External DAC with Connect
I am looking to add a DAC to my SONOS - Nak RE1 - KEF Q70 system, and am considering the Schiit Bifrost. My source is a wide range of ALAC, MP3 and AAC material. Any advice, is it worth it? Am I likely to hear the "wider, more detailed, deeper, etc." sound the reviewers write about.
This topic has been closed for further comments. You can use the search bar to find a similar topic, or create a new one by clicking Create Topic at the top of the page.
Page 11 / 11
+8
That part wasn't my post, it was Majik's
+8
But I do have a suggestion, why not have a Audiophile section of the forum? Then those that want to post about what they hear etc can do so and those that think it's all BS can stay out and not be bothered. Heck I'll even volunteer to be the moderater..
Another approach is one that Alan Shaw over in the Harbeth forums has started to kick off 2015.
He and many other users support the view that any modern stereo amplifier that has adequate power so as to not be driven out of its designed limits by the speaker load will yield the same sound quality from any Harbeth speaker in a DBT - it is therefore not necessary to pick one for sonic signature, but look to things like features, reliability and after sales support instead.
This view gets expressed over and over again - ad nauseam - in threads started by someone that comes along every couple of months claiming to hear unique sonic magic from their amp - which typically tends to be expensive and usually inadequately powered. Low powered valve amps are the usual suspects, though not the only ones. Almost all are much more expensive than the mass market makes.
The 2015 action is to start a thread and stop such discussions by moderating them out in a forum where all posts are subject to moderation before release, by pointing to the thread which explains the thinking.
Digital tech beyond CDPs isn't common there, so there aren't many such discussions around DACs even though the forum philosophy in general is that if an improvement can't be heard in a well constructed DBT, it doesn't exist and is a pointless pursuit for maker and buyer. Or perhaps not so pointless for the maker.
The other forum that operates on similar lines for a long time now is Hydrogenaudio.
PS: If interested, check out Alan's first post on the thread here:
http://www.harbeth.co.uk/usergroup/showthread.php?2473-Revised-HUG-mission-statement-for-2015&p=32218#post32218
He and many other users support the view that any modern stereo amplifier that has adequate power so as to not be driven out of its designed limits by the speaker load will yield the same sound quality from any Harbeth speaker in a DBT - it is therefore not necessary to pick one for sonic signature, but look to things like features, reliability and after sales support instead.
This view gets expressed over and over again - ad nauseam - in threads started by someone that comes along every couple of months claiming to hear unique sonic magic from their amp - which typically tends to be expensive and usually inadequately powered. Low powered valve amps are the usual suspects, though not the only ones. Almost all are much more expensive than the mass market makes.
The 2015 action is to start a thread and stop such discussions by moderating them out in a forum where all posts are subject to moderation before release, by pointing to the thread which explains the thinking.
Digital tech beyond CDPs isn't common there, so there aren't many such discussions around DACs even though the forum philosophy in general is that if an improvement can't be heard in a well constructed DBT, it doesn't exist and is a pointless pursuit for maker and buyer. Or perhaps not so pointless for the maker.
The other forum that operates on similar lines for a long time now is Hydrogenaudio.
PS: If interested, check out Alan's first post on the thread here:
http://www.harbeth.co.uk/usergroup/showthread.php?2473-Revised-HUG-mission-statement-for-2015&p=32218#post32218
I'd support this approach for the Sonos forums.
The argument is never ending in audio as to what constitutes better sound. There is certainly no denying that snake oil exist to some extent but that's painting with a broad brush isn't it ?
If I'm in the market for a Ferrari, and want some insight as to how it drives, I would ask someone who actually sat in the seat and took it for a spin rather than someone who read about how it drives off the internet.
All amps sound the same, cables too, dacs don't matter, blah blah, same old song and dance from people with little to no experience with a variety of gear.
You simply have to experience some things in life for yourself, and that goes beyond audio too. There are those who are happy with what they have and that's all well and good, but there are still others who seek out better. Experiment with some different stuff in your home, in your system with your ears. Not such a tall order is it ? If your that interested in audio anyway.
If I'm in the market for a Ferrari, and want some insight as to how it drives, I would ask someone who actually sat in the seat and took it for a spin rather than someone who read about how it drives off the internet.
All amps sound the same, cables too, dacs don't matter, blah blah, same old song and dance from people with little to no experience with a variety of gear.
You simply have to experience some things in life for yourself, and that goes beyond audio too. There are those who are happy with what they have and that's all well and good, but there are still others who seek out better. Experiment with some different stuff in your home, in your system with your ears. Not such a tall order is it ? If your that interested in audio anyway.
