Empirical Audio in Absolute Sound

[BobH]

It's a shame that Mr. Van Alstine doesn't understand that adding an Asynchronous USB input would broaden the appeal of his promising new DAC and Preamp/DAC combo.

 

The most important goal for any Dac has to be the quality of what comes out of its backside, rather than how it went into its mouth!

 

Mr Van Alstines' explanation for the lack of a usb interface doesn't ring entirely true when high res output, for any of the inputs, is a hardware jumper the end user must set. It seems more plausible that he simply couldn't get the quality of output he wanted, within the cost constraints of his product design, when using a usb interface with this particular chipset.

 

Personally I don't subscribe to the view that any particular interface is going to determine the ultimate quality of output that can be achieved, regardless of design. It may limit the resolutions that can be processed, but that is not an indication of its quality for the resolutions that can be processed. The dac in question is a relatively inexpensive design, if it does what it does well then it will be worthy of consideration, rather than condemnation for what it doesn't do.

 

Same goes for Empiricals' offerings. If, in the reviewers opinion, (and bearing in mind the cost of the units), comparable sound cannot be achieved without the use of both units then the reviewer is duty bound to write it as he/she sees it. In any event, a Dac must be viewed with regard to its overall performance and there is a danger that we end up condemning designs purely because they don't have a particular type of interface.

 

That would be wrong, IMHO.

 

[cfmsp]

"Personally I don't subscribe to the view that any particular interface is going to determine the ultimate quality of output that can be achieved, regardless of design."

 

I don't think anyone other than possibly the marketing departments for some audiophile DAC manufacturers would disagree with your statement as written. I agree, but primarily due to your use of 'regardless of design'.

 

If we changed that to 'all other things being equal', then we can have meaningful conversations about which interface allows the highest performance with the least amount of baggage and thereby likely less cost - by baggage, I mean extra devices such as reclockers & converters, extra (detrimental?) manipulation of the signal, such as in ASRC, or simply extra cleverness required by the designer which runs the cost up unnecessarily.

 

NOTE: As dCS have proven, any interface can be utilized to deliver sound of the absolute highest quality.

 

"In any event, a DAC must be viewed with regard to its overall performance and there is a danger that we end up condemning designs purely because they don't have a particular type of interface."

 

Presumably there is a grey area between someone sharing their opinion about a type of interface and 'condemning' designs. I don't read anyone here as condemning anything (other than TAS), perhaps you see it otherwise.

 

If a DAC requires a separate device (e.g., reclocker, converter, or even Lynx card) costing thousands (or even several hundreds) of dollars, I'm just not that interested (unless it's in the incomparable category, i.e. the Alpha) when there are DACs, with other interfaces, that don't require such to deliver equivalent performance, usually for less money.

 

respectfully,

clay

 

 

 

 

[Lars]

I haven't received the Feb. 2010 issue.

 

Thomas,

 

Your argument holds no water given the computers AT had for the review. This is the equivalent of a Wilson Audio Maxx3

being driven by a $59.00 WalMart amp. Is the outcome in doubt?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BobH]

Well, if we don't change what I wrote then we can stay with the point that I was failing to make! The comment that it was a shame that the lack of inclusion of an Async USB interface would diminish the products' appeal, makes the asuumption that we believe this implementation to be superior to those that the DAC does offer.

 

My point is that I do not believe this to be the case. I don't think that 'all other things can be equal' because each chosen input will make its own demands on the design of the DAC. It's how it sounds that matters and how it fits into your system and whether or not it has the inputs/outputs you require.

 

There is much discussion on this forum about DAC inputs and 'which is best'. Well, the best one will be the one that you think sounds the best in your system. If one input was really head and shoulders above all the others, then all the serious contenders for your cash would be using it. They aren't. There are a growing number of very high quality DACs on the market offering a wide range of inputs. I happen to think that is a good thing, rather than a shame.

 

[DanRubin]

I got the latest TAS in the mail this week and there's no review of Empirical products in it that I can find. Can one of you point me to it? Is it one of their online-only reviews?

 

Dan

 

[cfmsp]

 

thanks Bob, for your courteous reply

 

"The comment that it was a shame that the lack of inclusion of an Async USB interface would diminish the products' appeal, makes the asuumption that we believe this implementation to be superior to those that the DAC does offer."

 

Okay, I won't disagree. It might also assume that we know what all the other potential buyers would prefer.

 

I responded to your comments in their most sweeping, generalized form. My apologies for that, as it seems not to have been your intent.

 

I"ll state my related opinion - I wish there were more Async USB DACs available and Firewire too, for that matter.

