Berkeley USB review- upcoming?

[Elysian]

I'm a bit slow to the party but wanted to report my findings, as the BADA still seems to be a very popular DAC.

 

Thanks to a CA forum member, I recently acquired a WaveLink HS. The difference it's made in my system (previously using coax BNC, and Toslink before that) is staggering.

 

I've tried a number of DACs between the $300 to $5000 mark, including DIY models such as the Buffalo II and gamma2. I reached my 'significantly diminishing returns' point around the level of the Buffalo II, the better ESS9018 implementations, etc. I thought the BADA had the slight edge, but it wasn't night-or-day.

 

I read a number of people here say that the BADA needs to be fed a low jitter source to get the most out of it. After being subject to a lot of audiophile snake oil, I was pretty skeptical, so the bridge was a fairly low priority on my buy list. I was offered a WaveLink at a nice price from someone who didn't need it anymore, so due to Gordon's reputation, opted for it over the stock Off-Ramp 4 and Audiophilleo 2.

 

Wow, what a difference! I'm actually now hearing what the superlative reviews about the BADA were talking about. Before, the BADA always sounded musical and clean to me, but post-WaveLink, the veil (which I didn't really realize was there) is now gone. It's as though the sound has been brought into focus. I'm hearing the most impact in vocals and the bass. Vocals have this really nice natural shimmering/reverb effect to them, and the presentation has gotten very 'in your face', as though the singer is standing right in front of you. Definite improvement in instrument separation, too.

 

The only downside is that the Foobar spectrum visualization (WASAPI) is now really laggy. FPS seems to have dropped by about 90% for the visualization. The weird thing is that the visualization fps shoots right back to 30 in DirectSound. Tweaking buffer sizes in the Thesycon control panel and Foobar hasn't helped.

 

Anyone getting a BADA should consider a competent, low jitter bridge as mandatory. I have no idea if other legacy DACs benefit as much as the BADA, but I wonder how many people who were only somewhat impressed with the BADA would change their mind if they heard it through a proper bridge.

 

[firedog]

Chris-

 

I think a lot of us considering purchasing one would like it compared to some other hi-end converters such as Wavelength or Empirical Audio.

 

Also, in his recent reviews of DACs and USB converters, Steven Stone said that a good converter can make a modest DAC like the MF-1 sound very close in SQ to some much more expensive DACs being used without a converter (either straight USB or straight SPDIF).

 

If you could test this with the Berkeley,and it's true also for the Berkeley, then this would be an important piece of purchasing info to know: as then the high price of the Berkeley USB would be offset by the fact that it provides very high quality SQ without making a hi-end DAC a necessity.

 

Thanks

 

 

 

[Elysian]

I would love to see more comparisons, even subjective, comparing converters like the WaveLink, Off-Ramp 4, Audiophilleo 2, Alpha USB, INT202, etc. I've been reading a lot of people say that the use of one of those devices improves the fidelity of new DACs (with native async USB) from good developers.

 

I admit to being a skeptic when some people discussed their experiences pairing a good converter with the BADA, but after my experience with the WaveLink, I'm now a believer. I had a few friends listen and they were all taken aback by the difference.

 

I'm not sure if it's okay to post reviews from other forums, but Amir posted a review on the Alpha USB on 9/30 on What's Best Forum:

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?4160-Review-Berkeley-Audio-Alpha-USB

 

The impressions generally match the descriptions I've read from people who put their used Alpha USBs up for sale on Audiogon shortly after purchase. An improvement, but not a night-and-day one. There seem to be definite tierings among the converters, but I haven't read anyone who has heard enough converters to speak definitively, and take a first stab at settling the score.

 

[Jud]

I've been reading a lot of people say that the use of one of those devices improves the fidelity of new DACs (with native async USB) from good developers.

 

Elysian, did you mean with or without native async USB?

 

At a much lower price point, I've tried the Schiit Bifrost DAC, which has native async USB, with and without the Musical Fidelity V-Link (which worked a treat with my old Theta Pro Basic DAC), and it wasn't close - more boxes, worse sound. The Bifrost USB and optical inputs direct from MacBook Pro beat Bifrost coax and optical inputs through the V-Link hands down.

 

[Elysian]

I meant with native async USB, which was an interesting observation I've heard. On one hand, the 'fewer boxes in between you and your speakers/headphones' makes sense, but on the other, I've read people propose that one should do everything they can to deliver the lowest jitter signal possible to the D/A, even if it means putting another box in front.

 

I personally have not done the A/B test, but from my conversations with people who have (and whose observations line up with mine more often than not), I've heard and read a decent amount of criticism about the V-Link Mk1, as well as the stock hiFace and Halide Bridge.

 

Fwiw, the cheapest device which seems to have a majority of positive feedback is the Audiophilleo. After that, it gets hazy as there are not many impressions and reviews of the WaveLink, and even fewer of the Off-Ramp 3/4, Jkeny Mk3, INT202, and Alpha USB. Consequently, it becomes an on faith purchase for most, with the exception of the Audiophilleo. Audiophilleo's return policy probably also has a role to play in this.