I've been through dozens of amps, preamps, integrated amps and receivers over the past few years. Not a one of them sounded better than the others, once tone controls were disabled and volumes matched. But then that's been proven since at least as far back as when Peter Walker was running QUAD, hasn't it?
Same experience with interconnects and speaker cables. If they're of sufficient quality to meet the need, there simply is no difference between the Belkins and the absurdly priced ones.
Speakers, of course, are different. There is no perfect transducer. I believe my QUAD ESL-63s get as close to ideal as is currently possible, but that's far from perfect, and they don't have the dynamic range of dynamic drivers. Would love to hear some big Harbeths some day.
There is not much to moderate. As moderators we don't censor the comments, we keep things tidy and deal with bad behavior. Each of us made very plain that we were not signing up to be censors.
Are you suggesting that there should be some sort of litmus test required for admission to the audiophile section?
Other than attract more pundits, I'm not sure that a specialized section would serve to keep the two sides apart. I think that it is likely to attract trolls. For a while users needed to pass a quiz before they were given access to the Digital Experts section. Probably, this was designed to promote high level discussions between professionals. Overall, this did not work out so well because participation was limited and the experts tended to hang together rather than helping main stream users.
In my opinion, the problem is that neither side wants to acknowledge the existence of other side of the coin. Replies from the other side of the coin are unwelcome because ... er ... things are so "obvious" ... we are just wasting time.
Some of us can play both sides of this coin. I am docile here, but I can be quite disruptive in showdowns -- exposing the follies of both sides. The whole situation reminds me of an early teen dance where the boys line one side of the gym, the girls line the other side, and there is not much dancing.
+8
Are you suggesting that there should be some sort of litmus test required for admission to the audiophile section?
.
No I wasn't..
LOL, if audio does one thing well, it's the ability to start rifts. I can certainly see both sides of the coin, to some none of this matters and for whatever reason they can't hear differences. Like I keep saying, that's all well and good for you but your own personal experiences won't echo everyones. Is there anything wrong with 2 different people having 2 different opinions ? Obviously not and that's the whole point of discussions on forums, to share opinions and experiences...no ?
As long as you admit that your opinion defies all logic and science, and therefore is based on faith and faith alone, we have no problem. When you start referring to your opinion as anything else, that is when you get challenged for proof.
And stop with the veiled insults, suggesting you can hear something our inferior ears cannot, unless you are willing to subject your golden cochlea to an ABX test to prove it.
I have said this before, but it bears repeating. The listening experience is based on inputs from more than just the ears, and to that extent even a well constructed DBT has limitations.
However, the weightage that is accorded to these other inputs changes significantly from person to person and even with the same person over time. As a result this very much becomes a YMMV thing - or rather YMWV - mileage will vary. For instance, I like my speaker enclosures to look good in addition to how the speakers measure, but amber backlit VU meters don't float my listening experience boat anymore - at one time they did, as did the glow of tubes in a tube amp.
One thing that has always worked is a glass or two of the best tipple and the lights down low. Music has always sounded better from my set up then, an audiophile tweak I can always count on.
However, the weightage that is accorded to these other inputs changes significantly from person to person and even with the same person over time. As a result this very much becomes a YMMV thing - or rather YMWV - mileage will vary. For instance, I like my speaker enclosures to look good in addition to how the speakers measure, but amber backlit VU meters don't float my listening experience boat anymore - at one time they did, as did the glow of tubes in a tube amp.
One thing that has always worked is a glass or two of the best tipple and the lights down low. Music has always sounded better from my set up then, an audiophile tweak I can always count on.
+8
And stop with the veiled insults, suggesting you can hear something our inferior ears cannot, unless you are willing to subject your golden cochlea to an ABX test to prove it.
That's kind of what I've been talking about, the rudeness, where does he insult you directly?? Try reading your post objectively, it's so confrontational no wonder folks get turned off. You may not mean to come off that way but you do, relax its not life or death here.
Construction guy's point was that people hear differently... Or in the case of many folks, like my wife as an example, they simply don't care how stuff sounds..
Consider the two statements:
1. Two amplifiers that have the same measured flat frequency/distortion response of the kind that most modern amplifiers exhibit, that are working within designed limits - i.e, without clipping/distorting - cannot be distinguished from each other in a level matched DBT when operating with tone controls or the like not engaged.
2. All amplifiers sound the same.
People, of whom I am one, that support the first statement are often said to be saying the second, which they are not. The second statement is not a short version of the first, and isn't believed to be a true statement by them.
I am curious to know if there is anybody on this forum that disagrees with statement 1.
