|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
72.86.132.238
In Reply to: RE: Berkeley Audio and Bricasti dacs ... are they ok ? posted by beppe61 on April 29, 2015 at 04:20:47
Good DAC sound is found in the listening, not in the converter chip's architecture. There are Sigma-Delta Modulation DAC chips capable of excellent sound. Among which are the T.I. PCM1792 and PCM1794A, the E.S.S. Sabre DACs, and the ADI AD1955 and AD1853 which you mentioned. DSD/SACD is also based on Sigma-Delta technology.The resulting sound quality of any DAC box is greatly dependant on the many implementation details such as jitter suppression and digital reconstruction filter parameters, to name only two.
_
Ken Newton
Edits: 04/29/15 04/29/15Follow Ups:
Hi sorry again ... do you have any experience of the Analog Devices AD1852 ? is it similar to the AD1853 ?
I understand that implementation is key, but still ...
Thanks again a lot.
Kind regards,
bg
IIRC utilized the AD1852; although I auditioned this unit a while back, I remember it being a really nice experience, albeit, darker in tonality compared to my resident player.
Hi and thanks a lot.
I can live with something dark but not hard/harsh in the midrange
Often with digital and solid state there is a very fatiguing hardness in the midrange.
I understand very well who tries to tame this aspect using tubes.
But i do not like the bass from tubes ... it is not ok.
And also the very highs can be better with solid state.
But midrange with tubes can be very ok
When the sound is right it flows and i do not hear the system.
Never happened ... never. I have been always aware of the system.
Thanks again.
Kind regards,
bg
... the inherited "darkness" of the 588 was in comparison to my resident player, a model which offers a sunnier type presentation compared to the vast majority of players. I certainly didn't intend to give the impression that the 588 was overly "dark" compared to all other players.
As for the solid state / tube debate, I've no horse in that race ... if any such "fatigue" exist within my solid state system, it's 100% software based.
Hi and thanks again for the useful explanation.
I mention tubes because many use tubes in a digital chain.
Of course good solid state is just that ... good. And i prefer not to use tubes.
For instance almost all decent solid state with analog is quite ok.
It is with digital that everything gets difficult ... tricky.
The processing is a complex ... process indeed.
Like a reconstruction of a puzzle ... never an easy task.
Thanks again.
Kind regards,
bg
I've no hands on experience with it, but as I recall, the AD1852 is an voltage output version of the AD1853. The AD1853 is a current output device. The AD1852 appears to be equally capable of producing excellent sound as the AD1853, with the AD1852 notably being the DAC chip chosen by Meridian for their original model 808 Apodising DAC. However, it never appeared to enjoy significant use, with most vendors prefering the AD1853 over it.
_
Ken Newton
Edits: 04/30/15 04/30/15
Hi and thanks a lot again.
Incidentally i have discovered that my Apogee Mini-dac has a ad1955 inside ... i have to give it anothe listen ... especially now that i have better xlr cables.
Thanks again.
Kind regards,
bg
> > better xlr cables. < <
Cardas Hexlink 5C?
Hi ! yes exactly !
My chain is now:win 7pc (sadly not 8.1) > belden usb cable > Gustard u12 > Sommercable Binary AES/EBU cable > Apogee Rosetta 200 dac > Cardas Hexlink 5C > SAC Headphone amp > AKG k501
I have very few hours on the cables but i start listening something interesting.
I know that Cardas have a long break-in before sounding complete.
With 4 hours a day of use i am afraid they will take months to be burnt-in completely.
I have to stick with HP listening for sometime but i find the k501 quite revealing in the midrange that is my main interested.
In the weekend i will put a usb power supply on the Gustard that does not work without power on the usb. It does not wake up.
I hope it will be beneficial.
All in all i like the sound signature of Cardas cable a lot indeed.
I also read an interesting comment about the good quality of even the Cardas XLR entry level (Crosslink, Mic cable and 300B).
While the differences between the same models but RCA should be more pronounced ( i do not know if this is true or not by the way).
I cannot afford the most expensive models. Neutral Ref could be my perfect cable.
