Question regarding Wadia s7i Direct to amp connection -
Has anyone that was operating in the "Correct" output range 75-100 boosted the output? Depending on the level the cd was recorded at there are times when I wish I could go to 112 or so. Also...if you did increase the output to compensate for the lower cd levels what did it do to the higher level cd's- Did the lower end (Bass) increase because of the higher output voltage or was it that what used to be played at say 100 sounds the same as 88 after the increase.
BTW...Now that my s7i is fully broken in it's even more incredible!!! Love it!! - (using XLO sig3 bal to Bryston 7BST mono's.) |
In my opinion all Wadia's sound best running direct to the amp using a balanced approach. Congrats on the new Wadia purchase. It's a fantastic company and products! |
I just purchased my S7i. I'm running direct into my monoblocs. I can't add much to this forum since it's not broken in yet,still waiting to connect unbalanced (XLO Sig 3. -any comments?)and no Pre-Amp sessions but.... Right out of the box this is a FABULOUS CDP !!! I've been an audiophile for over 30 years and this may be THE best piece of eqp. I have purchased to date. Will add more info. once I'm all set up. AGAIN...GREAT CDP Worth every penny!!! |
Just a heads up, which I cannot believe. Both Frost Audio and The Great Northern Sound Company have closed their doors right after I bought their products. Talk about picking some winners! At least I am stuck with outstanding products. |
|
Alfa100- I use Frost Audio BlackFrost cables. Fantastic! |
thank you Kucharsk. what power cable are you using? |
FWIW, I run my S7i directly and don't hear any negative effects on the soundstage until the volume goes below 70 or so; typical listening is done in the upper 70s/low 80s and Wadia's papers claim no degradation above 74. |
talk2me, thank you. i too am interested in the power cable used |
Rtn1- I prefer using my GNSC Statement Wadia S71 with my tubed Concert Fidelity preamp. It adds just enough of that "tube" quality I personally love (but not too much :)). I switched all my cables to Frost Audio BlackFrost. It is the single biggest improvement I have ever heard from non-electric gear. |
It's all a question of relevance; I am a musician, so either in pleasure or in business I want to, or have to listen exactly, if so; I can always move the Passives volume control by hand using the W with 100%, at any other time when it is not essential I "do not hear" the difference, may that be because of casual listening, or because we are watching a film etc.
The actual important bit of my notion is that putting the Silver Rock TVC into the equation does not reduce quality, but increases practicality, it is my personal solution to those eternal discussions "Wadia direct or with pre"
all the best, E |
Yes, Egidius... i am no way near having the best system. But setting the Wadia to all under 100 is heard. Going down to 96 you should hear it without doubt. 100 -Is more like a full on blast on dynamics and openness. Let me ask, don't you hear a sort of slight muting effect going less than 100?
To me, this is as obvious as changing algorithms, if not more.
My friends have sometimes problems hearing differences with small changes in a system, but lessening the level below 97, most hear.
If this wouldn't be the case, i would never look for a single source preamp, if, i would change and go for an all active speaker system. I don't fart money, that's for sure (Practice don't show any signs of progress, sad but true:-( |
If you will, check out the Wadia S9 review by Rtn1, I offered a Pre-light version, by using an Audio Consulting silver rock TVC, which is usually in one position allowing Wadia's volume setting between 92-100, the silver rocks control only changed if the input's volume is highly different.
I dare you all to hear the difference between 100, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94 settings!!
all the best, e |
It is a variable question. Adding a pre, you are adding 3+ more variables(pre itself, interconnect, power cable and fuse). It is certainly more fun but it is going to cost you more. Would it sound better--> theoretically Yes but practically, it is going to depend on how u choose to put on your variables. Always remember this, never go lower level than your current status, otherwise it is like a sports car put a economy tires. Hopes that help. |
Talk2me, What's the verdict on direct vs. pre?
