|
Post by krisno on Jan 11, 2008 18:07:28 GMT
Hello I just received the X-Dac V3 from a UK seller on e-bay, but I am abroad so I can't test this before beginning of february. Anyways, I have some questions which I hope you can answer. 1) I am using the X-Can v3, as this amp is tube, there is no point of me getting the MF Tube output buffer as well. I mean, this is only needed if you want that 'tube' sound from equipment that contains no tubes, yes? 2) I got the little pinkie v3 on the X-can v3. I never tried the stock wallwart at all. I think somebody said that little pinkie on the x-can v3 gives more of an improvement than on the x-dac. Is there really any big benefit on getting a second little pinkie for the X-dac also? (with 2 little pinkies you get close to the price of a x-psu alone). 3) How good is this MF dac. I remember listening to a NAD 541 CD-player the other day(its based on burr-brown chip), will the MF-DAC be better sounding than this? How many of you people use a standalone DAC these days?? Standalone cd/dvd player has little future, get a DAC and HDMI video cable straight from the computer and you get very high quality image and video for very little money. Also, everyone plays mp3/flac these days, why get anything else than a DAC Kris
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2008 21:07:30 GMT
Speak for yourself !!! 2 Little Pinkies will outperform the MF transformer, which invariably will have some degree of interaction between it's various loads Even better, get something like an Oppo DV981HD DVD-A/SACD Universal player with HDMI, do a few simple mods to the chassis dampening and it's Switchmode PSU, then feed it into a quality DAC, or use the provided HDMI. Via SPDIF it is even possible to use digital remote volume control ! SandyK BTW, just as amatter of interest, I recently saw a review of the Denon DCD-700AE compact disk player. It is expensive at AU$699 including GST, but has superlative performance, and has a linear PSU and separate large PCB for audio output filtering and digital output. It is rather unique in that not only does it have SOA performance, including superb low level linearity, as well as EXTREMELY flat frequency response from 2HZ to 20KHZ, including +-.03db from 20HZ to 20KHZ !!! , but NO measurable sampling artifacts at it's output !!!
|
|
|
Post by krisno on Jan 11, 2008 21:50:15 GMT
Please, you did not really answer any of my 3 questions....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2008 22:24:56 GMT
Krisno The majority of these questions have been thrashed out many times previously in this forum. It isn't possible to give a definitive answer on what another person will hear, and prefer. We can only advise based on personal experience and technical quality. It also depends how far you are prepared to go in the pursuit of excellence. The experience of myself and several other friends in Sydney with the X-DAC V3 , was that straight out of the box, using the supplied wallwart, it was markedly improved when compared with a typical common denominator CD/DVD player. It was however not in the same league as equipment such as the Marantz SA11. This led to 3 heavily modified X-DAC V3s in Sydney, which IMHO , now outperform the >AU$4,000 Marantz SA11 on Redbook CD. I have no experience of the NAD 541 CD player, so I left this for someone else to comment about. I declined to comment on Q1 as my views on valve amplification are well known, and any comment from me would have been seen to be extremely biased. It is however, highly likely that a decent buffer, whether valve OR solid state will give an audible improvement when used in conjunction with el cheapo source equipment. I would expect that the MF valve output buffer would not greatly change the signature of the preceeding equipment, as it's primary use is for a lower impedance drive to the next stage, thus making it more tolerant to different types and lengths of interconnects,while maintaining minimal loading on the preceeding stage. This is the function of all buffer stages, whether for audio or video use.
SandyK
|
|
|
Post by fanboi on Jan 11, 2008 23:31:09 GMT
WRT Q1 - what sandy says re the purpose of a buffer stage. I use a Burson solid state buffer between my DAC and amp. Have tried it on a friends system between his CDP analogue out and amp and it gave a marked and immediately noticeable improvement, sufficient that he wanted one himself and straight away! I think it better than the X10D and I use valve amps but I do not think you would think them "warm" sounding, in fact, from the same source, I think the Solo headamp sounds warmer (slightly). The friend whose SS system I tried the Burson buffer in has unkindly called my system "analytical" although I notice he added a pair of addon tweeters to his Tannoys after listening to my system and discovering cymbals on some of his recordings.
