Hi Rayooo
I didn't check anything at 96k since 192k was available. I did notice a bit more detail with 192k up-sampling and native 192k was better again. Did'nt have 96k to check out but I would imagine up-sampling 96k to 192k would not be much if any better. However I would still do it. The reason I do up-sampling in J River rather than let the ESS DAC do it is the up-sampling algorithms in J River are state of the art right now while the up-sampling used in the ESS are not that recent and the DAC chip probably doesn't have the processing power of your PC which limits how good the up-sampling can be.
Thanks
Bill |
I did a quick listen to 192 then switched down to 96. Really can't say I detected any difference, but I did not really listen enough to make that determination conclusively.
I was assuming as you state, all being equal in the upsampling technique, should be no difference. If however the upsampling at one end is better, then obviously there could be a benefit using one way vs the other.
thanks for confirming what I thought I was thinking. :) |
Technically for the reasons I outlined I go 192k, but it would come as no surprise to me if 96k is just as good audibly. Actually I was just speaking to Eric Hider at dB Audio Labs the makers of the Tranquility and he says the best recordings he has ever heard were straight bog standard CD audio - but specially mastered direct from tape. High res is better but there is surprising quality to be found in bog standard 16 bit.
Thanks
Bill |
YES! I've got a handful of standard CDs (some purchased many years ago) that are as good and some cases sound better than recordings I have on 96/24.
I have to laugh sometimes, the first Audio CD I ever purchased, 'had to be early 80's (Nightlfy, Donald Fagen) to this day is a better sounding recording than 80% of the CDs I've purchased since.
I shouldn't be laughing though, it's a tragedy that 80% of standard CDs I've purchased in 25+ years are pure crap sound quality wise.
PS I'm liking the W4SDAC2, 'seems to be a good match for CJ ET3SE. Only 15 or so hours on it thus far though. |
|
Hi Bill,
I was wondering if you have had an opportunity to audition the Tranquility Dac as of yet? You originally thought you might receive it back on the 18th. |
Haven't had a chance to audition the Tranquility yet. Due to some issues there is no need to go into about here it will be shipped to me in Australia Monday. It was going to be part of a DAC shootout Saturday week and there is now some doubt it will not reach here in time for that. I will keep my fingers crossed but it will be tight.
Thanks
Bill |
Thanks Bill,
Looking forward to your report.
Take care,
No Regrets |
Hi Guys
The Tranquility just arrived. Have done a quick evaluation with a Windows Notebook which is far from its optimum setup. Already however to our ears we think it is better than the WFS - no trace of the sibilance issue. Both Dianna Krall and Tom Jones Praise and Blame sounded very fluid, liquid and musical. Maybe not quite the detail of the WFS. The output stage, while solid state, sounds very non solid state like.
What is planned is it will remain down at Mike Lenehans for a few days while he checks it out further. I will contact Eric Hider to set up the Mac Mini optimally then we can give it a serious evaluation.
Thanks
Bill |
Hi Bill,
Thanks for the quick update! Looking forward to hearing more from your "serious evaluation".
What is it about using windows that makes it far from optimum? If I were to get this, I'd be using it with my laptop which is Windows Vista Home Premium....would this not be compatible or not recommended?
Thanks |
The guy whose reference system we tried it out on did some further investigation when I left and this is what he posted in an unrelated thread on another forum (it was about a DAC shootout we were at):
Bill had a normal Laptop and I think he was using I River (it was J River) software. First impressions were ! well a little underwhelming. Nice and smooth to be sure , top end seemed a little down to me and the bass was Ahh lazy ! It did nothing wrong but it did nothing right either ! the ConnorNM24 killed it in my view. OK so bill leaves and I thought Id just drop my Compaq laptop on and feed it some of my wav files from I tunes. HOLY SMOKE what just happened, It was instantly competitive with the NM24. This little alloy brick thingy must be very sensitive to what USB signal its fed. More on this device soon when we feed it with a Mac mini ( as recommended by Eric Hider ) It did however trail behind the NM24 overall and particularly in the bass , being still a touch inarticulate and rounded. Resolution was very good with no hardness or detectable digititis evident Perhaps with MacMini integration we could have a real competitor. Although Mr Hider hasnt stated what DAC is being used it sounds very 1704 ish to me.