Also, the power cord will have a substantial impact on your sound? What are you using? |
I use S7i into a pre. My system is
Wadia S7i
ARC Ref 3
Lamm M1.1 Hybrid Monoblocks
Genesis G200
Using the pre is very worthwhile not least of all because it means running the Wadia at full 100% volume eg full 24bit. Of course it depends on the pre being used and the system itself. All I can say is that Wadia S7i plus pre works for me - very well indeed. The addition of S7i recently made as upgrade from 381i.
As a quick comment on the S7i - IT IS OUTSTANDING!
Jon |
I just bought a Great Northern Sound Statement Wadia S71 today. I plan to do a impartial test of the S7i direct into my Burmester 911 MK3, with my Concert Fidelity CF 080 LS/X preamp. Either way, as I look at it, I come out a winner.:) |
The major improvement on the new Wadia S7I is the new current source outputs.
This machine seems to have a whole different feel or grip on the music compared to past designs.
Cheers Johnnyr |
That is a good question, why don't you mail Wadia or Steve at GNSC? I would like to know myself, if anything in the S7i makes a change compaired to 381. |
hello folks
I specicifically read this forum regarding the S7i because I notice Wadia claims it has a new volume control.I have the Pass Labs XA30.5 and Wadia 301 cd player. I am upgrading and need to know whether to purchase either the Pass Labs XP 20 preamp or Wadia S7i. I know that the 301 volume needs to be turned up to 99 to sound best and needs a pre amplifier. I have been told by the dealer that the S7i does not need to be turned to max as it has dither problems at volume only below background music volumes. He confirms that the S7i has a new improved volume control unlike the381, 581 or 781. please reply with reference to the S7i only . |
If i lower the level at the Continuum (amplifier) and highten it at the Wadia, or lower level at Wadia and highten it at Continuum,.. there is a clear difference. No matter what physics say. It is very very obvious. The effect is as stated above.
I listen at nearfield, and yes my room is measured and acoustics has been reworked. It is no placebo, i care less (not at all is more correct) for placebo upgrades. All upgrades and changes must be heard and i will not change a thing in my system if i don't find it needed, or, in anyway bettering some key aspects.
I think, that if you buy a Wadia and can afford a stand alone pre amp. Maybe just to try it for yourself, you will find it yourself. If i would buy a more expensive Wadia, like S7i or even separates, i would be sad if i find a pre amp is better, but could not afford it.
Personally i dream of S7i reworked by GNS and the JRDG Corus and 625. But i can never buy those,.. sadly.
Also, i find Wadia very picky when it come down to matching powerchord with a platform. I noticed very big changes from trying different PC's and isolation/damping devices. More so than on any other audio device i have used myself.
I always try to get the best depth and relation between micro and macro dynamics.
Many of you at Audiogon have really expensive systems. Some of us can't afford that. I believe it is quite relevant if buying a Wadia, it is needed to know, one might find a need to also buy a separate pre amp. That is, if using pre/power combo instead of any integrated unit.
If anything, i think it might be a mistake to rule out that a pre amp will not be needed when calculating over what is possible to buy. |
hi rtn et al.
of course, the ongoing presumption is, that I am indeed missing something when going direct.
I wanted to make a point in saying I cannot hear it.
Of course I hear that it sounds different with a pre, but better? (I use a new Berning tube pre (ZOTL), too rare to be widely known, and an Audiopax M5, highly regarded in its public days).
And luckily, I am not yet deaf: as a violinist I live by hearing and acting on it - this is not too scare anybody away from disagreeing with me ;-) |
02-01-11: Rtn1
Even when volume is matched, there is unacceptable loss of dynamics when the digital volume attenuator is used.
first, the comparison that you suggest is highly unreliable; it's just hard to listen to one configuration, change the configuration and then try to get the same volume level from memory. second, i agree that listen to a wadia in a direct connect configuration is likely to sound different from that of a through-the-preamp configuration. to that extent, if you prefer the sound of the through-the-preamp configuration, then you are going to prefer the "dynamics" because you just like the configuration better. that's not a matter of any "flaw in the technology" it's just a matter of your own preferences. i'm not suggesting that there is anything wrong if you say that you prefer the sound of the wadia through a preamplifier. for my own part, for some recordings i sometimes find that i prefer the sound of the through-the-preamp configuration, other times i prefer the sound when going direct to the amplifier. from my observation, the preamplifier acts as a kind of tone control that does change the sound character of the musical presentation. |
Even when volume is matched, there is unacceptable loss of dynamics when the digital volume attenuator is used. It is a flaw of the technology, and is not dependent upon the number of power supplies. Apparently, those last couple of bits really matter. Luckily, it can be bypassed. The series 9 has six independent power supplies per channel, and suffers the same fate with volume.
