Steve, I am not throwing out anything else but the truth, and thanks for confirming it. You can select the digital filter on my DAC and I recommend the profile for 192 to be used for all sample-rates. This simply sounds best. Usually the digital filter in a delta-sigma converter is set at 2x for 192k, 4x for 96k and 8x for 48k sample rates, resulting in a constant out-of-band noise figure allowing you to use the same analog filter at the output. So you are still using 2x oversampling with 192 mode selected. The D/S modulator speed is fixed and there is nothing you can do about it. Some latest DAC chips support 384k with the digital filter totally bypassed, but this is not the case for the AN DAC device you are using. Please correct me if I am wrong. Yes, I have read your posts that you don't like the sound of AKM DACs, but try to convince the owners of Esoteric K-01, for example, that their player doesn't sound good because it has AKM inside. As I said, it is all about preferences (synergy to be exact) and the resulting sound quality, nothing else. This said, there is no universal recipe for anything, including audio. Best wishes, Alex Peychev APL Hi-Fi |
I would ask all involved to make an effort to highlight their own gear's strength's and not point out any other DAC's weaknesses. Specific descriptions of what tech is used and why you think its best are fine. Let's avoid mud slinging though…
All of the gear listed is SO good that the decision is not if they are good enough, but which sounds best with your particular system. |
UPDATE:
I am currently burning in the DSD-S with my DVD player via SPDIF and my ODSE via USB from my computer.
I will try, next week, to compare PC's, USB cables and software with the DSD-S as Alex requested. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to get too detailed. But I'm happy to give general feelings and opinions.
Burn in for both will be completed on 9/3 and I will listen that day to compare and highlight both.
BigKidz - If you would like to get me your Uber DHT DAC around that time, I can compare the three. PM me and we can arrange delivery.
I will also touch base with John, my local Aesthetix dealer, to see if the Romulus Signature has arrived and is being burnt in since it sounds like delivery has begun.
If anyone knows of a dealer (or even the distributor) for Lampy who wants to get the Big7 to me for evaluation, I'd be happy to listen. I will not be buying any other DAC's for the sole purpose of audition now that I have invested the money officially into the ODSE. The ODSE would need to be bested for me to sell it and move those funds to another DAC.
FInally, the new Allnic is shipping and is supposedly excellent as well. I will pursue an audition of that as well, if possible.
There are no other DAC's that pique my interest at this time. That's not to say that the Vitus and many others are not equally good. But I'd like to listen to something besides my same playlist! LOL!!!
that s all for now. |
Here is my sincere impression... If you decided to go with either of these top tier DAC's, you would walk away with one of the best out there and enjoy your purchase for years to come. These guys BOTH seriously know what they are doing!!! As a buyer, and a very long time enthusiast, I learned something totally new during my current system built. I used to shy away for these small, "One man show" companies and gravitate towards the big guys. These "One man show" guys usually have 4-7 other people working for them and produce top level gear for fair prices that offer way more performance for the dollar then lost of the big name labels can. It's a simply a matter of overhead and production. For those of you who are on the fence, try a Merrill Audio, Empirical, APL, Lampizator, or the many other speaker and electronic manufacturers out there that can't afford an advertising/marketing camping. You jus tight be happy you did. That is probably the most important point made in this thread. I have always gravitated towards boutique, artisanal manufacturers. A lot the best, most cutting edge gear can be found there. There are downsides, but if you are a true blue phile in search of the ultimate SQ, its the place to be.... I couldn’t agree more with both Matt and then Agear’s follow-up! Some of my best finds, with nary a downside, have been off the usual radar screens. My former Supratek Chenin (which my son is using) and present Aria Audio WV5-XL pre-amps, Galibier Quattro Turntable, and Wavelength Crimson DAC are some examples…. |
Hi Matt, I want you to know, since you are computer audio, The Romulas signature has the prized X-mos chip inside that the two designers here are raving about, Then you have the harmonix technology resonance footers stock on the player to get the player to perform to best results, there is alot more I can specify about this product, however, I believe you should go to the Aeshetix site and research, in turn, only if you get the Romulas or pandora signature will you be able to out perform the current dacs here, and God forbid you get a signature with the state of the art volume control to run direct to amps that does not come stock, it is an implentation that cost more money for many good reasons, cheers |
matt, I also wanted you to know, there is NO difference in sound quality between the Romulas signature cd-player and the Pandora signature dac, getting the cd-player that does all the Dac does would eliminate some cables and save you money, and you can still use your usb connections for absolute computer audio, cheers ole chap. |
I'm definitely enjoying this thread and following Matt's journey. Lots of really great DACs being mentioned.
