ECdesigns

[Norton]

19 minutes ago, matthias said:

 

Would be niice to know if it makes sense to go for Qobuz Studio up to 24/192 or if Qobuz HiFi is the better option.in this case.

Thanks

 

Matt

I’d say you definitely benefit from a plan that includes 24/96 for use with the ECD kit.  To my (classical) ears it’s excellent with modern 24/96 stuff from BIS, Chandos etc. But local file replay with the UPL is better still.  Is HiFi just 16/44?

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

@Norton are you sometimes revising your judgment (in a good or bad way) on the  quality of recordings after playing them on the UPL ? 

[matthias]

21 minutes ago, Norton said:

But local file replay with the UPL is better still.  Is HiFi just 16/44?

 

Local file replay is no option for me.

Yes, Qobuz HiFi is just 16/44.

 

Matt

[bodiebill]

13 hours ago, bodiebill said:

I just ordered an U192ETL to initially use with my Terminator. Who knows what is next... 🙂

 

From John Brown I understand that the U192ETL will be shipped coming Monday!

 

I think it is wise not to order the DA96ETF (Fractal DAC) yet. Scenario's:

 

(1) PC + U192ETL + Terminator TosLink sounds worse than SDTrans384 + Terminator I2S
Then I have less confidence to buy the Fractal DAC as it should correct that delta.

 

(2) PC + U192ETL + Terminator TosLink sounds as good as SDTrans384 + Terminator I2S

Then I might use both setups. At least then I have added the possibility to conveniently play from my PC/music library via usb. And I would still be able to play 24/192 and DSD.

 

(3) PC + U192ETL + Terminator TosLink sounds better than SDTrans384 + Terminator I2S

Then I could switch to the U192ETL altogether and sell the other setup. I would loose the ability to play 24/192 and DSD but this could be compensated for by the overall SQ improvement.

 

So in scenario (2) I might, and in scenario (3) I certainly would, add the Fractal DAC.

[matthias]

Can someone shed some light on why the DAC is limited to 24/96?

Thanks

 

Matt

[Norton]

41 minutes ago, hopkins said:

@Norton are you sometimes revising your judgment (in a good or bad way) on the  quality of recordings after playing them on the UPL ? 

Funny you should mention -as this is precisely what I have been thinking.  To my ears the UPL/DAC combo sounds particularly good with 24/96 stuff recorded in the last 5 years or so, whereas some (but by no means all) of the analogue transfers I’ve revered in past don’t sound quite as good as I expected. Maybe because replay  is just so transparent?  I guess feeding 24/96 rather than 16/44 to a NOS DAC also brings benefits in itself?

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

The greater transparency is definitely changing my appreciation of some recordings. I'll try to provide some examples in the coming days.

 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

12 hours ago, Norton said:

Funny you should mention -as this is precisely what I have been thinking.  To my ears the UPL/DAC combo sounds particularly good with 24/96 stuff recorded in the last 5 years or so, whereas some (but by no means all) of the analogue transfers I’ve revered in past don’t sound quite as good as I expected. Maybe because replay  is just so transparent?  I guess feeding 24/96 rather than 16/44 to a NOS DAC also brings benefits in itself?

 

The topic of sample rates is contentious. I have not made any comparisons myself. I tend to think that the key factor is the recording quality and mastering, rather than the format. Since labels that offer "audiophile" quality recordings generally tend to offer them in higher rates only, it makes comparisons sometimes difficult (masterings could be different). But I would be happy to hear otherwise. 99 % of my music is 16/44. 

