|
Post by dalethorn on Jul 14, 2012 23:07:58 GMT
This is my first posting of this semi-formal review, so feel free to rip it apart....
When I connected the AudioQuest DragonFly to my computers I was pleasantly surprised that it interfaced perfectly with no configuration effort. Since the DragonFly is exactly like a typical USB thumb drive, excepting the 3.5 mm jack on the end where headphones and other output devices are connected, the only cable issues occur when you connect something other than a headphone such as powered speakers or a power amp to drive non-powered speakers. In such a case I would recommend a very high quality cable to maintain the full benefit of the DragonFly's sound processing properties.
There is no physical volume control on the DragonFly, no doubt because it's just a small USB device the same size as a typical USB thumb drive. Since you'll need the computer's volume controls with the DragonFly, how they work on the different computers can be a minor challenge. On PC's using Foobar2000, I keep the Foobar volume slider all the way up and open the computer's volume window after Foobar is loaded. I suppose you could set the computer volume to maximum and then use the Foobar slider, but in my case the Foobar volume slider is so small I use the computer slider instead and that works fine. There may be cases where one method is better than the other sonically, but I didn't find that to be significant in my case. On the Apple Mac I use iTunes only with WAV-format files, and there I set the computer volume to maximum and used iTunes' volume slider instead.
One thing I really like about the DragonFly besides the convenience of having a DAC and headphone amp in one little plug-in device is the fact that it doesn't get very warm in use. My air conditioner died about 36 hours ago and I've been running a laptop PC with the DragonFly in an indoor temperature ranging from 86 to 89 degrees F. While the DragonFly feels slightly warm after playing music for a couple of hours, it's surprisingly cool given the ambient temperature plus the fact that all of those electronics and the LED status light are contained in such a small package. The body is 1.75 inches long less the metal USB connector, the width is nearly 0.75 inches, and the height approximately 0.5 inches including the small hump on top which accomodates the 3.5 mm headphone jack. Fortunately the DragonFly includes a good secure cap for the USB connector, but I don't see a way to attach a lanyard to it.
For those people who have been using the headphone jack on their desktop or laptop computers, and assuming that those computers have USB ports, they should expect better sound using the DragonFly instead of the computer's headphone jack. The actual improvement with my computers is a cleaner sound with a greater sense of "space" and "air" around the instruments. The fact that the DragonFly includes both a DAC and headphone amp in such a tiny package suggests to most audiophiles that the DragonFly's sound would be of much less quality than the typical separate DAC's and headphone amps selling for twice as much or more. I don't own the more expensive separates myself, but I have other DAC-plus-headphone-amp devices such as the HRT Headstreamer and Audioengine D1, and I have the HRT iStreamer DAC-only for Apple i-devices that I use with the Objective2 headphone amp.
I don't hear anything to suggest that the DragonFly is less than a good upgrade to the computer's headphone output in spite of the very small size. Doing lengthy comparisons yesterday and today with the DragonFly and my other DAC-plus-headphone-amps, playing a variety of 96 khz music tracks downloaded from the HDTracks and DownloadsNow sites, I don't hear a significant difference between them. I did expect to hear some differences in the ultra-high-frequency harmonics and so on, but in spite of the amazing detail in these tracks and the resolution of the USB DAC/amp devices, there's so little difference that I could easily guess wrong about which is better than the other. I could tell rather easily that these 3 DAC/amps were better than the iStreamer plus Objective2 headphone amp (and I think the limiting factor there is the iStreamer) and better also than the FiiO E17 DAC/amp which has additional features.
I'm going to take a guess here that since the DragonFly costs about $80 USD more than the Audioengine D1 and $110 more than the Headstreamer, and given the very small differences in sound (for the intended users at least), I expect people will buy the DragonFly because of the small size and convenience of not having to use a USB cable, or possibly other reasons. If such a small USB DAC were used with audio systems driving speakers, then one extra little cable would probably not make any difference, especially since the cable carries only digital data and the signal processing and jitter reduction occur after the cable in the DAC. But used with headphones, plugging the DragonFly directly into the USB port without a cable is a great convenience, especially when a laptop computer is being used away from the home desk/workstation.