I've had my Aesthetix Romulus back with the Signature upgrade installed for about 5 weeks now. I'm very, very happy with the sound (it's predessors included the Meitner MA-1 and a brief fling with the Lampi Big 5 w/DSD--the Lampi had some problems and so I didn't get to hear it for long or at its best I'm sure).
I'm loving the Romulus Sig and having lots of fun tuberolling (my pre is the Aesthetix Calypso and I love that it uses the same tubes). I haven't been able to get the Romulus Sig to play DSD files via its spdif inputs (supposed to via DoP of course), but I'm not sure if the problem is the DAC one my Audiobyte Hydra X usb converter. But DSD via the Romulus USB input is sublime. That beying said, I think where I truly prefer the Romulus Sig over my prior DACs is on PCM & redbook.
Enjoy Matt!
Randy |
Darn auto correct. I meant predecessor DACs and that I wasn't sure if the problem playing DSD via spdif lies with the DAC OR the usb converter :)! |
Audiolabyrinth and Rrsclyde - Thank you both for the input and info. I am certainly open and interested in giving the Aesthitix Signature DAC a listen (either the Romulus or Pandora). I'm just waiting to get the email or call from John (my local dealer) to offer me a few days to give it a listen. As always, I'll post my results.
Does anyone know what DAC chip the Aesthtix uses? Just curious.
Alex, you definitely lost me on your last post, but I am truly enjoying the back and forth between you and Steve (as long as it stays civil and collegial). I am learning a ton!!! |
Alex said... "Yes, I have read your posts that you don't like the sound of AKM DACs, but try to convince the owners of Esoteric K-01, for example, that their player
doesn't sound good because it has AKM inside."
Bingo! A couple of years ago I had an Esoteric K-01 loaner in my system for quite a spell, and its music with 4X upsampling and Slow Delay 2 (apodizing) filter was sheer magic to my ears.
Let us not get too hung up about the quasi religious propriety of using a particular chip, electronic part, sub-circuit design tactic, etc... The totality of a component is often much more than the raw sum of its parts... While sometimes, sadly enough, it ends up being much less than the aforementioned sum of such promising parts.
G. |
Audiolabyrinth - the problem with trying to evaluate D/A chips by listening to different DAC implementations is the following:
Some D/A chips, like Op-Amps, require a bit more babying in the power delivery in order to deliver the goods. If the same lame treatment for power delivery is done for all D/A chips, then the ones with better on-die power delivery and better packaging/power-pin assignments will always win. On the other hand, if one optimizes the power delivery, the results may be very different. The better D/A chip may have poor on-die power structure, but actualy sound more natural. So you see, the answer is not black-and-white.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
Matt, Alex, you definitely lost me on your last post, but I am truly enjoying the back and forth between you and Steve (as long as it stays civil and collegial). I am learning a ton!!! I know it was a bit more technical. What I tried explaining to Steve is that the DAC chip from Analog Devices he is using still oversample CD data by a factor of 2, even with he 192 option selected. His claim that with 192 option selected there is no oversampling is not exactly correct, at least to my knowledge. Further more, oversampled in the PCM domain or not, the PCM data from your CD-qulaity source is still converted to something very similar to DSD inside the DAC chip. The Analog Devices converters used in the Aeris and ODSE use the so called Delta-Sigma modulators that convert PCM to a signal similar to DSD but with higher order, so the noise is kept way out the hearing range. With Steve's 192 option selected for CD, the combined digital filer and modulator speed is reduced with a factor of 4, resulting in a noise figure that is a lot closer to the hearing spectrum. This is the reason why I said that it emphasizes the midrange more than the usual. Of course, this is to my knowledge and experience that I believe to be the truth. If someone here with a better technical expertise can prove me wrong, I will be happy to learn something new. I would ask all involved to make an effort to highlight their own gear's strength's and not point out any other DAC's weaknesses. Specific descriptions of what tech is used and why you think its best are fine. Let's avoid mud slinging though… Here is a summary of the DSD-S features that highlights its strengths, as requested: 1. Proprietary XMOS based USB input module accepting up to 384/32 PCM as well as DSD64 and double DSD128. 