 

"Well, the best one will be the one that you think sounds the best in your system"

 

Touche'

 

enjoy

clay

 

 

[kana813]

Bob-

 

I not condemnating Mr. Van Alstine's new DAC for what it doesn't do,

I just think he's missing an opportunity to expand his market.

 

I'm into less boxes and cables. If you want to use Mr. Van Alstine's new DAC with the USB output from your PC, you need more boxes and cables.

 

If your TacT had an Asynchronous USB input, you won't need your Transporter. BTW, improving your TacT's digital inputs will improve it's

output.

 

Dan

 

 

 

 

 

 

[kaka]

I've got an Overdrive (and an Offramp) and the USB cables that came with the Offramp and a Red Wine Audio Isabella, plus a Locus Polestar and Nucleus.

 

The improvement in sound as you move up through those cables is amazing, so I am left wondering what TAS used?

 

[BobH]

I suppose I ought to put it in my sig line, but mine did arrive with the full set of MauiMods upgrades for the model. I've compared it to an unmodded 2.2xp (my son's) and we were ultimately undecided. Still, I take your point about the Async USB in as much as it would be interesting to try it out, as it would with Firewire. (Actually, my son has just received the M2Tech HiFace and I'm very much looking forward to seeing how it compares to the Transporter).

 

I'm with Clay in the 'less is generally better' camp when it comes to getting sound out of a computer - the less bolt-on goodies the better. And in this respect the firewire and usb ports win. But I remain yet to be convinced that there is enough difference between the various choices of computer output/dac input to make this aspect the driving force in any decision making process. In fact, if anything, I am more convinced by the likes of the Wavelength, or the Ayre, that just do one input but do it really well. I'm just no sure it matters which input that is, provided it's the one that suits your system!

 

Having said all that, one thing that led me toward the Transporter, other than its balanced outputs, was the fact that its network connectivity means it really doesn't matter what computer I use or what type of outputs it has or how much noise it makes. That, and the fact that no-one has come up with a killer driver for networking me that is, just, well sooooooo much better!

 

See, there are just too many ways of doing it for just one to be the right one - until LightPeak, maybe

 

[kaka]

I have found out that the TAS review used a Locus Polestar, which means they didn't hear everything that the Overdrive delivers

 

There is a significant difference between a Polestar and a Nucleus

 

[cfmsp]

 

"I have found out that the TAS review used a Locus Polestar, which means they didn't hear everything that the Overdrive delivers"

 

I would beg to differ here. More on this later.

 

Steven Stone did as good a job as any TAS reviewer has ever done with a Computer Audiophile product in his review of the Empirical products. FULL STOP!

 

Steve N should hire him as copy writer, as he very clearly pointed out the various differences amongst the products and options in Steve' line, as well as articulating their not insignificant engineering principles, esp. innovative volume control. I came away very impressed with Steve's products given that this is the first detailed review/expose of Steve's products that was done by an 'objective' third party.

 

OTOH, I disagree with the statement that they (i.e., TAS) didn't hear everything the Overdrive could deliver. I think TAS went above and beyond in this category. They used the most souped-up models that Steve offers for each of the two products - Off Ramp and Overdrive DAC - as well as the Locus Nucleus USB cable - at $1149 per meter.

 

And this is where the Empirical products seem to fall down. They are overly expensive for the sound they deliver - admitting that in these stratospheric heights, all products sound pretty darn good, and price is rarely the major consideration. IOW, if you can afford a $5k DAC, you can probably afford a $6k DAC.

 

The comparison that TAS made was against the Weiss Minerva (aka the Weiss DAC2 in it's pro audio styling). In every instance, the Minerva bested the Overdrive unless/until the Off Ramp was inserted.

 

so, here's the math issue. The Overdrive as tested costs $4000, which is already $1000 over and above the Weiss DAC2. The review model that bested the DAC2/Minerva was the aforementioned $4K Overdrive, PLUS the $1500 Off Ramp3 AND the $1150 Locus Nucleus cable. That's a total of $6650 going against the $3k Weiss. Even with a more prudent Polestar USB cable recommended by the Empirical site, the total price of the combo would be $6k.

 

$6650 puts the Empirical above (the costs of) the likes of the Berkeley Alpha, the Prism Orpheus, the Amarra Model Four and the Metric Halo ULN-8. Lofty heights, indeed.

 

My cost comparison notwithstanding, Steve Nugent appears to have created devices that stack up against the best in the industry.

 

Kudos to Steve Nugent.

 

clay

 

PS, I use the word 'appears' above, not to damn Steve with faint praise, but becuase I'm not totally comfortable with Steven Stone's relative (in)experience reviewing top end digital playback systems. Only about one year ago, he stated in print that an Apple TV was pretty much as good as it gets, or words to that effect.