If people like their unit without a preamp, then great. They also should know that they may like it even better with a good preamp. |
just out of curiosity, as this thread is about the s7i, i am wondering if you any of you compared the s7i and the 381. from what i can tell, the main difference (aside from some cosmetic differences in the display) is that the s7i adds additional regulated power supplies so that more subcircuits have their own regulated power supply whereas in the 381 more subcircuits share a common power supply. i'm wondering how much that design change affected subjective impressions of the 2 units. |
01-28-11: Inpieces
I also tried the level adjustment at my Wadia.
I use a JRDG C-500 and 381. If i lower the level, i can clearly hear that the sounds becomes less dynamic and full/punchy.
It's heard directly (- no question!), if i lower the level from 100 to 97.
as it turns out, if you connect the wadia to the preamp and lower the volume at the preamp you would notice a similar phenomenon. it's just a characteristic of the mechanical nature of speaker cones (not to mention the limitations of your own hearing and/or room acoustics) that volume level affects the sonic character of a musical presentation. |
I agree with Inpieces. When the level is reduced to 90, there is a very substantial drop in dynamics and detail. I'm not sure I can accurately differentiate 99 vs. 100 in a blinded trial, but definitely 90 vs. 100.
If you like the Wadia direct, great. But you are missing things, just FYI. With a separate preamp, music sounds great from 45db to 95db (measured by SPL meter). |
I enjoy the s7i direct to berning zh230 driving stella Opus/novus speaker System, dont miss a thing! |
I also tried the level adjustment at my Wadia.
I use a JRDG C-500 and 381. If i lower the level, i can clearly hear that the sounds becomes less dynamic and full/punchy.
It's heard directly (- no question!), if i lower the level from 100 to 97.
Even so, the further i lower level, the more the effect.
If i would use my Wadia in a system with a power amp, i would use a stand alone pre amp also.
This was not the case with my old Krell KPS 25sc. OIfcourse, that unit had an inbuilt KRC-HR pre amp and were not at all designed like the Wadia.
I also used a Teac (Esoteric) P-70 and D-70 years ago. This combo, did also sound better with a pre amp.
I would not see a pre amp as a unit which obviously colour the sound or in anyway makes it worse. |
Well when I said the preamp adds something I did not mean colouring. Without preamp the Wadia sounds great but with the preamp I can set the Wadia to maximum output and maximum volume on the dipswitches. The music then gets more dynamical and open with the preamp. Also the bass is tighter. So in my system it sounds better with the preamp and the Wadia set to maximum output. Also the noise is less then.
