|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.205.80.52
In Reply to: RE: Upgrade from AQ Dragonfly v1.2 posted by Sprezza Tura on April 25, 2015 at 09:08:28
Thanks for the info. What is so special about the micro iDSD compared to micro iDAC or the nano iDSD besides the price?
-------
I.D.
Follow Ups:
The Micro iDSD is clearly better than the Nano. I have used them side by side..the Micro is more sophisticated sounding.
The only thing I know about the iDAC for sure is that does not have DSD capability, and I think the iDSD has some other design updates, but I am not positive about that.
And the units for that are?
R.
-------
I.D.
No, but everyone who has heard it loves it. I could be wrong but I think it is stuck at 24/96, making it really non-competitive.
I have one. As you say, it sounds great.
Yes, it is limited to 24/96. I disagree that this makes it "non-competitive"; out of the many GB of ripped files in my systems, almost all are Redbook, and all but a couple of the "HD" rips are 24/96. Lack of 24/192 capability was a total non-factor for me when purchasing, and I suspect that is true of many people, even amoungst we inmates.
But then again people say my Ayre QB-9 is "non-competitive" because it only accepts USB input. It is to laugh!
Cerebrate!
Well, as far as non competitive..I really mean on paper since there are a slew of other units that do do 192 and even higher for less..
For most 24/96 will be all they ever need. I happen to have a huge 192 library.
Actually, as far as the QB9, I see it's one input as a strength, you know full well it is optimized for one specific application. The Ayre is a peace of mind purchase, as it sounds great and is hassle free, and as good as I have heard.
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: