X-10D adds glorious weight....

[Deleted]

Apr 26, 2010 9:00:33 GMT @sandyk said:

Apr 26, 2010 8:51:53 GMT @iancraig10 said:

Oh, I see. Thanks Alex. So you don't actually need a digital out from the CD player to connect one in ... and different versions give different flavours!!


Sounds a good idea for cheaper CD players. I wonder how much it can do for a higher quality player. Obviously, Miguel reckons it.

Maybe worth investigating next for me then.

I presume that the CD player sees an 'ideal' output resistance in the X-10D and it in turn, delivers an 'ideal' output into the amp? (Whatever that is)

Thanks Alex. I've wondered for some time, but too scared to ask in case y'all think I'm daft or something!!

Ian

Ian
Many people prefer to use the all solid state Burson or Audio GD buffers.
A decent modern CD player that doesn't have valves in it, does NOT need a buffer to drive the next stage properly.
Alex

Thanks Alex. That's what I was wondering. Maybe a cheaper CD player may benefit more than a better one?

I don't know. I've never actually heard an audio buffer in the line. A lot of people report improvements with one though.

Ian

[Deleted]

Maybe a cheaper CD player may benefit more than a better one?

Hi Ian
That is what Nigel found. He no longer needed his after upgrading. (See Nigel's recent post.) I seriously doubt that there would be any worthwhile gain other than added warmth with a modern CD player when using a valve buffer. A solid state Burson MAY be a different story, and PERHAPS the latest X10. Personally, I do not believe you need a buffer with a half decent CD player these days. Don't forget that Miguel loves tubes in everything, including CD players, and they would benefit in most cases from a good buffer to help prevent HF rolloff due to normally having a relatively high output impedance.
Alex

[mrarroyo]

Apr 26, 2010 7:30:25 GMT @sandyk said:

Apr 26, 2010 7:06:22 GMT @iancraig10 said:

Just a quick question -

Is the X-10D just plugged in between CD analogue out and headphone amp? ie is it just a buffer or a matching device?

Ian

Ian
It would be helpful if people said which version they were using. From what I can see there appear to be 3 versions. One is valve only, whereas the 3 is turbocharged by using good old output transistors to give it more clout. i.e. a lower output impedance.
Obviously, there is going to be quite a difference in performance between various versions.
Alex

Alex, the X10-D is the first generation as far as I know. The next generation was the X-10 V3 which I also had but IMO did not do much for the sound. BTW, these two use different tubes.

Ian, the X10-D is indeed a buffer, I have it on the analogue out of the DAC feeding the X-Can V2 analogue in. Cheers.

[Deleted]

I have it on the analogue out of the DAC feeding the X-Can V2 analogue in.

Miguel
Out of which make and model of DAC ?
A buffer should not be necessary, or of any advantage,with most modern DACs either, (except those with valves in them) and just puts in line another electronic stage to cause further degradation.

Alex

[elysion]

Apr 25, 2010 22:51:12 GMT elysion said:

Yes, I have tried... at the moment I'm using my X-10D together with my X-Can V3. Both the X-Can V3 and X-10D are unmodded at the moment. I use vintage 60's Philips E88CC SQ (special quality) valves with the X-Can V3 and JAN Philips ECG 6922 with the X-10D.

To my ears, it's a clear enhancement in sound quality. The X-10D really adds some "weight".

Maybe I hear a SQ enhancement because I don't have a good DAC at the moment (I know: its absence is probably the weakest point in my setup...). I've already choosen which DAC I wan't to buy – but this damned thing isn't in stock at the moment. Beside my rather weak source (MacMini analog out with good Profigold cable), I'm almost sure to hear an improvement in the midrange. The Philips E88CC SQ valves in my V3 are great. I guess together with the JAN 6922 in the X-10D they show better midrange. The sound feels more "open", "spacious" and a bit softer (absolutely no harshness with this combo in conjunction with the K702).

Could it be possible that a tube buffer with one sort of valves has a positive/negative effect to the sound characteristics of an amp with a second sort of tubes? Or more accurate: Is it possible to correct some minor disadvantages of one valve type with the addition of a tube buffer (with different valves) in the signal path? Of course the signal path doesn't get better with the addition of a tube buffer.

Perhaps it's all about the current condition of my amps. None of my MF amps is modded at the moment. And I NEED a good DAC.

Nevertheless I was quite impressed with the SQ after I have added the X-10D. I haven't heard any negative effects up to now.

