2. member-reviews
  3. 1255906899

Review: db System Zardoz Ultimo Transport

Category: Digital

Zardoz: a state of the art WiFi device from db System

Digital audio preamble

For better or for worse, many audiophiles are gravitating towards computer audio. Much of this is driven by the allure of Ipod-like convenience. Rifling through CDs has lost its luster. Modern life is frenetic, and draining, and the 21st century audiophile’s threshold for inconvenience is low. As expected, manufacturers have developed computer based front ends in which an entire music library can accessed and perused instantaneously, with purported sound quality superior to many CD players. In parallel with this development, new high resolution formats are popping up like mushrooms, adding yet another layer of temptation for the weary audiophile. Currently, a mosh pit of devices exist, framed by bold claims and subsequent debates and tribalism on audio threads regarding what is technologically relevant. I myself was recently involved in a lengthy thread on the importance of jitter. A lot was said. Little was answered.

The digital realm, much like the computer industry, is very fluid. What is hot today may be disregarded tomorrow. Furthermore, the theoretical basis for digital performance is surprisingly fuzzy and ill defined. We can only postulate why things sound they way they do. To me, the central issue is this: what digital technology relaxes the soul? To many, the road to relaxation is built upon recreation of an “analog” sound. From a literary standpoint, the term analog is difficult to describe. For me, it evokes exhalation and the calm that follows. Mentally and emotionally, it takes me back to a time when things were indeed relaxed, such as college summers, with all the bohemian meandering. When I listen to music, this is where I want to be. Bad digital playback fails to produce this experience. What are the attributes of bad digital? Sharp, brittle, edgy notes, like thousands of little razor blades perforating the eardrum, making it bleed. Your ears fatigue. Your listening sessions shorten. Yes, digital is dynamic and possesses a low noise floor, but much of it is an assault on the senses. In a recent article in the Wall Street journal by Terry Teachout titled “The Mystery of Music,” there is a quote attributed to the late Jazz great Eddie Condon regarding empirical measures of musical quality that I think is very poignant: "As it enters the ear, does it come in like broken glass or does it come in like honey?" That is how we should measure digital playback.

The Search

I was not systematic in sifting through and researching options for computer audio, nor have I done explicit head to head comparisons. I sold my Granite Audio 657 CDP prior to receiving the Zardoz, so any direct comparison would be a derivative of sonic memory only. My goal in this review is to describe what I am “hearing” in light of the prelude about analog sound. The Granite CDP was a fantastic piece (one of the best honestly), but I grew increasingly tired of getting up and down to change CDs. When used without a pre-amp as I did, the 657 was very dynamic and live sounding with a huge soundstage, great bass, detail, etc. However, a subtle fatigue would creep in, especially with certain pieces of music (this may have been a system issue, but that is a moot point now). During this time, I had a chance to fiddle with a Sonos (wireless device) at a friend’s house and was hooked. The evil seed of computer audio had been planted. Rifling through your entire music collection with a light finger tap on a touch screen was too good for words. The only problem was the sound: it was just brutal. An unadulterated Squeezebox or Sonos is just plain rude even on an average system. You need a DAC, power supply mods, etc to make them palatable IMO.

In my extensive reading and research, there appeared to be many good options. Empirical Audio Pacecars, Memory Player, cMP (homemade computer-based memory player) Berkley DAC fronted by a computer with a trick sound card, heavily modded Squeezeboxes, heavily modded Sonos, etc. Many of these options were either expensive or two box solutions. I wanted a simple, one-box solution that did not require a DAC, extra cabling, and was also extracted from the computer itself and its inherent flaws. I did not have the time or inclination to dick around with modding a computer (or paying someone else 5-10K to do so). I wanted a plug and play option that was mucho analog sounding, convenient, and user friendly. Enter the Zardoz….

My discovery of the Z was serendipitous. A French audiophile who goes by the moniker Juanintox on Audiogon posted a picture of his rig within the context of a speaker thread. Everyone asked what this one particular box was, and he proceeded to wax poetic about this “Zardoz.” He was a vinyl guy, and this was the best piece of digital he had heard. It replaced an Audio Aero Capital 24/192. He and Dan, the lead engineer and owner of db System, had apparently performed multiple blinded shootouts between the Zardoz and many alternative digital rigs (dcs, Audio Aero 24/192 mkII, Wadia 860X, PC >> Empirical Audio Offramp turbo >> modded Pass Labs D1, modded Squeezeboxes, etc). The Z won them all. I was intrigued and once my Granite sold, I decided to take the plunge. Please note that Dan’s primary vocation, in addition to being a French engineer with a background in computers, has been as a designer of hi end tube gear at db Sytem in France. He is a true analog nut, and tubes and vinyl are his sonic reference. That was important information. Right or wrong, I have an implicit trust of analog guys and their sonic bias. That is my bias despite being a Gen X CD dude.