 

As for the DAC's performance with various sample rates (and why it is limited to 24/96), that's a question for John Brown. If anyone here has the opportunity to discuss it with him, please report back! 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

Vis à vis recordings, and how they sound through the UPL, and hopefully soon through the USB interface  - the other threads on the forum got me to thinking about this, but I rather post it here. When you don't have that extra "transparency", you can't know whether the recording itself has that extra "resolution" that makes individual instruments sound "sharper" and more "realistic". That's one aspect of the recording that I was not really capturing in my previous setup, and that was missing, I believe, in some higher-end systems I listened to as well (not all...). It is very subtle, but important. So when you start using the UPL/Fractal, you realize that some recordings you thought were really good are in fact limited in that aspect when compared to other recordings, perhaps  not perfect either (on some other aspects of sound recording) but that do have that added resolution. Not sure I am making sense !

 

I guess you could say that the UPL/Fractal lifts a veil, but in some cases, you realize there is a further veil hidden underneath in the recording - at least now you know  Could be also that further improvements can be obtained on other components of one's system. It can be long road...

[matthias]

1 hour ago, hopkins said:

Vis à vis recordings, and how they sound through the UPL, and hopefully soon through the USB interface  - the other threads on the forum got me to thinking about this, but I rather post it here. When you don't have that extra "transparency", you can't know whether the recording itself has that extra "resolution" that makes individual instruments sound "sharper" and more "realistic". That's one aspect of the recording that I was not really capturing in my previous setup, and that was missing, I believe, in some higher-end systems I listened to as well (not all...). It is very subtle, but important. So when you start using the UPL/Fractal, you realize that some recordings you thought were really good are in fact limited in that aspect when compared to other recordings, perhaps  not perfect either (on some other aspects of sound recording) but that do have that added resolution. Not sure I am making sense !

 

I guess you could say that the UPL/Fractal lifts a veil, but in some cases, you realize there is a further veil hidden underneath in the recording - at least now you know  Could be also that further improvements can be obtained on other components of one's system. It can be long road...

 

I think I understand your point.

 

Another topic I would like to know about these devices:

You talk about resolution and transparency. As you I listen to a lot of Jazz. 

I am wondering what do these devices in the PRaT department?

And are they able to produce slam and the kick of a live concert?

Thanks

 

Matt

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

48 minutes ago, matthias said:

 

I think I understand your point.

 

Another topic I would like to know about these devices:

You talk about resolution and transparency. As you I listen to a lot of Jazz. 

I am wondering what do these devices in the PRaT department?

And are they able to produce slam and the kick of a live concert?

Thanks

 

Matt

 

Definitely yes. Whether you listen to big band or John Coltrane, ECD is going to be your friend

 

I was listening today to "Art Pepper Meets the Rhythm Section" , and it had incredible drive, which I had only previously heard with a vinyl setup. Very dynamic.

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

A good example of a sub-par recording, IMO, is Stan Getz's "Sweet Rain" album. I'll have to play it again with the volume way up to confirm (could not today), but the recording is simply not that great, and that seems to be the case for all releases (CD, vinyl).

 

 

[matthias]

@hopkins

 

I directed two questions to ECD in the thread at diyaudio. Hopefully I get the answers in due time.

 

Matt

[Norton]

I’m past the initial  “listening to the kit“ stage with the UPL/DAC96 and just using it everyday to listen to my music, but it’s still serving up daily surprises in terms of how good digital can  sound.  I can’t recall ever hearing the level of resolution and refinement  I’m now getting from ECD, including my Resonessence  Mirus Or the Esoteric players I had before it.  Truly remarkable what ECD have achieved for the price and in the absence of so many of the established  solutions to support digital SQ.

 

The one thing I can’t  quite decide on though is whether or not the DAC ultimately lacks some of the necessary “slam” to really convey orchestral crescendos or if what I’m used to hearing is actually an artificial presentation from other D/S DACs.  Don’t know what’s in the “black box” but wondering if the DAC might benefit from a beefier psu?  
 

Just as with the previous generation from ECD, I’m very much thinking of the UPL and DAC as an indivisible pairing, an integrated player in effect.  But willing to see how the U192 develops.