As side note: Before everyone rants about the analog out of the MacMini (in this case one with intel/NVIDIA chipset), Mike has tested his iPhone with the HD25-1/II and is very happy with it (see the HD25-1/II thread). I have an iPod Touch 32GB (almost the same regarding audio as the current generation iPhone Mike uses) and in comparison the analog out of the NVIDIA MacMini is better in many respects. I have also a pair of HD25-1/II's, therefore I should be able to understand what Mike writes in the HD25-1/II thread. The only real disadvantage is the combo plug socket Apple uses in the MacMini. With some headphone/amp combinations I hear sometimes a bit of low noise when I don't play anything. I've found a couple of user feedbacks about this on various forums. The general conclusion there is that the ground of the analog part of the plug socket doesn't connect proberly with an analog audio cable – resulting in those low noises. It's not a big problem though... Most of the time I don't hear anything annoying with the analog out. It will be very interesting to see if my rating of the analog out changes significantly after I got the DAC.

[Spirit]

Apr 27, 2010 20:00:08 GMT elysion said:

It will be very interesting to see if my rating of the analog out changes significantly after I got the DAC.

I was astounded at the difference between an X-Meridian (with replaced opamps) - one of the better soundcards in terms of analogue out - compared to the BuffII with PH regs.

If the DAC you're planning on is even half way decent, I think your rating will change

Having said that, the X-Meridian was better than a Keces-151 with replaced opamps.

Cheers,
Phil

[Deleted]

If the DAC you're planning on is even half way decent, I think your rating will change

Phil
With, or without, a jkeny modified HiFace ?

Don't worry, I definitely agree with John that very clean PSUs for DACs etc., make a world of difference. In fact, the PSU may well be the most important part of most audio designs ?
Alex

[Spirit]

Alex,

Either or
I've told the boys I want one for my birthday (June), so I'll get to have a play with it then.

Cheers,
Phil

[elysion]

Apr 27, 2010 20:00:08 GMT elysion said:

Apr 25, 2010 22:51:12 GMT elysion said:

Yes, I have tried... at the moment I'm using my X-10D together with my X-Can V3. Both the X-Can V3 and X-10D are unmodded at the moment. I use vintage 60's Philips E88CC SQ (special quality) valves with the X-Can V3 and JAN Philips ECG 6922 with the X-10D.

To my ears, it's a clear enhancement in sound quality. The X-10D really adds some "weight".

Maybe I hear a SQ enhancement because I don't have a good DAC at the moment (I know: its absence is probably the weakest point in my setup...). I've already choosen which DAC I wan't to buy – but this damned thing isn't in stock at the moment. Beside my rather weak source (MacMini analog out with good Profigold cable), I'm almost sure to hear an improvement in the midrange. The Philips E88CC SQ valves in my V3 are great. I guess together with the JAN 6922 in the X-10D they show better midrange. The sound feels more "open", "spacious" and a bit softer (absolutely no harshness with this combo in conjunction with the K702).

Could it be possible that a tube buffer with one sort of valves has a positive/negative effect to the sound characteristics of an amp with a second sort of tubes? Or more accurate: Is it possible to correct some minor disadvantages of one valve type with the addition of a tube buffer (with different valves) in the signal path? Of course the signal path doesn't get better with the addition of a tube buffer.

Perhaps it's all about the current condition of my amps. None of my MF amps is modded at the moment. And I NEED a good DAC.

Nevertheless I was quite impressed with the SQ after I have added the X-10D. I haven't heard any negative effects up to now.

As side note: Before everyone rants about the analog out of the MacMini (in this case one with intel/NVIDIA chipset), Mike has tested his iPhone with the HD25-1/II and is very happy with it (see the HD25-1/II thread). I have an iPod Touch 32GB (almost the same regarding audio as the current generation iPhone Mike uses) and in comparison the analog out of the NVIDIA MacMini is better in many respects. I have also a pair of HD25-1/II's, therefore I should be able to understand what Mike writes in the HD25-1/II thread. The only real disadvantage is the combo plug socket Apple uses in the MacMini. With some headphone/amp combinations I hear sometimes a bit of low noise when I don't play anything. I've found a couple of user feedbacks about this on various forums. The general conclusion there is that the ground of the analog part of the plug socket doesn't connect proberly with an analog audio cable – resulting in those low noises. It's not a big problem though... Most of the time I don't hear anything annoying with the analog out. It will be very interesting to see if my rating of the analog out changes significantly after I got the DAC.

I have the DAC now. It's a Native Instruments Audio 4 DJ USB2 interface. It's not a high-end DAC though. I have started a thread in "Computer Audio" and will not go into the details here.

