Pro gear = digital nirvana

[fahadm]

I’ve been lurking here for a while now, but probably it is worth sharing my latest experience as a thank you for all those who shared their knowledge with us.

 

For over 20 years, I’ve been trying to equal the sound of analog with little success. I bought a multitude of CD players, but none could touch a decent vinyl rig (e.g. Linn Sondek LP12). My final digital attempt was a combination of headless mini + HiFace + Pure Music + Monarchy M24 with Amprex NOS 1974 6922 tubes. The Monarchy M24 is a very well regarded DAC that uses a pair of select-grade Burr Brown PCM63K chips. Even so, digital never sounded right; always harsh, lifeless, veiled. I upgraded to a pair of wonderful Manley monoblocks, then a pair of Harbeth SHL5, isolation transformers, room treatment, expensive cables, but still redbook sounded poor in comparison to vinyl. I was close to the level of a Linn CD12, but still behind analog.

 

So I sought the opinion of hifi dealers which led to even more confusion (a lot of marketing and little engineering). When I say marketing, its more about cosmetics, product segmentation and advertising. It seems that cost of goods sold (COGS) is a small proportion of the asking price. I felt that the ‘audiophile’ industry not giving the consumer a product that matches the price paid. For example, well-known DACs had $10 mass-market converter chips and ‘economical’ op-amps selling for thousands of dollars. Naturally, because of the limited supply runs (lack of economies of scale), the consumer had to absorb a significant part of the dealer margins, advertising, and other overheads. Hence, a product made of components costing (COGS), say $200, would be sold at a dealer for $3,000. The sad thing is, that an upgraded (higher-end) product would have COGS of $250 and be sold for $5,000. It’s all about market positioning and segmentation.

 

A mastering engineer confirmed that the audiophile industry has a lot of over-priced, under-performing, products; and suggested that I try pro gear. At first, I resisted the thought: how can this be. A pro d/a is only $999, it can’t be better than a $5,000 audiophile dac; not with a wall-wart anyway! After having a listen to an Apogee firewire converter, and a lot of research in here and other forums, I took a risk and ordered a Prism Orpheus.

 

During the waiting period, I had expected the Orpheus to sound 10-20% better than my current Monarchy DAC. I waited patiently for a 2 weeks until my unit arrived. I configured the Mac mini with Pure Music and connected the Orpheus via firewire. Also, managed to get the Denon DCD1500AE connected via a Stereovox coax. And this is when a new era began. All being fed with very high quality cables (no preamp) to the Manley monoblock pair and Harbeth SHL5. So finally, pro gear is now ‘in da house’.

 

The improvement in sound was simply overwhelming (in the region of 50% improvement). I was expecting a veil to uncover/disappear, to my surprise; an entire wall came down (read shocking transparency). So much 'air' and ambience was introduced, I could not believe that the Orpheus was that good. My old DAC is nothing short of excellent, but what I'm hearing now is another level. For example, I can hear musicians breathing (in Taksim Trio's self-titled album), as well as all sorts of low-level detail from the recording studio (foot taps, lip smacks, etc...). The jitter control is astounding. Stereo is smack-on, solid and 3D. More depth behind the speakers, more forward presentation in front of the speakers (not only in the center). Previously, the image was squashed (image a tight oval), now the oval expanded more like a circle (hence 3D).

 

Rhythm and pace are superb. Instruments such as guitars are extremely life-like with amazing presence. I can hear strings vibrate during strumming, and all sorts of details such as the guitar pick (e.g. Beck Sea Change MFSL). I play the guitar so I know how it really sounds. What I hear is a ‘real’ guitar in my listening room. Cymbals shimmer with a lot of truth and presence. The dynamic range (speed, attack, presence) is life-like. The excellent Kent Poon jazz tracks sound ‘correct’, as if I am sitting inside the mastering room. Vocals have presence (which can seem creepy, as though the performer is inside the room).

 

If I had one sentence to describe the pro piece of gear, would be that its like listening to a mic-feed (rather than a machine). Finally, I stopped listening to a converter and have complete faith in what is being presented is what was mastered.

 

One wonders why don’t more audiophiles audition digital products from Metric Halo, Apogee, Lynx, DAD and Prism? These products are being used by professionals in studios for a reason, and only now, do I know the reason why. Engineers have so much exposure to live music recording, it must be very hard to sell them poor value products. I’ve learned a valuable lesson: buy pro gear for best value/performance ratio.