Technical data

Before launching into technical issues, one important question should be answered: why wireless (WiFi)? Many audiophiles perceive wireless music streaming as a low or midfi technology. This is incorrect. Wireless transmission of data possesses an inherent superiority for several reasons. One, you are quarantined from potential garbage or noise from the computer itself in the form of high frequency radiation. According to some, this can have an audible influence (please see the LessLoss site for further details on this subject: http://www.lessloss.com/page.html?id=45). Second, potential sources of jitter are minimized. There are multiple sources of jitter in any given system, including the power supply, the computer, inputs, DAC chips, cables, etc. Steven Nugent, founder of Empirical Audio and former lead chip designer for Intel, recently published an article on the subject of jitter in Enjoy the Music: http://www.enjoythemusic.com/Magazine/manufacture/0509/. He delineated various sources of jitter, and in particular, he described the inherent benefits of wireless audio:

“Networked audio (Ethernet), both wired and Wi-Fi is a unique case. Because the data is transmitted in packets with flow-control and re-try for errors with buffering at the end-point device, it is not as much of a real-time transfer as USB, S/PDIF or FireWire. Networking also avoids the use of the audio stack of the computer audio system since it treats all data essentially the same. Because of the packet-transfer protocol of Ethernet and data buffering at the end-point, the jitter of the clock in the computer is a non-issue. The only clock that is important is the one in the end-point device. Examples of end-point devices are: Squeezebox, Duet and Sonos. This would seem to be the ideal situation, which it certainly is. The only problem that can occur is overloading the network with traffic or Wi-Fi interference, which may cause occasional dropouts. The problem for audiophiles is that the majority of these devices were designed with high-volume manufacturing and low-cost as requirements, with performance taking a lower priority. As a result, the jitter from these devices is higher than it could be. It should be the lowest of all the audio source devices available.”

The Zardoz platform is built around Apple’s Airport Express wireless receiver. The prototype of this device debuted on July 21, 1999 at the Macworld Expo in New York City. Since then, it has gone through many permutations. The AirPort Express is essentially a simplified version of the AirPort Extreme base station. The main processor in the AirPort Express (802.11g version) is a Broadcom BCM4712KFB wireless networking chipset. The current 802.11n version, which my Z is derived from, employs an updated version (MB321LL/A) that allows transmission in both the 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands. Audio is processed by a Texas Instruments Burr-Brown PCM2705 16-bit digital-to-analog converter. Dan, the lead engineer at dbSytems, has modded the Airport express in a number of innovative (and proprietary) ways. Due to the small size of this artisan company, I will be lean on the specifics for the sake of intellectual property protection.

The Zardoz is not simply an Airtunes receiver with a new power supply and a few new caps as is often the case for other modded WiFi devices. It has been gutted and redesigned on multiple levels. First, he has decoupled the Burr-Brown DAC from the signal path and rerouted the data to a proprietary, external master clock built around a chip manufactured by a semiconductor company not normally seen in hi end audio. Jitter levels are vanishingly low (< 12 ps peak to peak). Second, the clock also has its own power supply, designed by Dan. Third, Dan has tricked out the main power supply using a proprietary double regulated, filtration process with ultra fast, soft recovery rectifiers. This power supply possesses close to 200,000 uF of filtering capacity. This is important since undulation in power supply voltages contributes to jitter more than almost any other variable. Again, according to Nugent:

“Power "noise" as it is referred to is probably one of the largest contributors to jitter.”

Fourth, the output stage has also been modded. Silver wiring is used throughout, along with upgraded caps. The digital outputs are rigged with Lundhal transformers, and options include SPDIF, AES/EBU, and USB if so desired. Balanced analog output is an option using passive transformers with amorphous cores from Lundahl in Sweden.

In terms of construction, the fit and finish of the Zardoz is elegant and top notch. Aesthetically, the Zardoz is very attractive. Dan works with a cabinet maker who constructs beautiful boxes out of Teak wood. Dan believes that Teak possesses certain attributes that positively effects sound. Whether that is true or not escapes me. All I know is that the WAF is very high. Case closed.