So bottom line here is even with a bog standard windows machine we were achieving results comparable to an uber expensive heavily tweaked statement DAC. However this is getting a bit out of the scope of this thread. For you guys it is probably best to follow it on the thread in Audio Circles where I will be posting this stuff.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=74816.440
Thanks
Bill |
Has anyone tried the Wyred 4 Sound C1 Ultra Analog Balanced Cables? Looking to upgrade to balanced cables and was so happy with the Wyred 4 Sound DAC1 thought I might try the C1 Ultra Cables. They cost $119.00.
Thoughts? Experiences? Other balanced cable choices in this price range? |
I haven't tried their cables yet, but going from single ended to balanced did give me a larger soundstage. |
i've had a Wyerd DAC1 running for about a week now - previously, i owned Weiss Minerva and Musical Fidelity Tri Vista... the Wyred is my favorite of the three. seems to combine the best traits of my prior DACs - has the detail and resolution of the Weiss, while maintaining the extraordinary soundstage and realism of the Tri Vista. it's a fantastic DAC, and a ridiculous bargain at its price.
@Ronwills... i've used balanced cables from audio art and sound silver - both sound fantastic, albeit slightly different. |
@ bhobba
What settings were you using in JRiver?
That actually have a new WASAPI mode out now (this week). |
EJ recommended, and what I used, was Kernel Streaming Tried ASIO but it did not work. It's not hard to try various modes and see what you like best. However I have now switched to using the Mac OS rather than Windows and have found Play to be a bit clearer than JRIVER so that is what I now use.
However right now I have a stinking case of severe bronchitis and the last thing I feel like doing is listen to Hi Fi.
Thanks
Bill |
>What settings were you using in JRiver?<
I more or less have stumbled into getting this set up:
JRiver 15.0.106, Kernel Streaming, Win7 (64bit)
USB to W4SDAC2 using W4S USB Driver.
working very well! |
Thats it. But I have found Play under the MAC to be a bit better - clearer to my ears.
Thanks
Bill |
New here but have been following this thread for a while. I also have the DAC2 and tried the JR with XP however, using KS and have been thinking to buy the full license. It is very musical, relaxed and very resolving I may add.
My setup is:
XP with W4S Asynch drivers and JR(KS) or XXHighEnd(KS) (testing both currently)
USB (WW Starlight6 usb)
DAC2 directly driving the W4S ST500 via balanced ic's.
I used the JR for a few days and the results are very good. Recently I gave a shot to the XXHighEnd which brought things to another level. Specially with female vocals the results are astonishing and there is now lots of air around the singers and instruments. On a side note the nice thing with JR is that you can have it read directly from a CD and output via usb to DAC2 (thus you may not need to turn the CD to FLAC). I also tried the up-sampling (for CD playback) used in JR and it gave me the impression that restricts the air around recordings. The sound does become slightly more analytical but I think there is a slight compression as well. It is best to leave DAC2 do its job alone. JR is very good all around and I may still get it, but memory playing with XXHighEnd seriously got my attention.
Kudos to W4S for such a wonderful DAC (and power amp)!
Cheers and happy listening! |
Digilog5,
What speakers are being driven by the Wyred amp?
While my pre-amp is getting a slight upgrade and a replacement volume pot, I'm going straight from my DAC-2 to my Musical Fidelity A3.2cr amp and it's sounding a little harsh in the upper register. Wondering if its a weakness in my amp that my pre has been hiding. |
Right now the amp drives a pair of ML-Sources due to space restrictions. I also have a pair of older yet wonderful ML SL3s but at a different location which I would like to try with the w4s one day. I am sure it will do fine.
Granted that the little Source has its limitations (in terms of uniformity I would say) it is still very very transparent and still...an electrostat.
Driven from XP with KS and Jriver, the W4S combo sound is wonderful. Never harsh, yet very detailed. Cables are DH labs (BL1 balanced ic & Q10s for the speakers). I also hookedup an old DVDp as transport that was lying around (with a Theta Coax cable) and still the sound was fairly nice, very smooth and relaxed, but felt that using JR with a good USB gave a cleaner sound, more transparent, but never harsh. I actually enjoyed this combo tremendously.