As the NI A4DJ is new – I got it today – it's too early to give final statement about the SQ. I use it currently with a X-Can V3 / X-10D combination and I've already tested which difference the adding and removal of the X-10D has on the SQ. IMHO it's still better with the X-10D in the chain. There's absolutely no annoying HF and harshness when using the X-10D, without I hear a little harshness out of the Philips E88CC SQ in the X-Can V3. The X-10D has JAN Philips 6922 tubes in it. The X-10D smoothes the sound quite good. I like it that way and I guess the midrange is improved as well (thanks to the JAN 6922 in the X-10D?). My X-Can V3 really shines with the Philips E88CC SQ tubes together with the AKG K702, this combo has good bass. The smoothness the X-10D adds makes the V3+K702 combo more pleasant.

The DAC itself is IMO a good improvement for me. It's not like night and day, but it's really and improvement (as expected). But I still believe the analog out from many Macs is not that bad at all if you used good cables with it. I'm much happier with the DAC though.

[elysion]

Maybe I have to rethink about the X10-D in the chain. Initially I have liked it, but after a couple of hours more the sound started to be annoying. There was something which was fatiguing my ears.

I have removed the X10-D now and it almost instantly got better. Looks like sandyk was right.

Hopefully I'll get the ordered Neco Desktop Mosfet V2 in a couple of days. Then I can compare further.

The NI A4DJ is still almost new and I can imagine it will also change slightly with time.

[mrarroyo]

Interesting, I still enjoy my PinkFloyd modded X10-D tremendously and do not plan on removing it from my system.

[elysion]

I'm still not sure what was the reason why I liked the X10-D in my chain first and why this changed after a couple of hours more with the Native Instruments Audio 4 DJ.

Maybe it's related to current state of the my X-Can V3 and the X10-D (both unmodded beside already changed tubes) and the tubes I'm using with them.

IMO the Philips E88CC SQ are very good tubes which offer great bass among other things, but I hear always some harshness with them. It's not that bad, but it's just enough to say it could be better and it's fatiguing my ears if I'm listening for a very long time. Perhaps the new DAC is also a reason why the slight harshness is more perceptible now.

I've ordered a Neco Mosfet V2 desktop amp. It has already arrived at my parents house (I have my parcel address there, because it's rather difficult for me to receive parcels here in the city). Probably I can get the amp tomorrow.

I'm VERY curious how the Neco Mosfet V2 will compete against the X-Can V3 with/without the X10-D. Maybe it's also a good test for the NI A4DJ DAC. I'm rather sure the harshness I hear at the moment with the SQ-tubes will be gone as I've noticed the harshness since I've replaced the original JAN 6922 tubes. I love the Philips E88CC SQ tubes since the give the X-Can V3 just what it needs for driving the K702 beautifully. The bass with the K702 is very good, but the midrange of the JAN 6922 is likely a bit better.

Of course I should test the X-Can V3 again with the X10-D in the next few days/weeks and compare again. Maybe I'll change my mind one more time. I've already used other headphones with both configurations (with/without X10-D) and K702 sounds best with both setups. The SQ-tubes have too much bass for the HD650 and are not a good option for this 'phones. With HD25-1/II there's also more bass than I'd like while the same 'phones offer decent bass with and iPod for example. The HD560 OvII are rather close to the K702 but has not as much resolution and the soundstage is much smaller. The HD560 OvII also has some annoying HF but this is valid for every configuration in which I've used them.

[elysion]

I forgot: The initial reason for adding the X10-D to the chain was the slight harshness of the SQ-tubes in the X-Can V3. As long as I've used the analog out of the Mac this worked great. I've had absolutely NO harshness then.

After adding the DAC to the chain (replacing the analog out from the Mac) the harshness was more perceptible than before. My feeling is that it's now just more noticeable than before while being still the same type of harshness I heard before I bought the DAC.

Maybe the Neco amp will prove if my theory is right.

The worst case would be that the DAC itself is the problem.

[elysion]

The Neco Mosfet V.2 is working now. I hear absolutely no harshness when using the Neco together with the NI A4DJ DAC.

I'm sure the harshness I've heard with the X-Can V3 and the SQ-tubes is related to the tubes itself. I still love the SQ-tubes but they're not perfect.

I can understand why Krisno had so much problems to find the perfect tubes for his configuration. Maybe there's no perfect tube at all.

At the moment my attention is fully focused on my new Neco amp. It's very close to what I'd expect from a perfect amp, at least together with K701/K702.

Solid-state or tubes don't really matter for me. The sound quality I get from the amps is what really counts for me. At the moment the Neco amp is my top favourite.

[Deleted]

May 14, 2010 15:02:25 GMT elysion said:

Solid-state or tubes don't really matter for me. The sound quality I get from the amps is what really counts for me. At the moment the Neco amp is my top favourite.