The System

Speakers: Intuitive Design Gamma Summits
Amplifiers: Intuitive Design Coordinate Monoblocks (housed in ID granite stands)
Pre-amplifier: Tube Research Labs Dude
Source: db System Zardoz (WiFi receiver) fed by an Apple MAC Mini + Apple Time Capsule router
Cabling: Intuitive Design speaker wire, ICs, and power cords throughout
Isolation devices: Stillpoints on speakers and stands; Sistrum stands for Dude and Zardoz
Remote: Apple Iphone 3G

Listening Vignettes:

When it comes to listening sessions and formal analysis, I am not as disciplined as some. I rarely perform a complete vivisection of a piece of gear and its attributes. I think it is more revealing to describe what it does within the context of a specific piece of music, or even within just one part of that music. To me, these little audio vignettes speak the most clearly and give the reader more potential revelation, a light unto your audio feet.

1. Cowboy Junkies, Trinity Sessions: this was actually one of the first albums I played after getting the Z. Sonically, this album is spooky. It was recorded in an old church and has a cavernous, sonic ambience imparted by the size of the space. I have “listened” to this album a lot in the past. Now, I was tuning into things I had missed before. In “Mining For Gold,” the song begins with the sound of coal cars in the background or periphery of the stage. I could hear each car clicking by with cumulative echoes creating a weird, ghostly hum. This “detail” was new. Margo Timmins voice is very clear and well defined with each inhalation articulated. The echo of her voice is also beautifully defined as it travels outwards to the perimeter of the church much like waves created by a stone hitting the water. The echo delineated the space, and this recreation of the recording venue was stunning. This simple experience opened my eyes and transformed my listening experience of this album. Every note and instrument expanded outwards in the same fashion. Furthermore, the Z’s presentation possessed see-through clarity within the context of a relaxed sound. Yeow.

2. Eva Cassidy, Songbird: a favorite album of mine. She was an exquisitely gifted singer who succumbed to metastatic melanoma at the tender age of 33. Her voice knew no bounds and she was free ranging musically, singing everything from gospel to jazz and blues and inventive covers (Police, Fields of Gold for example). Again, the Z stripped away the digital fizz so I could zero in on individual instruments and the actual space they space they inhabit. On the song, “Songbird,” Eva’s voice is captured with all its mellifluous texture and vibrancy. For the first time, I heard the backup singer directly behind Eva, singing in her shadow, with a magnificent and powerful voice in her own right. Please note that this album is not well recorded. It is bright and forward, particularly when she nails her high notes. With my previous front end, it was hard to listen to for long periods of time. Not so anymore. That is an achievement…being able to listen to less than stellar CDs without losing necessary detail.

3. Steve Davis, Quality of Silence: this album is an extremely well recorded (DSD/SACD hybrid) piece of music. It is what I would call ambient or atmospheric jazz. The philosophical gist of the music is that less is more and what matters inhabits the silence between the notes. The sparseness of the format allows your brain to track individual instruments and the veracity their portrayal. “Yesterdays,” the second track features Steve Davis tinkering in the background on the drums. Gentle, single strikes on the cymbals and their idiosyncratic resonance are captured with great depth, energy, and a sense of the recording studio space along with a perfect timbre. I feel like I am right in the studio with a cup of coffee in hand.
.
4. Eric Clapton, MTV Unplugged: this is a well recorded live album. On the song “Malted Milk,” you can hear Clapton tapping his foot on the stage. I had noticed this artifact before, but now, I could hear the initial tap of his shoe on the wood followed by the dull thud that was propagated with an echo that seems to travel in a longitudinal fashion towards the listener and away to the back of the stage. Clapton’s voice echoes upwards, like a plume of smoke. Again, this was new detail, but the Zardoz did not present it in a fatiguing or irritating way. It was eminently musical. Also, the pluck of his guitar was incisive, dynamic and woody sounding. A perfectly portrayed acoustic illusion, almost (almost) as good as being there. This is an important feat for this “live, small venue” music lover.