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Jan 12, 2008 9:10:56 GMT
Hello I just received the X-Dac V3 from a UK seller on e-bay, but I am abroad so I can't test this before beginning of february. Anyways, I have some questions which I hope you can answer. 1) I am using the X-Can v3, as this amp is tube, there is no point of me getting the MF Tube output buffer as well. I mean, this is only needed if you want that 'tube' sound from equipment that contains no tubes, yes? 2) I got the little pinkie v3 on the X-can v3. I never tried the stock wallwart at all. I think somebody said that little pinkie on the x-can v3 gives more of an improvement than on the x-dac. Is there really any big benefit on getting a second little pinkie for the X-dac also? (with 2 little pinkies you get close to the price of a x-psu alone). 3) How good is this MF dac. I remember listening to a NAD 541 CD-player the other day(its based on burr-brown chip), will the MF-DAC be better sounding than this? How many of you people use a standalone DAC these days?? Standalone cd/dvd player has little future, get a DAC and HDMI video cable straight from the computer and you get very high quality image and video for very little money. Also, everyone plays mp3/flac these days, why get anything else than a DAC Kris Q1. Concur. Q2. Definitely. Higher VA rating the better. Q3. I have a NAD 502 lying around and gave it a spin. The X-dac V3 is more detail and with better presence. The NAD can sound euphonic capturing a big volume of the recording space. I love the NAD on how it convey vocal, classical and some jazz music. However, once the 2354 goes into the x-dac it can sound the same as well as the NAD with better refinement over the NAD. Of copurse, I've not moded the NAD yet but stock I love it and most probably will be keeping it. The NAD uses a Philips CDM4 transport which is amongst the best cd mechanism that you can buy. It will outperform those from cheaper Pioneers and the likes.
|
|
leo
Been here a while!
Team wtf is it?
Posts: 3,638
|
Post by leo on Jan 12, 2008 12:24:24 GMT
A good modified external dac should blow the Nad out of the water, I've modded a Nad S500 silverline, it was improved but my PCM1794 dac knocked it stone dead
|
|
|
Post by krisno on Jan 12, 2008 18:48:51 GMT
You really have to mod everything to make it sound good?
I am suprised if the MF DAC doesn't beat the NAD cdplayers, but then again, CD player cannot be connected to a computer(normally), and a DAC can.
The hifi guys just hasn't understood it yet, it takes time to trickle through. The main 'station' will not be centered around the cdplayer but the computer. Lossless downloads from Itunes, etc.
LP might stay though.... but that is my not so humble opinion.
It seems like noone of you have tried the x-dac v3? ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2008 0:59:27 GMT
Krisno Intel and Microsoft have been trying to do this for years with very limited success. Intel high definition audio, for example, when was the last time you saw it actively promoted ? While the tech types squabble over Linux vs. Microsoft, the average person, who is already pissed off with ongoing security problems with most operating systems, and believe me, if Microsoft loses market share, the other vendor's products will soon have the attention of hackers, won't embrace this new concept designed in the main, to make Microsoft and Intel etc. even richer. The sad fact is that too many people have had problems with operating systems and poorly written software, that the PC as the hub of entertainment in the home will remain mainly in the realm of dreamers like yourself. She who must be obeyed will almost certainly be the deciding factor on whether this lower performing concept fails or succeeds. Do you really think that serious vinyl listeners will want to play their fragile medium through an inherently electrically noisy environment like a PC ? SandyK
|
|
leo
Been here a while!
Team wtf is it?
Posts: 3,638
|
Post by leo on Jan 13, 2008 3:33:58 GMT
You really have to mod everything to make it sound good? If you heard one of my units then you'd understand why Not meaning to sound like a big head but I've listened to so many commercial units and not once thought "I wish I had one of those" How many times do you see me moan on here complaining I'm not happy with my system? How many times have I posted anywhere asking for advice for a dac or CDP?