 

Finally, after 20 years, my digital journey is over. I’m no longer thinking about digital vs. Vinyl; that comparison is now irrelevant. Finally, I’m listening to the music, not gear.

 

[fahadm]

Old configuration - a bit messy (short cables)

 

 

New configuration: with Prism Orpheus

 

 

[blueixus]

What a great post, I am sure there are lots of us in this forum that have had similar experiences and enlightenment.

 

Computer Audio brings Pro equipment into play as the pro guys have much more experience than the consumer audio manufacturers of the key Computer Dac interfaces.

 

Amongst Audiophile manufacturers I think only Weiss (and they are really a pro manufacturer) has a Firewire interface!

 

That tells the whole story. The consumer audio industry is trying to protect itself and continue in it's old way, but this trend will not go away.

 

And of course you get better value, dealer margins are much lower, and gear is priced to reflect the greater volume potential of the pro world.

 

Happy Days.

 

Of course it may just be the strange plugs on pro gear that keeps audiophiles away!

 

[Audio_ELF]

That tells the whole story. The consumer audio industry is trying to protect itself and continue in it's old way, but this trend will not go away.

In defense of the consumer audio industry...

 

Yes prices tend to be higher, but the companies involved are NOT making huge end of the day profits. A lot of (at least in England) HiFi shops are in quite high rent premises and so the markup they expect has to reflect that.

 

A quick example (figures are from quick google research). One HiFi shop I know of is in a small retail "arcade". A similar shop is currently up for lease at a cost of £22,500 PA. The shop is staffed by 2(IIRC) full time members of staff and 2 part time - so we'll call that equivalent of 3. Average salary in UK for a sales assistant is just over £18,000 -- total of £54,000. Add to that business rates, insurance, staff National Insurance, and a host of other things that I can't think of and your fixed costs must be approaching £100,000 a year for a small shop.

 

A good HiFi shop has to be providing demo facilities, have a good range of products, knowledgeable staff, etc.

 

Now I'm sure that for this HiFi shop, the majority of the time customers will come in asking about a small table top radio or an iPod dock rather than the high end, high value products. And I suspect 75% of the time, they will spend half an hour (or more) with the staff showing the products, then walk out the shop "to think about it" and promptly buy it online or at a big retailer saving themselves £20 or so.

 

The same is true of the bigger "consumer brand" products. The staff spend and hour or two demoing the latest Marantz or Denon or Yamaha kit which the customer buys offline to save maybe £100 - and in the process loosing the dealer the £100s which maybe his margin on a £1000 amp.

 

On the other hand, buying a Prism Orpheus you took a chance and bought blind. Well what else are you going to do - even the best pro-audio stored (that I'm aware of) are little more than warehouse stores with a few displays. On the off chance they had one setup, it would probably be with unknown active speaker setup which would be nothing like your own system in sound. So instead you put down £3,000 blind based on reviews and online comments.

 

The pro-audio retailer makes 100s of sales at a low margin. The Hi-Fi retailer makes 10s of sales at a higher margin. At the end of the day - those differences (and the before and after sales service you receive) are why there is such a price difference. It's about the way HiFi Enthusiasts expect to buy their equipment - mostly through demoing. Maybe you are happy to give up demoing, a lot of people aren't. And yes in some cases you can return a product, but thats less common - as Wyred4Sound say; their prices are low because they don't offer money back satisfaction, you read the reviews and make a choice and I can sympathise with that - double the cost and they can afford to have half the units returned.

 

Some interesting stats - last year (May 2009 - 2010) - 41,400 CD players were sold at an average price of £386. Now the UK is quite a large market, and lots of other devices play CD players, but that really is quite pitiful. This compares to 151,000 iPod speaker-docks (average price £263) and 672,000 blu-ray players. No I don't know what the market for pro-audio gear is like.

 

Eloise

 

[blueixus]

Eloise, as always some excellent points about the cost base of the traditional HiFi shop.

 

Much as I understand the numbers I feel things are changing, witness this site and others.

 

The demo argument is highly persuasive and the pro environment is not really geared to this. Further more the level of explanation required with Pro Gear is also a problem. (You could also apply this to the trend of direct selling as well)

 

For me I would like to see a new more transparent business model. As buyers we need to accept some of the cost of doing business, such as home trials, whose real cost is built into the margin of a traditional HiFi retailer and the eventual price we pay when we buy - there is no such thing as a free lunch or in this case a free trial.