Driven from XP with XXHighEnd, there is additional clarity over JR as if a veil lifted, it is more focused and it does feel a bit brighter now but in a nice way, with some recordings. Nevertheless, the 3D image is outstanding and most recordings sound very good.
I would assume, since the DAC2 is dual differential balanced, theoretically it may be better to drive a dual mono setup with balanced ics. I havent listened to the MF A3.2 Cr amp but given the MF pedigree it should be very musical sounding. Can it be something in the cabling or the speakers themselves? |
Hi Cutterfilm
You may be running into the slight upper midrange issue the Saber chip has. This is an excellent DAC but when compared to much more expensive DAC's you can hear this. It may be inherent to the Saber chip or it may be that it is a difficult chip to work with. When we did our DAC shootout one person rated this DAC better than even the much more expensive reference DAC's we had there which is no mean feat. But I think the comments of one person there summed it up:
'An amazing amount of detail, excellent tonal consistency and powerful bass. But it sounded like you were playing a CD and there were electronic artifacts in the form of a mid treble glare that intruded. Grey background. Microdynamically restricted. However its combination of consistent tonality and detail was impressive in a hifi sense and I can actually believe that some listeners might place this as their favourite.'
You may simply be one of those people who prefer something a little different. I am in that boat as well so don't beat yourself up over it if that turns out to the case. I found I preferred the Tranquility DAC.
Personal preferences and system synergies make it really hard for any one product to do it for everyone.
Thanks
Bill |
Hi Cutterfilm
Oh I forgot to mention I think you have simply run into a system synergy thing that the removal of the pre amp highlighted. I suspect by bypassing the pre amp your system is now more transparent and you can hear some of the issues that were being masked.
Thanks
Bill |
I also have been following this thread as well as the one on AC, and I appreciate its approach and the quality of membership contributions. I understand everyone's qualifications concerning their appreciation of the several DACs discussed.
Having said all that, and because I value that approach and those values, I was wondering if anyone could create a ranking from their point of view concerning the various DACs.
Let me explain myself. I am especially sensitive and irritated by upper mid/lower treb sibilance and glare. When I hear that, regardless of its various phenomena, the enjoyment of music collapses into annoyance and avoidance.
As I read the thoughtful analysis here, I think I'm reading that some members think that the Wyred DAC2 and the Tranquility are highly competitive in many essential respects, but in the area of my concern, the nod appears to go to the Tranquility. I sincerely hope I am not misreading here. My apologies if I am.
Mention has been made of more expensive DACs (ones more expensive than the Wyred DAC-2 and the Tranquility) that solve/address this problem and have the virtues of the Wyred and Tranquility. I am aware of the Ayre Qb-9 being mentioned, perhaps here or in AC.
My question, beyond the Wyred, the Tranquility,and the Ayre, what are others under 3k US$ that members would recommend for consideration?
I use a MacMini, with RSA Alethias USB, and AIFF files into several systems through an iRoc DAC. This DAC works very, very well with two of my systems in all respects; however, on my highest res system, its limitations reveal themselves frequently enough for me to continue my search and exploration.
I have enjoyed the iRoc over the years, have tried other DACs against it, have found some to be a little better and many a little worse, but have not found one that is so much better that I can justify the time, money, and aggravations of change.
DACs seem to be highly system dependent, and the prospect of buying one and taking the time for burn in and cabling to "fit" has seemed very unappetizing. But now I am interested in exploring this further.
My apologies for the long-winded post.
:) listening,
Ed |
I am especially sensitive and irritated by upper mid/lower treb sibilance and glare. When I hear that, regardless of its various phenomena, the enjoyment of music collapses into annoyance and avoidance. I couldn't agree more. Glare and sibilance are show stoppers. My question, beyond the Wyred, the Tranquility,and the Ayre, what are others under 3k US$ that members would recommend for consideration? Bel Canto DAC3 and DAC3.5 are excellent sounding. I'm sure there are others, but I haven't heard them. |
If you are extremely sensitive to sibilance and glare then I believe the WFS will not be your preference. This is not to slight the DAC - it is very hard to make a DAC that will synergige in everyones system to their taste. The tranquility will be a better choice IMHO for you. It was instantly competitive with a very expensive reference DAC that was describes this way:
'But let me say the things a beast ! Ive spent time with a full DCS stack and I can tell you the Connor24 smacks it down simple as that. The 24 is a DCS stack with a velvet glove.'