In summary, the Zardoz scales a peak that is very difficult in digital audio: clear and realistic rendering of detail, dynamics, openness, and an accurate recreation of space in the context of a mellow, relaxed, analog presentation. Crappy CDs are tamed (to a degree). Good CDs sound off the map. You can listen for hours and hours without fatigue. To top it off, this can all be done with an eminently pragmatic device that allows you to stream your 4000 CD collection and thousands of internet radio stations at the brush of a finger. What more would you want? The Zardoz is indeed audio honey for the audiophile’s ears.

p.s. Please feel free to email me with questions. If they are of a more technical nature, I will forward you onto you onto Dan (contact data below*) whom you can Skype or email anytime. The website is in French, but Dan speaks excellent English. He makes himself readily available. If you are in or around Charlotte, NC, feel free to swing by for an audition. Ciao.

Andrew J.L. Gear

*db System
c/o Dan Bellity
5 ave Jean XXIII - 06130 Grasse - France
Tel : (33) - 04 93 42 53 47
Fax : (33) - 04 26 00 72 74- 04 26 00 72 74
db-system@wanadoo.fr



Associated gear
Speakers: Intuitive Design Gamma Summits
Amplifiers: Intuitive Design Coordinate Monoblocks (housed in ID granite stands)
Pre-amplifier: Tube Research Labs Dude
Source: db System Zardoz (WiFi receiver) fed by an Apple MAC Mini + Apple Time Capsule external HD/router
Cabling: Intuitive Design speaker wire, ICs, and power cords throughout
Isolation devices: Stillpoints on speakers and stands; Sistrum stands for Dude and Zardoz
Remote: Apple Iphone 3G
agear

Showing 28 responses by agear

agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Thanks for the data Tony. I have perused a few discussions on digital processing formats and always came away with the impression that NOS produced a more "analog" sound. For a while, I was looking into both Wavelength and Ultrafi DACs using that format. At the end of the day, I guess its a matter of implementation rather than processing format???

Luis, much of the banter is self-fulfilling. Others have born witness to your observations that increasing bit rate resolution and sampling rates does not always translate into a more analog presentation. I tried to insinuate that in the review and Juanitox was more blunt about it. I know some of this by experience as well. My Granite Audio 657 CDP used a DAC chip with 20bit/96KHz DAC chip. Don Hogland told me he chose this particular chip over other 24 bit versions since it sounded more "musical." People gave him crap about it, but I am afraid I agree. The 657 was an incredibly good CDP and bettered a lot of players with fancier 21st century chips. I have heard a similar testimony from Steve Nugent at Empirical in that certain chips (even with a similar bit rate) sound better than others. There is obviously more to this story.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Brain fart: I put the wrong URL for Nugent's jitter article. Here is the correct link

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/Magazine/manufacture/0509/
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Hi Rohan. That is kool. Thanks for the feedback. I did reference the Marvel chip (just not by name).
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Hi Brian. I cannot accurately assess that difference since I did not do a side-by-side comparison. Vaguely, the Ultimo had a little more bass energy and the level of clarity seemed to go increase as well. Both models had that same analog signature. The model one is a very good value for the performance level. If you are the typical neurotic phile climbing the mountain, then I would suggest going with the Ultimo. All that being said, Dan is very flexible and would probably work on a trade-in program if you wanted to upgrade.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
It is clear from the thread that there is absolutely no consensus on the actual value of asynchronous USB. Some people are using. Some are not. The point was made that the Alpha Berkeley DAC does not and it is considered by many to be one of the best out there. Hmmm.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Thanks for the feedback guys.

Luis, I respect your audio insight and acumen. You seem to suss out technical issues in real time while the rest of us read about them and then work backwards. In terms of 24/96 vs 24/192 and beyond, Dan and I have not had specific discussions about it. At one point, he did say that when Itunes is able to stream 24/96, the Z would be able to decode it. Right now, I "believe" Itunes can decode the higher rez formats but cannot stream them? I have read a lot of contradictory info on this matter and I find it irritating. I have also not been convinced of the sonic merits of upsampling music. That being said, Apple is a big enough and innovative enough of a company to continue to be at the forefront of the wireless revolution and make changes when necessary. Right now, the hi rez game is in the same boat as SACD and DVa was a few years ago...unresolved. A lot of people makes claims about this or that format, but who knows. As Rohan/Juanitox said, he heard the Weiss device, which like the alpha Berkeley DAC, has up to 24/192 capability I believe. He still preferred the Z.

Tony, the Lessloss device is excellent and cleverly designed, and I agree you have no real need to change. Furthermore, if your actual CD collection is not extensive and not a primary vehicle for music, you have even less reason to chase this stuff.