2. Femto jitter master clocks. 3. Proprietary PCM to DSD encoder with DSD64 and double DSD128, user selectable. 4. Proprietary paralleled DAC module working in a special mode that achieves a better overall sound quality without sacrificing anything. 5. Completely lossless hybrid attenuator working in pure DSD and analog domains, without conversion to any sort of PCM. 6. Pure Class-A output stage with MOSFET devices with no negative feedback and no OpAmps. As pointed out so many times already, at the end of the day, it all comes to a certain synergy in a certain audio system. So specifications are not always a ticket for the best sound in a given audio system. YMMV! Best wishes, Alex Peychev APL Hi-Fi |
Steven Alex, on your respective DACs, what signal processing parameters can be controlled by user selectable settings on front panel / remote? E.g...
* Upsampling rates,
* Filter types and subtypes,
* filters on/off,
:* Other?
Saluti, Guido |
Matt, yes, The Aesthetix digital products use the X-Mos chip and the Burr-Brown 1792A chips, I am very familiar with all vesions of the 1792 Dac chips, owned a few, hope this helps. |
This is directed to Randy....did you find the Signature upgrade on your Romulus to be worthwhile for playing Redbook? Also, do you think the transport in the unit is up to the quality of the DAC? Would it make sense to use a dedicated transport, i.e. Levinson 31.5, with the Pandora Signature DAC rather than go for the Romulus Sig player? I know the transport only adds 1K to the price so it seems like a worthwhile "risk". |
Having recently compared the Aesthetix Pandora Signature, PSA DS and Berkeley Alpha Series II, I agree with Randy that the Aesthetix DAC is sublime and a hand picked set of of Gold Lion tubes adds to the enjoyment. |
I was told the Romulus transport is a TEAC but not one of the best as installed in the top Esoterics.
IMO: It would be tough to beat the interface between transport and DAC in the Romulus with a separate transport and cable. I'll give it a try with my Wadia 270SE.
BTW: I had Aethetix replace the RCA digital-in with a bnc which they gladly did. |
Reading this thread has been very interesting, but I do wonder whether a Mac Mini, even if upgraded for audio, is an optimal digital source. Also, I have found that there is often an interaction between source and DAC that can makes the combo either much better or much worse than the sum of the parts. For example, the PW Transport sounds great with the PW DAC, but lousy when used with my Behold Gentle G192 DAC/integrated. The Bel Canto CD3t sounds phenomenal with the Behold, but mediocre with the PW DAC. The best digital source I have had in my system, a demo of the LauferTeknik Memory Player, trumped everything else I have tried. In my experience the digital source can matter as much and sometimes more than the DAC. So, this thread may be quite useful for Mac Mini users, but may not be universally applicable. Of course, Matt has made it clear that his views are one man's opinion. But I guess I would be hesitant to conclude that the ODSE is the best DAC...it may just sound best with Matt's particular source. |
Alex-APLhifi-usa, Hi, your attenuator-volume control appears to be very similiar to the one that Aesthetix impliments when Bought in the Romulas and Pandora digital products, congrats on a very good volume control, this is what I am saying, The technology these days with attenuator-volume controls in some digital products are closeing the gap, if not better, with performance versus an active pre-amp. |
08-08-14: Audiolabyrinth
Melbguy1, welcome to this great thread, are you going for the vitus player? Thank you kindly AL! You guessed right. I plan on upgrading to a Vitus Signature Series spinner (SCD-025) for synergy with my SIA-025, though i'm waiting on a new DSD USB board to be released in a couple of months. Imho it is the most musical sounding single box player in the world, but of course is not cheap! |
@Lula: I do think the Signature upgrade is a major improvement with respect to redbook; however, IMHO the upgrade cost is not inexpensive. I probably would have a difficult time justifying the cost solely for redbook, but I have a pretty extensive collection of DSD that I really enjoy, so the DSD capability was my primary motivation. My decision was made much easier by being able to purchase a demo Romulus from a dealer going out of business at a great price.
