V-DAC II and Squeezebox Touch :-)

[Deleted]

With a third party app. on board my Squeezebox Touch could be 'upgraded' to allow 24 bit /192kHz data to be output via its S/PDIF socket.

Interesting, but no good to me. Neither of my stand-alone DACS accept 24/192.

However, Richer Sounds here in the UK have Musical Fidelity's 24/196-capable V-DAC II at the very keen price of £179; last Monday I took a gamble & I collected one from the Chester branch.

I have yet to install the 24/196 SB Touch app. but I'm already very impressed with the V-DAC II. I'm never good at describing sound quality but, to me, the V-DAC II has precise imaging with the illusion of good stage depth. A nice and finely detailed top end gives the whole presentation a 'liquid' sound. Very easy to listen to with a sound that encourages one to conduct along with the music using whatever comes to hand, be it a ball-pen, paint brush or one's bare hands. No lack of detail at all whcih is good as some reviewers have described this DAC as 'smooth' and maybe the only negative comment is that the bass can sound a touch loose now and again... but that's picky and only apparent when I do an A/B with my X-DACv3 - which sounds more clincal and a touch 'grey' (?) in
comparison.

Seriously a good DAC with a top-end sound but at a silly price. It doesn't
interest me but the USB input is supoosed to be pretty good too And the only feature I'd like it to have is a co-ax or optical ouput.. but I can live without that.

So, so far, using it at up to 24/96 I'm thrilled with the very realaxed and
musical presentation (reviewers may risk calling it analog-like). It's as if
the V-DAC is already run in? Soon I'll do the Squeezebox 24/192 upgrade and tell you more.


Regards,

Derek


P.S. Richer Sounds don't allow you to order the V-DAC II on-line; it's an
in-store pick-up only... are they running the store stocks down? Are MF about to release a V-DAC III?

[Deleted]

I have installed "triode's" third party app ("Enhanced Digital Output") with total success. I can now play my (few) 24/192 music files without having to downsample. The file has to be in FLAC format at source. Which means that the FLAC is de-coded on-the-fly by the SB Touch. Whereas 24/96 can be sent to the touch in WAV format with no need, therefore for de-coding. I've listened to both now via X-CANv3 and HD 681... darned if can tell the difference.

So which sounds best! 24/192 FLAC or 24/96 WAV ? Only one way to find out....


F.. I.. G.. H.. T.. !!!!!!

[Deleted]

Noticed the V-PSU II seems to be almost everywhere now for £99 including delivery. At that price couldn't resist one and it could arrive today or tomorrow. Choke regulated I notice.

If the V-DAC II is improved as much as 'they say' then it'll be a seriously good dac.

Derek

[Deleted]

May 17, 2013 11:01:18 GMT hifidez said:

Noticed the V-PSU II seems to be almost everywhere now for £99 including delivery. At that price couldn't resist one and it could arrive today or tomorrow. Choke regulated I notice.

If the V-DAC II is improved as much as 'they say' then it'll be a seriously good dac.

Derek

OK, OK... V-PSU II arrived and installed along with the V-DAC II. Simply stunning. I spent too much time yesterday having one of those 'just ONE more track...' sessions. Some jazz remasters from the 60s, and some new jazz e.g. Dave Grusin's 'Homage to Duke (some wicked trombone solos on this album) and, of course 'The Wall', disc one, side one.

My system is now sounding seriously good. Velvet smooth with a hint of fine glitter when it's called for, and a solid, focussed bass :-)

And yet another purchase !!  As I have the V-PSU II with its spare outputs I thought it sensible to get the V-CAN II too - are you following this? Not had long to listen but a quick and dirty try-out with the HD 681s shows the little V-CAN II amp to be well behaved, powerful-sounding. The 681s weren't flattered in that their slightly brittle top end showed clearly; whereas my X-CANv3 smoothes this off a tad.

When the V-CAN (I) came on to the scene many of you guys gave it praise and there was much activity with Mike upgrading the caps etc. and putting in an alternative op amp. What's the feeling about the V-CAN II? Has much been changed inside by MF?

Or is Grotto bored with V-CAN stuff now? If so I'll shut up and go play some music ;-)


Derek

[Deleted]

My V-LPS ii phono stage is on its way. Oh well, thought I'd might as well go for the whole set.

On Thursday I ordered one from Guildford Audio; they were offering an ex-display model at an attractive price. Overall I've done quite well with end-of-line deals on this range.

Actually, I won't have much need for this phono stage; I rarely listen to LP but I do have a few which I still want to transfer to my PC-based music library. Until now I've been using the phono stage on my X-Pre V3 but this particular pre-amp is off to Ebay land and the phono stage of my home office Kenwood amp is very run-of-the-mill.

So I feel I've achieved my aim now. Namely getting my system set to last for the forseeable future. I'm 60 now and guessing that if I get a further 10 years life out of the kit then that'll do me fine. After all, by the time I'm 70 I may be deaf, daft or dead.

So... main system? Squeezebox Touch > V-DACii > Creek passive pre > A3.2cr power amp > Spendor A5 :-) I use a Humax satellite box for Tv and radio and the sound quality, TOSLINK into a DacMagic, is really good. Add on the V-CANii and various 'phones. No problem. And the home-office based PC system of turntable / SME / Nagaoka / V-LPSii / M-Audio 24-96 soundcard / Kenwood / LS3/5a monitors? That's enough to play around with.