Peter |
A 3db reduction in power corresponds to a 3db reduction in voltage, for a given impedance. A 6db reduction in power corresponds to a 6db reduction in voltage, for a given impedance. Almarg, you are correct. Guys, I stand corrected on this. P1 = V1^2/R1 & P2 = V2^2/R2 P2 = 0.5*P1 & R1 = R2 = R because we are looking at the power reduction at the same location hence impedance at that point remains unchanged. So, if we take the ratios: P2/P1 = 0.5 = (V2^2/R)/(V2^2/R) or V2^2/V1^2 = 0.5 or V2/V1 = sqrt(0.5) = 0.707 I should have done this calc before I wrote my post - my bad. ;-O Yeah, so if we want half the amplitude, we will find it at 6dB lower power where we'll have 6dB reduction in ampl as well. So, my earlier post on 12/04/10 is correct where I showed the digital volume versus full-scale amplitude - you will get 1/2 the voltage amplitude at setting 88 & at setting 65, you will get approx 1/8 full-scale meaning that you will lose 3 bits. If you start from 21-bits, you'll be down to 18-bits at digital volume setting 65. You will lose 6 bits at digital volume setting 28. Dennis_the_menace, I apologize for hijacking your thread. If it is any solace to you, I think, that you already got your answer to your question (which is depends on the quality of your preamp & on your personal preferences -> cannot remember right now which members wrote these 2 apt replies). |
Paperw8: If you look at power as a function of voltage and perform the power measurement AS A RATIO OF THE CORRESPONDING VOLTAGE LEVELS, then each halving of voltage level corresponds to a 6dB reduction in power level Yes, absolutely. But note that each halving of voltage ALSO corresponds to a 6dB reduction in voltage level. the voltage level is halved at each 3dB increment I haven't taken the time to follow the parts of the thread that may be behind that statement, but an increment that results in voltage being halved is not in fact a 3db increment, regardless of the wording that may be used to refer to it. It is a 6db increment. db = 20log(V1/V2) = 10log(P1/P2) 20log(0.5) = -6.02 Best regards, -- Al |
12-05-10: Almarg
I haven't taken the time to read through most of this thread, but I'll just say with respect to the quoted comments that neither is correct.
A 3db reduction in power corresponds to a 3db reduction in voltage, for a given impedance. A 6db reduction in power corresponds to a 6db reduction in voltage, for a given impedance.
the reason why impedance is not considered is because you are generally looking at power at a given point. for example, when you measure output power, you are always measuring power at the output terminals, so there is no difference in impedance. in this case, what we are describing is the effect of the wadia digital volume control on either the voltage output level or on power output level. so if you do a decibel measurement on voltage, the voltage level is halved at each 3dB increment; if you do a decibel measurement on the power level, that too is halved at each 3dB measurement, but if you look at power as a function of voltage and perform the power measurement AS A RATIO OF THE CORRESPONDING VOLTAGE LEVELS, then each halving of voltage level corresponds to a 6dB redunction in power level (you need to pay particular attention to the capitalized section). at this point i have to say that i think that i have explained this as best i can. so if someone still isn't following this, then i can't help them and they will have to refer to other sources for further discussion. |
12-05-10: Bombaywalla
wrong! a 3dB reduction in POWER corresponds to a 6dB reduction in VOLTAGE.
unlike much of the subjective discussion in this forum, this is a factual matter; your *opinion* on the matter is irrelevent to the actual *facts*. |
Paperw8: a 3dB reduction in voltage corresponds to a 6dB reduction in power.
Bombaywalla: wrong! a 3dB reduction in POWER corresponds to a 6dB reduction in VOLTAGE. I haven't taken the time to read through most of this thread, but I'll just say with respect to the quoted comments that neither is correct. A 3db reduction in power corresponds to a 3db reduction in voltage, for a given impedance. A 6db reduction in power corresponds to a 6db reduction in voltage, for a given impedance. To see that, consider that a 3db reduction in voltage corresponds to the voltage being reduced by a factor of 0.707. Since, as I think we all agree, P = Esquared/R, that 3db reduction in voltage results in power being reduced by a factor of 0.707 x 0.707 = 0.5, which is also 3db. Regards, -- Al |
so, a 3dB reduction in voltage corresponds to a 6dB reduction in power. wrong! a 3dB reduction in POWER corresponds to a 6dB reduction in VOLTAGE. i took a look at the wadia manual, and i think that there is an error in the manual. I had a good laugh at this one!!! :-) it appears that there is actually a 1dB change in volume for each step in the digital volume control. Oh, is it?? so, now we have 100 steps & 100dB of volume control?? You better call up Wadia & tell them that they actually have 100dB of volume control & not 50dB..... |
12-04-10: Bombaywalla
wrong! every 6dB (i.e. every 12 steps) is halving of the voltage amplitude. You correctly wrote that the digital amp works in the voltage domain & not the power domain but you did not understand that concept fully.
