AURALiC G2 series digital components (ARIES G2, VEGA G2 and etc) information

[allhifi]

Fair enough. But, a multi-thousand dollar DAC or Streamer should use something else ! Such as Wrd Clk. (on BNC).

 

However, i2S has been around for decades (or close to), unfortunately with no standard "plug". Some use the RJ-45/Ethernet connector, others HDMi . Granted, the non-standard termination is unfortunate.

But, then, their is the more modern, standardized Wrd.Clk. jack (over BNC) !

These are esssential for the best clock/Jitter performance, as so should be expected in any and all higher-end digital devices. Ask D.C.S. why they use the Wrd. Clk. interface, or Esoteric and others.   

 

pj

[allhifi]

2 hours ago, Hauser said:

Many customers have purchased Vega and Aries products expressly for their value, myself included.  Auralic are one of the few companies that willingly participate in these threads to inform people with useful questions.

 

Martin

 

Hi Martin: Concerning Auralic's current and previous efforts, that may be a fair fair assessment.

 

Releasing the expensive G2 series comes with far greater expectations, and a huge consideration is jitter performance, as strongly determined by hardware (clock) choices, interface and of course cable quality.

 

For Auralic to offers the standard shit-ball SPDIF (Aries G2) while a sophisticated i2S (over their own HDMI implementation) for their matching G2 DAC will likely not thrill the more demanding audiophile using their existing DAC provisioned with either i2S or WC.  

 

pj    

[allhifi]

15 hours ago, Mike Pinkerton said:

I still don't get why there is no standalone DAC in the G2 lineup. Everything, even the Vega, has built-in streaming. Am I missing something? 

 

Hi Mike: No. it's everyone else that appears to be missing something. lol

 

pj

[allhifi]

On 7/13/2017 at 1:33 AM, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Peter - Please show me data with respect to consumer expectations being low for expensive equipment. 

 

You are acting like the product police. If you disagree with a design, someone must be held accountable. Very strange to me. 

 

You have 100% confidence in your opinions. Can you share what information you  used to reach your conclusions?

 

Based my research, I'm fairly certain your conclusions are incorrect. I've been talking to DAC designers about interfaces for 10 years. Each designer has a little different take on the choices, but absolutely none of the top designers I most respect would agree with you. What is said online in marketing materials and what is said behind closed doors are two different things. 

 

There is no perfect interface. There is no best interface. If we look at interfaces in a vacuum and don't consider any other components or what's going on to get data to the interface and what happens after the interface, we will reach different conclusions than looking at real world situations. Specifications, application notes, and theoretical potential are far different from an implemented product. 

 

If there were one or two best interfaces, all high performance products would offer them. 

 

 

CA: A casual (i2S) perusing revealed the following (do take note):

 

X- " .. I2S skips the S/PDIF transmitter and S/PDIF receiver. I2S is actually a format to use internally within digital audioequipment. When equipment is interconnected via I2S, usually line buffers and receivers are specified so that it can drive the cable capacitance and reject noise. However, the drivers and receivers are not perfect, so there is still a small amount of interface jitter, but it's much less than with typical S/PDIF."

 

X- " ...I use I2S gear in both my main system (transport & DAC) and headphone rig (jitter reduction unit to DAC). The lower jitter of the I2S connection as compared to both AES/EBU and 75 ohm BNC connected S/PDIF has a smoother, glare free sound; I much prefer my gear hooked up with I2S. Kal Rubinson wrote an article years ago in the Audio Amateur on how to add an I2S bus to a CD player. I hope to someday convert a few of my other components. Fortunately, my transport in my big rig was already designed around the I2S connection."

Q) Could you explain a bit why it can bring jitter lower.

 

A) "It isn't so much that "it can bring lower jitter" as it avoids higher jitter.

When the clock is embedded in the digital audio signal, the likelihood of jitter increases. This can be avoided when the clock signal is carried separately from the audio, as it is with I2S or in some pro gear with separate word clock connections, 

For a decent explanation, see:"
http://www.anthemav.com/OldSitev1/pdf/i2Srev1.pdf

 

Tell me again CA, about the superiority of SPDIF ?

