I wonder what is in the V-DAC?

[jonp]

I can't stand it when MF keep saying their stuff is full of state of the art technology but never tell us what is inside.

So who will be the first to get one and bust it open?

I am actually looking for a DAC to run between my Sony PCM D50 and my X-Can. The onboard DAC in the Sony isn't up to the standards of either my ASUS Xonar or Auzentech Prelude soundcards. I wonder whether this gadget might cut the mustard? Possibly a bit expensive at $350 US though. Considering the spartan packaging (in both respects), it would really want to be state of the art inside.

[Deleted]

jonp
Typical MF BS! The few available reviews don't say much more than O.K. from what I can see.

How do you rate the ASUS Xonar or Auzentech ? 1. Against say, the Creative X-FI series.
2.Each other ?
I have been waiting for the Xonar to come down in price. I may have a long wait ?

SandyK

[jonp]

If you have any links to reviews I'd be interested to see them. I haven't found any yet, though I have heard that What Hi Fi liked it (and of course they hated the V-Can).

Anyway, I am probably not the best person to ask about soundcards. I love both the Xonar and the Prelude and they both work happily and flawlessly side by side in the same PC. The reason I have both of them is that I use the Xonar to perform DSP processing (Dolby Headphone and some very subtle EQ) from an analogue input (phono amplifier) and the Xonar then passes that signal digitally (via coax) to the Prelude for bitperfect capture. This gives me headphone-ready recordings at extremely high quality.

If I had to pick out differences between them, the DAC circuitary on the prelude sounds smoother, more buttery and more laid back than the Xonar, but at the same time a little restricted in punch and dynamics. The DAC circuitary in the Xonar is more punchy, is more forward sounding and has more stage depth, but in saying that both of them are very listenable for very long periods and cause zero listening fatique.

This is all playing into my XCan V3 with Tesla (Siemens copy) valves. If I plug the Sony D50 directly into the Xcan, you can hear the much lower quality from the onboard DAC in the Sony right away - no question. Both the Prelude and Xonar are a big step up from the Sony. But run the Sony optical output into either the Prelude or Xonar and it sounds just as good as the soundcards - though for some reason just a tad less dynamic and a tiny bit more aggressive sounding.

Both the Xonar and Prelude are extremely well built and feel like they would serve in several generations of PCs - really solid stuff. They seem very stable and the software is quite well sorted (the Prelude iteration of the Creative software is much better in my opinion than Creative's own version of it.

One thing that counts against the Xonar is that the digital outputs (either coax or optical) are only 16 bit, despite the fact that ASUS claim it can handle 24 bits. It can't, and you only need to make bitperfect copies out of the outputs to see this shortcoming. It doesn't matter if you select 24 bits or 16, you still only get 16 out of the digital output. Having said that, there seems to be some sort of "super bitmapping" process going on (to steal the term from Sony), since the 16 bit output with 24 bit selected does sound more detailed and clearer than the 16 bit output with 16 bit selected.

In my own experiments, I think the ADC capabilities of the Xonar are a little bit overrated. If I make a copy of an LP at 24-192, I can still hear the difference between the original analogue and the digital copy, and it isn't hard to hear this difference, even to my old, tired ears. It's the same with the Prelude too. Digtial theorists keep telling me the differences should be inaudible if everything works as it should according to theory, but I guess I have never had the privilage of hearing digital theory work in practice.

All said and done, if I did not have a need to process an input for headphone listening, I would probably pick the Prelude over the Xonar - Creative headphone stuff is absolutely horrible and I think there is unanimous agreement there from anyone with functional ears).

Back on the subject of DACS, if I could get an external DAC that was as good as either of these soundcards, I would actually be pretty happy. To me, the test of a good audio anything is how long you can listen to it without fatique setting in. With either the Xonar or Prelude, I have to drag myself away.

[Deleted]

jonp
Have a look at whathifi.com/forums/t/135729.aspx

SandyK

[jonp]

Thanks. I think Borders might have the What Hi Fi issue in stock, so I might go down there on Monday and pick it up. 4 Stars is pretty good - I'm sure if they sonically tested the Xonar or Prelude DAC capabilities, they would probably get 3 or 4 stars at the absolute most.

I like that the V-DACis upsampling, as I notice if I run the optical output of the Sony into the Xonar and select the 192 Khz sampling rate on the Xonar (the output from the Sony is 96 khz), then there is quite a noticeable imporvement in the sound.

The problem though is what sort of incredibly rediculous price will this sell for in Australia? I still can't believe that quoted $999 price for the V-Can. That surely, surely, surely, surely has to be a mistake, especially when they quote that they are pleased to have been able to offer it at such a great price Either that or I predict the total sales of those units will amount to zero - especially as one can buy it from the US for $199 US.

So I now see that you will be able to buy a V-DAC in the US for $299 US, but that only includes the US wall wart. I don't know whether the power supply output is A/C or D/C.

Although it clearly did not win the shootout comparison, it looks like the V-DAC might compare favourably when things such as size matter. There are not that many DACs around that small at a similar price and which upsample to 192 Khz. Actually I can't think of any. Are there any others?