actually, you are incorrect. the basic decibel measurement is computed as follows: 10*log10(q1/q2) where q1 and q2 are quantities that are being measured (ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decibel). [wikipedia is not a peer-reviewed reference so you always have to view statements there with some degree of caution, so feel free to challenge this statement if you have a better reference - i just don't feel like digging through my own books since the wikipedia equation matches my own knowledge on the subject] as it turns out, power is proportion to voltage**2. so when the quantities being measured are power levels, and since power is a function of voltage, the equation for power can also be represented as a ratio of voltages: 10*log10((vo**2/r)/(vi**2/r)) [i am assuming equal resistance values for simplicity] however, because of the way that logarithms work, you can also express this equation: 20*log10(vo/vi) this is the equation that you presented - i'm just trying to explain to you how the equation was derived. so, a 3dB reduction in voltage corresponds to a 6dB reduction in power. you will notice that the wadia white paper refers to *volume* output. volume output is a power domain concept. so the wadia white paper on digital volume control indicates that you start to lose significant (i.e. non-interpolation bits) when the digital attenuation causes a 36dB reduction in *volume* output. i took a look at the wadia manual, and i think that there is an error in the manual. the manual states that there is a 0.5dB change in *volume* for each step in the digital volume control. from my calculations, and the wadia white paper on digital volume control, it appears that there is actually a 1dB change in volume for each step in the digital volume control. |
the digital preamplifier is operating on voltage (and not power), so 3dB is a halving of voltage level. wrong! every 6dB (i.e. every 12 steps) is halving of the voltage amplitude. You correctly wrote that the digital amp works in the voltage domain & not the power domain but you did not understand that concept fully. Did you do a sanity check to see if every 6 counts starting from 100 down to 0 would yield exactly 50dB of amplitude control before you wrote you prev post? We have 100 steps with each step giving us 0.5dB => 50dB of voltage control. What is 50dB in linear/numeric? 316.22. So, we can attenuate the digital music signal by a factor of 316.22 using the DSP. setting 100 = full scale signal amplitude setting 88 = 1/2 full scale setting 76 = 1/4 FS setting 64 = 1/8 FS setting 52 = 1/16 FS setting 40 = 1/32 FS setting 28 = 1/64 FS setting 16 = 1/128 FS setting 04 = 1/256 FS setting 00 = 1/307.175 FS & 20log10(1/307.175) = -49.75dB, which I'll round off to -50dB, which is exactly the amplitude control range of the digital preamp. |
12-04-10: Bombaywalla
yes, Paperw8, thanks for taking the time to explain this to me but I already understand the concepts of DSP.
I agree that (100-65)*0.5 = 17.5dB, which you are rounding up to 18dB. I seem to have 1 issue in your calculations - how did you arrive at 18dB being an attenuation factor of 64??
it's a voltage attenuation of 18dB i.e. 20log10(x)=18dB. So, what should x be to get 18dB?
since each increment in the digital output level corresponds to 0.5dB, each increment of 6 corresponds to 3dB. the digital preamplifier is operating on voltage (and not power), so 3dB is a halving of voltage level. in the binary domain, a halving corresponds to 1-bit. so each 3dB knocks off 1-bit so when you knock off 6-bits you have reduced the binary value by 2**6=64. as far as actual amplitude, bits 17-21/22 are fraction bits but i am just speaking generally, so if you just consider the 21/22-bit binary word, each 3dB would correspond to a right shift of the binary word as you knock off the least significant bit. so, for example, the binary value 100 corresponds to a base-10 value of 4. however, if you right shift the binary value, binary-100 becomes binary-10, which is a base-10 value of 2. if you do a right shift on binary-10, you get binary-1, which is a base-10 value of 1. anyway, that's the idea... |
that's why you don't start losing significant bits (from the 16-bit input stream recovered from the cd) until you hit a digital output level of about 65 (out of 100). each step in the digital output level knocks off about 0.5dB, so by the time you get to 65, you are down about 18dB, which effectively reduces the signal by a factor of about 64; i.e. the signal is about 64 times weaker in comparison to the unattenuated digital signal.... yes, Paperw8, thanks for taking the time to explain this to me but I already understand the concepts of DSP. I agree that (100-65)*0.5 = 17.5dB, which you are rounding up to 18dB. I seem to have 1 issue in your calculations - how did you arrive at 18dB being an attenuation factor of 64?? it's a voltage attenuation of 18dB i.e. 20log10(x)=18dB. So, what should x be to get 18dB? |
12-03-10: Bombaywalla
OK, I see that I am right & you are also right - after upsampling (marketing verbage used by Wadia is "resolution enhancement") the word length is 24 bits (which is what I wrote) & then, after processing by DigiMaster algo, they chuck the least 2 significant bits & reduce the rez to 21/22 bits (which is what you wrote).
