Audio Alchemy DDP-1 and Ayre Codex Side by Side

[Johnseye]

Not that post. Look at "Overall isolation - network..." I have both MC200CM and MC100CM FMCs and have found the MC100CM to generate less noise than the MC200CM. They are not expensive if you want to try an experiment. 100mbps is more than adequate speed for audio - I play 352.8 with no glitches.

 

To power the downstream FMC I started with a 9v iFi iPower. This was improved by a 7.5-8.5 battery. I had been this route in trying power for the microRendu and had settled on the LPS-1 at 7v so I purchased another LPS-1, set at 5v, for the FMC. Perhaps others can report LPSs for an FMC. Make sure everything is burnt-in and warm, at stable temperture, before evaluating.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

hmmm. Austinpop's opinion was the 200CM sounded better.

[glrtrgi]

Wondering if you are still happy with the AA gear?

 

GLR

[Johnseye]

Wondering if you are still happy with the AA gear?

 

GLR

Very. Love the DAC with PS-5 power supply. I've been torn between the DPA-1 amp and the Benchmark AHB-2 amp. They both have a similar clear, dimensional sound. I think the AA amp has a more traditional class A/B sound, a bit warmer or thicker, where the Benchmark drops the floor a bit more taking the noise level down even further allowing for more dimensionality and detail. Both amps are near silent with the volume cranked to max, but the Benchmark is just a little more silent. My ear needs to get closer, like right next to to the tweeter to hear anything. I'm going to select the Benchmark and have to return the AA amp. Wish I could keep them both and just swap when I want. It's been a fun audition, and a tougher decision than picking out new speakers. The DAC is without a doubt amazing, especially at its price point. I've had it for about a year. Peter Madnick is a top notch engineer.

[Stu_N]

I have enjoyed reading this post as I have just purchased a DDP1, and I am in the process of deciding what to feed it with. I am new to the forum and to Computer audio. Not new to computers or audio but how to make them sound great is a vast new topic for me. I am like a newborn babe.

I have the same decision as you..modded pc or something like the Sotm or Sonore or the new fidelizer etc

[tyvo]

Wondering if you are still happy with the AA gear?

 

GLR

 

I have the DDP-1 and a PS-5. Had it for a year now. I absolutely love the sound it produces. Super smooth and unstressed. Customer service phenomenal as well.

[Johnseye]

On 3/17/2017 at 4:52 PM, Stu_N said:

I have enjoyed reading this post as I have just purchased a DDP1, and I am in the process of deciding what to feed it with. I am new to the forum and to Computer audio. Not new to computers or audio but how to make them sound great is a vast new topic for me. I am like a newborn babe.

I have the same decision as you..modded pc or something like the Sotm or Sonore or the new fidelizer etc

My 2012 R2 media server is running AO and Fidelizer.  I also bought a microRendu and sMS-200 because I had to know.  I'm trying now to determine which I like the best, but they are so close that if you chose one or the other you can't go wrong.  If your PC is close to your DDP-1 a direct USB connection will be very good. Again the difference between that and an endpoint is subtle when compared to a change in speakers or amp.  But if you want to get down to tweaking there's no end to it.

Enjoy the DDP-1, it's a great DAC.

[ctsooner]

On 2/4/2017 at 9:45 PM, Johnseye said:

 

I get the idea behind stripping noise with fiber. Optical in to the DAC would serve the same purpose but there's a reason why USB is preferred. Not sure what that is.

 

Why would you be using a preamp? The DAC is the preamp. Direct balanced output of the DAC to your amp and on to your speakers.

The reason to use a preamp is because it sounds better.  Much better in nearly every category you can think of.  I own the Ayre QX5/20 and auditioned in my system many of the top DAC's from 27k down.  I have had the Codex in the system at times also.  In no instance has any DAC sounded nearly as good run directly.  There are plenty of articles on why digital preamps are not as good, so just Google if you want to read about them.  

As for the Codex and it's sound, I find it nothing like you have described at all.  For me it's the best DAC under 5k that I've heard and that includes so many that I won't list, but basically most of the named products that folks post about on the board.  I used to own an Empirical Audio OSDE/SE before the Ayre.  My system is an Ayre AX5/20, Vandersteen Treo's and a custom built mac mini server optimized for audio only and powered by a Paul Hynes LPS made and formerly used by Steve Nugent of Empirical.  

The Codex has a very full and rich sound, which being highly detailed.  It's one of the few DAC's that I've heard where you can truly relax into the music and enjoy it.  It's neither forward, nor laid back.  You are sitting in the orchestra center.  I feel that it's a coherent sound in that it's not top heavy, bass heavy or emphasizing the mids. One of the major things that stands out to me about all the Ayre products, Codex included, is that they seem to give you the sound stage that's on the recording.  I know of many DAC's at all costs that either give a truncated stage or it's always big, even on intimate recordings.  I like that and even my wife can hear it and will ask about it at times.  