Future purchases? Larger discs for my music library of course, and maybe, downstairs, I'll need a BluRay player when I get around to upgrading the plasma tv monitor to HD. And when I've done with copying my favourite LPs then the SME goes Ebay too, along with the V-LPSii phono stage.

Soo that's it folks.

[Deleted]

By the way, I did upgrade my TV to a 50" Pansonic plasma 3D job along with a budget Toshiba BluRay machine. Bluray sound is currently hdmi to TV then optical out from TV to a DacMagic. Sounds good, picture quality from the 60 quid BluRay is brilliant.

Derek

[Nigel]

How does the current set up compare to past systems you've owned, Derek? Is this the top dog?

[PinkFloyd]

Feb 20, 2014 11:18:07 GMT hifidez said:

By the way, I did upgrade my TV to a 50" Pansonic plasma 3D job along with a budget Toshiba BluRay machine. Bluray sound is currently hdmi to TV then optical out from TV to a DacMagic. Sounds good, picture quality from the 60 quid BluRay is brilliant.

Derek

How are you finding the plasma TV Derek? I went for one of the Samsung LED TV's and it's been really good but I'm now looking at buying a slightly bigger one (screen).... the current screen is about 40 inches and used for bedroom duty.... I only watch TV in bed and mostly stuff like re-runs of Minder and "old" type films so blu ray as a source is not applicable.

I "have" noticed, however, that the bigger the screen the more flaws it shows when you are feeding it a poor signal (ie: 70's and 80's programmes) through a sky box..... fine if you are feeding it the latest wankfest blockbuster via Blu Ray but I don't watch any current type productions.

What I am, essentially, trying to say is that maybe I should downgrade to a smaller screen to watch my choice of TV? Big is good, it's great seeing Arthur Daley with a head the size of a hot air balloon or a newsreader with a nose as long as concord but...... the larger screen estate we go with a pretty "standard" signal seems to result in the same garbage in / garbage out as it does in audio.

The further away you get from the screen the more the mind compensates for the imperfections but if you have to sit 100 yards away from the screen then it defeats the object of having a big screen, am I making sense?

In your opinion is plasma more sympathetic to a poor signal than a backlit LED telly?..... That's what I thought when I looked at the plasma V LED backlit in reality.... the plasma appeared to be less well defined BUT the demo was using the latest and greatest source.... that slight "fuzz" of the plasma may pay dividends with a poor source / signal..... it may balance things out (to the eye) like a graphic equaliser can do for someone who has crap audio gear / is obviously deaf.

I just "turn the TV on"..... simples. The same way man has been turning the TV on since:



The only difference being, the switch on time is faster and the screen is a bit bigger.........

I think what I am trying to get at here is why did quality television programmes stop as soon as Channel 4 was launched?

Mike.

[Deleted]

Feb 22, 2014 21:35:15 GMT PinkFloyd said:

Feb 20, 2014 11:18:07 GMT hifidez said:

By the way, I did upgrade my TV to a 50" Pansonic plasma 3D job along with a budget Toshiba BluRay machine. Bluray sound is currently hdmi to TV then optical out from TV to a DacMagic. Sounds good, picture quality from the 60 quid BluRay is brilliant.

Derek

How are you finding the plasma TV Derek? I went for one of the Samsung LED TV's and it's been really good but I'm now looking at buying a slightly bigger one (screen).... the current screen is about 40 inches and used for bedroom duty.... I only watch TV in bed and mostly stuff like re-runs of Minder and "old" type films so blu ray as a source is not applicable.

I "have" noticed, however, that the bigger the screen the more flaws it shows when you are feeding it a poor signal (ie: 70's and 80's programmes) through a sky box..... fine if you are feeding it the latest wankfest blockbuster via Blu Ray but I don't watch any current type productions.

What I am, essentially, trying to say is that maybe I should downgrade to a smaller screen to watch my choice of TV? Big is good, it's great seeing Arthur Daley with a head the size of a hot air balloon or a newsreader with a nose as long as concord but...... the larger screen estate we go with a pretty "standard" signal seems to result in the same garbage in / garbage out as it does in audio.

The further away you get from the screen the more the mind compensates for the imperfections but if you have to sit 100 yards away from the screen then it defeats the object of having a big screen, am I making sense?

In your opinion is plasma more sympathetic to a poor signal than a backlit LED telly?..... That's what I thought when I looked at the plasma V LED backlit in reality.... the plasma appeared to be less well defined BUT the demo was using the latest and greatest source.... that slight "fuzz" of the plasma may pay dividends with a poor source / signal..... it may balance things out (to the eye) like a graphic equaliser can do for someone who has crap audio gear / is obviously deaf.

I just "turn the TV on"..... simples. The same way man has been turning the TV on since:



The only difference being, the switch on time is faster and the screen is a bit bigger.........

I think what I am trying to get at here is why did quality television programmes stop as soon as Channel 4 was launched?

Mike.

Have moved up from 42" to 50" and find that standard def TV is not quite as good as it was on the 42"... the smaller screen suited our viewing distance better (3.9m). But, as would be expected, HD is fabulous. I chose plasma over backlit because the blacks are better and there is not that sort of 'smeary' movement I see with LCD. Colours are more cinematic too with plasma IMO. Granted LCD is better in bright light but I'm an evening viewer and watch with the lights dimmed so plasma works great in low light.

Compared to my outgoing 42" black levels on the new 50" Panasonic are superb.

Derek