as you saw in the white papers, the wadia has a 22-bit DAC, so the wadia digital preamplifier operates on the 21/22-bit signal. that's why you don't start losing significant bits (from the 16-bit input stream recovered from the cd) until you hit a digital output level of about 65 (out of 100). each step in the digital output level knocks off about 0.5dB, so by the time you get to 65, you are down about 18dB, which effectively reduces the signal by a factor of about 64; i.e. the signal is about 64 times weaker in comparison to the unattenuated digital signal. this, in turn, effectively knocks off the 6 least significant bits from the 21/22-bit signal. thus, by the time you are at 65 on the digital output level, you only have the most significant 15/16 bits remaining in the original 21/22-bit signal and you are at the point where you are starting to lose significant information (since the original signal from the cd was a 16-bit signal). |
i'll say this again: don't take my word for it, READ THE WADIA WHITEPAPERS and draw your own conclusions. wadia has several whitepapers posted on their website that anyone can download and read. OK, I see that I am right & you are also right - after upsampling (marketing verbage used by Wadia is "resolution enhancement") the word length is 24 bits (which is what I wrote) & then, after processing by DigiMaster algo, they chuck the least 2 significant bits & reduce the rez to 21/22 bits (which is what you wrote). On a side note - I think all of us would be better of if you dropped your high-handedness altogether. You might have a good reason to attain your attitude but realize that you are on a PUBLIC forum where all sorts come to visit & discuss. If you feel compelled to share your knowledge & uplift the "ignorant" masses here do it with an attitude of a school teacher - you'll be appreciated much more. Just my suggestion to you being a long-term member here. |
12-03-10: Bombaywalla
Paperw8, I'm pretty sure that the Wadia resolution is 24 bits (& not 21 bits) after it upsamples.
i'll say this again: don't take my word for it, READ THE WADIA WHITEPAPERS and draw your own conclusions. wadia has several whitepapers posted on their website that anyone can download and read. |
however, where it can make a difference is that you can lose resolution through the process or digital attenuation. the source material from a redbook cd has 16 bits of digital resolution. the wadia operates with 21 bits of digital resolution. Paperw8, I'm pretty sure that the Wadia resolution is 24 bits (& not 21 bits) after it upsamples. |
I am getting fairly tired of people knowing more than other people, that includes people who actually know, but use 3million words to say so, or manufacterers who have a double agenda, maybe a'gon has its limits.
I approach a system of simplicity, staying with my merlins and my berning power amp, source either wadia s7i direct, or sometimes TT Elite Rock with a Berning pre,
so I guess I just have to take both roads; and being a musician, I plan to be utterly happy with both.
mr dennis indeed never chimed in anymore, so what was that about? |
|
11-30-10: Bar81
I understand the concepts at play here and as I stated, I have owned Wadia gear for extended periods. Unfortunately, given your posts in this thread, it does not appear that you want to accept anything other than your own opinion. No use in further wasting my time. Enjoy.
