 2.6.Volumio 2 on Pi3 is not ready yet IMHO.
Got to give Rune another chance, the first time I tried it I didn’t find any I2s driver working with the DS
Paul McGowan said I2S is better than UDSB, certainly, but I do not know if those interfaces you mention will work.Other than there being relatively few compatible I2S sources, is there any reason why one would not want to strive to use I2S if possible? Since I2S is essentially the native format for DACs, doesn't I2S simplify the process by eliminating extra digital conversion steps and eliminate the numerous potential issues with USB? I am trying to understand why I2S is not the clear way to go.
Really the differences at this level depend on your source and other attributes of your system:
From a theoretical point of view I2S wasn’t designed for long distances. Paul and I probably disagree a little but I attribute most of the I2S improvements on the DS (as opposed to other DACs) to the better grounding that I2S cables have rather than other things like potentially lower jitter or other differences. Indeed if one wants the simplest hardware one would use TOSLink. There’s literally just a TOSLink receiver module and a wire to the FPGA… TOSLink also has the advantage of galvanic isolation, so if it has the bandwidth you need you should at least consider it. AES/EBU and S/PDIF also avoid the worst theoretical problems from USB and their hardware is as simple as I2S, but the typical cables used for them both radiate more than I2S and also usually have much weaker grounds. Also, to beat a dead horse: when one is comparing one digital cable to another, one should disconnect any other digital cables that won’t be in your system for each test. Most of the noise/interference from a digital cable comes from ground loops, etc. so having multiple cables from one source to the DAC can mask potential benefits of one cable over another.
Ted Smith said Really the differences at this level depend on your source and other attributes of your system:Oops, I have just done a bunch of comparisons of the digital inputs and tend to always leave the inactive cables in. Are the "inactive" ones active anyway even if nothing is playing through the source just by being plugged in?From a theoretical point of view I2S wasn’t designed for long distances. Paul and I probably disagree a little but I attribute most of the I2S improvements on the DS (as opposed to other DACs) to the better grounding that I2S cables have rather than other things like potentially lower jitter or other differences. Indeed if one wants the simplest hardware one would use TOSLink. There’s literally just a TOSLink receiver module and a wire to the FPGA… TOSLink also has the advantage of galvanic isolation, so if it has the bandwidth you need you should at least consider it. AES/EBU and S/PDIF also avoid the worst theoretical problems from USB and their hardware is as simple as I2S, but the typical cables used for them both radiate more than I2S and also usually have much weaker grounds. Also, to beat a dead horse: when one is comparing one digital cable to another, one should disconnect any other digital cables that won’t be in your system for each test. Most of the noise/interference from a digital cable comes from ground loops, etc. so having multiple cables from one source to the DAC can mask potential benefits of one cable over another.
Also, if I have a source that is active but running to one DAC by SPDIF and another by TOSLink at the same time or USB, does that create problems? On my streamer, I have to select either USB or other digital outputs and only one of them works.
Also, if I have an ethernet cable plugged in (non optically isolated) to my streamer but not active since I use 802.11 ac wi fi instead, does this matter?
il Carletto said My new I2s streamer based on Pi3 (and Moode 2.6 TR5) is finally ready. Linear psu with Belleson SPHP 10A regulator is great.This is the best source for the DS I ever had
Il Carletto, this looks amazing! Would you consider publishing a parts list/“recipe” w power supply schematic for this build?
yacheah said Oops, I have just done a bunch of comparisons of the digital inputs and tend to always leave the inactive cables in. Are the "inactive" ones active anyway even of nothing is playing through the source just by being plugged in?It's not really a problem with function, etc. It's just that every cable causes another set of ground loops. The flux thru each ground loop causes a current to flow around that loop which can subtly alter any signals in that loop. So each additional cable (whether there is any signal at all in it) can add a possible source of noise pickup in all other cables (including power cords) connected between the new cable's source and it's destination. As you system gets better and better these small effects become a bigger and bigger part of the noise that's left in your system. A TOSLink cable doesn't add to the problem, but any other unused cables connected may be causing extra noise with other parts of your system that hide the lack of noise from the TOSLink cable.Also, if I have a source that is active but running to one DAC by SPDIF and another by TOSLink at the same time or USB, does that create problems? On my streamer, I have to select either USB or other digital outputs and only one of them works.
Also, if I have an ethernet cable plugged in (non optically isolated) to my streamer but not active since I use 802.11 ac wi fi instead, does this matter?
I wouldn’t get carried away with plugging and unplugging cables every time I listen. But it may be worth it when you are doing explicit A/B’s and or taking the time to tune your system. (I don’t remove all extra cables every time I A/B or even often when I’m just listening, but it’s really hard to tell the exact effect of replacing a given cable if that old cable is what’s making your system sound better or worse than your system would be with that old cable gone.)
Ted Smith saidIt’s not really a problem with function, etc. It’s just that every cable causes another set of ground loops. The flux thru each ground loop causes a current to flow around that loop which can subtly alter any signals in that loop. So each additional cable (whether there is any signal at all in it) can add a possible source of noise pickup in all other cables (including power cords) connected between the new cable’s source and it’s destination. As you system gets better and better these small effects become a bigger and bigger part of the noise that’s left in your system. A TOSLink cable doesn’t add to the problem, but any other unused cables connected may be causing extra noise with other parts of your system that hide the lack of noise from the TOSLink cable.
I wouldn’t get carried away with plugging and unplugging cables every time I listen. But it may be worth it when you are doing explicit A/B’s and or taking the time to tune your system. (I don’t remove all extra cables every time I A/B or even often when I’m just listening, but it’s really hard to tell the exact effect of replacing a given cable if that old cable is what’s making your system sound better or worse than your system would be with that old cable gone.)
Some DS users locally have reported good results with this USB to I2S bridge/ adapter if you can call it that.
http://www.shenzhenaudio.com/singxer-su-1-usb-digital-interface-with-xmos-xu208-cpld-dsd256-dop.html
This would remove the USB noise I presume? But I guess it is best to have an I2S source?
Blanket statements like “remove the USB noise” are an over simplification. That box is using the same tech as the DS, whether it removes more noise from USB will be system specific. Some people get great USB results in their systems with minimal work while others go to heroic efforts. Just as some get much better sound with the Bridge and others get better sound with USB. IMO pick the way you want to use the DS (or any DAC) then optimize your system for the way you use it. I prefer the user experiences that I get connected with USB so I concentrate my efforts there. Others prefer various UPnP control interfaces so they tend to use the Bridge.