Brian, thanks for defending Dan. Small business can be tough and we have to give the little guys grace IMO. Fundamentally, I will support them until the end irrespective of perceived inefficiencies short of unethical behaviour. As I said in the review, many audiophiles seem irritable these days and there is a low threshold for small ripples in the day.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Perrew, the SACD is a "hybrid" meaning it contains 16/44.1 data also and can thus be played on a regular CDP or imported into Itunes. There are apparently programs out there that can manipulate the data within a SACD and potentially be harvested but that remains to be determined. Again, the computer world is crazy and always in flux.

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Ripping-SACDs-itunes

p.s. Nice system.....
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
I forwarded Dan your concerns and here is his reply. He had technical difficulties trying to post to this thread, so here is his reply:

"Hi Andrew,

Sorry to all of you whom have not received answers to your emails. For a time, I had a very aggressive, anti-Spam filter and thus many emails were blacklisted.
Now the problem is solved. (I read all my emails including Spam:-)

Another good option is Skype. Then, we can speak face to face.

To answer the question of resolution of the original AE: it is 24 bits 48kHz maximum. It was probably limited by Apple to reduce the quantification noise generated by upsampling. The chip that I have used in the Zardoz is made by Marvel and is 96Hz capatible and even higher.

Please feel free to Skype or email me with further questions.
Kindest regards to all of you.
Dan Bellity"
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Bravo Tony. I agree 100% with that last paraphrase. You should most definitely visit Don in AZ. He is an awesome dude, is a musician (pianist), and makes incredibly good, "musical" gear.

The Marvel chip is where at least some of the magic resides in the Z. I too tried to dig up more info on that chip in preparation for this review. I actually called the company, and they would not provide information to me regarding the chip since I did not have a formal contract with them (as buyer). This is probably typical for big, semiconductor companies. They do a lot of private, contract work in addition to their public offerings for consumer electronic applications, and thus their reticence to speak. An engineering friend of Dan's with military connections turned him onto this particular chip (I believe). It has PGA funtionality and is multifunctional in that it performs multiple operations within a single chip, etc. Dan is a little tight lipped about some of these elements which is appropriate in my mind. Dale Pitcher from Intuitive Design and the TRL gang are the same. I presume you know why.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
I will get Dan involved. Some of your questions are answered in Nugent's jitter piece. That is why I included it. He addresses the logic behind the potential superiority of wireless. Steve is to me the most erudite dude in the computer arena. He has an actual pedigree. He would be worth calling....I have in the past.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
You can ask the same question of USB. It is not univerally applied and many of the designers I have spoken with have a low opinion of it. I think there are a multiplicity of reasons why wireless is not universal most of which have to do with pragmatism. Hi end audio is a business after all. It is not some think tank where the optimal decision is made every time. I think any design algorithm can be used and made to sound good. It is up to the designer and the ears God gave him (or her). That being said, Nugent did make some surprising statements and that is why I included the link. Here are some snippets to refresh people's memory:

"There is much misinformation on the forums about USB for audio streaming. USB is a fairly jittery interface on it's own."

and

"Networked audio (Ethernet), both wired and Wi-Fi is a unique case. Because the data is transmitted in packets with flow-control and re-try for errors with buffering at the end-point device, it is not as much of a real-time transfer as USB, S/PDIF or FireWire."

and

"This would seem to be the ideal situation, which it certainly is. "

and

"The problem for audiophiles is that the majority of these devices were designed with high-volume manufacturing and low-cost as requirements, with performance taking a lower priority. As a result, the jitter from these devices is higher than it could be. It should be the lowest of all the audio source devices available."

This "problem" referenced above is now being tackled by people like Dan. Enter the Zardoz baby!
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Talk to Nugent about his statements about wireless and let us know. I think his words speak for themselves.

As you may know, I am a surgeon, researcher, and I am more "demanding" than most. I too have quite a bit of involvement in the computer industry and was involved in developing one early version of an electronic EMR (Cmore medical). But that is honestly irrelevant. At the end of the day, the proof is in the pudding. What are your ears telling you (or your brain). Audio is an odd hobby in that it is an amalgam of actual science and belief about things that are not provable (and yet still possibly true). For years, people have haggled about the influence of cables for example. There is not hard science behind their influence in the audio chain but I can HEAR it in a blinded, A+B setting. My wife can too. In choosing equipment, philes (including myself) think they are making an objective decision and often we are not. It is a reality. I am comfortable with that. I am telling people about this device because I like it. It is not some new audio gospel that has to be accepted.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Luis and Tony, you are making very good points, but as I said in the review, the computer world is very, very fluid. Things change rapidly. Simply because wireless (or any other format) is not the vanguard does not mean anything in and of itself. Things are in transition, rapid transition, and that is exciting and kool but also aggravating. You do have to be thoughtful, do your homework, etc. We have all had the experience of paying too much for a computer only to have it outdated 6 months later. I don't think digital audio is quite that fickle but it could be.

