I just read this morning that the Phasure NOS 1 has a very similar architecture to the Trinity DAC. Quote from ACG at Whatsbestforum below:
"The Phasure NOS1 USB dac seems to use much of the same tech as the Trinity. Eight x PCM1704 and completely filterless (analogue or digital) running femto clocks. The Phasure relies on the computer software to upsample to 705 or 768 and to apply a special Arc prediction filter that eliminates pre and post ringing (called impulse response in the Trinity manual) which takes all of this processing out of the dac which improves dac clock behaviour.
When I read the description of the sound of the Trinity dac I thought that it was exactly how most of us Phasure owners would describe the sound of our dac: that it has no sound of its own. I am quite sure that the designer of the Phasure does not pick the cream from his crop of PCM1704s Like for the Trinity) and it's unusual shape and presentation do manage to keep costs down so it is a fraction of the price of the Trinity, but I sure would love to hear them both side by side one day."
"The Phasure NOS1 USB dac seems to use much of the same tech as the Trinity. Eight x PCM1704 and completely filterless (analogue or digital) running femto clocks. The Phasure relies on the computer software to upsample to 705 or 768 and to apply a special Arc prediction filter that eliminates pre and post ringing (called impulse response in the Trinity manual) which takes all of this processing out of the dac which improves dac clock behaviour.
When I read the description of the sound of the Trinity dac I thought that it was exactly how most of us Phasure owners would describe the sound of our dac: that it has no sound of its own. I am quite sure that the designer of the Phasure does not pick the cream from his crop of PCM1704s Like for the Trinity) and it's unusual shape and presentation do manage to keep costs down so it is a fraction of the price of the Trinity, but I sure would love to hear them both side by side one day."