The Tranquility really is a hard nut to crack. The reason you may prefer the WFS is if you prefer the following type of presentation as described by one person at the shootout:
'An amazing amount of detail, excellent tonal consistency and powerful bass. But it sounded like you were playing a CD and there were electronic artifacts in the form of a mid treble glare that intruded. Grey background. Microdynamically restricted. However its combination of consistent tonality and detail was impressive in a hifi sense and I can actually believe that some listeners might place this as their favourite.'
Thanks
Bill |
Cutterfilm wrote: I'm going straight from my DAC-2 to my Musical Fidelity A3.2cr amp and it's sounding a little harsh in the upper register. Do you notice this harshness more when using lots of attenuation, or is it present equally throughout the DAC2's entire attenuation range? Can you discern any (other) changes in sound quality as attenuation increases? I may be getting this DAC some day and would like to know more about the attenuator's audible characteristics. Thanks. |
Yea it makes sense. The reason I up-sampled everything to 192/24 is I thought it reduced the sibilance control issue better. But what I found was the mac operating system was better, and with further experimenting I found Play with no up-sampling sounded better again - clearer and more neutral to my ears. However interestingly today when we checked out Play on the Tranquility one of the guys thought the bass was a problem. My advice is to suck it and see.
Thanks
Bill |
I am at a loss to understand why Bhobba suffers from glare and sibilance from W4S. From my experience, I could not attribute that to the DAC itself but must conclude its source is upstream in Bhobba's system or in his cables. I have been using the W4S DAC2 for a few months now, probably have about 50 - 75 hrs on it, and if anything I find it on the laid back side of the spectrum (not unpleasantly so , although this may change with greater use.
My source is a CEC TL-1X through a Stealth Sextet AES/EBU digicable to DAC set at fixed output.
Overall, I think it is an exceptional DAC regardless of price and facilities. When those are taken into account it is the proverbial steal. And I went from a Dodson 218, no slouch itself though perhaps a bit dated at this point.
Neal |
I agree, no glare or sibilance here with my DAC-1 or DAC-2. Maybe he has an impedance mismatch or just poor synergy? |
@Face and Nglazer,
Thanks for your points and thoughts. Much appreciated.
Your speculations are exactly the kinds of things, especially the variables of impedance mismatch or poor synergy that daunt me in the DAC ugrade selection process.
Wyred and others don't seem too enthusiastic about a trial period, or mention of a "loaner," and while I understand their point of view regarding this, a poor fit into a system could be expensive on a number of annoying levels. Even the idea of going to a dealer and listening to the DACs in question is problematic given these variables.
I continue to be very interested in audiogoners' careful and thoughtful recommendations; I'm definitely not interested in a bandwagon rah-rah approach.
:) listening,
Ed |
>>Overall, I think it is an exceptional DAC regardless of price and facilities<<
I agree 100% |
Hi Guys
Regarding the glare and sibilance thing its great you guys are not experiencing it. However everyone at the recent DAC shootout heard it and the other DAC's did not have it - well the modded Oppo may have had it a little bit but that was from someone with am exceptional ear who listens to Hi Fi day on day out for a living - I actually didn't hear it in the Oppo. My personal opinion is its a system synergy thing that appears if you system is revealing enough. The system we tried it on at the shootout was very very reveling without going into the details. Buy IMHO it does not have to be uber revealing - it shows up quite easily on my home system. Also I want to emphasize at least one person thought this was the best DAC there which is a really great accomplishment. Just had a chat to the guy that wrote about the WFS at the shootout and he still thinks what he said sums it up:
An amazing amount of detail, excellent tonal consistency and powerful bass. But it sounded like you were playing a CD and there were electronic artifacts in the form of a mid treble glare that intruded. Grey background. Microdynamically restricted. However its combination of consistent tonality and detail was impressive in a hifi sense and I can actually believe that some listeners might place this as their favorite.