Luis, you own the Transporter. I think that is another example of a solid wireless device or at least a step in this whole evolution. The company who made that device has a lot more R&D cash than most mom and pop audio companies....and that may be why they were able to pull it off....
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Tony and Luis, can you elaborate on why you purchased your current front ends and what thinking went into that decision? Tony, the Lessloss DAC is well regarded. It is expensive and uses a novel approach that most do not (like the Zardoz). It would be an interesting experiment to slave a wireless device to your DAC. Luis, many have bought and then sold their Transporters and/or modded them (Modwright, APL at one point, etc) due to its analytical, threadbare sound. Are you in that position now or is it a phenomenon that is recording dependent....?

As a FYI, in the not too distant future I will doing an informal shootout with the new alpha Berkely DAC which many are regarding as SOTA like the Weiss Minerva. That will put a lot of the empty audio banter and posturing to rest.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Good stuff Tony. I like to hear people's audio history. Another TRL family member bopped by my house and we did some A+B power cord testing and I believe he had the midlevel Lessloss cord. It was very nice. I liked it. I think the "dude" behind is very clever and has a lot of good knowledge. That is why I referenced his web site. It is chalked full of good data.

The reel-reel thing is a whole another can of worms.

Esoteric has recently gotten into the wireless game with a DAC:

http://blog.stereophile.com/ces2009/esoteric_wireless_wonder/
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Lol! Pat, you and I think alike. I would be game for a shootout any day of the week! Bring it....

otherwise all we are left with is words floating around in the internet ether....
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Other tidbits to mention:

1. I had been intrigued by the Amarra software and whether it influenced wireless. I initially thought the answer was no. Apparently not. You can apparently route things to an Airtunes via the Roque Amoeba software AirFoil application.

2. Why are more manufacturers not going wireless if there are the advantages alluded to above? I asked Steve Nugent that question and this was his answer:

"As far as the investment to make these happen, it is a big deal. You must generate a software driver, a player software (like squeezecenter) and then the hardware receiver and the receiver firmware. Usually requires at least two software engineers and one hardware engineer and about 12-18 months of work to make this happen. Small companies cannot afford this."

This was my gut on this subject.

3. Technical side note: I did have temporary trouble with the Apple remote function (via Iphone) when using a PC-based system. This was due to my security software. It was temporary but irritating. I am now a MAC convert and have not had a single issue.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Lol. We could have young Ryan, our budding director film the whole thing...an audio documentary....!
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Thanks Luis. Again, I like tidbits from the audio journey. Fun. I had forgotten part of our last telephone conversion in which you told me you had tinkered with it. I too looked at the Transporter and was impressed by the work Logitech put into it. I was also impressed that a company of that size and nature felt compelled to tackle such a project. I know one of their lead engineers got a little pissed when people who started modding the device and made some extravagant claims afterwards.

That shows me they were passionate about it. I never heard it. I did hear a Squeezebox SB3 through a DAC. I went elsewhere based on intuition. That is how I have made quite a few audio decisions (Intuitive Design, TRL, Merlin) and have yet to be disappointed.

I think the software is indeed an important influence on the sound as you have experienced. I know Dan demoed all the Logitech gear and software in addition to Sonos. He liked Itunes better. People will obviously argue about that. I myself am intrigued to fiddle with Amarra. A lot of MAC users are buzzing about it and it made a splash at RMAF 2009. We will see.

It is too bad you guys don't live in the hood. We could demo all this stuff. Irritating.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Juanitox, you owned the LessLoss DAC prior to the Zardoz. Any care to comment on the two sonically?
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Juanitox:

"Hi, I never had the Lesslos and Zardoz at the same time. I had sold my lessloss dac 2004 to Mike Smith ( 6moons audio) because I discovred that my db System modded PASS dac D1 was better than the Lessloss. I then sold my PASS Dac because the Z was better alone ;-) so I never compared the two at the the same time."