An important issue to consider when purchasing audio components to improve sound quality is detail, i.e. how much additional detail will be revealed in the music tracks by the new components. It's possible that a new audio component could reveal existing distortions in the recording in a way that makes them less pleasant to listen to, and some buyers may experience that dreaded feeling of "Uh-oh, I need to buy more stuff", or "Crap - this isn't working out the way I expected". I didn't have that issue with the DragonFly though - the sound was more revealing but less harsh, which is interesting since I would normally expect more harshness and sibilance with the greater detail. I suppose it's the natural result of having better components to process the data in those digital music tracks.
Questions have come up in several places as to whether a typical computer's USB port can supply enough power to run the DragonFly's DAC and headphone amp, to provide good volume especially in the bass where the greatest power demands occur, and to have enough headroom to avoid clipping or otherwise distorting the loudest most dynamic music passages. The answer seems to be yes, since I have many FLAC format music tracks with a 96 khz data rate that have extreme dynamics which distort noticeably when sufficient power is not available. Some of those tracks that I've made 320k MP3 copies of for playing on the iPhone will not play on the iPhone at the full volume I prefer because of the extreme dynamics, however those same MP3's will play without clipping on the computer using the DragonFly DAC and headphone amp. Headphones tested with include the Shure 1840, Philips L1, ATH M50, and B&W P3/P5.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2012 23:24:37 GMT
Are you in a position to compare it against a M2Tech HiFace Two and a roughly $150 digital headphone amp? At over two hundred GBpounds the above becomes its automatic competition.
If it can get VERY close then it will win on size/convenience especially with laptops in mind. If not then it's an also-ran.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Jul 15, 2012 0:39:54 GMT
Right off I wouldn't recommend comparing the Hiface2 plus DAC plus amp to the Dragonfly. Both the Audioengine D1 and Headstreamer sound as good as the Dragonfly, are much cheaper, and are made more for desktop use, i.e. they require cables where the Dragonfly's price IMHO is justified only by the extra portability. Plus you can put the Hiface between a computer and D1 if you wish since the D1 has an optical input. I think that would work. Or get a better DAC for the Hiface, but that's out of my budget currently. Any thoughts?
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Jul 15, 2012 0:53:19 GMT
but in my case the Foobar volume slider is so small I use the computer slider instead and that works fine. A very nice first impression review there. Btw, Foolbar volume can be made big. See .............. but I don't see a way to attach a lanyard to it. Eh, you want to carry it around instead of just at the PC where it is most intended to be used? The fact that the DragonFly includes both a DAC and headphone amp in such a tiny package suggests to most audiophiles that the DragonFly's sound would be of much less quality than the typical separate DAC's and headphone amps selling for twice as much or more. Actually, if we hear it thru a real hirez speakerfi system, the differences will be revealed more clearly than thru headfi, not matter what price. We did a cdp pow-wow in Singapore many Jupiter ago and one of them was with the Wadia 170 docker, Apple Ipod thru a highend dac (Sorry, can't remember what dac. Could be the highend Cyrus faintly). We had high expectation of that combo as it was reviewed again and again in even such illustrious mag Stereophile as being no difference between a dedicated CD player and the jazz. You know what, that combo was ranked 2nd last as it was clearly so inferior to even a NAD. An important issue to consider when purchasing audio components to improve sound quality is detail, i.e. how much additional detail will be revealed in the music tracks by the new components. Actually, if based on a very good speakerfi std, just only details is not enough. A better system will put us into an illusionary space that's closer to Live when playing back Live recording sessions. The highs will be smoother and more rounded as in Live. The dynamics will be felt more and we can feel the music more as in Live. We will be more literally in a wall of sound as Ian had described in his professional involvement in band tours, taking, enjoying and absorbing (Yeah, absorbing ) in a more relax manner eventhough loud, when your favourite music is played (not death metal or rap for me). There will not be the dreaded hifish bright sound of those cheap combo setup that we will like to switch off or lower the volume after a short while of critical listening. Yes, we will be completely and mentally teleported to a Live event and letting our guards or hair (if we still have any) down kind of thingy. Lesser of the shock of turning on the hifi and hearing after a session of Live concert. I guess the ultimate yardstick to gauge is still how much of a shock we get on turning on any thing relating to AV after a Live session. Lesser of that shock, the better the setup will be rightfully attributed. the sound was more revealing but less harsh, which is interesting since I would normally expect more harshness and sibilance with the greater detail. That's exactly what is happening and should be judged for a better system.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Jul 15, 2012 1:41:11 GMT