Or, rather why i2S or Word Clock should not be used (in a four-thousand dollar Streamer or DAC) ?

Much appreciated.

 peter jasz 

 

[mjb]

1 hour ago, allhifi said:

For a decent explanation, see:"
http://www.anthemav.com/OldSitev1/pdf/i2Srev1.pdf

 

I would have loved to have read the explanation, but it 404's.

[allhifi]

mjb: You can visit stevehoffman.tv (forum), the page posted below:

 

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/is-i2s-connection-better-than-s-pdif-why.165268/

 

pj

[uncola]

heh allhifi well i2s was designed to be an internal connector between pcbs so past like 6" it has problems, I forget if it was jitter or being vulnerable to emi or bad.. bits that don't get resent?  hah I don't know the lingo.  the balanced version with hdmi enables longer cables but I see people saying like 1 foot is the max for optimal performance.  personally I loved the improvement I got when I used a singxer su-1 to convert usb to hdmi i2s for my ps audio dac but although it's gaining ground it's still a tiny niche..  and the short cable thing will prevent some people from using it.  also there's no standard so different dacs have different pinouts..  that's a major problem.. also I think there's no protection on the hdmi i2s port so using a wrong converter or pinout setting might cause damage?  but yeah I think that's the main reason it hasn't seen broader adoption..  personally I wish they'd all just use the ps audio pinout standard, ps audio made it free to use for everyone.. but yeah if I ever buy another high end dac I'll look for one with hdmi i2s but I definitely see the reasons why auralic didn't implement it.. sorry for the big wall of text!

[uncola]

can you tell me about that word clock connector?  I thought that was only for using an external clock..  does it also carry the audio?  haha this is very off topic

[allhifi]

2 minutes ago, uncola said:

heh allhifi well i2s was designed to be an internal connector between pcbs so past like 6" it has problems, I forget if it was jitter or being vulnerable to emi or bad.. bits that don't get resent?  hah I don't know the lingo.  the balanced version with hdmi enables longer cables but I see people saying like 1 foot is the max for optimal performance.  personally I loved the improvement I got when I used a singxer su-1 to convert usb to hdmi i2s for my ps audio dac but although it's gaining ground it's still a tiny niche..  and the short cable thing will prevent some people from using it.  also there's no standard so different dacs have different pinouts..  that's a major problem.. also I think there's no protection on the hdmi i2s port so using a wrong converter or pinout setting might cause damage?  but yeah I think that's the main reason it hasn't seen broader adoption..  personally I wish they'd all just use the ps audio pinout standard, ps audio made it free to use for everyone.. but yeah if I ever buy another high end dac I'll look for one with hdmi i2s but I definitely see the reasons why auralic didn't implement it.. sorry for the big wall of text!

 

Hi uncola: Good points. If i2S (over HDMi) is not satisfactory, then certainly the Word clock signal (over BNC) should do the trick !

 

Why does dcs, MSB, Aurender, Rockna, Esoteric and others use these advanced digital interfaces --specifically Wrd. Clk. (over BNC), or i2S?

 

Uncola, also look for (or consider) the Wrd. Clk. interface. 

 

pj  

[The Computer Audiophile]

First a little internet etiquette, ALL CAPS means yelling. I'll assume you understand what an exclamation point means. Please keep this in mind when accusing me of being angry, while at the same time looking at your own statements.

 

 

 

On 7/5/2017 at 9:53 AM, allhifi said:

 

The decision  to offer models with no front panel operational controls is  incomprehensible.

Have "they" not learned a damn thing --or even experimented with/without these basic controls ?

 

I consider "incomprehensible" to be something on the order of using chemical weapons on one's own people (think Syria and Iraq). I consider the lack of front panel controls a design decision that some may not agree with. Fortunately there are countless other product from which to chose. 