1. Two amplifiers that have the same measured flat frequency/distortion response of the kind that most modern amplifiers exhibit, that are working within designed limits - i.e, without clipping/distorting - cannot be distinguished from each other in a level matched DBT when operating with tone controls or the like not engaged.
2. All amplifiers sound the same.
People, of whom I am one, that support the first statement are often said to be saying the second, which they are not. The second statement is not a short version of the first, and isn't believed to be a true statement by them.
I am curious to know if there is anybody on this forum that disagrees with statement 1.
Loved it, ErikM. Your comment sounds just like my wife too. I am convinced she would watch her c*** TV movies as a flickering image on a black & white telly, with audio coming from a tin can on the end of a piece of string... and still be quite content! Ah well, each to their own!
I know some women that are auto or camera enthusiasts, though in a minority - but I haven't come across a single audiophile woman. It isn't that they don't appreciate good sounding music, but they seem to be able to remain focused on the music once a certain SQ is achieved. They are happy to leave the kit to be the passive thing it is.
Speaking of people who don't care how stuff sounds, how does one explain hires aficionados who, even after being given scientific proof that hires formats can damage the sound through distortion; they still continue to tout the format as audio nirvana? Certainly they also "simply don't care how stuff sounds" if they prefer a distorted format over a clean one?
Construction guy's point was that people hear differently... Or in the case of many folks, like my wife as an example, they simply don't care how stuff sounds..
Bingo....nothing confrontational about that. Even as an individual your hearing changes over the years too so will your audio preferences.
All I suggest is that people try stuff for themselves, regardless if the results support one position or another. Simply don't take my word, or anyone elses as written in stone.
All I suggest is that people try stuff for themselves, regardless if the results support one position or another. Simply don't take my word, or anyone elses as written in stone.
Agreed. And all we are suggesting is that there is a rational and widely regarded methodology for these trials if one wants to be sure of processing only what one's ears have conveyed. Failing that, be aware of the fact that the brain will also process other inputs than from the ears and if that is ok for you, that is fine too.
All I suggest is that people try stuff for themselves, regardless if the results support one position or another. Simply don't take my word, or anyone elses as written in stone.
But don't you realize that when you state one digital cable sounds better than another, it is the equivalent of standing at the dock and saying to the sailors "Don't sail too far, you will fall off the edge!" Nobody with a scintilla of knowledge about engineering will take you seriously, and they don't have to "listen" (or sail too far) to know that you are speaking nonsense. And on top of that, when confronted with these facts, instead of admitting that your opinion makes no scientific sense, and that you may be experiencing a placebo effect or bias, you insult the objectivists ability to hear or the ability of their system to resolve differences.
The simple fact is audiophiles have every opportunity in the world to prove they hear what they hear, and they can't. So why should the objectivists have to accept their observations, when there is no way in h-e-double-hockey-sticks that an audiophile is ever going to accept the fact that what they hear just may be all in their head?
Sure it is, but it doesn't matter what you or I think, or the processes involved. What matters is the way the end user enjoys his music, regardless if he/she gets there with a Hello Kitty cdp or a Musical fidelity. More so about simply enjoying your music and less about the gear's name plate.
That said though, if those who wish to explore better sound, there is certainly a variety of products to help you on that journey.
Now if we can get past that, then we can move on to helping some who want to make their Sonos sound better.
I've never in the past been a big fan of digital music files. There always seems to be something missing. Call it lack of soul, a more sterile sound, musicality, whatever....just always something missing. Some have a saying....to enjoy digital playback, never listen to good analog. That may hold true for some as I come from the era of vinyl and reel to reels on tube gear. That's always been my personal benchmark, but lets face it folks, who wants to deal with the pops, clicks, record cleaning, tone arms, needles/carts, platter speed and weight. Not really a good fit for todays lifestyle.
When the cdp was introduced, it was like a savior, but still not up to par on good vinyl playback. Now in the digital file age, my benchmark is to just get everything to sound like a good cdp. When I first got a Sonos, I wasn't all that thrilled with the SQ as compared to a good cdp. There was that "something missing". So I rolled a bunch of dacs, cables, to try and make my digital more analog like. The sound of my old Sonic Frontiers gear of my youth still ringing in the back of my head, It became a mission to make my digital sound at least close to analog. Budget constraints, a wife, and certain other parameters were holding me back, still are, but that's how life works. Priorities, with more and more things demanding your wallet. Still, I needed some vestige of tubes in my system or warmer sounding SS. What works for me so far is the Sonos connected into a Cary Xciter dac, into a Pioneer Elite receiver, into a Butler TDB2250 hybrid amp, out to my Legacy Focus 20/20 speakers. The only reason the receiver is in the mix is because my system pulls double duty, HT and 2 channel. This sounds excellent to me, and as good as any 16/44 lossless file has a right to.