I'm not a good candidate to critique the transport capability as I very rarely use it--99.9% of my use is solely as a DAC--I would have bought the Pandora and saved the extra cost but for the great deal on the demo Romulus. |
Alex, what user-controllable options are available via remote or front panel on DSD-S, besides PCM2DSD 64 vs 128 conversion?
G. |
Great thread and some great dacs. But I can't help wondering that the using mac mini is the bottleneck and not doing remotely any justice to these top of the line dacs. |
Guido - The Overdrive can select between 3 digital filters and preemphasis. There is no upsampling. This allows one to feed a really low jitter digital signal and get the full benefits.
I have heard the effects of non-apodizing filters and other custom filters. I didn't care for any of them. The only good filter is a single-order analog filter IMO. The same trend is happning is speaker crossovers, low-order and minimized filters.
If you look at the impulse response of my Overdrive, the pre and post ringing is minimal. Pretty ideal. The plots are downloaded from the webpage.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
Mccondon - the source is all about the jitter level. If the interfaces are poorly designed, then even the best source may be compromised. Comparing USB input to S/PDIF is apples-to-oranges too.
Besides jitter, common-mode noise can come into the equation, if you are using AES/EBU or USB as your transport cable.
These are systems, so everything matters. I don't call it synergy. Its more a matter of both the transmitting and receiving interface being designed well and the cable being designed well.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
"His claim that with 192 option selected there is no oversampling is not exactly correct, at least to my knowledge."
I never made such a claim. Show me the post.
My Overdrive does no upsampling and the filters are selectable so that you can select the 192 filter when playing 44.1 tracks, resulting in minimal damage and approximating NOS DAC behavior.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
The problem with attenuator volume controls is that they add resistance to the signal path, which adds thermal noise. In the case of passive attenuators, these change the impedance of the signal path, which can cause low-pass filtering and/or loss of dynamics.
The Overdrive DAC has less than 50 ohms in the signal path. The volume technology on it is superior to any other technology available. I can say this with confidence because it adds nothing and changes nothing in the signal path. It only adjusts the D/A reference voltage, which scales the height of the stair-steps created by the D/A conversion. This is the perfect way to adjust volume. No loss in resolution, no added distortion or noise. The behavior actually reduces THD as the volume is decreased. All other volume technologies increase THD as the volume is decreased.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
Congrats are in full order Melbguy1 on your Vitus singnature series SCD-025 you will be getting, I would like for you to do a review of the player on the Tara Labs Thread when you get your final impressions of the player after burn-in, cheers Melbguy1. |
Steve Nugent, wow!, your volume control is quite impressive too!, see, this is what I'm talking about, closeing the gap with the volume controls today made on modern state of the art dacs and cd-players versus active pre-amps is a big learning exsperience for me here, I had no idea that volume controls these days were this profound!, cheers to you steve. |
Thank you steve, could you please give more detail about the OV digital filter selections, and preemphasis settings.
B |
BTW... I enjoy learning about OV from Steve... DSD-S from Alex... And K-01 from Esoteric... Please do continue to sing the refined virtues of your very own designs!
Yet, Call me oldfashioned, I am deeply uncomfortable reading engineers publicly and shamelessly peeking into each other's technical "private parts".
G. |
Steve - the advantages of your volume control make perfect sense, but your knob is still more of an attenuator then a formal volume control. It doesn't go down to silent, or really anywhere close to silent. It can adjust the music within my listening range from "on the quiet side of where I would listen" to "on the loud side of where I would listen"
For a computer I can see that being ok (although I was always under the impression that you needed to 100% the volume on the computer USB out to get the best sound), but not for a transport with no way to adjust volume.