you, and anyone else, can believe whatever you choose to believe: some people believe in santa clause, the easter bunny and the tooth fairy, but that's their choice. from my perspective, knowledge has value. the idea of "you don't have to read - just trust your ears" struck me as stunningly ignorant: if you "trust your eyes" you could draw the erroneous conclusion that the sun revolves around the earth... but don't take my word for it on how the wadia works. you, and anyone else here who can understand the subject matter, would serve yourselves well to actually read the wadia white papers that describe various aspects of the system. as white papers go, they are relatively short and not heavily technical, so they are fairly easy to read. the reason why i value understanding how stuff works is because on audiophile forums and reviews, i often read authoritative sounding statements that are patently ridiculous. understanding underlying principles is a way that i separate the wheat from the chaff...and believe me, there is a lot of the latter out there. |
I understand the concepts at play here and as I stated, I have owned Wadia gear for extended periods. Unfortunately, given your posts in this thread, it does not appear that you want to accept anything other than your own opinion. No use in further wasting my time. Enjoy. |
11-30-10: Bar81
Unfortunately Paperw8, what you fail to realize is that the concept is quite simple. The Wadia is trying to do two jobs - that of a CD player and that of a preamplifier. It should come as no surprise that a top flight dedicated preamplifier, such as the Ayre KX-R, which is focused on a singular task, will outperform the all-in-one digital preamplifier in the Wadia.
you are comparing apples and oranges because, as i explained, the wadia preampliifer operates in the digital domain while the ayre preamplifier operates in the analog domain. so your statement is incorrect that the wadia is doing *two* things - in reality, the wadia does *one* thing: digital signal processing. since the wadia performs preamplification in the digital domain, that constitutes part of "digital signal processing" which is what the unit does anyway. thus, there is no need for separate "fixed" and "variable" outputs as i previously stated.
11-30-10: Bar81
Accordingly, you actually are entering into your analysis backwards since your basic assumption, i.e., that the Wadia produces an "uncolored" presentation, is incorrect. Rather, the Wadia is coloring the sound via the suboptimal volume control in its digital preamplifier.
i will accept your statement that the wadia colors the signal. in fact, wadia does something called "resolution enhancement". ostensibly, the purpose of resolution enhancement is to reduce DAC errors by randomly augmenting the signal. but notwithstanding the rationale, resolution enhancement is a coloration of the signal (although wadia's claim is that in the end you get a "truer" analog signal). however, that a wadia-colored signal is passed to the preamplifier so net net result that you get is a wadia-colored *plus* preamplifier-colored signal. it is then up to the individual to decide which sounds good to him. it's just that it is my preference to also understand how stuff works because that allows me to get a sense of which explanations make sense and which ones don't.
11-30-10: Bar81
With regard to your argument that there is no way to turn off the digital preamplifier in the Wadia; while that is technically accurate, even Wadia itself admits that the preamplifier portion of their players do the least harm to the signal as you go higher up in the volume range. Accordingly, 100 volume (i.e., using a preamplifier) must impose the least harm to the signal as it exits the Wadia.
i don't know how much you know about digital signal processing, but i explained all of this in one of my previous posts - it's the part where i talked about the 16-bits resolution and 21-bits resolution stuff. if you do understand this stuff, then i would suggest that you read the wadia white papers; if you don't, then those papers may be a bit hard to follow; even though i think that wadia tries their best to explain technical material in understandable terms. |
Unfortunately Paperw8, what you fail to realize is that the concept is quite simple. The Wadia is trying to do two jobs - that of a CD player and that of a preamplifier. It should come as no surprise that a top flight dedicated preamplifier, such as the Ayre KX-R, which is focused on a singular task, will outperform the all-in-one digital preamplifier in the Wadia.
Accordingly, you actually are entering into your analysis backwards since your basic assumption, i.e., that the Wadia produces an "uncolored" presentation, is incorrect. Rather, the Wadia is coloring the sound via the suboptimal volume control in its digital preamplifier.
With regard to your argument that there is no way to turn off the digital preamplifier in the Wadia; while that is technically accurate, even Wadia itself admits that the preamplifier portion of their players do the least harm to the signal as you go higher up in the volume range. Accordingly, 100 volume (i.e., using a preamplifier) must impose the least harm to the signal as it exits the Wadia.
My practical experience over many years with Wadia products, most recently the Wadia 861se GNSC Statement running direct, through an ML 326S and through an Ayre KX-R is consistent with the foregoing.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, you will get no argument from me regarding the fact that most preamplifiers on the market color the sound and that it is often just this coloration that the owners enjoy (whether they like the coloration itself or that coloration counteracts another coloration produced by a different component in their system). |