 

I don't mean to speak badly of gear, but after hearing and reading many people reporting degraded sound through converters (this criticism extends right up to the $2k devices), it seems particularly important to sort out what is and isn't working.

 

[tubesound]

I have an Audiolab 8200CD which is more like a DAC (ESS9018) with a CD transport. Its USB input is async with John's own coding. I was not impressed with the USB sound and was thinking to sell the player. However, a few days ago it occurred to me I never tried its coaxial input and so I put the V-Link in front of it. What an improvement! The lesson I learned is that not all async USB applications are equal. I'm inspired to try a better USB to SPDIF converter. An obvious candidate for me would be the soon to be released V-Link 192.

 

[Elysian]

Schiit's on the record saying that they feel the S/PDIF input is superior to the async USB on the Bifrost, so that could be an interesting candidate to try different converter implementations on. We've already got one data point on degraded sound using a V-Link, presumably Mk1, as opposed to feeding directly from a MBP.

 

It'd be interesting to try some other converters with the Bifrost, particularly with someone who knows the Bifrost's sound quality very well.

 

http://schiit.com/schiit-faq/about-bifrost/

Wait. Are you saying USB is crap?

We’re saying we put a ton of time into our USB implementation, but, to our ears, USB still doesn’t quite offer the performance of SPDIF. And we can even get into shades of gray on SPDIF too: consider Mike Moffat’s AT&T ST-optical interfaces and Sumo’s Axiom/Theorem transport and D/A, which had a separate low-jitter master clock connection from the transport.

 

[Jud]

You will also want to consider that I was not comparing the V-Link to any of the products you mentioned, but rather to the optional USB input in the Bifrost. It's a $100 option, meaning it is a piece probably roughly comparable in price to the $160 V-Link (since the box and some of the other necessary electronics are already included in the Bifrost). I always very much liked the sound of my system with the V-Link in it (together with the Theta). So did Chris in his review on this site - it's in the CASH list.

 

When I was looking at user discussions of the various converters trying to decide what I should buy, my own personal impression was that the V-Link and Halide Design Bridge got mostly favorable reviews, while the Audiophilleo did not. I think this just shows the inherent difficulty in assessing subjective judgments in a non-rigorous way, i.e., I didn't do actual counts of user impressions for these pieces, and I assume you didn't either.

 

[Jud]

Schiit's on the record saying that they feel the S/PDIF input is superior to the async USB on the Bifrost, so that could be an interesting candidate to try different converter implementations on.

 

You don't even need a converter. As a Bifrost owner, I can tell you the USB input sounds better than the optical S/PDIF input direct from my MacBook Pro. Here is my response to someone at Head-Fi who also thought Schiit was saying the S/PDIF input would always sound superior (my own opinion is I don't think that's quite what they were saying):

 

"Jason has been adamant that the SPDIF inputs should absolutely better than the USB. Curious that you find the USB better.

 

"It's often the particular system rather than abstract considerations of what's 'better,' all else being equal, that governs. The MacBook Pro's optical output is fairly famous for having relatively high jitter, and at the price of the Bifrost my guess is that what it can do about a high-jitter optical source is relatively limited. The jitter through USB is very much reduced by the Bifrost's asynchronous USB interface. I tried minimizing source jitter with a Musical Fidelity V-Link USB-to-S/PDIF converter, but that adds another box in the signal chain, and it sounded worse than either optical or USB direct to the Bifrost.

 

"There are some disadvantages to USB that I believe my playback software (Audirvana Plus) probably does a better job with than iTunes or much of the other playback software available. (If you are up for reading a bit of theory, the Audirvana author has written a paper - http://www.amr-audio.co.uk/html/dp777_tech-papers_OSX-Integermode.html .) Another relative disadvantage of USB is transmission of electrical noise. The Bifrost having a power supply separate from the USB bus helps minimize this. While noise can still be transmitted through a shared ground connection, I'm guessing it isn't bad enough in my particular system to counterbalance the better jitter performance of the async USB interface.

 

"Two other possible factors: (1) I'm using a $110 USB cable (Audioquest Carbon), and my optical cable, which uses plastic fiber, costs less than half that. (2) I've done hardly any burn-in on the optical interface, which of course does have electrical components, while the USB interface now has over 120 hours on it. (However, the USB interface definitely sounded better at 24 hours, though at the time that was 24 hours more than the optical interface.)

 

"Any or all of these things might be responsible, or it may be something else entirely; all I can tell you is what I hear from my system."

 

 

 

[Elysian]

I compiled about a few dozen Firefox tabs of reviews from somewhere between 6-8 audio sites, then compiled a separate list of professional reviews and Amazon/consumer/auction site reviews, and then finally categorized many recent correspondences I had with audio engineers and dealers in the audiophile product industry. From there, I prioritized the reviews and impressions based upon my familiarity with the person (and general agreement with their prior reviews), and an (admittedly very subjective) peer ranking also based on that person's prior posts and statements. Last but not least, there were some phone conversations with industry people, which also got filed into various buckets.

 

It's not very scientific, but it follows a general, structured methodology I've developed for myself while assessing products (both for fun and professionally).