A very nice first impression review there. Btw, Foolbar volume can be made big. See .............. I remember looking at those UI options months ago, and I just said no. I work as a software dev, and I'm up to here (indicating neckline) with software configs etc. - can't take it anymore.... Eh, you want to carry it around instead of just at the PC where it is most intended to be used? Laptop use, a laptop that's carried around, is the only justification I can see for the $250 USD. Actually, if we hear it thru a real hirez speakerfi system, the differences will be revealed more clearly than thru headfi, not matter what price. We did a cdp pow-wow in Singapore many Jupiter ago and one of them was with the Wadia 170 docker, Apple Ipod thru a highend dac (Sorry, can't remember what dac. Could be the highend Cyrus faintly). We had high expectation of that combo as it was reviewed again and again in even such illustrious mag Stereophile as being no difference between a dedicated CD player and the jazz. You know what, that combo was ranked 2nd last as it was clearly so inferior to even a NAD. Anytime an i-device is used, whether docked via analog or i-device-compatible DAC, sounds much worse than the 3 DACs I mentioned (iStreamer being the much worse example). Actually, if based on a very good speakerfi std, just only details is not enough. A better system will put us into an illusionary space that's closer to Live when playing back Live recording sessions. The highs will be smoother and more rounded as in Live. The dynamics will be felt more and we can feel the music more as in Live. We will be more literally in a wall of sound as Ian had described in his professional involvement in band tours, taking, enjoying and absorbing (Yeah, absorbing ) in a more relax manner eventhough loud, when your favourite music is played (not death metal or rap for me). There will not be the dreaded hifish bright sound of those cheap combo setup that we will like to switch off or lower the volume after a short while of critical listening. Yes, we will be completely and mentally teleported to a Live event and letting our guards or hair (if we still have any) down kind of thingy. Lesser of the shock of turning on the hifi and hearing after a session of Live concert. I guess the ultimate yardstick to gauge is still how much of a shock we get on turning on any thing relating to AV after a Live session. Lesser of that shock, the better the setup will be rightfully attributed. That is the impression I get of using the 3 DACs plus headphone amps I mentioned. I don't go into much detail on that since I can't devote the time necessary to make the extensive and possibly expensive tests.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Jul 16, 2012 13:22:53 GMT
I added a Youtube video, but also summarized the other 4 DAC options with headphone amps that I have. youtu.be/NSVu-ZeBH-A
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2012 19:23:32 GMT
Thanks for the review, Dale. An interesting device that may start people to be more interested in proper high resolution digital files. I wonder how good the amp section on that device is?
If it's getting the numbers off nicely, I wondered how the amp sounds as an amp itself since that's the part that could 'colour' up the sound. (Or add noise to the system)
Is it possible to get 'digital' out from an Ipod - send it to an external convertor/amp? If it is, where do you get the leads for this? The Audioengine device looks great.
Where on earth do you get all this gear?
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Jul 16, 2012 20:52:42 GMT
I budget about $1000 USD per month for gear, but sometimes I cheat. So far the only freebie or even a discount was the GMP 8.35D, which by now is in Singapore with a happy owner. The only way I could offer something useful in reviews is pick my way into something priced low enough I could buy a couple of followup items to check against the first item. I had no plan for these DAC's - it just happened. But I'm learning things I don't think I would have from just reading.
Take the ipod/ipad/iphone, even the lowly Shuffle. They pretty much all sound the same, with minor differences depending on the chipset and year of manufacture. Being ignorant of Apple's special recipes for their audio systems, I think the reason they get such consistent sound is the same way L.A. gets such consistent morning traffic on the 405. You accumulate all the cars you can stuff in from numerous ramps and 6 to 7 lanes each way for a few miles, then squeeze it down to 3 lanes shooting past the 110 and 710.
So in the freeway sense we take the side roads past the bottlenecks wherever possible, but in the Apple sense we have few options. One is the ipad camera kit, which I have but haven't used yet. The other is the iStreamer or the more expensive DACs for i-devices like the Fostex. I could be wrong, but I don't trust them to completely eliminate those bottlenecks. I think the reason the iStreamer doesn't sound as good as the other 3 DACs I have (ignoring the FiiO) is because of some Apple logic. The Headstreamer is 1/3 the bulk of the iStreamer and much more convenient to use, yet sounds just like the Audioengine D1 or Dragonfly.
