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 6 / 11
In the search for the ultimate quality of sound (?) surely the most significant factors in the quality are at the beginning and the end of the chain.
Microphones and their placement.
The handling/ amplification of low level signals from the microphone...
The transformation of electrical signals back into acoustic energy.
The listening area/ position etc.
My own experience has been that themove from Amplifiers via Crossovers, to active speakers where the drive units are closely coupled to the integral amps has made the greatest difference so far. Actually coupling a loudspeaker unit to generate air pressure changes is probably the hardest part, and probably the place where the amateur has most choice.
Changing my passive speakers to actives has made the most difference in my listening experience when listening to excellent minimally processed recordings. I have found it particularly revealing on Hyperion recordings for example, with acoustic instruments, human voice and also piano (quite often badly recorded). I know what these sounds should sound like from the concerts we attend.
I dont really know what non acoustic instruments are supposed to sound like so i cant really tell.
None of this is science, only true double blind testing can really determine if there is an actual difference that can be heard. If there is then do the science and determine what parameter or factor produces that change.
Too many of the current hifi mags just rather sloppily say X is better than Y but dont bother to measure why. I guess its hard for a magazine that relies on advertising to go that extra mile and prove the £5000 amplifier is no better than a £500 amplifier, its not in their commercial interest!
Its only an opinion of mine with little science and no measurements to back this up, but the electronics is probably now as good as it needs to be if competently designed. Try actives and get those pesky drive units doing what they should do!
Oh well off to buy a £500 mains lead and a mains conditioner for my £5 Tesco toaster so i get a much better uniform browning of my toast.....
Microphones and their placement.
The handling/ amplification of low level signals from the microphone...
The transformation of electrical signals back into acoustic energy.
The listening area/ position etc.
My own experience has been that themove from Amplifiers via Crossovers, to active speakers where the drive units are closely coupled to the integral amps has made the greatest difference so far. Actually coupling a loudspeaker unit to generate air pressure changes is probably the hardest part, and probably the place where the amateur has most choice.
Changing my passive speakers to actives has made the most difference in my listening experience when listening to excellent minimally processed recordings. I have found it particularly revealing on Hyperion recordings for example, with acoustic instruments, human voice and also piano (quite often badly recorded). I know what these sounds should sound like from the concerts we attend.
I dont really know what non acoustic instruments are supposed to sound like so i cant really tell.
None of this is science, only true double blind testing can really determine if there is an actual difference that can be heard. If there is then do the science and determine what parameter or factor produces that change.
Too many of the current hifi mags just rather sloppily say X is better than Y but dont bother to measure why. I guess its hard for a magazine that relies on advertising to go that extra mile and prove the £5000 amplifier is no better than a £500 amplifier, its not in their commercial interest!
Its only an opinion of mine with little science and no measurements to back this up, but the electronics is probably now as good as it needs to be if competently designed. Try actives and get those pesky drive units doing what they should do!
Oh well off to buy a £500 mains lead and a mains conditioner for my £5 Tesco toaster so i get a much better uniform browning of my toast.....
My own experience has been that themove from Amplifiers via Crossovers, to active speakers where the drive units are closely coupled to the integral amps has made the greatest difference so far.
You are spot on with the first part.
For the second, the problem is you are dealing with two variables at the same time, so it is not possible to isolate the reason. The first variable is the changed location of the amp and the second, the change in the speaker/speaker voicing itself. I suspect that the differences you are hearing are from the second variable and not on account of where the amplification resides.
Kumar
You maybe right.
As an electronics engineer, it has always concerned me putting a collection of capacitors and inductors in the ouput of an amplifier to create a set of low pass/high pass filters. As we know these filters have some unforeseen effects both on the damping factor, or control of the drive unit and also complex waveforms. While music is not a square wave (not what i listen to anyway....) if you attempt to pass a square wave through these networks you dont get a square wave out the other side.
One of the biggest changes i have noticed has been in the control of the bass unit. My active speakers do not exhibit the boom of previous speakers (ProAcs) and the drive units are of similar size. ProAcs are not bad speakers by any stretch of the imagination.
Perhaps you should try some actives. Mine are fed from a Sonos Connect via Toslink with the DAC incorporated in the speaker cab. Also with the rise of wiresless connectivity (like Dynaudio Xeo) it makes a lot of sense to concentrate the electronics in the speaker box.....hang on....thats a play 5 surely, but with a bit more headroom, i dont know what amp is in the Play 5, its not bad, but i suspect its not quite as powerful as the 75w/250w in the actives.