Am I missing something? |
08-10-14: Mcondon
Reading this thread has been very interesting, but I do wonder whether a Mac Mini, even if upgraded for audio, is an optimal digital source. Also, I have found that there is often an interaction between source and DAC that can makes the combo either much better or much worse than the sum of the parts. and So, this thread may be quite useful for Mac Mini users, but may not be universally applicable. Of course, Matt has made it clear that his views are one man's opinion. But I guess I would be hesitant to conclude that the ODSE is the best DAC...it may just sound best with Matt's particular source. Bingo.... |
08-10-14: Radiohead99
Great thread and some great dacs. But I can't help wondering that the using mac mini is the bottleneck and not doing remotely any justice to these top of the line dacs. It absolutely is and one reason why the ODSE has a distinct advantage with its built-in Offramp. |
08-06-14: Rsf507
His search will NEVER end! Seems Matt is more interested in equipment than muzic. This is precisely the reason I don't chase DACs. Until the technology matures, I will only upgrade when necessary. |
08-10-14: Audiolabyrinth
Congrats are in full order Melbguy1 on your Vitus singnature series SCD-025 you will be getting, I would like for you to do a review of the player on the Tara Labs Thread when you get your final impressions of the player after burn-in, cheers Melbguy1. Thanks for your generous comments AL. Yes once the Vitus reaches 250hrs I will probably post a review, though in a separate review thread. Best to keep your Tara Labs thread a discussion about their products. The SCD-025 will club my old Ayon CD-5s like a baby seal! |
I'm sure there will always be new DAC's and more expensive kits to consider. Vitus, Aesthetix, Allnic, Lampy Big7(and then Big8,9......)
This coming Wednesday I will give the DSD-S another listen and listen to my ODSE, cooking for almost a week by then. I'll let you know.
I can say, quite definitively, that I am done trying to listen to a DAC without my preamp. Nothing gives the level of reproduction that I get when the electroncs are fed through my Criterion. I'd love to avoid needing it, but it's not going to happen short term.
The Vitus looks amazing and I'm sure it sounds it as well. Congrats. Feel free to post some thoughts on its sound here as well. |
Matt,
Given all the discussion concerning these very latest volume controls and their technical advantages, it's interesting that you still prefer an active preamplifier. I'm not at all surprised by your choice. Ears are wonderful if you trust them.
Charles, |
charles1dad, Hi, Matt has not listened to the volume control in a Aesthetix Romulas or Pandora signature, and, as far as I know, he has not listened to the volume control in the APL DSD-S player, I do hope he does give some thoughts about listening to the volume control of the APL Dac, Alex deserves some exsposure about his volume control he is raving about, who knows, it may turn out to be a good one, charles, I understand your position with active pre-amps, my interest is with what Matt has to say about alot of these modern day volume controls on todays digital, Happy Listening Charles1dad. |
Hi Audiolabyrinth,
Perhaps I misunderstood Matt, but he wrote that he's done listening to DACs "without" his preamp (Criterion). So I assumed he has been listening via the DACs volume control up to this point. By the way if a DAC's VC were to better an active preamplifier I'd be the first to celebrate that achievement, so far, no go in my experience. Premium active preamplifiers are mandatory for me. So I can relate to Matt's desire to use his Criterion. He wants better sound quality.
Charles, |
Oh my this whole single volume control pot, attenuator, LDR etc... vs active preamp thing. What Charles and Matt say times 1000. I have heard so many integrated units that claim to dispence with a preamp that I may not be able to count anymore. The gap in sound quality from those compared to my active tube preamp is so wide that an active is an absolute must.
As Matt and Charles say, this is true for us and our ears...for us. If you like the preampless sound, then great and it is wonderful to save all that money. I wish I could.
I have a Romulus and love it with my tube preamp. I have tried LDR's and transformer based attenuators that are touted to be the best and they take a far back seat in sound quality compared to my active ... to my ears.
No 3 inch attenuator board, LDR, or any other type of volume pot alone can compare to a full out active tube preamp in my experience.