Now you can use the Dragonfly and the D1 (according to the mfr's) as DACs only, since the D1 has analog outputs and the Dragonfly supposedly has a "fixed" output analog mode suitable for speaker driving. The Headstreamer literature seems a little less forthcoming on exactly what might or might not be lost that way with their device.
But when I listen very carefully with the best tracks I have and I don't hear a real difference between these 3 DACs plus amps, I become suspicious that the new breed of chipsets that make these USB-powered amps possible also makes it less likely that they could perform very differently. But then again, maybe the amp is the bottleneck and these DACs would be a lot better with a separate headphone amp. I do have the Objective2 I could test with these to see if that improves things, but I'm not optimistic that it would serve much purpose unless I got a really good headphone amp instead. And that tends to defeat the enormous (to me anyway) breakthrough in technology and personal power these little devices represent, especially the Dragonfly.
So I think I'll sit on my thumbs for a bit and see how things go - there apparently is a rash of these DAC/amps coming out, so I'm almost sure a lot of folks are gonna get stiffed when they make the wrong choice, cheap as they are. I just don't know what's the best choice, but the Dragonfly is a great item to stick in your pocket for emergencies, if nothing else.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Jul 16, 2012 21:08:52 GMT
BTW, after connecting the D1 to the O2 headphone amp (and I don't like the double volume control thing), although I don't hear a difference that jumps out at me (you can plug the headphone into each back and forth, pretty convenient), I see one obvious difference where a separate headphone amp could make for better sound: Dynamics. The USB powered DAC plus amp really has its power limits, and probably is suitable only for very efficient headphones.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2012 21:17:59 GMT
That's very honest of you, Dale. Big price differences but not in terms of what you're getting. Perhaps measurements would show something but not enough for the ears to easily discern.
I would like to sidestep the Ipod analogue output and I have heard that it's possible but never seen anything to connect one digitally to a DAC so I can then put it into a decent amp.
I have a soft spot for Fiio gear. I quite like its warmth as far as the amps go. I have a couple of E11's which are quite nice.
I have a Mini Ape digital player which works extremely well but the idea of a portable DAC and amp is very appealing to someone who is quite often away from home, like me.
An integrated DAC/amp is a sensible idea as long as they don't scrimp on the amp. I've become a bit of a power freak with amps (thanks to the Horizon) and I find the authority that having a lot of power in reserve extremely useful. The Horizon makes all of my headphones seem easy to drive. I think Frans is working on an even higher powered amp as well!!
Have you tried the integrated devices with very low impedance headphones? - great for spotting noisy amps.
It'll be interesting to see what does appear - as you say, there's probably a revier of these about to burst.
I'm more interested in whether it's possible to get digital output from an Ipod. That would be nice and could improve their sound a great deal.
I have the Classic, Touch and 3 versions of the Nano!! All used very heavily.
|
|
|
Post by nonaim on Jul 16, 2012 23:00:21 GMT
Rabbit there is the Onkyo ND-S1 digital iPod dock which bypasses the iPods internal amp and dac and outputs via optical,coaxial or USB to a dac or PC.I think Cambridge audio,Arcam,Wadia and Pure also make them ,although none are for portable use.
|
|
mrarroyo
Been here a while!
Our man in Miami!
Posts: 1,003
|
Post by mrarroyo on Jul 17, 2012 1:08:48 GMT
Actually there are a couple of high priced units that are portable and bypass the iPhone/iPod/iTouch internal DAC and Amp feeding a digital signal to an external amp. Look under Foxtex and Cypher Labs.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Jul 17, 2012 1:16:44 GMT
Here's the possible problem: The ipod doesn't put out a USB digital signal like a computer - it's specially coded by Apple and people who make the ipod-compatible DACs like iStreamer, Fostex, Algorhythm, Nuforce et al have to pay Apple royalties for the rights or the code etc. What I suspect but can't confirm is the signal (hard limited to 48 khz BTW) may just not be as good as what you get from a computer.
Edit: I also think the analog signal from the ipod dock to a FiiO E17 analog input sounds about as good as the iStreamer DAC's processing of the ipod's digital output going to the O2 headphone amp.
Edit_2: My headphones range from 26 to 65 ohms, and I don't hear any noise in the Headstreamer, the D1, or the Dragonfly.
