Jump to content

Kevin M.

  • Content Count

    99
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    United States

Posts posted by Kevin M.

  1. Minidsp U-DI08 USB to SPDIF interface up to 8 ch.


    I purchased this for multi-channel into my stand-alone dacs. Works great but sounds identical  to my Lynx AES-16e card. Used only for a few hours. I don’t need both interfaces. This is SPDIF version which comes with BNC comnectors. Price includes shipping. Check Stereophile for review.


     

  2. On 3/1/2017 at 11:43 AM, jmjohnson said:

     

    . A few hours of that and I was getting seriously worried but then I took the Alpha USB out of the loop and went direct to the DAC via USB and it was night and day, I was back to what the Berkeley had provided but with improvements.

    What connection where you using? It seems the XLR of the Dave is limited to 24/96. What about higher than 24/96 sample rates with BNC? Do you have to use dual mode to get higher rates with BNC?

  3. I've owned the Wireworld 7 Platinum, Straightwire, Supra and now have D H Labs Mirage. I found the Wireworld Platinum and D H Labs Mirage to be the best. Seems like the cables with a separated power wire, sound better. My favorite is the DH Labs Mirage and the one I kept. It's the most neutral cable I have tried. I notice the Curious cable also has a separated power wire.

  4. I'm also highly suspicious of network rendering as a means of improving SQ. You have to understand that it looks counter-intuitive to add several active components which re-create a square wave several times over...just to get rid of source-generated electrical noise? The DAC's receiver is still creating self-noise from processing USB packets.

     

    Since the only option for high rate DSD is USB/I2S these schemes can't work for me anyway. I got a Paul Pang v3 USB card...with external power and a 24MHz OCXO clock I really doubt you'd get better out of a series of cheap consumer network devices and rendering gadget.

     

     

    Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

    I too am baffled. The theory of isolation between the devices and the core server seems to be refuted by the fact that the sound improves with a direct LAN connection. Yet, there seem to be a consensus that it does work. Do you know of anyone that has compared the Paul Pang V3 vs the mrendu and the host of tweak devices connected to it?
  5. I think I need to qualify, "expensive." The linear supply is expensive compared to modifying the existing supply. The cost was $160 plus shipping from Singapore. I felt that reasonable for the supply considering the design work. The designer was very helpful and provided directions. I think the directions actually made it seem more complicated than it was to install. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bx_GtKC7_I2HUjVHN0pULXJmZDA/view

  6. Hi, when the box is small actually an external smps is the common solution because of the mains transformer size, weight and radiations.

    However I am not completely set on the external solution. I am thinking to keep only the transformer out and place inside the rectification and stabilization stage.

    Or use a double stabilization stage, one outside and one inside the cabinet.

    Not that is really needed all this complication.

    Regards, gino

    Expensive but fairly simple to install. It fit. Bigger than the original for sure but the guy who designed it also owns the Tascam. This was easier for me. I wanted everything inside the box. I'm not opposed to external supplies but I already have enough of that.

    IMG_4238.jpg

    IMG_4239.jpg

  7. Hi and thanks a lot for the helpful advice.

    Other interfaces use a very simple solution, an external smps power brick of decent quality.

     

     

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]31199[/ATTACH]

     

    In this way the psu is more isolated from the circuits, a nice thing in general.

    No RFI or EMI from the psu contaminating the signal.

    And it shows in the noise floor spectrum quite nicely. Love that test.

    Regards, gino

     

    Yes. It's seemed more difficult to use an external smps with the Tascam.

     

     

    Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

  8. Hi ! thanks a lot for the very valuable advice. When you say much quieter does this mean that this shows in a noise spectrum test ?

    Because I saw the noise only with tests. The unit is quite silent by ear. But clearly a very low and flat noise floor throughout the band is much nicer than a noise floor with bumps, even if low in level.

     

     

     

    Also this is very interesting and a really strange mistake by Teac. I see that even in cheap cd player they use copper screws.

    I will try to find some fit for the use.

     

     

     

    Thanks again indeed. I see on the psu pcb some parts missing and replaced with jumpers.

    It is strange. With a electrical schematic maybe some kind of troubleshooting could be possible. Ok to the expert eye also without scheme.

    What really amazes me is that replacing the stock even with a very cheap Dell smps 12V the noise floor looks much nicer.

    For me extremely low noise floor is the 1st thing. The 2nd one extremely low distortion.

    The 3rd one extremely low price ... (joke).

    For instance I am amazed when I look at the creations from ExaSound. That is a noise floor

     

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]31192[/ATTACH]

     

    Thanks a lot again. I will try the mods you suggest.

    Have a nice day, gino

     

    I replaced my power supply with a custom made linear supply. Fairly easy install but much costlier. Still I'm quite pleased with the results especially when I use it as a dac.