The sound of an integrated volume is clean, fast, detailed, vibrant etc.... Every one I have heard shares these same great qualities for sure. Fact is they all sound like they were cut from the same cloth when compared to my active. All in the same "family" of sound if you will. Straight wire with gain and all that stuff. I can see why folks like them. Like all things audio it comes down to preferences in the way we like to experience our music. That's all. For folks like Charles and I and many others, a full blown active is prefered and no matter that form of tiny, stand alone attenuator is thrown at us.
I suppose Aesthetix even knows this as they and many of their customers certainly like the sound of their new, active tube preamp better than the 3 inch board in the Romulus. $1000 vs over $10,000, but many choose the more expensive Aesthetix option for "sound" reasons. |
Bill,(Grannyring)
Yes, there have been "many" threads on this topic already so I wasn't trying to resurrect it again, but Matt is clearly quite emphatic about this issue. He misses his Criterion very much!
Charles, |
08-10-14: Mattnshilp
The Vitus looks amazing and I'm sure it sounds it as well. Congrats. Feel free to post some thoughts on its sound here as well. Thanks for your comments Matt. The SCD-025 takes the sound of cd's to a place heretofore unknown in the digital domain. Especially in concert with the SIA-025 i've heard this combo sound haunting. At that point i'll probably post a system thread, but will leave an in-depth review until the 250hr mark. |
Charles1dad, How much money do I need to spend on an active pre-amp, $10,000.00 plus for a additional sound to deal with that degrades the signal by going through more circuit boards and cables?, I have found that cost alot, much, much, more money to get an active pre-amp to be sublime in sound, LOL!, ask matt how much money the criterion cost?, I know a state of the art active can do wonders, Re- morgage the house! |
Hi Audiolabyrinth, Criterion used to list for $18.9K, but has completed production... The current Rowland flagship is Corus, listing for $14.9K.... The Capri S2 at $3,950 is also a wonderful linestage.... A little warmer than Corus, and supports an optional internal DAC card with SPDIF input.
G. |
Hi all. I was including the DSD-S in my opinion about running direct. I listened to the DSD-S direct for about 20 min to completely firm up what I knew in the first 2 minutes.... I like my sound pumped through my Criterion better.
As always, my opinion, in my system. I make no speculation as to how it would sound with different gear or the same gear and different ears. I would suspect that those who like the clean, crisp, accuracy and dynamics of Meitner's gear would love running direct.
Thanks Melbguy1, for bringing up a nice option. I'm sure some readers will definitely look into the SCD-025 with your suggestion. What is the retail? |
Matt - I couldn't find confirmed US pricing but the SCD-025 sells for £16,500 in the UK which converts to ~$27,700 US. |
I heard the Vitus RD-100 (dac + balanced line stage) while back in MN in a SOTA dedicated room fronted by Rockports, etc. Very good piece. Not as good as the Brinkman table but very good. MSRP is $14,000.
I received my Lampi L7 last Wed and am burning it in. Best digital I have owned or heard to date. Both PCM and DSD are sublime, but DSD reproduction takes it over the top. My previous reference point was the Light Harmonics DaVinci (albeit in a show setting). This is a true conversion experience for me in that I have always felt digital fell short (despite it being my primary medium). Paradoxical I know.
It takes about 30,000 hours to fully burn in, so I will report back then.... |
Audiolabyrinth,
Grannyring's TRL DUDE or my Coincident Statement are both well south of 10K (much less) and both would be considered premium level performers IMO. Naturally between these two personal taste decides preference. You may not choose either compared to direct source to amplifier. As Grannyring noted, some will lean toward the direct sound, just depends on what presentation you are drawn to . I'd guess that Matt's Criterion preserves musical information and involvement he finds diminished or absent with direct source alternatives.
Charles, |
Audiolabyrinth,
How much does it cost to get better sound in a stereo system. $5,000 or $50,0000?
How much does is cost to get a better sounding turntable or dac?
Answer? Well that depends on what you're willing to spend and the sound you are trying to achieve.
This is what all Aphiles must answer for themselves. |