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Jan 13, 2008 3:44:46 GMT
You really have to mod everything to make it sound good? I am suprised if the MF DAC doesn't beat the NAD cdplayers, but then again, CD player cannot be connected to a computer(normally), and a DAC can. The hifi guys just hasn't understood it yet, it takes time to trickle through. The main 'station' will not be centered around the cdplayer but the computer. Lossless downloads from Itunes, etc. LP might stay though.... but that is my not so humble opinion. It seems like noone of you have tried the x-dac v3? ;D In my humble opinion, a full mode NAD will still loose out to a well designed dac with good components in it. Good though the Logitech Transporter (formely slim devices) with lossless audio files, I don't think it will be as good as a proper cd system. I have not compare a dac with the transporter though and wish all having one to report on your findings. X-dac V3, SandyK and me have, fyi.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2008 5:42:12 GMT
In several tests against a Marantz SA11 and a couple of modified X-DAC V3 , IMHO, the transporter had a only a small soundstage and wasn't even in the same ballpark. FLAC is NOT lossless as is claimed. Differences can be clearly heard on my system between a .wav file converted to FLAC, and then back to.wav again , AND then burned to a CD. The original .wav file burned directly to CD has a better soundstage and dynamic range. Yes, this goes against all the claims elsewhere about so called "lossless" files !!! FLAME SUIT ON AGAIN ! SandyK
|
|
pagan
<100
How do I activate my account?
Posts: 81
|
Post by pagan on Jan 13, 2008 8:47:03 GMT
In several tests against a Marantz SA11 and a couple of modified X-DAC V3 , IMHO, the transporter had a only a small soundstage and wasn't even in the same ballpark. FLAC is NOT lossless as is claimed. Differences can be clearly heard on my system between a .wav file converted to FLAC, and then back to.wav again , AND then burned to a CD. The original .wav file burned directly to CD has a better soundstage and dynamic range. Yes, this goes against all the claims elsewhere about so called "lossless" files !!! FLAME SUIT ON AGAIN ! SandyK Flac not lossless? Wav is lossless? If you convert between any lossless format, number crunch the files and their should be no difference. Flac or Wav on CD? isn't that something to do with the equipment playing the cd or at least it's conversion to a format the DAC can convert.?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2008 9:33:30 GMT
Allan I have posted this several times before,so I won't go through all that "audiodiffmaker " freeware program stuff again. These "lossless " files like FLAC, use special algorithms. Where they seem to come unstuck is at very low level stuff, where much of the ambience is. With the test disc that you have a copy of, there was another version made which used the exact same .wav files off the HDD (after EAC), converted them to FLAC, reconverted them to .wav again, and then burned the result to the same make of CD-R at the same speed. Geoff, and others, have been able to pick the non flac copy as better within 30seconds. This also ties in with comparisons that I made with downloaded .flac CDs where I have been disappointed with the reconverted result in comparison with the purchased CD. I think I still have a copy of the Test disc as derived from .flac conversion and back if you want to compare for yourself. BTW, many people's systems may not be of high enough resolution to readily pick the difference. Alex
BTW, Don't forget that you can burn the exact same unconverted .wav files to a an archival 24K gold Kodak CD-R , and although both discs will give the same checksums, the 24 K gold version has a markedly better soundstage.If you use EAC , you can rip the existing TestDisc to a 24K gold disc,(Woolworths) and you will find the new one sounds better. Try it with your favourite high quality (non Mobile Fidelity Gold) CD
|
|
pagan
<100
How do I activate my account?
Posts: 81
|
Post by pagan on Jan 13, 2008 9:43:07 GMT
Hello 3) How good is this MF dac. I remember listening to a NAD 541 CD-player the other day(its based on burr-brown chip), will the MF-DAC be better sounding than this? How many of you people use a standalone DAC these days?? Standalone cd/dvd player has little future, get a DAC and HDMI video cable straight from the computer and you get very high quality image and video for very little money. Also, everyone plays mp3/flac these days, why get anything else than a DAC Kris Kris It is not just the Dac, it is also the implementation of it. The Nad costs $XXX and it has to be the transport too The MF costs $XXX but it is just a Dac. There are upgrades you can do with both. The Nad to concentrate on the digital side for spdif out. The MF as SandyK has written about. As for a pc as audio server!!!!!!!!!!!!! I prefer my modded CD67 on spdif to dac over the Auzentech X-Prelude based pc. ps You shouldn't use mp3/flac together very different capabilities, do some googling to find out. pps If you think mp3's sound really really good!!!! well!
|
|
pagan
<100
How do I activate my account?