[matthias]

6 minutes ago, Norton said:

The one thing I can’t  quite decide on though is whether or not the DAC ultimately lacks some of the necessary “slam” to really convey orchestral crescendos or if what I’m used to hearing is actually an artificial presentation from other D/S DACs.  Don’t know what’s in the “black box” but wondering if the DAC might benefit from a beefier psu?  

 

Reading this thread this is also my main concern related to ECD products. "Slam" is very important for me. If devices lack in this area then it is a no-go for me. To get an answer I would recommend to compare ECD vs the latest Schiit Yggdrasil with Unison USB input, using the same source, maybe a MBP with Audirvana and streaming from Qobuz.

 

Matt

[Huubster]

54 minutes ago, matthias said:

To get an answer I would recommend to compare ECD vs the latest Schiit Yggdrasil with Unison USB input, using the same source, maybe a MBP with Audirvana and streaming from Qobuz.

 

No worries there Matt, that's what I did, though it was a Gen 5 usb in my Yggdrasil.. A complete no-brainer, the Fractal DAC brings all the detail, staging and power like the Yggdrasil, but far less digital artifacts and harshness and a more coherent, more real soundstage .. There was no way back.

 

And besides, when you have a really resolving sound, Spotify is much better then Qobuz, believe it or not. Qobuz sounds small and stressed in comparison, Spotify brings far more spacial and accoustic information. I have to add, this was only after I changed my interlinks and speaker cables to the really high end stuff.

 

Edit: Heard the Yggdrasi with AES and Coax as well, though sound quallity between the 3 options differ, the 'digital' sound signature is still the there.

[matthias]

8 minutes ago, Huubster said:

 

No worries there Matt, that's what I did, though it was a Gen 5 usb in my Yggdrasil.. A complete no-brainer, the Fractal DAC brings all the detail, staging and power like the Yggdrasil, but far less digital artifacts and harshness and a more coherent, more real soundstage .. There was no way back.

 

And besides, when you have a really resolving sound, Spotify is much better then Qobuz, believe it or not. Qobuz sounds small and stressed in comparison, Spotify brings far more spacial and accoustic information. I have to add, this was only after I changed my interlinks and speaker cables to the really high end stuff.

 

Nice to know, the single caveat is maybe that Unison is surely better than USB 5.

I like Spotify as well, very musical. What do you use as IC and speaker cables?

Thanks

 

Matt

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

I think I need to take a cognitive test because I am having a hard time keeping track of what I have on different USB keys, but appart for that I'm a little surprised by concerns with lack of dynamics, as my experience is really the opposite. I do agree that there is some time involved in getting accustomed to hearing things slightly differently, but to me it is definitely closer to the recording (good or bad). Transparency and accuracy is what brings dynamics, and pretty much everything else, if you ask me

[Huubster]

6 minutes ago, matthias said:

Nice to know, the single caveat is maybe that Unison is surely better than USB 5.

 

Unison is supposed to bring USB to the level of Yggdrasil's best output, AES, so I don't think there is a caveat

 

6 minutes ago, matthias said:

I like Spotify as well, very musical. What do you use as IC and speaker cables?

 

All Tellurium Q Black Diamond. 

[matthias]

1 minute ago, hopkins said:

I think I need to take a cognitive test because I am having a hard time keeping track of what I have on different USB keys, but appart for that I'm a little surprised by concerns with lack of dynamics, as my experience is really the opposite. I do agree that there is some time involved in getting accustomed to hearing things slightly differently, but to me it is definitely closer to the recording (good or bad).

 

My point is that I have no interests in playback from USB keys. Up to the last revision from begin of July where there is no info about so far the USB key playback was superior to the the playback from the USB to ElektoTOS interface. 

I have no local files and do only streaming from MBP so far.

 

Matt

[matthias]

1 minute ago, Huubster said:

Unison is supposed to bring USB to the level of Yggdrasil's best output, AES, so I don't think there is a caveat

 

According to MM from Schiit Unison is superior to AES.