 

The solution could be a short term hire scheme for products like MH, Prisms, Wavelengths (are these really only available in Poland?), etc etc. if one liked the product the sale would then take place with the established dealer.

 

That way at a small cost we could try before we buy. I believe this would be transparent and a mid way point between paying the high dealer margin or buying blind at a low cost.

 

I suspect also that a 'Hire Company' that had product knowledge but was not reliant on the 'final sell' would offer more impartial advice.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Audio_ELF]

Yes there are pro-audio Hire companies (at least in the UK)...

 

www.fxgroup.net lists various "pro" ADC/DAC devices which people have reported to use in domestic environment. They tend to start at a daily rate of £70 (minimum of 4 days) for an Apogee Rosetta 200 (£1500 to buy).

 

Maybe you're right an paying to try before you buy, ordered offline is the way to go ... but maybe not.

 

Eloise

 

[Codifus]

...the orpheus now sells for 4 to 5 grand:(

 

CD

 

[Audio_ELF]

The Prism Orpheus is £3225 (GBP) or $4495 (USD).

 

Or have I missed some subtle sarcasm in your post?

 

Eloise

 

[Audio_ELF]

Sorry but I've just realised something ...

 

You start your post by heading it "Pro gear = audio nirvanna" and talk a lot about cost of parts vs. retail cost all of which is pretty irrelevant to a $4,500 (pro) DAC sounding better than a $1,600 consumer DAC isn't it?

 

Now if you felt the $4,500 pro DAC beat a $10,000 consumer DAC maybe that would relate to your headline...

 

So as I say ... am I missing something?

 

Eloise

 

[Codifus]

The OP made it seem as if the orpheus was $999 pro DAC with a walwart;

 

At first, I resisted the thought: how can this be. A pro d/a is only $999, it can’t be better than a $5,000 audiophile dac; not with a wall-wart anyway!

 

CD

 

[barrows]

The Prism Orpheus is quite a costly DAC, I am not saying that it is not worth the money, it likely performs very well, but I am not sure it supports your "value" argument? I can assure you that the Orpheus is full of low cost parts like IC opamps. There is pro gear that sounds good, and pro gear that sounds bad. As an example, my first foray into computer audio I purchased a $1500.00 RME Fireface 400, it sounded terrible through its analog outputs in comparison to my $1000.00 PS Audio DL-III, and even worse, when I used the Fireface as only a Firewire to SPDIF converter to the DL-III's SPDIF input, it still sounded terrible.

Some audiophile products are over priced (only in that they spend huge sums on cosmetics and case design) but let me point out an example of a DAC that is not overpriced:

The Ayre QB-9: it is not built with cheap parts, it features:

1. Custom, made in US, IE style transformer with multiple secondaries.

2. Custom oversampling filters, developed over a year of exhaustive listening tests.

3. Custom "Streamlength" async USB interface to provide the lowest possible jitter levels, and accept all current sample rates to 24/192 with vanishingly low jitter.

4. Custom, discrete, linear power suplies/regulators.

5. Custom, discrete I/V and analog output stage (no IC opamps) with made in US PRP resistors.

The QB-9 costs about half what your Prism cost, and is available only from dealers who will provide for in home demos. Now the QB-9 is not the highest example of what a high end company can do (I think that Ayre will likely offer a higher performance/price DAC someday...) but it does pack a lot of value into its demure chassis.

I have nothing against pro gear, and I think you will find many happy users of Metric Halo, Prism, and Weiss pro DACs on these forums, but I think that your value equation is just a little off.

 

[cfmsp]

I did not get the impression he was suggesting that Digital Nirvana was available for $999, wallwart included.

 

 

Neither is he suggesting that the Orpheus is the ONLY pro audio DAC that should be considered by audiophiles, he's using it as an example of Pro Audio gear that he has experience with.

 

In my opinion, the major point being made is that computer audiophiles should be considering pro audio gear in their search for digital audio nirvana, as it can be a better value than audiophile gear for reasons both the OP and Eloise pointed out.

 

I heartily agree with this.

 

OTOH, Pro gear has features not always used by audiophiles, so the value equation moves a bit back in favor of the audiophile gear perhaps.

 

One important thing to consider is that often the better pro gear can sonically best the audiophile gear even though it doesn't employ all the touted/respected design practices that are considered essential by (some) audiophiles, and yet are quite expensive to deliver.