"the roku was modded and slaved by the lessloss clock output..."
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Tony, I read the review. Interesting. He did not blind himself to the A+B portion of his session (slaved Transporter vs CEC), and so Lessloss' recommendation could have influenced him. Its hard to know. The nice thing with the Z is that there is no cable/DAC interface to contend with and its jitter production. I guess the true test is A+B things with a good analog rig. Dan and the gang at db Systems did just that. But, at the end of the day, the old dictum:

"one can enjoy digital music reproduction as long as one does not listen to analogue"

may still be true. Stay tuned.

agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Kool. Nugent was commenting on asynchronous USB and how it is a major step forward away from crappy plug and play USB. Gordon did a lot of proprietary programming to make it happen and deserves the recognition.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Thanks for reminding me of Arvo. I will snag a few more CDs off of Amazon. Remember, that Amarra and Pure Music are Mac programs....
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Right on Luis. That's what I currently believe as well. Wireless is the future. One element that I mentioned in my review (Perrew alluded to it and I am sure you feel this too) is one of pragmatism. It is a pain having to have a computer in your listening room or common space. It is not practical. Furthermore, once you experience flipping through your ENTIRE music collection from a touch screen, there is no going back IMO. The concept of getting up to pop in another CD or even walking across the room to a computer keyboard seems so 20th century....lol.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Tony, there is a single response to the above thread. Keep us posted on further content. The opening comment:

"Yes. you're right, transferring raw files by network has theoretical advantages over USB or Firewire, but I see no reason to do this wirelessly if you want maximum performance - I prefer to hard wire with standard Cat 5 or Cat 6 Ethernet cable."

is incorrect. According to Steve Nugent:

"Any cable feeding a DAC will affect jitter. Standard CAT5 cables are pretty poor actually."

I read the PSA newsletter referenced as well. I researched more to try and find out what they were up to and saw this on their webite:

"The Digital lens is the key to the success of the Bridge. Without it, the type of transmission and the quality of the data would have a major impact on the sonic qualities of the music. To date, no one has gotten this part right. All the other attempts at transferring data over a network have been compromised at best. High level of jitter , errors and improper formatting for best sonics plague every system we have examined to date.
The built in Lens on the bridge gets it right. A Digital Lens is a device that takes any quality of digital audio data and focuses it to a single, perfect point of data. The Lens does this with the use of a very large digital storage tank (memory) coupled with a jitter free set of asynchronous (disconnected) clocks to output data to the Lens in perfect I2S format."

Sounds like buffered memory/RAM (Memory Player, Pacecar) connected to asynchronous clocking using I2S connectivity?? I will ask Nugent to chime in.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
Very kool to hear that Topsel. You and I essentially have the same upstream equipment (Z + TRL Dude + Samsons). Good synergy abounds or rather abides. BTW, I have some Arvo Part (Passio) but not Tabula Rasa. I will have to check that out.

In terms of technical particulars pertaining to the Z, it is still unclear to me whether it sounds better with a Mac vs a PC. From sonic memory (since I made that transition), I cannot really tell. Steve Nugent and others claim that Itunes is a bit perfect transducer of digital content with Macs but not with Windows. I am not sure if I could tell the difference from behind a curtain. Another potential issue is the potential quality of your media player. I assumed that since the Z is a WiFi device it was somehow quarantined from that issue. Steve Nugent told me otherwise and said programs like Amarra and Pure Music would make a sonic difference. I am unsure at this point. I farted around with the Amarra demo briefly, and the changes were very subtle. I need to do some more A+B work and involve other listeners. Pure Music had more discernible impact, but again, I need more listening time. The only ripple with PM is that you need Airfoil (separate program that hacks into the Airport Express), otherwise PM will not play through the Z currently. They are apparently working on a fix for this. Amarra used to require Airfoil but now does not. We will see.
agear OP
1,362 posts
 
From a technical standpoint, there should not be any difference. They both interface with Airtunes and float out the 1 + 0s. That being said, there may be interference issues that influence sound on a level I do not understand. Who knows. To really know, you could do a blinded listening sessions with your friends.

However, people do argue that MAC sounds better than PC in this arena. I am not sure on this one. I "think" its true. People speculate that Apple somehow compromised Itunes when running on a PC but that is conspiratorial at this point. I did used to think that the media player (Itunes, Foobar, etc) did not influence wireless sound production. Wrong. I am now using the Pure Music program and loving that....
More to discover