 

 

[kaka]

I haven't seen the TAS article - thanks for the info. I was reacting to being told that it was only the Polestar that had been used.

 

I already had the USB cables (having moved from a Offramp+Altmann) so the pure sound comparison was what interested me.

 

The firewire/usb scene will really come to the boil if Metric Halo do a ULN2+ using the components from the 8. There are rumours aren't there ? There is another price point of note - the Sonic Studio 303 (a cut down ULN-8) is at $3195 at the moment. It wasn't when I got my Overdrive.

 

 

 

 

 

[Blu]

I stopped reading TAS for computer audiophile information when I read an early Steven Stone article, where he confused burning with ripping. I thought this guy doesn't know what he is talking about.

 

[cfmsp]

 

Kaka says:

"There is another price point of note - the Sonic Studio 303 (a cut down ULN-8) is at $3195 at the moment."

 

The 303 is purely an 8 channel interface, with NO DACs, and should be of little interest to the normal audiophile (do I get credit for creating yet another oxymoron - "normal audiophile"?)

 

Indeed, the Amarra 3 was a similar model, but as far as I can tell, it's been abandoned.

 

But I will agree that BJ's next move (at Metric Halo), if any, in the direction of audiophiles should definitely be of interest.

 

NOTE, for those of you considering a ULN-2 who might hold out to see what happens at MH, I would definitely advise going ahead, for two reasons. 1) MH offered a HUGE existing customer discount on the ULN-8 when officially introduced last May, and 2) the ULN-8 had a 2 year plus beta period.

 

Kaka, since you have an Overdrive, you might want to purchase the PDF of the article at the TAS site. Quite informative, I think

 

 

clay

 

[cfmsp]

 

Blu,

 

The reference you make was in the same article as the Apple TV mention.

 

While I don't disagree with your overall assessment of TAS - as I too have been quite critical of their apparent lack of even basic knowledge of computer audio, combined with having no qualms about presenting absolutist, generalized statements as facts - I was simply giving Steven Stone credit for having done what I thought was a good job articulating the details, including engineering aspects, of Steve Nugent's products, for the simple reason that I came away from the article with new found respect for Steve N.

 

Steven Stone appears to be at least 'trying' to get it right which is way more than can be said for Msr. Taffel.

 

OTOH, he did make a couple of comments that made me cringe in their naivete, but a little slack may be in order given that most don't know the answer, e.g., what is the actual limiting factor in USB above 96 kHz? He said it was the 'stock' Mac Mini's USB output (and Toslink too, for that matter). He also claims the Overdrive is 'limited by USB' to 96kHz.

 

 

What was most annoying to me, due to it's glaring absence, was the total LACK of mention of Asynchronous USB interfaces. For those who believe TAS is engaged in a "freeze out" of Gordon/Charles Hansen via lack of discussion of their Async USB products, there is NO evidence I could find to challenge that view. This despite a sidebar article by R. Harley describing the I2S interface offered by the Empirical.

 

YMMV,

clay

 

PS, I have let my subscription to TAS lapse.

 

 

 

[Lars]

I agree with you Clay. The Absolute Sound is no longer worthy of my subscrition dollar. Stereophile is a much better magazine in my opinion. I am also considering the Hi Fi Critic. Expensive, but an honest publication without Robert Harley's political agenda.

 

[cfmsp]

 

As if on cue, Robert Harley has demonstrated his inability to discern facts - or his unwillingness to print them - in an article on dCS. I just skimmed the dCS article and found this in the first few paragraphs.

 

He states "Although the USB interface was never designed for transmitting high-quality audio, it inherently has the ability to allow the receiving device to control the data rate from the source device - a feature NOT POSSIBLE with S/PDIF, AES/EBU, OR EVEN FIREWIRE."

(capitalizations are mine).

 

What a clueless thing to say, when it can't be further from the truth with regards to Firewire.

 

Gordon, who invented USB DACs, has said that one of his goals with Async USB was to emulate the advantages of Firewire interfaces without having to write Firewire drivers.

 

Gotta feel a little bad for Steve N given that TAS continue to demonstrate their cluelessness with every new article, and therefore have ZERO credibility when it comes to computer audio playback.

 

clay

 

PS, despite the mention of the Async USB interface in the dCS article, no mention made that anyone other than dCS are using it, or that someone other than dCS developed it first.

 

 

 

 

 

[labjr]

I'm not going to buy a whole stack of components to do one job. They should have one box for computer audio. And an $1150 cable? This seems ridiculous. Buying a product with all those options and add-ons just to make it sound good is worse than buying a new car then having to pay $500 for an FM radio.