Edit_3: The portability problem with ipods and DACs is the ipod/iphone/ipad doesn't have enough USB power for the DAC. Too many devices and cables are the result. Much simpler to use a small laptop and ideally a Dragonfly, hence no cables at all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2012 7:02:22 GMT
Yes, that's a great problem so you are kind of limited in choice.
Interesting that you don't hear much difference between analogue out and digital, Dale. I guess, I expected it to be a little 'cleaner' sounding.
I think you're right - the Dragonfly is nice given that there is a distinct lack of wires and it's a simple plug in device for the computer.
I thought that by 2012, digital amps would have been the 'norm' for home set ups. You know, stright out from CD player into external DAC/amp and on to speakers but it never happened big time.
Obviously, most think that the CD digital converters are fine.
I had visions of it all contained at the speaker end way back!!
The Dragonfly isn't widely available yet in the UK. I just had a look. I found a place retailing it at a gobsmacking £215. I could buy a decent portable amp for that money.
I've often looked at the Ray Samuels amps since they do get great write ups, but the problem for us lot in the UK is that the amps aren't that cheap and then we get VAT smacked on to the top and it just gets a bit too much for a portable!!
The idea of getting the digital away from the Ipod into a quality converter followed by a quality amp is very tempting - especially portable for hotel moments!!
Again, you may be right - wait for more to roll out; as they probably will!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2012 7:45:34 GMT
There are already amps that are digital and use the same technology as DAC's (bit stream delta Sigma). These are the so called class-D and class-T amps. The T class is basically a class-D with a slightly different overall feedback configuration. One would indeed expect a simple coupling from such an amp into the digital signal but I figure there is a good reason it isn't done. Consider this: Firstly everyone has experienced glitches and 'ticks' e.t.c. These can be at max volume. Now consider you have a 250W or 400W class-D module that occasionally 'ticks' or makes loud 'crackling' noises at maximum power. It would be standing by the dustbin soon as no-one would like that. Also consider this (though less relevant). Most people play at levels of 1W (normally). take the 250W module again and assume 22 bits resolution at max volume (a very good design). at 1W this is around 25dB below max volume and would be 'wasting' a lot of resolution (say around 4 to 6 bits). In fact that's what happens with all class-D and class-T amps in real life when played at 'normal' levels. But don't think analog is much better as the noise floor and distortion floor of an analog amp has more or less the same effect. Most (common) analog amps however do not deliver 250 to 400W. When you look at the impressive opamps with 0.00003% distortion this is ONLY at output levels close to the maximum range and at -30dB it may already in the 0.01 to 0.03% region as well. (still pretty inaudible) Anyhow ... the same problem arises with digital volume control and is THE reason for having 24 bit DAC's in the first place so you can attenuate digitally and still have at least 16 bits resolution left. So connection problems/glitches may be the factor that is preventing the all digital chain to happen. Funnily enough I never hear audiophiles (except Alex) complain about class-T(D) amps when played at 'normal' levels to lack resolution while and still want 32 bits or 24 where the actual signal at those levels is closer to 16-18 bit resolution. Given that normal SPL is around 90dB (pretty loud already) would suggest that a S/N ratio of above that would suffice so 16 bits is already good enough to 'describe' even signal changes that are well below the audible treshold.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2012 8:26:39 GMT
Frans You know damn well I won't use Digital amps, so why drag me into this comment ? I refuse to use them except where they may be in TVs etc. and I have no choice IF I wish to listen to audio directly from pissy little inbuilt TV speakers,because of the mains and other pollution they create. Their deleterious effects on other mains powered source components is well documented, as is their typical lack of longevity. Alex
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2012 8:41:12 GMT
Alex,
I think you misunderstood, I clearly EXCLUDED you in particular because I know you don't like these amps. My remark specifically states that you complain about these amps while the rest does not. Most reservations you have I share...
Fortunately, considering hearing being not nearly as good as people think/hope it is, these amps are generally well liked, even by most audiophiles, and heard no-one complain about lack of resolution or sound quality.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2012 8:50:12 GMT
Alex, I think you misunderstood, I clearly EXCLUDED you in particular because I know you don't like these amps. My remark specifically states that you complain about these amps while the rest does not. Most reservations you have I share... Fortunately, considering hearing being not nearly as good as people think/hope it is, these amps are generally well liked, even by most audiophiles, and heard no-one complain about lack of resolution or sound quality. Frans That may have been your intention, but that is still how I read what you have written there. Alex
|
|
|
Post by freddypipsqueek on Jul 17, 2012 8:51:30 GMT
Dale.