     

     

    Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

  9. I know it's been over 2 years since the last response to this thread, but just yesterday I stumbled on, "HOW TO SET UP A DEDICATED LISTENING ROOM WITHOUT FANCY TREATMENTS." I was so intrigued I rearranged my system and room right away and was very happy with the increased depth and width of the soundstage. Today I came across this thread and read the recommended articles, "Setting up your monitoring environment," and "Vibration control for better performance." Thing is I also have my home theater in the same space as my stereo setup. I've read that the TV and other (unused) speakers can interfere with the stereo setup's performance. Soon I'll have a bedroom that I could use as a dedicated music room but it only measures 12 x 10 feet. Along the back long wall is a single window the opposite long wall has the entrance door with a 3 x 3 foot alcove and the closet with double sliding wood doors. Both short walls are totally solid. I'd like to know from those with experience if this room is too small before lugging an 80 pound power amp in. My speakers are monitor audio Gold 300 and an SVS PC-2000 subwoofer. The other option is to keep everything were it is now, (which would be more convenient for music listening while doing other household chores) and adding a power conditioner and air bearings and straightening out the jumble of cords in back of the rack.

     

    My guess is that the room would be smaller than is optimall. It's also close to being a perfect square in width and length which is not good for room modes. Some type of room correction could help. The problem is that because of the size of the room, it will limit seating and speaker placement positions. As you know, this can have a great effect on room acoustics. With all of this said, I have seen guys make a room this size work. I can't imagine it working well however without some good room correction.

     

    Unused speakers or other boxes with holes in them like instruments can interfere with good room acoustics. In the future, technology like Dirac Unison will seek to use others speakers to assist the performance of the speaker playing audio. As for your TV, perhaps you can find a throw or blanket to put over the TV when listening to help reduce reflections. You can try this to see how much of an effect it is having. Placing the speakers further out into the room away from the TV can also reduce the problem.

  10. Spoken like a true "professional" audiophile. Most of us here would give our right ear for 1/10 of that gear. The guy is new here, be nice.
    New HERE indeed . I'm just stating the obvious about his set-up. I'm not sure what a professional audiophile is? If "professional audiophile" means I place my speakers away from boundaries within reason even if it would look neat all in line against the wall or rack, I am guilty. I only state that I have as much electronics so one would know that my criticism is not jealousy nor am I constrained by envy. I will not get personal. It's just hard truth that you'd tell any beginning audiophile. Don't push your speakers against the rack or near the wall. There are boundary effects and that can't be solved even by the best room eq or correction. Do you disagree with my advice? Perhaps I'm off base but it would seem to be acoustics 101, the stuff I posted. Nothing really outlandish?

     

    From my perspective, guy comes in with a lot of beautiful gear and room that you'd hate to mention the "elephant in the room" or "Emperor has no clothes." Aesthetics are nice but set-up and just the very basic things one would do to tame boundary effects and acoustics are all WAY off. All the criticism posted by all are accurate.

  11.  

    Kevin M.......I assume your comments are directed toward me. I'm happy you have an equal amount of expensive electronics. To have that much discretionary income for audio gear tells me you must be successful at something. Good for you. You can certainly set up all that gear as you deem fit. What I don't see is any point in your "amateur" comment except perhaps self aggrandizement. You must be special to have such a supernatural ability to perceive events beyond normal sensory contact. Otherwise, how in the world could you possible know what my room and system sounds like? The simple answer is, you don't. Thinking and knowing are two entirely separate events.

     

    Please feel free to continue with your agenda, whatever it may be, and I will do the same.

    I have no agenda. It's just acoustics. I don't have to hear it to know that your speakers are too close to the rack in one, for aesthetics I guess and the boundaries in the other among other things. I don't have to hear it to know what sidewall reflections are. What I posted is just the truth. I am not going to get personal. I'm just discussing what I see from purely an audio perspective.
  12. That coffee table is also detrimental to sound quality and the sofa should be placed 1/3 or 1/5 into the room.

     

    I almost bought those nice LS6332s instead of my current speakers.

     

    R

    I have an equal amount of expensive electronics but would never set it up like that. You really are not optimizing your system when you do that. It's harsh to say but it's amateur for the amount of money being spent.
  13. I'm looking to do a new build and couldn't help noticing the new M2 SSD of AsRock motherboards. Especially how AsRock is uniquely interacting directly with the CPU from the M2. These super fast memory devices with low power seem to be the new answer for a better optimized build. In particular I am looking at the new M.2 PCI Express Gen3 x4 that except the Samsung 950 PRO M.2 SSD . Click on the link for a review. The Samsung 950 with a possible read speed of 2.5 Gb/s.

    What does this mean for media playback? In my case I use JRiver for audio and video playback in an optimized Windows 10 OS. Would I benefit from M2 OS in SQ? Would it be even better to stream from M2 over memory? sata SSD?