 

Suggesting AURALiC hasn't learned "a damn thing" or that the haven't experimented with something is quite presumptuous. Unless you work there, you have absolutely no idea. 

 

 

 

 

 

On 7/12/2017 at 3:00 PM, allhifi said:

Yeh I know he wishes to sell his (non MQA) DAC along with Streamer, but fails to recognize that there are innumerous existing DAC's with these highly respected interfaces. And that not everyone will desire his new DAC --or wishes to invest in both at once.

 

Fails to recognize? Do you have a mole inside the company that's feeding you this information? 

 

I consider something to be "innumerous" is it is either 1. very numerous, or 2. incapable of being counted; countless. I'm willing to bet you could count the number of DACs with such interfaces in less than 10 minutes of Google work.

 

 

 

17 hours ago, allhifi said:

Next, you misread my statement, which read: " ...consumers expectations are so low for expensive equipment" .

 

And NOT, as you somehow read: 

... " Please show me data with respect to consumer expectations being low for expensive equipment." 

 

I asked for data to backup your opinion that consumer expectations are low for expensive equipment. Still waiting for this. All my experience suggests otherwise.

 

 

 

 

 

Quote

Moving on, you state:

" You are acting like the product police. If you disagree with a design, someone must be held accountable. Very strange to me"

 

What do you think sites such as yours are providing --a policing forum, plain and simple. And, a great thing at that I must add. As do, sharp-eyed/mind readers, and of course, we hope, the traditional audio rags.

 

Absolutely not. I have no interest in being the world's HiFi police and a place for people who disagree with a subjective design decision to come and espouse opinions as if they are facts.

 

CA is all about education. Educating people about technologies and products empowers them to increase their enjoyment of this wonderful hobby.

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

It strikes me how bent-out-of-shape (and angry) your reply, when all the G2 series had to do was OFFER these additional digital connections (IF FOR NO OTHER REASON THAN TO ENSURE GREATEST CONNECTION FLEXIBILITY) for greatest compatibility.

 

Many manufacturers believe offering the greatest connection flexibility decreases performance. I don't speak for AURALiC, just offering information to educate you, based on what I've been told by top designers. Standard HDMI (non i2s) is much more ubiquitous and would offer the greatest number of consumers the greatest number of options. You should really be arguing for standard HDMI if you are interested in "ENSUR[ING] GREATEST CONNECTION FLEXIBILITY."

 

 

 

 

Quote

Precisely why ALL (premium digital HiFi) should be offer consumers spending serious money all available connection options so at the very least, the purchaser himself can decide on which works best for him, and his particular product compliment.

 

Again, why stop at i2s? Why not add standard HDMI if you are truly interested in "all available connection options." I could list more connection options.

 

 

 

 

 

15 hours ago, allhifi said:

name one that states that either i2S or Word Clock (Wrd. Clk.) is, was and will continue to be the INFERIOR digital interface ?

 

I can't name designers in public. I suggest you ask some of them. They'll give you plenty of reasons. 

 

 

 

8 hours ago, allhifi said:

CA: A casual (i2S) perusing revealed the following (do take note):

 

X- " .. I2S skips the S/PDIF transmitter and S/PDIF receiver. I2S is actually a format to use internally within digital audioequipment. When equipment is interconnected via I2S, usually line buffers and receivers are specified so that it can drive the cable capacitance and reject noise. However, the drivers and receivers are not perfect, so there is still a small amount of interface jitter, but it's much less than with typical S/PDIF."

 

X- " ...I use I2S gear in both my main system (transport & DAC) and headphone rig (jitter reduction unit to DAC). The lower jitter of the I2S connection as compared to both AES/EBU and 75 ohm BNC connected S/PDIF has a smoother, glare free sound; I much prefer my gear hooked up with I2S. Kal Rubinson wrote an article years ago in the Audio Amateur on how to add an I2S bus to a CD player. I hope to someday convert a few of my other components. Fortunately, my transport in my big rig was already designed around the I2S connection."

Q) Could you explain a bit why it can bring jitter lower.