 

My point here is, the better pro designers seem to be able to offer better value via other means than simply greater numbers/lower margins. They can employ less costly parts and design techniques yet still deliver sound that equals/bests quite expensive audiophile gear.

 

Frankly, I think this factor is as likely to explain the perceived value (to me) as the economies of scale argument. Do we really believe there is an order of magnitude more recording engineers in the world who will drop $5k on a box than there are audiophiles? I don't.

 

Another significant factor is the audiophile distribution costs, as Eloise pointed out. In the well known Weiss example, the audiophile distributed version of their DAC2 (aka, the Minerva) cost almost double, with NO additional sound quality or (negligible, if any) parts expense.

 

Given generous return privileges (of the pro audio firms I deal with), "taking a chance" (to use Eloise's words) could be renamed "home audition", or "in home trial", IMO. And you don't have to listen to (nor pay for) a dealer's sales pitch to try it out in home.

 

 

Clay

 

 

Disclaimer: I've used Pro audio ADC/DAC/pres (specifically Metric Halo) as my primary DAC from the getgo.

 

[fahadm]

Just to clarify my post. The mastering engineer (who does 5.1 mixes for movies and 2.0 for audio) was referring to a Lavry Blue 2 channel D/A. The Lavry Blue retails for under $999 and, in his opinion, beats most 'audiophile' converters. I had a chance to listen to the Lavry, but not in my system.

 

The Orpheus is priced at around $4,500, but please take note that it has multiple functions:

 

1) d/a

2) a/d

3) pre-amp

4) mixer

5) RIAA preamp

6) firewire interface

7) reclocker (for jitter reduction)

 

So to say that the Orpheus interface is a $4,500 d/c is not accurate. It's much more than that, and is priced accordingly. The d/a alone (if it were available) would cost much less than $4,500 (maybe $2,000). Note that studios such as Abbey Road are using Prism gear. Artists such as Mark Knopfler and Sting are using Prism converters as well. You can check this in Prism's website.

 

What I'm trying to convey is that a dac, no matter how exotic, shouldn't cost more than a few thousand dollars. These are the pieces of gear that are being used to master the recordings that you're listening to. They are mostly priced in the $500 to $4000 range. And they sound superior to their 'audiophile' siblings (otherwise, Engineers would be using five digit audiophile gear instead).

 

The cost of goods sold (electronic chips + engineering/manufacturing) is in the hundreds of dollars. When audiophile companies price these products, the following is added:

 

* Marketing and advertising

* Promotions

* Product price points (expensive perception = high quality)

* Other overheads

* Dealer margins (usually very high - demos, showrooms, staff, rent)

* Unaware consumer (thinks he/she is buying something extraordinary good)

 

Engineers, because they KNOW live music better than most of us, don't fall for these marketing 'gimmicks'. They buy gear in a competitive and efficient market at prices far below what 'unsuspecting' audiophiles do.

 

There is an example of a 'design' that was packaged in a 'pro' and 'audiophile' version. Both products sounded identical, but had different distribution channels:

 

Pro version price = $2,500

Audiophile version price = $5,000

Sound & Performance = identical

 

The owner of the 'design' above has stated this fact in this forum (I applaud him for his honesty and integrity, he makes very fine converters).

 

I don't want to pay $5,000 because of a flawed/inefficient business model. If others are willing to pay 100% premium, its their hard-earned money, and they can spend it any how they please. I'm just stating a fact (and sharing my experience). In sum, to get the best performance at the lowest price: "GO PRO".

 

Please don't make this into a Brand A vs. Brand B comparison. I avoided naming the 'design' above to avoid inflaming any owners/advocates. It's just my personal and humble opinion/experience.

 

[Audio_ELF]

"I did not get the impression he was suggesting that Digital Nirvana was available for $999, wallwart included."

I equally didn't get that impression, but given the OP was taking about $3,000 and $5,000 DACs (from audiophile companies) I was a little surprised to find he was gushing about how good a "pro" $4,500 DAC was compared with a $1,500 audiophile DAC. I made the assumption that his DAC was from the $3,000 or $5,000 market. Just shows how different people make different assumptions...

 

In the UK the standard returns policy is governed under Sale of Goods legislation which gives a 14 day cooling off period - whether this allowed for in home demo no-one quite knows. Of course you also have to pay outward and return carriage which can add up once you include insurance in the costs.