 

Matt

[Huubster]

4 minutes ago, matthias said:

 

According to MM from Schiit Unison is superior to AES.

 

Matt

 

Ah ok, that's new to me, they did once again a good job then! Don't get me wrong, the Schiit is still an amazing DAC, I once thought I would never part with it. But, I know the Yggdrasil very well and I'm convinced that another usb implementation in the Yggdrasil will not surpass the Fractal DAC. 

[Huubster]

Oh, @hopkins, totally forgot, but your latest upl tool works like a charm!

 

I like the buttons you introduced, and I'm especially happy with the re-order button, one click and everything is in alphabetical order again! 👍 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

5 hours ago, Norton said:

I’m past the initial  “listening to the kit“ stage with the UPL/DAC96 and just using it everyday to listen to my music, but it’s still serving up daily surprises in terms of how good digital can  sound.  I can’t recall ever hearing the level of resolution and refinement  I’m now getting from ECD, including my Resonessence  Mirus Or the Esoteric players I had before it.  Truly remarkable what ECD have achieved for the price and in the absence of so many of the established  solutions to support digital SQ.

 

The one thing I can’t  quite decide on though is whether or not the DAC ultimately lacks some of the necessary “slam” to really convey orchestral crescendos or if what I’m used to hearing is actually an artificial presentation from other D/S DACs.  Don’t know what’s in the “black box” but wondering if the DAC might benefit from a beefier psu?  
 

Just as with the previous generation from ECD, I’m very much thinking of the UPL and DAC as an indivisible pairing, an integrated player in effect.  But willing to see how the U192 develops.

 

I listened to some orchestra tracks I know well. 

 

First movement of Beethoven 's piano concerto no 1  - Richter/Munch, Boston Orchestra (https://www.highdeftapetransfers.com/products/beethoven-pc-no-1-and-piano-sonata-no-22-richter-piano?_pos=1103&_sid=c8c606b05&_ss=r) 

 

I have never heard the piano with such clarity. There is also more finesse in the sound of the string and brass sections which may explain why it could appear less impactful? Maybe turn the volume up a tad? I could see also how a more forward mid-range could artificially give a sensation of more impact on this type of track (that was the case with my Harbeth speakers, for example). But I do not feel dynamics are lacking. 

 

Another challenging piece: Jessye Norman / Kurt Masur, Strauss's Four Lieders - Beim Schlafengehen (Philips). 

 

This is not a great recording, but with the UPL, there is also here much better resolution than before, providing more depth to Norman's voice, and more clarity to the various instruments. It is really a pleasure to listen to. 

 

Another recording I struggled with before, thinking the sound was muffled: Chopin Piano Concerto no1, Giulini/Zimerman:

 

 

Now very satisfying !

 

We may all be sensitive to different aspects of sound, and the UPL definitely introduces some changes that may be appreciated differently? 

 

 

 

 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

Edit: the recording of the that last album (Chopin) is actually fine. Must have gotten it confused with another. The other two examples illustrate well, IMO, the contribution of the ECD set. You get both a more realistic and precise sound on individual instruments, and a better overall presentation of the orchestra as a whole as well. 

 

Basically, my personal conclusion at this point is that the ECD set makes a lot of recordings more enjoyable, to the point where it would be a serious downgrade to take it back out of my system.

 

I like Arthur Salvarore's scale for audio equipment review, here: http://www.high-endaudio.com/philos.html#Levels

 

On that scale I rate the ECD set a 6 (lets not beat around the bush!):

 

"Level 6- The sonic improvement is "transformational"; meaning not only would it be completely unthinkable to live without it, but the improvement actually alters an audiophile's thinking and perspective on both their particular system and "Audio" in general"

 

@Norton I completely agree that the UPL and DAC have to be considered as a single unit. 

 

Lets see now (well, hopefully soon) how the U192 performs with the Fractal DAC (and others, though at this point I am less interested about that).