Yes, I got to hear your AA Dac this past week and it's nice.  It's priced right and I like it better than the Brooklyn DAC.  It's in the same league as the Codex for my ears, but none of us in the room felt it was that close.  

This is why we have so many different products out there as we have different systems.  I've heard the Codex on less expensive systems and it still had that great warm yet detailed sound that I love.  I haven't heard the AA on less expensive system.  None of these listening sessions have been 'clinical, lol'.  Since  both units were run through an integrated amp I assume the sound levels were very close.  I have always hated it when folks or stores audition products and they don't match volume with a meter as the louder one most often sounds 'best' in the moment.  That's just a pet peeve I guess.

[Johnseye]

7 minutes ago, ctsooner said:

The reason to use a preamp is because it sounds better.  Much better in nearly every category you can think of.  I own the Ayre QX5/20 and auditioned in my system many of the top DAC's from 27k down.  I have had the Codex in the system at times also.  In no instance has any DAC sounded nearly as good run directly.  There are plenty of articles on why digital preamps are not as good, so just Google if you want to read about them.  

As for the Codex and it's sound, I find it nothing like you have described at all.  For me it's the best DAC under 5k that I've heard and that includes so many that I won't list, but basically most of the named products that folks post about on the board.  I used to own an Empirical Audio OSDE/SE before the Ayre.  My system is an Ayre AX5/20, Vandersteen Treo's and a custom built mac mini server optimized for audio only and powered by a Paul Hynes LPS made and formerly used by Steve Nugent of Empirical.  

The Codex has a very full and rich sound, which being highly detailed.  It's one of the few DAC's that I've heard where you can truly relax into the music and enjoy it.  It's neither forward, nor laid back.  You are sitting in the orchestra center.  I feel that it's a coherent sound in that it's not top heavy, bass heavy or emphasizing the mids. One of the major things that stands out to me about all the Ayre products, Codex included, is that they seem to give you the sound stage that's on the recording.  I know of many DAC's at all costs that either give a truncated stage or it's always big, even on intimate recordings.  I like that and even my wife can hear it and will ask about it at times.  

Yes, I got to hear your AA Dac this past week and it's nice.  It's priced right and I like it better than the Brooklyn DAC.  It's in the same league as the Codex for my ears, but none of us in the room felt it was that close.  

This is why we have so many different products out there as we have different systems.  I've heard the Codex on less expensive systems and it still had that great warm yet detailed sound that I love.  I haven't heard the AA on less expensive system.  None of these listening sessions have been 'clinical, lol'.  Since  both units were run through an integrated amp I assume the sound levels were very close.  I have always hated it when folks or stores audition products and they don't match volume with a meter as the louder one most often sounds 'best' in the moment.  That's just a pet peeve I guess.

As you've read from another thread of mine, my system has changed quite a bit over the past month and a half.  I've heard the subtle difference that an endpoint like the mRendu or sMS-200, as well as fiber ethernet can provide.  Subtle when compared to other changes, but enough to make a difference.

I use the AA as a preamp, and I also used the Codex's preamp.  As we know, there are many things that can impact the music's sound.  Perhaps it was the AA's preamp I liked more and that caused me to like it over the Codex.  I suspect that if I used a completely different preamp for my audition that my impressions could have been different.

I will be giving preamps a shot next.  I use a Marantz 7701 prepro for my surround, but have no intention of using that for 2 channel, as musical as it is.  I did run both the AA and Codex through it and didn't like it as much as both of those with their own preamps.  I think there's a lot I can do to influence the sound with a preamp, especially if I involve tubes.

[ctsooner]

2 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

As you've read from another thread of mine, my system has changed quite a bit over the past month and a half.  I've heard the subtle difference that an endpoint like the mRendu or sMS-200, as well as fiber ethernet can provide.  Subtle when compared to other changes, but enough to make a difference.

I use the AA as a preamp, and I also used the Codex's preamp.  As we know, there are many things that can impact the music's sound.  Perhaps it was the AA's preamp I liked more and that caused me to like it over the Codex.  I suspect that if I used a completely different preamp for my audition that my impressions could have been different.

I will be giving preamps a shot next.  I use a Marantz 7701 prepro for my surround, but have no intention of using that for 2 channel, as musical as it is.  I did run both the AA and Codex through it and didn't like it as much as both of those with their own preamps.  I think there's a lot I can do to influence the sound with a preamp, especially if I involve tubes.

This is why I personally started from scratch and purchased a system. I have made major upgrades, but when I make changes, I make one at a time and take time (at least a few months) to make sure I know how my system truly sounds so that I know what and how much a difference each change makes.  Again, this is just the way I do things.  Based on all your posts, I'm sure you will get the AA pre amp and you will enjoy it very much.  They make good gear.  If you are open minded go listen to a Belles as think I mentioned on another thread to you.  It's a killer pre. I have no clue how much it costs. I only know one dealer who sells it and he's in NJ.  Not sure who else has it, but you can look on their site.  I don't own one, but it's a killer amp company for the prices (their 1800 integrated to me should go up against some of the 5k integrateds I've heard.