Posts: 81
|
Post by pagan on Jan 13, 2008 10:07:15 GMT
Alex 1 converted from wav to flac then to wav Played on disc by wav all 16/44k1 or 24/96? or converted between? I had eac'd a variety of disc's and converted to either 24/96-/192 flac and/or wave. Then i eac'd disc's to 16/44k1 and same format. Still prefer the cd67 as transport to dac Dac upsamples, but i think it was the noise on spdif out on the pc. allan next i2s output
|
|
|
Post by krisno on Jan 13, 2008 11:59:53 GMT
You have understood very little of what I meant..
1) Vinyl is for the really enthusiast. It is a old medium which gets worn down by use, and its 'big'. CD's take less space, FLAC / MP3(yes I know its lossy!) or .wav files on a harddrive don't take any space at all.
If you get a proper DAC and you have digital out from the computer, you will not get any 'noise' from the computer over into the SP/DIF signal. The computer should act as a transport just as good as anything else. A good DAC makes a difference, a good transport makes zer0.
Do you people know how small bandwidth playing a CD/SACD need compared to everything else a computer does? Remember that at a network technician runs 10gigabit fiber networks through som very cheap cables, not a single 'bit' is lost. CD quality is like 1000kbit pr sec... haha.
Therefor, a good external DAC like the MF X-DAC v3, on spdif out from a computer, is alot more versatile, and alot less expensive than a full DVD / CD system because you pay alot of money for the 'casing', the 'brand', the 'transport' and decoders of a CD player.
Remember that most people use LCD's with HDMI. I have HDMI out on this computer. If you don't need scaling (like a farudja chip), the picture from a computer running HDMI is just as good as any other $20K DVD player running HDMI. It's the same 0's and 1's... the bandwidth needed compared to fiber optics is nothing, and a computer handles 10gbit speeds even on crappy cables.
Thats my view of things...
What I asked for is really, how good is the MF X-DAC compared to a $2000 CD player? Is it the same??
Kris
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2008 12:47:15 GMT
A good transport makes a world of difference, whether in a PC or a CD/DVD player. Yes, the difference that the transport and it's electronics can make is quite obvious through a good DAC. The original designers of the compact disc system also said " it's only 1s and 0s " They forgot about a myriad of other factors such as read jitter, and the processing of the recovered waveform's influence on the sound. Even the construction of the chassis of the player affects the sound, and don't think that a PC with it's rather noisy switchmode supply, and whirring fans is immune to these problems. Even the physical location of the sound card relative to the video card will affect results. I suggest that you find out for yourself how your X-DAC V3 compares with higher priced players, but do remember that the X-DAC V3, like everything else, is built to a price point. That is why many of the forum members invest so much time and money, doing modifications to upgrade the performance that the penny pinching accountants, or mediocre designers who rely only on manufacturer's application notes have stifled.
Please come back to this post again after you have auditioned your X-DAC V3, and we may be on a more similar wavelength ?
SandyK
|
|
pagan
<100
How do I activate my account?
Posts: 81
|
Post by pagan on Jan 13, 2008 13:09:38 GMT
[quote If you get a proper DAC and you have digital out from the computer, you will not get any 'noise' from the computer over into the SP/DIF signal. The computer should act as a transport just as good as anything else. A good DAC makes a difference, a good transport makes zer0.