 

A) "It isn't so much that "it can bring lower jitter" as it avoids higher jitter.

When the clock is embedded in the digital audio signal, the likelihood of jitter increases. This can be avoided when the clock signal is carried separately from the audio, as it is with I2S or in some pro gear with separate word clock connections, 

 

For a decent explanation, see:"
http://www.anthemav.com/OldSitev1/pdf/i2Srev1.pdf

 

 

Tell me again CA, about the superiority of SPDIF ?

Or, rather why i2S or Word Clock should not be used (in a four-thousand dollar Streamer or DAC) ?

Much appreciated.

 peter jasz 

 

 

That information does nothing for me.

 

In addition, please tell me where I said S/PDIF was superior. I went into detail about how a single interface in a real product isn't superior. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6 hours ago, allhifi said:

 

Hi uncola: Good points. If i2S (over HDMi) is not satisfactory, then certainly the Word clock signal (over BNC) should do the trick !

 

What interface are you suggesting be used in combination with the word clock, because audio is't sent over this interface?

 

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

 

On 7/12/2017 at 10:31 PM, allhifi said:

 

By far, the best digital connection (bar none) is either of the ones referenced.

 

Exhibit A: 

I believe you referenced i2s (HDMI or RJ45). Let's keep your above statement in the back of our minds for this discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

On 7/12/2017 at 11:46 PM, allhifi said:

... the lowest jitter interface extant ...

 

Exhibit B: 

I believe you referenced i2s (HDMI or RJ45). Let's keep your above statement in the back of our minds for this discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

Quote

... the superior (according to the designer's and listeners themselves!) i2S or Wrd. Clk. connections.

 

Exhibit C: 

Let's keep your above statement in the back of our minds for this discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Quote

long-standing superiority of these connections (that Esoteric, Rockna, PS Audio, even the bargain basement priced Gustard X-20PRO and many others have offered EXPECTANT audiophile consumers for decades !).

 

Exhibit D: 

Let's keep your above statement in the back of our minds for this discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

10 hours ago, allhifi said:

...These are esssential for the best clock/Jitter performance...

 

 

Exhibit E: 

Let's keep your above statement in the back of our minds for this discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

10 hours ago, allhifi said:

...the standard shit-ball SPDIF...

 

 

Exhibit F: 

Let's keep your above statement in the back of our minds for this discussion.

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

Continuing, you ask " You have 100% confidence in your opinions. Can you share what information you  used to reach your conclusions?"

What confidence am I espousing CA?

 

Please see exhibits A through F above. This is the crux of my argument. Your 100% confidence in your opinion that certain interfaces are the best, despite information I provided and information you could glean from additional research.

 

 

 

 

[firedog]

"Allhifi" apparently isn't aware of ALL hi-fi.He doesn't seem to know that those manufacturers he mentioned haven't all been offering those interfaces "for decades". (A few years would be correct in several cases)

There are good designers of famous brands who don't think I2s and Wrd Clk are the superior connections, especially not WC.

I even know of some who prefer well implemented AES.

[allhifi]

19 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

 

Exhibit A: 

I believe you referenced i2s (HDMI or RJ45). Let's keep your above statement in the back of our minds for this discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit B: 

I believe you referenced i2s (HDMI or RJ45). Let's keep your above statement in the back of our minds for this discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit C: 

Let's keep your above statement in the back of our minds for this discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit D: 

Let's keep your above statement in the back of our minds for this discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit E: 

Let's keep your above statement in the back of our minds for this discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit F: 

Let's keep your above statement in the back of our minds for this discussion.

 

 

 

 

 

Please see exhibits A through F above. This is the crux of my argument. Your 100% confidence in your opinion that certain interfaces are the best, despite information I provided and information you could glean from additional research.

 

 

 

 

 

19 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

First a little internet etiquette, ALL CAPS means yelling. I'll assume you understand what an exclamation point means. Please keep this in mind when accusing me of being angry, while at the same time looking at your own statements.