 

The key trend I picked up on, though, was that the vast majority of these (even from some of the engineers and designers) was that the assessments were qualitatively, not quantitatively made. Afaik, none of the the async USB code is open sourced, either, so we can't even do that analysis. At least with amps, it's easy to pop the case open, trace the circuit, and look at the components. Another trend was that the base assumptions (particularly regarding points of weakness) varied drastically.

 

Anyway, my reason for posting this is that I went a bit deeper than just glancing at a handful of reviews on forums, and think to myself 'well, it seems like 2 people didn't like this device for this reason. I better buy something more expensive'.

 

[Part-Time Audiophile]

I just got my Berkeley Alpha Series 2 and Alpha USB today, so I have had no time to really do much with them other than plug them in, but I can say this -- they work. Like I said, it's not much. I have some pics on the blog for now and I'm going to run them in for the next week or two before I give them a serious listen.

 

[57gold]

For almost $7K, you'd think the BAD guys could have sprung for some more solid looking case work?

 

And, with some guys complaining about noisy transformers...at this price level!

 

Perhaps they need to meet some of the Apple guys down the way from Berkeley to learn them about industrial design.

 

 

 

[barrows]

Do you still have the Legato in house? If so, a comparison (although perhaps a little unfair via the high res capability of the Alpha) could be instructive. I am at least curious.

 

[Part-Time Audiophile]

But it's gonna be a couple weeks before the Alpha USB burns in.

 

[onthebeach]

I'm very new to the world of computer audio and much of the technical side of things written around here I barely understand so what I'm saying should certainly be taken with a grain of salt.

 

I recently introduced the Alpha USB into my system and I am quite astonished at the improvement of SQ I am hearing. Up until this time my benchmark for digital had been my faithful Bryston CD player, the BCD1. I was actually very happy with the results I was getting from it and I didn't really think much improvement was to be had from computer audio.

 

I thought the data base and ease of smart lists etc was the big plus to be had with computer audio over the silver disc - not sound quality.

 

So yes I spent the first night listening to my system with the addition of the Alpha USB shaking my head in astonishment with a big stupid smile on my face. Its like a dirty window which I didn't even know was dirty has been cleaned to show the fantastic view so much better.

 

As I said I am new to this game so this is the first USB interface I have had in my system so naturally the computer audio side of things is vastly improved. Its the improvement the Alpha USB has give over my CD player, which is no slouch, that has amazed me.

 

So to get that along with the accessibility of all my digital music has really changed the way I listen now.

 

I'm converted

 

[barrows]

... I look forward to hearing how they compare for 16/44.1 playback, it should be an interesting comparison.

 

[Audioseduction]

Converter added to your digital front end is a VERY good method to extract clean data from a PC/MAC. I myself added a "WaveLink HS 24/192 USB to SPDIF Converter" from Wavelength and was just blown away how much better the music sounded. I think with a good media converter is one of the best ways to take full advantage of your DAC by feeding it an excellent clean signal. Enjoy your listening sessions!

 

[liszt]

Toslink is crap and has high jitter, so it's not surprising you heard what you did, and sometimes, adding an extra usb->spdif converter doesn't help things much. All asynchronous usb is not equal, implementation is everything. Just because it has 'asynchronous usb' doesn't mean it has truly low jitter. I had a hiface before and the legato stomps all over it.

 

Much more palpable sonic images with greater stereo depth, air between instruments is better defined, bass extension improved with much cleaner highs.

 

The thing with jitter is, you gotta make sure you're buying a solidly engineered product. Everything matters in the converter when we want truly low jitter. From the clocks used, to the quality of the power supply, even the BNC connector and spdif cable. If any one of those aren't up to par, forget about getting low jitter.

 

[ijarvile]

Hi Chris,

 

I just recently joined to your forum even Its been a pleasure to read these threads/posts a couple years for now. I like myself as a quiet member even I have a strong technical background (RFI, Digital Data and System SW optimizations) and I do test reviews / recommendations for few distributors also.

Why quiet? The reason for my lack of inputs to these threads comes from that there are many times the members who does not even a clue what they are writing and they just want to continue with their statements even somebody would provide politely a strong technical facts how things really are.

 

I have seen it in here too though not that much as in AudiogoN or other audiophile forums/blocks. This forum I think is currently "The best" forum, because audiphile industry is heading a more and

more towards to the music server (computer based) direction, especially after SSD HDs.

As you are going to write a review about Alpha USB, would it be too much to ask if you could do a reasonable comparison between the Alpha USB and Steve's Off-Ramp 4 with Turboclocks. As many audiophiles has Steve's product and would like to know the differences between these two (2) products.

 

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue39/ramblings_computer.htm

 

I think a many philes would like to see the similar comparison

to be done between Off-Ramp and Alpha USB (Pros / Cons in different areas).

 

And I believe that the both products are great even there are always differences it would nice to write recommendations to the readers even in simplest format as everybody has they own systems and tastes.

As an example:

This product X would be a more suitable to bright sounding system and the product Y would be better for neutral and dark sounding system.

 

Thank you, Ilkka