 

Economies of scale do come into it - but probably more at the £1,000 point than the £5,000 mark. Most (even small) recording studios will have a number of RME FireFace 800 (or similar) devices - equalling (probably) 10s of thousands worldwide. Whereas the sales of £1,000 CD players (or audiophile DAC) are in the low thousands if not hundreds (I'm guessing a bit here).

 

At the end of the day I have no issue with using pro-audio DACs ... but I'm not sure it's the only path to audio nirvanna and often the support offered by a good dealer can be worth a lot.

 

Eloise

 

[cfmsp]

 

 

"Economies of scale do come into it - but probably more at the £1,000 point than the £5,000 mark. Most (even small) recording studios will have a number of RME FireFace 800 (or similar) devices - equalling (probably) 10s of thousands worldwide. Whereas the sales of £1,000 CD players (or audiophile DAC) are in the low thousands if not hundreds (I'm guessing a bit here)."

 

Eloise, I won't quibble with your guesses (except to say that I think the audiophile DAC numbers are probably much higher than you predict) as I realize there is some aspect of economies of scale.

 

I just wanted to point out that that's not the only aspect where great value could be delivered, in my opinion.

 

cheers,

clay

 

[barrows]

"So to say that the Orpheus interface is a $4,500 d/c is not accurate. It's much more than that, and is priced accordingly. The d/a alone (if it were available) would cost much less than $4,500 (maybe $2,000)."

 

they key words here are: "if it were available", guess what, it is not! The Prism Orpheus offers lots features, but these features do not add value to an audiophile who will never use them. This is the same point of view that it is put forth re the Metric Halo products-Like I said, I have nothing against people using these DACs if you like them, great! But I would prefer to not pay for a bunch of features that I would never use. In the pro world, this makes Weiss DACs quite appealing, as an example, one can purchase the top of the line Weiss DAC1 Mk. II with a Firewire interface, and not pay for any uneeded features (multi-channel, A/D conversion, mic preamps, etc.).

You can find examples of all currently available converters in the hands of recording engineers (unfortunately, they often use bad sounding converters). Check out the thread here regarding recording-the fact is that common, current, recording practices are terrible, and are making for bad sounding recordings (yes there are exceptions). As such I would not trust the idea that a D/A converter is good because it used for recording/mastering.

 

[cfmsp]

"The Prism Orpheus is quite a costly DAC, I am not saying that it is not worth the money, it likely performs very well, but I am not sure it supports your "value" argument?"

 

It's certainly the maximum amount I'd spend on a component, so maybe it's not the best example on a pure value basis, but let's consider the relative value.

 

Do we have any audiophile contenders that sound better (as opposed to slightly different) then the Orpheus/LIO-8 class of Pro Gear. If so, what price are they?

 

EDIT: Seems to me that many of the great sounding DACs have pro audio origins, beginning with the Pacific Microsonics Model Two, also including Weiss, Metric Halo, Prism, etc., etc, and at lower price points, Lavry, Apogee, Benchmark, etc.

 

 

Perhaps Charles will have an all out assault soon, but as cost effective (of an audiophile implementation) as his QB-9 is, I don't recall anyone reporting that they preferred it to MH/Prism/Weiss boxes.

 

 

clay

 

 

PS

 

Lest we all forget, the Benchmark DAC-1 is (or at least was) a pro audio DAC. I've never liked it's sonic signature, but many have considered it a great bargain, and perhaps still do.

 

[barrows]

"Do we have any audiophile contenders that sound better (as opposed to slightly different) then the Orpheus/LIO-8 class of Pro Gear. If so, what price are they?"

 

Now we get into problems, as determining these differences is subjective: Chris C. has stated his clear preference for the sound of the BADA Alpha over the Metric Halo/Sonic DACs, and he has also stated his preference for the Weiss DAC 202 over the Alpha-hence we can conclude that he would prefer the Weiss 202 over the MH/Sonic. Another listener might not agree. I have read online opinions from some who preferred the Ayre QB-9 to the MIO-8 (or ULN-8 cannot remember), once again, another listener might not agree.

To be clear, the Ayre QB-9 does have some compromises (at least from my, and Ayre's perspective) in its design to meet its price point. There is no doubt in my mind that Ayre could produce a higher performing DAC at the next price level (~$4K-$5K) by using even more sophisticated power supplies, a higher performing DAC chip(s), using their stash of discontinued Toshiba JFETS (which are "priceless" as they are irreplaceable), and all in a larger chassis allowing for better layout (more physical separation between channels and power supplies).

In any case, determining clear "winners" amongst this level performance is subject to so much interpretation as to be at the least very difficult, if not impossible.