What is really needed is an OEM sonos module that can be incorporated in the active speaker, and then all you need is a mains lead!
With the decline in size of electronics it has become more practical to design like this.
Regards
You maybe right.
As an electronics engineer, it has always concerned me putting a collection of capacitors and inductors in the ouput of an amplifier to create a set of low pass/high pass filters. As we know these filters have some unforeseen effects both on the damping factor, or control of the drive unit and also complex waveforms. While music is not a square wave (not what i listen to anyway....) if you attempt to pass a square wave through these networks you dont get a square wave out the other side.
One of the biggest changes i have noticed has been in the control of the bass unit. My active speakers do not exhibit the boom of previous speakers (ProAcs) and the drive units are of similar size. ProAcs are not bad speakers by any stretch of the imagination.
Perhaps you should try some actives. Mine are fed from a Sonos Connect via Toslink with the DAC incorporated in the speaker cab. Also with the rise of wiresless connectivity (like Dynaudio Xeo) it makes a lot of sense to concentrate the electronics in the speaker box.....hang on....thats a play 5 surely, but with a bit more headroom, i dont know what amp is in the Play 5, its not bad, but i suspect its not quite as powerful as the 75w/250w in the actives.
What is really needed is an OEM sonos module that can be incorporated in the active speaker, and then all you need is a mains lead!
With the decline in size of electronics it has become more practical to design like this.
Regards
Kumar
Sorry just to be clear, you are right, its nothing to do with where the amp resides, its to do with what is between the amp output terminals and the drive unit input terminals.
Sorry just to be clear, you are right, its nothing to do with where the amp resides, its to do with what is between the amp output terminals and the drive unit input terminals.
Perhaps you should try some actives. Mine are fed from a Sonos Connect via Toslink with the DAC incorporated in the speaker cab. Also with the rise of wiresless connectivity (like Dynaudio Xeo) it makes a lot of sense to concentrate the electronics in the speaker box.....hang on....thats a play 5 surely, but with a bit more headroom, i dont know what amp is in the Play 5, its not bad, but i suspect its not quite as powerful as the 75w/250w in the actives.
What is really needed is an OEM sonos module that can be incorporated in the active speaker, and then all you need is a mains lead!
With the decline in size of electronics it has become more practical to design like this.
Regards
Martin,
As to the active v passive speaker thing, it all comes down to implementation quality - and since I have a very decent pair of Harbeths, I don't see any reason to move to actives.
My main system now has a Connect Amp driving a pair of Harbeth C7s, with the Sub doing LF support duty. Works brilliantly - very discreet, short speaker cable runs, and the Sub is placed in a way that it also replaces the wired Bridge, allowing for Sonosnet version 2.0 across the home.
Harbeths are easy to drive, so the Connect Amp suffices, but if it could be paired in stereo, and bridged to be wired to one speaker each, that would be a 110wpc system, with even shorter speaker cable runs if mains power sockets are available. It would then be suitable for many other high end passive speakers that need more power to perform than 55wpc of one Connect Amp.
I doubt that Sonos will do this - or the suggestion you have of a Sonos Connect module that can work in just the same way with active speakers - too small a market. Though I think there is a way to use a Connect with a pair of actives such that it is connected to only one of the pair.
Perhaps Sonos will come out with a larger scale version of the play 1, to provide the depth and scale that only a larger enclosure can provide, that also looks like a high end 2 channel system speaker. But this too may be too small a market for them to address.
Memory failing with age:) - here is an interesting thread on this subject I had started some time ago:
http://forums.sonos.com/showthread.php?t=31135&highlight=Mono+Connect
See the posts near the end of the thread.
Kumar
Thanks for the response.
Harbeth make good speakers. Prior to trying actives my main speakers were ProAc Studio 125 ( floorstanders), i also used ProAc Tablette 2000 and of course a pair of BBC LS 3/5a, and a home constructed LS 3/5a from Falcon Acoustics. In addition some Rogers Studio 1 speakers were in the mix.
All of them sounded good in their own particular way. They were fed by an ARCAM AVR 350 with the ProAcs bi-wired. However what became obvious from examining the crossover assembly in the ProAcs was that even if the bi-wiring option was used, elements of the crossover were present in the signal chain.