    Has anyone tested the M2?

    I use a M.2 drive with an Asus Hero VII. I don't hear any sound quality difference between it and a conventional SSD drive. With the M.2 drive actually being on the motherboard, you lose the ability to add a SOTM noise filter, however. I've used a SATA SSD as well but never with a filter.
  14. Hi Guys,

    I am using the new Dh Labs "Mirage" Signal Isolating USB Cable - Its really, very very good! The difference between their other Max Bandwith USB Cable is like sky and earth! although the Max Bandwith is excellent for its price.

     

    I consider the Vertere USB Cable (which i also have and use) the best ever - now with the Mirage i think the gap is clearly bridged!

    I totally agree. I have had several and my favorite before this one was the Wireworld Platinum. I like the DH labs Mirage much more. All the note decay and resolution is there as with the Platinum but it seems a more neutral cable. It's really superb. My past experience with Dh labs cables were that they were OK. The USB is stellar.

  15. Hi astralite- that is interesting info. However, I don't think the Aerial 10T uses the Discovery ring radiator?

    I searched and none of those looks anything like what is in mine.

     

    By treble refinement, I am looking for clarity and dynamics when the tweeters are playing large complicated orchestral movements. Perhaps I am reaching the limitations of a single tweeter / single mid range / single woofer speaker?

     

    I use McIntosh XR200s. Look on http://www.audioclassics.com . They have a used pair and you can return them if you don't like them. IMO they are several levels above the 10t and considerably better than the current 7t. The highs on Aerial 7t are excellent but the XR200s offers much more resolution and dynamics,MUCH more.

     

    I compared the XR200 in same system with B&W N802 D2. In terms of resolution, the N802 offered just as much. Highs were more extended on N802 but I found them harsh. XR200 offered extremely wide and deep sound stage with much broader sweet spot. There is no comparison with the XR200 much greater dynamics as well. If you look on audioasylum, another owner chose XR200s over Revel Salon 2s. I'm not surprised.

     

    A few of my friends snicker at McIntosh speaker. " I didn't know they made speakers!"[emoji38] But I wish I had taken a pic of the look on 3 of their faces when they heard them.

     

    With Audioclassics, you'll only lose shipping if you don't like them. They take trades too, so you can trade in your Aerials.

  16. Eventually someone will hack some sort of solution like what has been done with SACD's.

    But my point all along is not to support something we'll have to break laws to do that which we can do now..

    Friends don't let friends do MQA. :)

    I'm afraid many do support MQA. I am not one. However, I think that efforts should be directed at the labels and manufactures to not support it. Those who do certainly have contacted many companies asking when will they get support for MQA. I suggest that those who do not support MQA do the same.

     

    Chris should not oppose MQA in my opinion. If he does, people like Bob Stuart will never participate on this forum. Seldom is there a universal consensus on anything. I remember the debate about motorcycle helmets many years back for example.

  17. Any company can provide a digital output. MQA so far has denied licensing to any product with a digital output.
    No, I think you may be missing my point :). That company will provide a digital out for licensed MQA products that do not have a digital output. For example, you can bypass HDMI audio restrictions that way and get 4 SPDIF outs. You find a licensed MQA product and then have that company create a digital output and get around the MQA restrictions.
  18. Nope, You hit that nail on the head R.

    So far I've seen no credible evidence if temp-de is a real enhancement, a euphonic coloration by the process, or just some expectation bias a work? But they're using this supposed SQ improvement claim to justify putting HDA under lock and key.

    What's locked can be unlocked. It MQA has widespread use on consumer electronics devices, this company JVB Digital for all your MultiZone MultiRegion Codefree Blu-ray and DVD players. Including 3G-SDI, HD-SDI, SPDIF and Darbee is sure to provide a digital out on at least some of them. Not a cheap solution however, but at least you could use Dirac Live or other room correction on the decoded signal sent to the dacs and intercepted by the digital out board.
  19. I asked the Dirac help desk . Response was that they didn't not know but felt it unlikely Dirac would implement MQA. Mentioned licensing fees and gave me a good link that's not positive for MQA. http://www.metal-fi.com/meridian-audios-mqa/ This was just help desk and I wouldn't consider it an official position.

    I guess, someone could play back a decoded file without Dirac live and compare that to an un-decoded file with Dirac Live and see which technology offers the greatest improvement.

  20. Hi Kevin - Dirac and all room correction devices can work with MQA just like any other DAC. The companies just need to license the tech from MQA.
    How would that work? My dac does not have Dirac Live capability inside of it. I use my HTPC to do Dirac and then output to the dac. That doesn't seem possible with MQA?

     

    Would Dirac have to decode the MQA and then re-encode it, corrected and then my dac with MQA decodes the corrected signal?

×
×
  • Create New...