 

 

 

 

I consider "incomprehensible" to be something on the order of using chemical weapons on one's own people (think Syria and Iraq). I consider the lack of front panel controls a design decision that some may not agree with. Fortunately there are countless other product from which to chose. 

 

Suggesting AURALiC hasn't learned "a damn thing" or that the haven't experimented with something is quite presumptuous. Unless you work there, you have absolutely no idea. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fails to recognize? Do you have a mole inside the company that's feeding you this information? 

 

I consider something to be "innumerous" is it is either 1. very numerous, or 2. incapable of being counted; countless. I'm willing to bet you could count the number of DACs with such interfaces in less than 10 minutes of Google work.

 

 

 

 

I asked for data to backup your opinion that consumer expectations are low for expensive equipment. Still waiting for this. All my experience suggests otherwise.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Absolutely not. I have no interest in being the world's HiFi police and a place for people who disagree with a subjective design decision to come and espouse opinions as if they are facts.

 

CA is all about education. Educating people about technologies and products empowers them to increase their enjoyment of this wonderful hobby.

 

 

 

 

 

Many manufacturers believe offering the greatest connection flexibility decreases performance. I don't speak for AURALiC, just offering information to educate you, based on what I've been told by top designers. Standard HDMI (non i2s) is much more ubiquitous and would offer the greatest number of consumers the greatest number of options. You should really be arguing for standard HDMI if you are interested in "ENSUR[ING] GREATEST CONNECTION FLEXIBILITY."

 

 

 

 

 

Again, why stop at i2s? Why not add standard HDMI if you are truly interested in "all available connection options." I could list more connection options.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can't name designers in public. I suggest you ask some of them. They'll give you plenty of reasons. 

 

 

 

 

That information does nothing for me.

 

In addition, please tell me where I said S/PDIF was superior. I went into detail about how a single interface in a real product isn't superior. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What interface are you suggesting be used in combination with the word clock, because audio is't sent over this interface?

 

 

 

 

19 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Many manufacturers believe offering the greatest connection flexibility decreases performance.

 

CA: Incredible.

 

"First a little internet etiquette, ALL CAPS means yelling. I'll assume you understand what an exclamation point means. Please keep this in mind when accusing me of being angry, while at the same time looking at your own statements."

(FYI, CAP's can also be used for impact, clarity or effect --as in "hey, really think about this".

Suggesting some "computer etiquette" to someone who started with :

 

" Thank you for your detailed reply ...."  AND

"Firstly, let me acknowledge your extensive (and earned ) knowledge base ... "  gets a (angry) reply starting with " "First a little internet etiquette, ALL CAPS means yelling." 

 

Anyway, let's unpack this a bit more.

 

Absolutely not. I have no interest in being the world's HiFi police and a place for people who disagree with a subjective design decision to come and espouse opinions as if they are facts.

 

(What makes you think I was referring to YOU ??? I was referring to this open forum and everyone's input that contributes to "policing" efforts. I must say though, the ME thing surprises me not.) 

 

CA is all about education. Educating people about technologies and products empowers them to increase their enjoyment of this wonderful hobby.

(Indeed it is, the heart and soul of it in the words of all its contributors)

 

"I asked for data to backup your opinion that consumer expectations are low for expensive equipment. Still waiting for this. All my experience suggests otherwise.

 

(For goodness sakes, consumer expectations regarding features and connection options, i.e., i2S and Wrd. Clk. for example. Get it ?

 

But since you put so much stock into data, Data, this must be tempered by the following: What data do you have that states high priced gear and cable is better --than the cheap shit?

And finally, an insider joke you fail to appreciate is: What data would you like, and for what purpose (to what end). In other words, what lie (deception?) would you like your data to support?  

 

Exhibit's A-to-F ! 

(Seriously? Yes, your HONOR, I acknowledge your infinite wisdom and rule of law credentials)

 

Or, as you said to me about the use of "incomprehensible" (out of context you chose to embark --I wasn't writing to, for or about that which may be of interest to the Washington Post. Hello, I'm here, on CA)

 

We can go on mindlessly endlessly with this, yet I feel it's best to end this from whence it began.