 

[cfmsp]

 

"The Prism Orpheus offers lots features, but these features do not add value to an audiophile who will never use them. This is the same point of view that it is put forth re the Metric Halo products"

 

Actually, the point of view of Metric Halo owners/supporters is that MH boxes are a great value on purely sonic merits and used solely as a DAC, irrespective of the unused features.

 

clay

 

[cfmsp]

"In any case, determining clear "winners" amongst this level performance is subject to so much interpretation as to be at the least very difficult, if not impossible."

 

agreed and understood. question withdrawn, as it was mostly rhetorical.

 

For the record, I view Chris' preference for the BADA to be of the "different but not clearly better" variety, since I've heard from multiple others who have done the same comparison who think the MH/SS boxes are clearly superior. (No disrespect to Chris' opinion meant)

 

I, for one, hope Charles has something in the works, and that it's available soon, even if I don't like the looks of the QB-9 anymore than I do the LIO-8.

 

cheers,

clay

 

 

 

 

 

[Codifus]

....from this post. I think we can all agree that if a DAC costs $4000 to $5000, be it pro gear or not, for those kind of clams, it better be good

 

CD

 

[fahadm]

The comments above gave me a thought: why is the audiophile industry & press so 'mysterious' and uninformative?

 

For those who flick through automobile magazines every now and then, you'll find an edition that compares similarly priced vehicles in driving tests:

 

e.g. BMW 5-series vs Merc E-class vs Audi A6 vs ...

or Porsche Turbo vs Ferrari 599 vs Lambo vs ...

 

Why can't an audio magazine do such an objective, measured shoot-out?

 

Is it too much to ask?

 

Will the results cause 80% of advertisers to stop paying for ads?

 

Is there a reliable source for scientific comparions (other than recording engineers who perform their internal tests/comparisons)?

 

I hope I'm not stepping on any toes ;-)

 

[barrows]

is quite simple. As discussed above, evaluating components at this level is subjective in nature, and system dependent as well. DACs at >$3000.00 price points cannot be evaluated by scientific means, because currently we do not know how to measure their performance differences effectively. As an example, I just spent a little time at the Prism website looking at the specs of the Orpheus-its numbers for distortion, and noise, are nothing special-in fact there are many "audiophile" and "pro" converters that have better specs. Does this mean that you are "wrong" and that the Orpheus actually sounds "bad"? Of course not, it just goes to show that measurements are not the answer to finding a product with superior sound. In high end audio it is important to accept that sound appreciation is subjective, and that not everyone likes the same "sound"; good reviewers understand and acknowledge this, and know that they are reporting their response to a component under test. Good reviewers also accept that some listeners might have sonic preferences different from their own.

The performance of a sports car is pretty easy to measure though: go to a good road race track, with a few excellent drivers, make sure they get adequate time learning the habits of the cars under test, and then have them do a series of hot laps and average all the results. Of course, this test only measures the true performance of the cars in question, potential buyers will still have other factors to consider (aesthetics, comfort, etc).

 

[fahadm]

The performance of a digital interface (a/d + d/a) can be measured against the original signal. That's what mastering engineers do in their studios. When an engineer records a piece of audio, he/she listens to the 'live' mic-feed in the analog domain, then a/d gear converts it to the digital domain, finally d/a converts back to analog domain. Using Pro Tools (and a controlled environment) engineers are able to discern variations between converters.

 

So in order to do a proper 'shoot-out' its important to compare against the 'source' or original performance. How can you or I say that converter A is better than converter B when neither of us were at the studio/event during recording?

 

Hence, given that 99% of us don't have access to studios, nor have 'heard' the original performance, rather than speculate in sonic 'qualities', its better to either:

 

a) Perform a proper/controlled test (using a studio); or

b) Ask the opinion of a professional who does this for a living

 

I chose option (b) and reiterate the message: Go Pro - better value & closer to studio/live sound.

 

[barrows]

"The performance of a digital interface (a/d + d/a) can be measured against the original signal. That's what mastering engineers do in their studios. When an engineer records a piece of audio, he/she listens to the 'live' mic-feed in the analog domain, then a/d gear converts it to the digital domain, finally d/a converts back to analog domain. Using Pro Tools (and a controlled environment) engineers are able to discern variations between converters."

 

If you do not see the inherent flaw in the above test methodology I truly think you need to think a little harder about this (hint, what gear is the "mic feed" playing through).