Thanks Bill... do keep us posted. G. |
The Esoteric site has a fairly detailed descriptive PDF for the K-01. See:
http://esoteric.teac.com/resources/pdf/k-01.pdf
It looks like K-01 uses 32-bit AKM DACs--8 per side. K-01 uses neither Burr Brown nor Analog Devices, making it potentially sounding different from X-01 D2 and P-03/D03. . This early in the game I would not venture to guess whether the K-01 exceeds the performance of the P-03/D-03 combo, or even of the X-01 D2. It is unlikely that any of the K-01 in the US right now are fully broken in. It may be a spell before we can get some detailed findings on this device.
G. |
APL NWO Master uses AKM 4399 DACs. K-01 also employs the AK4399. There are no tubes in K-01.... The Esoteric PDF file states: "A discrete buffer output circuit with a high voltage power supply of
+/- 22 V has been deployed for the analog audio output, following
the technology used in the D-01. [...] These powerful discrete buffer output
circuits are laid out symmetrically for each of the hot/cold signal
lines to construct a rich and fully balanced configuration for XLR
audio outputs. Additionally, a parallel buffer output configuration is
implemented to switch the buffer amplifier to a parallel
configuration, when RCA audio outputs are used."
As for K-01 being more/less precise/musical than APL NWO, I doubt that anyone has any hard evidence one way or another this early in the game. |
Thank you Alex, info much appreciated. Undoubtedly, A comparative listening analysis of the two devices would make for a fascinating project.
Guido |
Tony, you are causing me pangs of audiophilic anxiety mixed with generous amounts of neo-Freudian 'Esoteric envy'!
Can you already characterize any difference between K-01 against X-01 Limited and X-01 D2 (this last one on upsampling to DSD)?
And what about against P-03/D03 with same external clock?
Guido
Disclaimer: unabashed Esoteric fanboy. |
Matjet, my own limited experience on Esoteric X-01 Limited and Esoteric P-03/D-03 combo driven by G-0S clock are consistent with the opinion that external clocks appear to have little or no impact on single box units, but can have a major impact on the sound of twin boxes.
Every time I heard G-0S driving X-01, I found the effect to be imperceptible. Conversely, G-0S always had a clarifying effect on P-03/D-03 that has ranged from major to profound, depending on the IC being used.
I am inclined to suspect that G-0S may end up being also a negligible factor on the APL NWO variants and on the new Esoteric K-01.... but only direct experience can yield certainty.
As Bill is an Esoteric dealer, I invite him to share his knowledge on the effect of external clocks on various Esoteric single and multi-box players.
G.
|
Hi Bill, what was the rest of your system? G. |
Thank you Bill, if I remember correctly, C-03 has pseudo-balanced inputs and outputs, while it is internally single ended. This design might have a 'normalizing' effect on C-03, as X-03 output is transformed into single ended no matter what. It might be interested to drive a symmetrically balanced pre that has both XLR and RCA inputs... with X-03 and see what happens.
Saluti,
Guido |
I listened to K-01 extensively at RMAF 2011... While it is rather difficult for me to contrast K-01 with my own X-01 Limited, without having both in the same system, K-01 was A/B/C/Ded against several lower end Esoteric players in the suite, with audible results commensurate with a good fraction of the respective price differences.
The benefit of controlling K-01 through a G-0Rb clock was not at all a subtle affair... The audible result was rather obvious to me, as well as to all listeners I queried on the subject.
I left RMAF intrigued enough that I intend to audition K-01 in my own system one way or another before too long.
Harv, it was absolutely fabulous finally meeting you!
G. |
Hi Harv, yes the ability of K-01 to tune effectively the sound to a user's preference via oversampling options and filters was very impressive. I did preferred FIR1 and FIR2, while Esoteric staff seemed to be fonder of the Slo2 filter.
G. |
Very interesting Matjet.... In the Esoteric suite it seemed that the G-0Rb clock was making a significant difference.... Seemed to be the consensus.... Tim Crable, visitors, myself... I wonder what else may have been going on that caused the general opinion in the suite, short of mass histeria? Have you tried various clock modes and settings?
By the way, what combination of oversampling and filter settings do you prefer on K-01, and why?
Have you tried the K-01 directly into amp? Opinions?