As far as hearing one is concerned this DAC is the DAC of the moment right now so if you got one and didn't like you it you should have no trouble on selling it. Its what I did and have no regrets about trying it. I will be getting a good friend who runs a review site to review it then on sell it. I am pretty sure I will get close to what I paid for it.
Thanks
Bill |
I should have been clearer. The issue was a bit of harshness in the upper range when i started to really drive the speakers. That's why I was wondering if it could have been the amp. With the pre-amp in place I settled on a volume of 67. Never had any issues. But now with DAC to amp I sometimes get some harshness on the high level section of a song when I'm cranking it (like Lucinda Williams voice). For me cranking it doesn't mean ear drum shattering. But my neighbors know when I'm home. It seemed like something that could be happening with the amp. Wish I had a multitude of equipment to interchange. As far as a sibilance issue. It doesn't sound like that to me. Not that I haven't heard some. But if I hear a couple seconds of sibilance once every two or three hundred songs, I don't attribute it to the DAC but to the recording or mastering/compression. That's my experience anyway. I listened through headphones straight from the DAC a couple nights ago, didn't really experience the issue. I could try out new cable combos. But sometimes you're just tired of all the experimentation and just want a solution so you can listen. :)
I appreciate everyone who's been comparing their experiences. The biggest difference in equipment is us: our own expectations and preferences. |
Bhobba,
I run the W4S DAC2 with Stealth Indra IC's through a Wyetech Opal pre,to a Krell 300cx with JPS Aluminata IC's, and on to Von Schweikert VR5HSE's using Nordost Valhalla spkr cables. So I do not think it is lack of system resolution that accounts for my --and others -- not noticing any glare or sibilance. Were you using the DAC2 as a pre? Could this have been a contributing factor? Did you try any resonance controls under DAC, or swap input digicable or output IC's?
Neal |
We ran the WFS as a pre. The reference system we used has an extremely good isolation stand. The amp was Macintosh 501's mono-blocks that many rate as possibly the best amps you can buy. The amps were heavily isolated as well. The speakers were Lenehan ML3's reference fully tricked out with Dulund capacitors and hand tuned. These are the bigger brothers of the famous Lenehan Ml1's that are often said to be the best mini monitors you can get. They are dead neutral and include heroic measures to reduce resonance such as lining them with steel. That is just one measure they use. Many, including myself, rate them as simply the finest speakers they have ever heard even above such famous speakers as Quad electrostatics and Martin Logsans. Take my word for it these speakers are as revealing as you can get. This is not just my view - we had a professional reviewer present who has heard more stuff that I can poke a stick at. He was so impressed with these speakers he is getting a pair as am I.
We all heard the sibilance issue as clear as a bell. Neither the Tranquility nor the systems reference DAC had it. It is not just me that heard it - everyone at the shootout including the professional reviewer did as well. I am simply conjecturing it is how revealing the system is that accounts for it. That may not be it. All I can say is I even hear it on my home system. If that is not the case then your guess is as good as mine.
Thanks
Bill |
I don't doubt anything you say, Bhobba. But it is not clear to me (no pun intended) whether you heard the sibilance and glare when using the DAC2 both as a DAC and a pre, or even when using as a DAC alone. If the latter, it may be that the DAC2 is simply over its head as a pre in a system of that level.
Thanks.
Neal |
I have used the DAC2 both as a pre and in a system with a pre. I have noticed zero difference in how the DAC sounds if you set the output to fixed or variable. And the input impedance of the amps I have used should have, and did not, place any strain on the DAC ie it was easily over 10K.
Thanks
Bill |
I think I've cured the sibilance related issue with ths dac. Although it didn't present as sibilance in my system I have experienced a slightly grainy and etched treble and reduced air, ambience and resolution.
The fix was a good quality mains filter - connected to a good quality mains cable. I used 2x ferrite toroids with about 20T on both active and neutral and then bypassed with a 100nF MKP. After doing this the resolution went into a new stratosphere. Sibilance is now very natural - although it is of course still present if on the recording.
|