I agree with your comments about ipods and the digital out. I do have a Wadia i170 dock (now in a box) which i tried with my dac. It was not bad but given the cost did not compare well against a PC. I understand the Wadia can be imporved, and the ipod is a very convenient source, but it is, in my opinion, another case of Apple making money out of a product which doesn't really deliver.
|
|
mrarroyo
Been here a while!
Our man in Miami!
Posts: 1,003
|
Post by mrarroyo on Jul 17, 2012 9:55:55 GMT
Actually, Alex does own a T-Amp but his has a pair of valves as buffers!
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Jul 17, 2012 13:44:19 GMT
Dale. I agree with your comments about ipods and the digital out. I do have a Wadia i170 dock (now in a box) which i tried with my dac. It was not bad but given the cost did not compare well against a PC. I understand the Wadia can be imporved, and the ipod is a very convenient source, but it is, in my opinion, another case of Apple making money out of a product which doesn't really deliver. I'm aware that ipods etc. can be "jailbroken" for various purposes, to put unapproved apps and/or lossless music on them, but I don't know about breaking the digital code. Since the ipad can use a normal DAC directly with the ipad camera kit, if the DAC is powered separately, that should produce the same sound as any USB, and it's a shame that the iphone and ipod cannot follow the ipad on that. But OTOH, as I illustrated in the Dragonfly video, DAC with ipods really isn't very effective compared to computers because of all the components and wires. Even if as a transport the ipod would sound as good, the memory limit with lossless music kills it on that point as well. To be honest, the last person I knew who had a really great vision for handheld (pocket size) computer power was Bill Hewlett back around 1974. Steve Jobs is a pitiful comparison to Hewlett, who BTW was a co-founder of Silicon Valley.
|
|
XTRProf
Fully Modded
Pssst ! Got any spare capacitors ?
Posts: 5,689
|
Post by XTRProf on Jul 17, 2012 16:17:53 GMT
And people say digital is digital? Wait till they compare something out from Ipod thru a Wadia and the same resolution thru a proper CDP or even universal player like Oppo 95. Then they can have a surprised bye bye look if they are unbiased and are all ears out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2012 16:20:53 GMT
That was a nice demo of the options available, Dale. I'd recognise your hands now anywhere!! You''ll have to put a mugshot on one day. I had one of the Meier audio portable dac/amps at one time. I really liked its sound from the computer but hated the nasty battery arangement. I thought that was really naff. I can't find the damned thing now but it relied on a piece of foam on the back plate to push the battery onto its connectors which was just poor. You can imagine how the foam eventually gave up and had to be changed or else the battery just broke contact. It also had a very silly, shiny volume knob that was too small to grab. However, it was quite decent coming from usb. Not great, but ok. I must try to find it. With the way that the Dragonfly connects, I'd always be worried about stressing the usb plug by having a headphone cord attached. I don't worry too much about connections and wires portable - I try to find bags that hold it all together in one piece or else just use the ie8 direct. Eventually, I guess we'll all be using digital files rather than CD's.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Jul 17, 2012 17:45:01 GMT
And people say digital is digital? Wait till they compare something out from Ipod thru a Wadia and the same resolution thru a proper CDP or even universal player like Oppo 95. Then they can have a surprised bye bye look if they are unbiased and are all ears out. The ipod is hard-limited to 48 khz, so whether you stop at 96 with USB DACs, or have the means to play 192 or even 384 khz, the ipod is in the same evolutionary position as the early CD players. I'm looking for an ipod equivalent that has internals like the Dragonfly DAC and at least 256 gb memory. Perhaps even Apple is paying attention.
|
|
|
Post by dalethorn on Jul 17, 2012 17:49:14 GMT
That was a nice demo of the options available, Dale. I'd recognise your hands now anywhere!! You''ll have to put a mugshot on one day. With the way that the Dragonfly connects, I'd always be worried about stressing the usb plug by having a headphone cord attached. I always connect the headphone first. Then the weight isn't an issue when the USB port is vertical, and when horizontal like laptops, rest the cord on the table. I'm waiting for the need to show face on youtube - I have a source for wig and wraparound shades, but so far not needed.
|
|