G.
|
Denon1, if your integrated amp has an input for an external preamplifier, you should be able to connect K-03 to that input directly, or through an XLR 2 RCA adapter. G. |
Epic, I'm afraid there may be no substitute to putting K-01 on continuous repeat on some "meaty" material with lots of dynamics and complexity. Once a day turn the device off for 30 minutes and then restart the process.... and change sampling rate and filtering each time. On my X-01 breaking lasted a little over 1200 hours.... K-01, being based on AKM DACs instead of Burr Brown, may be different in this last respect. No need to leave your amplifier on during K-01 break-in. |
Mattjet, utilizing the Esoteric break-in CD is an excellent idea. As for cycling power on and off periodically during break-in, I have just heard from an Esoteric dealer that Esoteric may be recommending 16 hrs of playing time, followed by 8 hours of total downtime... I will check with Esoteric during the coming week.
I used to break-in equipment with continuous playing time.... However, I have heard from an extremely well respected equipment designer that allowing periodic cycling is more effective, because it fosters the overall "demagnetization" of dielectrics, capacitors, and other components. As I have not performed any a/b break-in myself, I do not know if cycling has an audible beneficial effect over simple continuous play.... But I suspect it can't do harm.
While I remain a babe in the woods, If indeed K-01 changes little with break-in, is something I hope to be able to experience on my own before too too long.
G. |
Hi Matjet, it is quite possible that K-01 takes enormously less break-in than X-01 and its Ltd variant, for whatever reasons.
Up to now, for most equipment I have had in my system, except for certain wire products and conditioners, I have detected very significant audible yet subjective evolution for a duration ranging from 500 hours to 1200 hours, as I have occasionally reported in a handful of articles. It is also entirely possible that my experiences are pure self-hypnosis. Unfortunately, I can only report what I think I hear, and then make weak extrapolations solely based on my personal involvement in audible matters.
G. |
"Unless the A-B comparison is performed as a blind test, it is useless; psychology can play tricks on audio perception."
Very good point matjet.... Fact is that, I did perform exactly that "blind" test with G-0Rb clock on K-01 at the Esoteric suite at RMAF... I started from an extremely skeptic position, because of past experience on X-01... But I had to change my mind.... and I seemed to have no problem determining when the clock was on or off.... How was my test "blind"? rather simple actually... I am in fact a blind audiofool and could not see what setting was being activated on the machine. G. |
Golden words matjet that I shall heed... I would definitely do some careful at home trials before committing to any clock... or any new CDp, including K-01... A false positive can turn into an, uhrn.... Expensive proposition:)!
Saluti, G. |
"And what the point would be, comparing something that has a switching-mode power supply with a linear power?"
Hmm, considering the old Stravinskian recommendation by which a tree is best judged by its fruits, rather than solely by its roots, evaluating the relative audible prowess of Esoteric K-01 and EMM XDS1 side-by-side in the same system may be a rather fun experiment... And if sonic results turned out inconclusive, that would be an interesting finding as well.
G |
Of course Alex, it is important to keep independent variables at a minimum.... Hence 2 well broken in CDPs should be in the same system, fed into identically broken in inputs of the pre, connected with identical and equally broken in ICs, and fed by identical power cords. Ideally, the two devices may be best set side-by-side on a rack, rather than on different shelves.
Interesting observation Alex about power conditioning on EMM.... Is EMM particularly sensitive to power conditioning? .... Why would this be the case more so than on Esoteric K-01?
Saluti, G. |
:Does this make product "a" better than product "b"?"
Typically, I avoid the terms "better" and "best" like the proverbial plague. I tend to use variants of the term "prefer" instead, in an as narrowly defined context as I can . However, I recommend that a general discussion on comparative auditioning procedures and merits be continued on a dedicated thread.... I am positive there exist a number of such items on Agon already, without the need to dilute this K-01-specific discussion any further with admittedly fascinating metatopics. |
My apologies Dev, as I mentioned already, analitical methodologies are best discussed in a dedicated thread. Guido |
Hi Harvey, not having had Alex's NWO nor K-01 or P02/D02 in my own system, I would not dare even venturing an uneducated guess on my preferences... But I hope none of them would ever emit plumes of "competitive smoke" in my music loft... Would be, uhrn.... So undignified of them *grins!* G. |
Alex, you are absolutely correct. Esoteric marketing mgr in Denver did state that P02/D02 utilized some form of 35 bits processing, rather than sporting 35 bits DACs. G. |
Harv, Tim Crable is now Esoteric marketing manager, although he may be retaining some tech services management functions as well. According to my information, Mark Gurvey has left Esoteric. G. |