Do you people know how small bandwidth playing a CD/SACD need compared to everything else a computer does? Remember that at a network technician runs 10gigabit fiber networks through som very cheap cables, not a single 'bit' is lost. CD quality is like 1000kbit pr sec... haha..[/quote]
Have you heard of jitter?
spdif cannot be classified the same as network protocol Network are duplex talk both ways. spdif, streams data out, with the clock inbedded with the data, one way only, time with the clock, if the dac misses something it's not going to be retransmiitted. Good dac's can recover some data within corrupted spdif, depends how good the dac's algarithem's are.
|
|
leo
Been here a while!
Team wtf is it?
Posts: 3,638
|
Post by leo on Jan 13, 2008 13:22:36 GMT
In several tests against a Marantz SA11 and a couple of modified X-DAC V3 , IMHO, the transporter had a only a small soundstage and wasn't even in the same ballpark. FLAC is NOT lossless as is claimed. Differences can be clearly heard on my system between a .wav file converted to FLAC, and then back to.wav again , AND then burned to a CD. The original .wav file burned directly to CD has a better soundstage and dynamic range. Yes, this goes against all the claims elsewhere about so called "lossless" files !!! FLAME SUIT ON AGAIN ! SandyK Flac not lossless? Wav is lossless? If you convert between any lossless format, number crunch the files and their should be no difference. Flac or Wav on CD? isn't that something to do with the equipment playing the cd or at least it's conversion to a format the DAC can convert.? Flac played back using a pc or recorded to a CD using a pc always sounds worse, no idea why , could be the pc's hardware or software, again no idea. Flac played back using a modified unit like a modified SB3 with all the crap removed out of it like the SMPS's, the output buffer SPDIF chip improved, the XO reclocked, added pulse traffo and feeding an external dac makes it much closer. Feeding an external I2S dac direct is even better. Flac is still not quite as good after all the work but its not bad, most of mine are done using APE or WAV files with a few Flacs in there too. Before one can dismiss a format you need to be sure you've tried all the options, its why I have no huge rush to change from what I use
|
|
leo
Been here a while!
Team wtf is it?
Posts: 3,638
|
Post by leo on Jan 13, 2008 13:30:41 GMT
What I asked for is really, how good is the MF X-DAC compared to a $2000 CD player? Is it the same?? Kris It depends which CDP, some yes the dac maybe better but a good implemented cdp is going to be better than any external dac using SPDIF. The cdp converts its data output to spdif, the external dac has to convert that spdif back to I2S or whatever format the chip needs, during this converting to one thing to another then back again you get errors/jitter. Upsampling can sometimes help but for best results you have to sort the problem out at the main source
|
|
leo
Been here a while!
Team wtf is it?
Posts: 3,638
|
Post by leo on Jan 13, 2008 13:36:16 GMT
Thats the best way to go if you can keep the lines short as poss
|
|
|
Post by krisno on Jan 13, 2008 14:32:47 GMT
yes i2s is supposed to be good. You can get a modded benchmark 1 with sidecar external 'clock' running i2s native from computer..
Anyways! Have I missed out on the Littlie Pinkie...
I read that if you want the best out of the X-DAC and X-CAN V3 you need to use a torroidal transformer. The X-PSU is torroidal, the Little Pinkie V3 is not....
1) Do I get better sound on the X-can v3 with torroidal (x-psu) than little pinkie?
2) Will the X-PSU work better on the X-dac than the littlie pinkie beceause of this?
Can somebody explain me the difference(and then I am finished with the questions. Will try the DAC in beginning of february)
K
|
|
leo
Been here a while!
Team wtf is it?
Posts: 3,638
|
Post by leo on Jan 13, 2008 14:56:44 GMT
E/I core, R -core and C-core based traffo's tend to be better than toroidal's for lower current circuits like dacs etc I've no idea what is used in a little Pinkie. Some of the small encased pcb mount traffo's can be ok too
Having good rectification ,regulation and decoupling is as important as just a better traffo supplying AC. If a dac or any unit has poor decoupling on the DC feeding the various circuitry a better traffo is only going to give slightly better results
|
|
|
Post by krisno on Jan 13, 2008 20:21:39 GMT
So, X-DAC V3 much better with little pinkie or not?
Why does some users say its not as much difference as it is on the x-can with little pinkie?
Btw, i heard the dac is discontinued....
|
|