 

You pleasantly offered some quote (likely to appease both yourself and your undergraduate alumni ) by stating and offering me the following:

"Perhaps a quote from Bertrand Russell can encapsulate my thoughts better than I:

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts"

 

Well, as it turned out, it didn't take long for me at all to find (and share) this quote with you:

 

" It's been said, those of delicate ego are possessed of the most robust aggressions ... "  

 

No doubt I missed much more of your reply. I'm certain it will be addressed soon enough ...

 

 peter jasz

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others. For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting.

 

According to some research, the projection of one's unconscious qualities onto others is a common process in everyday life.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

[allhifi]

30 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others. For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting.

 

According to some research, the projection of one's unconscious qualities onto others is a common process in everyday life.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

 

Right. As I suspected, a social sciences degree, or is this just a hobby of yours ?

 

Geesh, being psyhco-analyzed on CA. Go figure ! lol

 

pj

(P.S. Let's "focus" on Hi-Fi)

[allhifi]

36 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others. For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting.

 

According to some research, the projection of one's unconscious qualities onto others is a common process in everyday life.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

 

It just occurred to me, a Wikipedia "degree" no less. Gimm'e a break.

 

pj

[allhifi]

41 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others. For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting.

 

According to some research, the projection of one's unconscious qualities onto others is a common process in everyday life.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

 

I sure hope you don't "project" back with Fruit-Loop Freud.

 

pj 

[The Computer Audiophile]

12 minutes ago, allhifi said:

 

Right. As I suspected, a social sciences degree, or is this just a hobby of yours ?

 

Geesh, being psyhco-analyzed on CA. Go figure ! lol

 

pj

(P.S. Let's "focus" on Hi-Fi)

 

Actually yes, undergrad in social sciences (Summa Cum Laude).

[allhifi]

3 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Actually yes, undergrad in social sciences (Summa Cum Laude).

 

Haaha. How could I possibly have guessed ? Touche' !

 

pj

[pam1975]

Peter - I don't know you but you come across as a real psycho, borderline scary.

[Mike Pinkerton]

So anyway, back on topic....this was fun and all but....

 

Can't wait for September to see reviews of actual hardware and see how well they perform compared to the previous version. The good news is the Vega is now pretty deeply discounted at AudioAdvisor ($2800), probably to clear out stock before the G2 arrives (at 2x the price!).

[allhifi]

1 hour ago, pam1975 said:

Peter - I don't know you but you come across as a real psycho, borderline scary.

 

Pam: Now, now, take a deep breath.

 

Fear not, I am a very passive guy. Honestly. Simply consider it to be some intellectual bantering ... (lol)

 

pj 

[pam1975]

funny, I was going to say exactly the same: take a deep breath  we obviously think alike.

I'm sure for 99% of other readers you come across as a very passive guy and I'm just the exception here.

Fascinated by the "intellectual bantering" indeed: nice, pleasant and above all...productive.

 

[allhifi]

3 minutes ago, pam1975 said:

funny, I was going to say exactly the same: take a deep breath  we obviously think alike.

I'm sure for 99% of other readers you come across as a very passive guy and I'm just the exception here.

Fascinated by the "intellectual bantering" indeed: nice, pleasant and above all...productive.

 

 But "he" started it ! (haaha). But he did. Really.

 

No need for me to take a deep breath, I'm very, very calm. Plus, I don't fear paper/keyboard  "Psycho's" as easy as you !

 

Cheers,

 

 pj

[allhifi]

1 hour ago, Mike Pinkerton said:

So anyway, back on topic....this was fun and all but....

 

Can't wait for September to see reviews of actual hardware and see how well they perform compared to the previous version. The good news is the Vega is now pretty deeply discounted at AudioAdvisor ($2800), probably to clear out stock before the G2 arrives (at 2x the price!).

 

 

Hey Mike: Good call ! Let's move on ...

 

pj