All of the above speakers were compared with the actives. Not in a particular scientific way, other than to try to determine which i enjoyed listening to most over a period of time.
The actives won hands down every time, not surprisingly against a mid 1970s design from the BBC (LS 3/5a) of bookshelf size which was good on speech admittedly, but more surprisingly against some less than 10 year old mid end speakers £1000 - £1500. The Rogers fared not too well on this sounding boxy.
I was surprised at the result, but most of the old equipment went on ebay, and now i have a speaker approx size 30cm high by 25cm deep by 20cm on 60cm stands that are unobtrusive and have excellent imaging.
If you can get hold of modern actives you may be surprised. Dont write them off until you have heard some.
Happy Listening
Thanks for the response.
Harbeth make good speakers. Prior to trying actives my main speakers were ProAc Studio 125 ( floorstanders), i also used ProAc Tablette 2000 and of course a pair of BBC LS 3/5a, and a home constructed LS 3/5a from Falcon Acoustics. In addition some Rogers Studio 1 speakers were in the mix.
All of them sounded good in their own particular way. They were fed by an ARCAM AVR 350 with the ProAcs bi-wired. However what became obvious from examining the crossover assembly in the ProAcs was that even if the bi-wiring option was used, elements of the crossover were present in the signal chain.
All of the above speakers were compared with the actives. Not in a particular scientific way, other than to try to determine which i enjoyed listening to most over a period of time.
The actives won hands down every time, not surprisingly against a mid 1970s design from the BBC (LS 3/5a) of bookshelf size which was good on speech admittedly, but more surprisingly against some less than 10 year old mid end speakers £1000 - £1500. The Rogers fared not too well on this sounding boxy.
I was surprised at the result, but most of the old equipment went on ebay, and now i have a speaker approx size 30cm high by 25cm deep by 20cm on 60cm stands that are unobtrusive and have excellent imaging.
If you can get hold of modern actives you may be surprised. Dont write them off until you have heard some.
Happy Listening
If you can get hold of modern actives you may be surprised. Dont write them off until you have heard some.
Which ones are you using now?
I am using AVI ADM9RSS, these are built by a small UK manufacturer called AVI and retail at £1300which seems good value to me as all you then need are some stands, maybe £70 a pair, a Sonos Connect and a few metres of Toslink depending on how far your Connect is away from the Speakers.
Using sensible mains cable and in my case laying the cable under the carpets the speakers sit on stands seemingly unconnected to anything! My wife is happy!
I also tried the Dynaudio Xeo 3 ( similar sound but a bit compressed at high volumes) and the Xeo 5 which had poorer imaging than the Xeo3 and the AVI.
The MD of AVI is someone who says what he thinks, but could not have been more hospitable, its not often you can have a whole morning Demo.
Regards
Using sensible mains cable and in my case laying the cable under the carpets the speakers sit on stands seemingly unconnected to anything! My wife is happy!
I also tried the Dynaudio Xeo 3 ( similar sound but a bit compressed at high volumes) and the Xeo 5 which had poorer imaging than the Xeo3 and the AVI.
The MD of AVI is someone who says what he thinks, but could not have been more hospitable, its not often you can have a whole morning Demo.
Regards
Using sensible mains cable and in my case laying the cable under the carpets the speakers sit on stands seemingly unconnected to anything! My wife is happy!
Very important, the last part. My move to a Connect Amp in my main system has released three boxes - a SACD player that was used to wire a Connect to, via coax digital, and Quad99/909 amplification, along with a component rack that is now used to house photos and other miscellany, with the same result on the domestic front.
I was looking at something like the AVI DM5 for my bedroom, where I just now have a Denon M38 box wired to a Connect, and to a ten year old pair of Quad 11L speakers. With the TV audio wired to the line in on the Connect in auto play mode. It works well enough and I may stick with it after some research. One concern in India is after sales - even if something goes wrong with the Denon, it is cheaper to solve than if something went wrong with an active speaker. The passive Quads are such that little can go wrong with them.
Kumar
Good point about after-sales, if the manufacturer has a local agent then your cost of repair must be much reduced. Returning an item to the UK for repair must be quite costly.
In my experience here the specialist smaller manufacturers (like ARCAM) provide excellent service, when my old CD player stopped working, i made an appointment with them, took it up there (30 miles away) and sat with the technician while he repaired and tested it all out.