But i think that cables are important in the end. Even if they sometimes color the sound ?Moreover a friend will give me his old Benchmark DAC 1 to try out.
I am curious to listen to it because i have seen that many Inmates still use it ... maybe it is not that obsolete.
When i will get the sound right with headphones ... well that will be a good day. Headphones do not forgive a lot, especially in the midrange.
Thanks again.
Kind regards,
bg
Edits: 04/30/15 04/30/15 04/30/15 04/30/15 04/30/15 04/30/15
are my favorite sounding Cardas IC, by a country mile, IMO the GH5c is a different sounding animal compared to both older and newer Cardas wires.
The litz based wires do take their time breaking in (their tonearm wires take forever), but you won't suffer much in the meantime.
I used to think I was alone with my above thought, but here is a quote from the site hi-fi advice:
"Very different from the Cardas house sound of late. Literally all other cardas cables sound very different from the Hexlink. The Hexlink was the top of the line before the Golden Cross and is still a remarkable cable but its character has to match your setup and taste. It is very fast, open, bold and dynamic while maintaing a natural balance. The cable is very good for acoustic music and Piano has never sounded better. It does lack the last nth of air and fluidity that newer Cardas cables offer"
As for the balance version, tried a pair of Hexlink 5c (not golden) years ago using my CDP ... however, my system sound much superior via it's single ended connections.
It should also be noted that in order to get the best out of my GH5c, I modded nearly all my equipment w/Cardas RCA's.
tb1
Hi ... yes i have read two strong and valuable suggestions from:
1) a famous sound engineer
2) an engineer from Belden
both recommending to try some good AES/EBU cables also for balanced analog connections.
Their point being that the requirements for digital signals transfer are much more strict than for analog.
A recommendation based on science let's say.
I am using those now ... i have to wait for them to settle in a little
There is detail ... good one.
But the Cardas' midrange is gone ... now it is grainy and flat.
Exactly how digital without tubes sound. Bad.
I have to wait more but i think that enamelled solid core cables is the 1st choice for wiring in general and so also for cabling.
Thanks again.
Kind regards,
bg
Edits: 05/01/15 05/02/15 05/03/15
Hi and thanks a lot for the very helpful advice
Actually i come from unbalanced connections (and sometimes i think that i should have stuck with that).
I have experience of 300B and Neutral Ref rcas (older models i understand)
The 300B is nice (i have a pair). The Neutral are very good indeed (a friend lent me his pair to try).
They made my humble Rotel 970 cd player sound quite well indeed.
Very good outcome.My present dac has only XLR outs ... so i was forced to go XLR.
And honestly i did this with cables price in mind. For this rumor that even entry level XLRs can sound quite nice or that the differences are less pronounced than with RCAs.
So now i am balanced.
I just hope that some of the good things you say about the RCAs are also valid for the balanced version.
I am waiting with hope.
For now in my set up are quite ok. No bad sounds.
Thanks again.P.S. i would like to try the Neutral because they were quite neutral.
Every Hz treated in the same way ... very democratic cable.
Kind regards,
bg
Edits: 04/30/15
Very interesting indeed, Ken.
a
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
> > The resulting sound quality of any DAC box is greatly dependant on the many implementation details such as jitter suppression and digital reconstruction filter parameters, to name only two. < <
... the anti delta-sigma brigade is easily proven wrong in a simple demo within my system. In some particular cases, I've witnessed transports reproduce much more sonic variance(s) using identical & various chip-sets.
Implementation is key ... but that said, well implemented(*) 1702/4 based DAC/players (esp 1 box players) can offer truly impressive, very dynamic/transparent 16bit sound quality.
* yet those same HDCD chip-sets DID sound horrid in certain early - poorly - implemented players.
tb1
Hi and thanks a lot for the very comforting advice.
About the listening test as the final one i have also heard the confirmation of this in an interview of the Bricasti M1's designer.
Something like that they used listening session for the selection of parts and technical solutions.
I see this a little tricky to carry out anyway.
Thanks again.
Kind regards,
bg
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: