Audiophilleo

[labjr]

"But only the newer DACs have USB input and unfortunately for the most part I think the general consensus is that their USB input sounds worse than their SPDIF inputs..."

 

Hi Phil,

 

I think for a while the USB input was an after-thought. A little added feature. Over the last couple years people are realizing computer based audio is much more versatile and convenient than disc based digital source.

 

If it's not already obvious, I hope to see many more value priced USB & Firewire DACs which are well engineered.

 

I'm glad good designers come to the forums and point out the companies which are heavy on marketing but light on good engineering. Companies like Benchmark were relying on 3rd party stuff like CEntrance and marketing their inferior USB technology as state of the art when it was apparent that is wasn't.

 

 

Regards,

 

Larry

 

[Elprior]

I would certainly buy such an interface rather than change my dac (stack).

 

Anyway, thanks for all comments, especially the technical explanations : even though I don't understand them, I like the way they are debated/exposed.

 

I guess I will have to try these little boxes for myself.

 

@Philip :

There is definitely a need for a 1.5 version.

I am more than interested in the display and the bit transparency test. Still, others controls (volume, computer, trigger,...) I don't care much (but that's just me).

 

Elp

 

[pgruebele]

Larry:

 

I was unaware that Benchmark used CEntrance. That is indeed a good marketing job!

 

Elp:

 

Sorry, no 1.5 in the works....

 

Cheers

 

Philip

 

[labjr]

"I was unaware that Benchmark used CEntrance. That is indeed a good marketing job!"

 

Yeah and Elias Gwinn of Benchmark has been on here and other forums defending the use of Adaptive USB. Claiming there's no difference, when just about every Benchmark user who's tried an async converter into the DAC hears the difference. Far as I'm concerned they are all marketing.

 

[ar-t]

You can say that, as you are not a manufacturer. OTOH, "they" can take comments I have made, out of context, twist them around, to make me look stupid, and somehow that is ok.

 

Go ahead.............fire away at them! And the rest of the CEntrance users.

 

[ar-t]

"It's still not clear to me from your response: Do you measure your jitter at the actual BNC output?"

 

Don't be fatuous. This is the same line of thinking that lead you to conclude that it was inconclusive whether we used fixed frequency, or not.

 

I would worry more about what happens when you stick a 75 ohm source into a 50 ohm Wavecrest, and what that does to the jitter. Remember, it is measuring from 20% to 80%. I know what it does to our unit. Or doesn't.

 

[leo1311]

Did anyone test the virtual cable? What were the impressions? Is better then a mid level cable - Veloce or Cardas? Or, better then a hiend cable?

 

And the volume control? Is it effective? Replaces a preamp in that price range?

 

Thank you very much,

 

Leonardo.

 

[sky176]

Any news about the shootout?

 

[Nicholas.Bedworth]

The main difference between the various devices is that some simply deliver AES, S/PDIF, I2S, TOSLINK, or ST (hiFace evo) while others (Audiophilleo1) have preamplifier functions in addition. Jitter (or clock phase noise) is the critical parameter, and it varies enormously, almost by a factor of 100, between the best and worst devices.

 

Check p. 113 in the December Stereophile for John Atkinson's review and jitter measurements. And there are several other posts here that start to make comparisons.

 

[firedog]

Anyone heard this and some of the other competing units: Empirical Audio Off Ramp, HiFace (especially battery powered), etc?

 

 

 

[Nicholas.Bedworth]

The Audiophilleo can be plugged directly into the DAC, which thus eliminates a S/PDIF digital interconnect. The Virtual Cable is more of an educational feature, same for the Jitter Simulator.

 

The dithere, noise-shaped attenuation and balance control is competive and in some cases better than that on more expensive gear. Yes, it can readily replace many preamps and produce better sound. Eliminating a layer of cabling is usually a good thing: saves money, and can improve sound.

 

[pompon]

I have the AP2 and compared to my reference digital transport (Asus Xonar Essence ST).

 

I think the AP2 is at the same level as my Xonar soundcard. AP2 give more details but have less slam than the soundcard.

 

I just find the AP2 a bit polite but details are very nice.

 

 

[wdomeika]

Found it to be marginal at best, flat, ho-hum, journeyman quality sound. I made mine into a mini-desk lamp.

 

Cheers,

 

Bill

 

[pgruebele]

That's very interesting "Bill" because I have no record of a William or Bill as a customer. I'm also very curious why you would not return the unit if you disliked it so much? It's a lot of money for a desk lamp.

 

People in this forum are looking for real answers from real people so I wonder who prompted you to make such a post...

 

Cheers

 

Philip Gruebele

Audiophilleo.com

 

[wdomeika]

Didn't say that I bought it.

 

The mini desk lamp reference was metaphorical.

 

Cheers,

 

Bill

 

[pompon]

You have a wavelength ... it's asynch usb with buffer ... so ... in theory your dac is almost not affected with the connexion cable you take (usb, coax, optical ...).

 

My DAC don't use a sophisticated async ... so hiface -­> AP2 give something very apparent.

 

I tried a dCS Delius/Purcell (14k$ when was in production) with HiFace, HiFace Jenky's mod, Audio-GD DI and difference between them was apparent.

 

[wdomeika]

"People in this forum are looking for real answers from real people so I wonder who prompted you to make such a post..."

 

We're lurking everywhere....I could be from Weiss...or Benchmark...or dcs...or Madison, WI. Or I could simply be reflecting what I heard.

 

cheers,

 

Bill

 

 

 

[firedog]

Pompon-

 

"My DAC don't use a sophisticated async ... so hiface -­> AP2 give something very apparent.

 

I tried a dCS Delius/Purcell (14k$ when was in production) with HiFace, HiFace Jenky's mod, Audio-GD DI and difference between them was apparent."

 

Wasn't clear to me. How'd you compare the hiface, hiface JK, and AP2?

 

Thanks

 

[kamil]

Guys, I'll chip in here. I've had the Hiface, Hiface Evo (with LiIon battery or regulated supply) and AP2. The difference is not night and day, but in a high resolution system, the AP2 is consistently more detailed and presents more musical information.

 

For many listeners though, tonality may be of more importance and this is where compatibility and system matching come into play. The Evo is more rounded and airy in presentation and the Ap2 (out of the box) is more forward and in your face. The Evo may gloss over a poor recording.. and that may end up sounding better, as opposed to the Ap2 which will reveal everything... warts and all.

 

Strawberry sorbet or chocolate ice cream? It depends on which desert you eat it with. Some would prefer strawberry, even if the chocolate was the finest from Switzerland... You just have to taste it first.

 

[pompon]

"Wasn't clear to me. How'd you compare the hiface, hiface JK, and AP2?"

 

I not had occasion to test them all at same time on the same setup.

 

HiFace, HiFace JK, Audio GD DI same time on friend setup. HiFace JK = more details, Audio GD was more balanced (not sure). Hiface stock was not so far behind. * But dCS can minimize difference between them.

HiFace, Xonar on my setup. Big difference for me.

Xonar and AP2 on my setup. Similar (not same)

 

The best test will be have audio-gd on my setup and put it against AP2 or Xonar.

 

 

[pompon]

"and the Ap2 (out of the box) is more forward and in your face." ..

it's strange ... for me, AP2 is NOT AT ALL in my face.

 

My system show easily in your face and laid back presentation. I call that 3D sounding. Hiface show less spaces between music layer. AP2 and soundcard was similar (and my reference ... ).

 

HiFace is more in my face than my soundcard or AP2. Music with Xonar or AP2 is behind my speakers while with stock HiFace, it's between and front of my speakers.

 

I guess matching with DAC can have some impact.

I not notice difference between using AP2 with my Oyaide DB-510 coax digital cable or directly piggy-back on my DAC.

 

 

[Elprior]

Well,

 

a bit off my own topic, but the dCS stack you are talking about is kind of making everything sound the same.

 

There are small differences, but I can't tell huge (promised) differences between adaptative and asynchronous implementations on this stack so far. That said, the sound quality is very good

 

Elp