Absolutely. The gear serves up the signal and whatever delivers is the thing.

I think that people should stop comparing valves with solid-state. Each to his own.

It's interesting how I became so attracted to a big valve amplifier in a mega system that I auditioned in my home 6 months ago. It was mega bucks but was absolutely stunning. I just felt wobbly about £24,000 on a valve based system with a high end CD player. (My history with valves is scary!!)

I'm just as happy with SS as I am with valves as long as it delivers good sound. Really don't mind.

I must admit though, this talk of a buffer seems another option although I wonder whether it just changes the sound sig rather than 'improve' the quality of sound. However, if it's perceived as a better sound, then I'm all for it.

Never ever considered a buffer.

[Deleted]

Buffer put in line and it smacks you instantly. It's as though the V2 has developed a rather large sack of spuds. Like it's had a dose of steroids.

I'm getting a more authoritative type of sound with a slightly more 'mellow' presentation. The dynamic range also seems huge.

It really has made a difference. I'm using the K701 with the x-10D into a V2 and it just sounds weighty and mellow. I never felt that I would get to a point when I would say that the K702 is mellow, but it really is through this combo.

I have attached the K701 to lesser amps in preference to the V2 on its own since lesser stuff often doesn't seem to scream at you in loud stuff. ie, I have preferred the K701 on something like the Aune or even the Presonus. I thought that the Presonus may have been a better match with 60 ohm output impedance and it does sound more natural to me.

However attach the buffer to the V2 and it becomes a different sounding amp. I've been listening to the usual pop stuff as well as Mahler stuff which is big orchestral and difficult to portray on a headphone. This makes it take off with bothe the first and second symphonies just making me squirm in the seat because it's so gripping.

I must take these buffers more seriously. They seem to work well!!!

[Deleted]

I must take these buffers more seriously. They seem to work well!!!

Ian
Use a decent SS amp instead, and the buffers are already built in !
Don't even think about using one in line with the Panda.
Alex

[mrarroyo]

Ian, do not pay attention to Alex. He hates valves, or you could say he has an SS fetish!

[Deleted]

Sept 17, 2010 10:43:30 GMT mrarroyo said:

Ian, do not pay attention to Alex. He hates valves, or you could say he has an SS fetish!

Ian
More to the point, take no notice of the Miami boob fancier, as the sum of his technical knowledge could be written on the back of a postage stamp.
Even Mike's latest find doesn't have a single valve in it.
Nor does it need to be assisted by a buffer designed to make up for design inadequacies in toy valve amplifiers that use high tension supplies more appropiate for low powered transistor amplifier use, than the HT voltages that the majority of the elderly valves still available were designed to work with. Many of the virgin valves still available are older than many of the people that use them !
Alex

[Deleted]

;D

It sounds good to me. In fact, I'm chuffed.

The only thing that worries me is this amp that Mike's putting together!! He's really convinced and I'm sorry to say Alex, I think myself and Mike must have similar ears.

I've become really attached to my V1 and V2 and I just hate to admit if there's anything at the same kind of level in terms of quality and price.......

Mind you, they're all stunning really. I like them all ..... the Aune, MF X and V-cans, Neco ... all really good.

I'm not biased Alex. Equal opps man. ;D

[mrarroyo]

Sept 17, 2010 10:53:24 GMT @sandyk said:

...

More to the point, take no notice of the Miami boob fancier, as the sum of his technical knowledge could be written on the back of a postage stamp.

...

For a change you are telling the truth, I have no technical knowledge. But I know what sounds good. Valves do! Next

[Deleted]

Sept 17, 2010 22:17:18 GMT mrarroyo said:

Sept 17, 2010 10:53:24 GMT @sandyk said:

...

More to the point, take no notice of the Miami boob fancier, as the sum of his technical knowledge could be written on the back of a postage stamp.

...

c
For a change you are telling the truth, I have no technical knowledge. But I know what sounds good. Valves do! Next

Miguel
Valves are so yesterday. At least ,you have the common sense to these days buy valve amplifiers that are powered the way valves were designed to be run.Valve amps can sound MUCH better when they are run at the voltages that the valves were originally designed to run at, using the most linear part of their transfer curves.
Alex

[PinkFloyd]

Sept 17, 2010 22:58:49 GMT @sandyk said:

Valves are so yesterday.

Nothing wrong with yesterday... I LIKE "yesterday"... I would like to re-create "yesterday".......

It's "today" I have the problem with

[PinkFloyd]

I removed all last night's posts, I was out of order and have apologised to Alex.

Mike.

[leo]

Good man