That's how I get my sonos to sound great. Should have mentioned it's a Cullen modded one too. Which btw, offers up a cleaner sound over the standard ZP90. Admittedly though, those mods are costly and if I had to do it again, don't think the slight SQ increase is worth the coinage. Friend has the Synchro mesh on his standard Sonos, also sounds real good but again, not cheap. I guess if your going to use the Sonos on your main system for critical listening and not just casual listening or background music, the costs are worth it. To each his own though, we all have different wallets and priorities. I still profess good sound can be had at any level of wallet you carry. Enjoy your tunes guys.
I've never in the past been a big fan of digital music files. There always seems to be something missing. Call it lack of soul, a more sterile sound, musicality, whatever....just always something missing. Some have a saying....to enjoy digital playback, never listen to good analog. That may hold true for some as I come from the era of vinyl and reel to reels on tube gear. That's always been my personal benchmark, but lets face it folks, who wants to deal with the pops, clicks, record cleaning, tone arms, needles/carts, platter speed and weight. Not really a good fit for todays lifestyle.
When the cdp was introduced, it was like a savior, but still not up to par on good vinyl playback. Now in the digital file age, my benchmark is to just get everything to sound like a good cdp. When I first got a Sonos, I wasn't all that thrilled with the SQ as compared to a good cdp. There was that "something missing". So I rolled a bunch of dacs, cables, to try and make my digital more analog like. The sound of my old Sonic Frontiers gear of my youth still ringing in the back of my head, It became a mission to make my digital sound at least close to analog. Budget constraints, a wife, and certain other parameters were holding me back, still are, but that's how life works. Priorities, with more and more things demanding your wallet. Still, I needed some vestige of tubes in my system or warmer sounding SS. What works for me so far is the Sonos connected into a Cary Xciter dac, into a Pioneer Elite receiver, into a Butler TDB2250 hybrid amp, out to my Legacy Focus 20/20 speakers. The only reason the receiver is in the mix is because my system pulls double duty, HT and 2 channel. This sounds excellent to me, and as good as any 16/44 lossless file has a right to.
That's how I get my sonos to sound great. Should have mentioned it's a Cullen modded one too. Which btw, offers up a cleaner sound over the standard ZP90. Admittedly though, those mods are costly and if I had to do it again, don't think the slight SQ increase is worth the coinage. Friend has the Synchro mesh on his standard Sonos, also sounds real good but again, not cheap. I guess if your going to use the Sonos on your main system for critical listening and not just casual listening or background music, the costs are worth it. To each his own though, we all have different wallets and priorities. I still profess good sound can be had at any level of wallet you carry. Enjoy your tunes guys.
+8
1. Two amplifiers that have the same measured flat frequency/distortion response of the kind that most modern amplifiers exhibit, that are working within designed limits - i.e, without clipping/distorting - cannot be distinguished from each other in a level matched DBT when operating with tone controls or the like not engaged.
2. All amplifiers sound the same.
People, of whom I am one, that support the first statement are often said to be saying the second, which they are not. The second statement is not a short version of the first, and isn't believed to be a true statement by them.
I am curious to know if there is anybody on this forum that disagrees with statement 1.
Whats your point? That two amplifiers ( are we talking power amps or integrated amps?) that measure the same, are both solid state, that are both fundamentally identical will sound the same? I suspect they will.. because it sounds like you're asking if two identical amps will sound identical..
Far from it. Pick any two modern amps of different makes at any price point and different power outputs and these will fulfil the terms of statement 1 - provided that they measure alike in having a flat frequency response and close to modern levels of distortion, as most modern amps now do.
+8
And on top of that, when confronted with these facts, instead of admitting that your opinion makes no scientific sense, and that you may be experiencing a placebo effect or bias, you insult the objectivists ability to hear or the ability of their system to resolve differences.
You seem to protest a lot about folks insulting you, maybe it's because you are also insulting to others? Would you speak in the same way and tone if you weren't on an internet forum?
The simple fact is audiophiles have every opportunity in the world to prove they hear what they hear, and they can't. So why should the objectivists have to accept their observations, when there is no way in h-e-double-hockey-sticks that an audiophile is ever going to accept the fact that what they hear just may be all in their head?
That's an absurd statement.. How about Bob Stuart of Meridian I suspect he has a bit more than a scintilla of engineering knowledge.. I'm sure I can find at least a few Hundred more that actually both, Measure and Listen..
You seem to protest a lot about folks insulting you, maybe it's because you are also insulting to others?
Page 11 / 11
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.