I have heard the DM5s and they have similar characteristics to the ADM9RSS with excellent imaging. The downside is they dont have a sub output and the LF is slightly less, but half the price of the ADMs.
Good point about after-sales, if the manufacturer has a local agent then your cost of repair must be much reduced. Returning an item to the UK for repair must be quite costly.
In my experience here the specialist smaller manufacturers (like ARCAM) provide excellent service, when my old CD player stopped working, i made an appointment with them, took it up there (30 miles away) and sat with the technician while he repaired and tested it all out.
I have heard the DM5s and they have similar characteristics to the ADM9RSS with excellent imaging. The downside is they dont have a sub output and the LF is slightly less, but half the price of the ADMs.
Good point about after-sales, if the manufacturer has a local agent then your cost of repair must be much reduced. Returning an item to the UK for repair must be quite costly.
In my experience here the specialist smaller manufacturers (like ARCAM) provide excellent service, when my old CD player stopped working, i made an appointment with them, took it up there (30 miles away) and sat with the technician while he repaired and tested it all out.
I have heard the DM5s and they have similar characteristics to the ADM9RSS with excellent imaging. The downside is they dont have a sub output and the LF is slightly less, but half the price of the ADMs.
Yes, they do provide service - Quad UK did a great job for me with a CDP, including a free firmware upgrade - but it was quite expensive to ship it to and fro. Having a local agent for sales is one thing, their service capability is another.
The ADM 9s seem very well specified - 250wpc for the bass seems plenty!
And circling back to the thread subject, although it includes a DAC, their site also says that DACs are virtually impossible to be distinguished these days.
Empirical makes a living convincing gullible people like you to spend ridiculous amounts of money for nothing, so their opinion of anything is immediately suspect.
In this, we've asked users like you to provide independent, double-blind tests to confirm the superiority of these alleged high-end (or higher end, anyway) units. Nobody ever produces such evidence. I know why that is. Deep down inside, you do too.
You want to spend tons of cash on audio equipment? Go ahead. Some of us will continue to point out that the emperor has no clothes, no matter how questionable you think that may be.
NoBoB, a $350 piece of equipment is not going to contain much of a DAC. In a similar vein, nor is lamp cable going to provide much in the way of speaker cable. I think you belong to the silly fringe group that thinks otherwise. Deep down inside, you do too.
Userlevel 1
Really? Why not? Do you know how much a ""high quality" DAC chip costs? It isn't much...
Right. The best Wolfson DAC chips retail for about £15 for a single unit. Less than half that in volume.
So presumably a 'proper' DAC must have a massive mark-up before a certain type of customer feels comfortable....
Modern day electronics can be surprisingly cheap.
An extreme example - I bought a Chinese FM stereo radio last week to release a Denon RCDM38 box that was being used for that duty - it cost me all of USD 5! Poor fit and finish, but does the job, and even if it works for just a few months, who cares?!
And the Denon is now for about USD 200. It includes a CDP, AM/FM radio, 30wpc Amp, DAC, and a front panel socket for iPods. It is currently installed in my main system, serving a pair of Harbeth speakers, supplied by Connect, where the SQ is just as as good up to moderately loud levels as the Quad 909 it has replaced. Outstanding build quality too, nothing cheap or cheerful in that respect. Mini component sized footprint, runs cool in play, and takes 0.3 watts of power in standby. And it has a full featured remote too. A steal at the price.
And if a lamp cable can carry electricity, it is perfectly suitable for speaker cable use, as long as it is of adequate thickness for the length of the cable run.
A Wolfson WM8741 DAC cost £14 at a one off price in the UK, falling to under £10 for over 100 off. So thats about $10-7? This DAC is up to 24bit and quotes S/n of 128dB, dynamic range of 125dB, thd at -100dB etc etc etc. Providing the unit designer doesnt mis-design the board or psu, and fail to read the spec sheet properly, its all academic...
I think modern micro-electronics has pretty much killed snake oil!
Just off to buy my £500 mains lead for my £5 Tesco toaster.........and pop my tin hat on!
I think modern micro-electronics has pretty much killed snake oil!
Just off to buy my £500 mains lead for my £5 Tesco toaster.........and pop my tin hat on!
I think modern micro-electronics has pretty much killed snake oil!
You think??:)
It has just mutated, like a virus.
Speaker cable? Bwahahaha! With ears like yours, maybe you should take this challenge:
James Randi Offers $1 Million If Audiophiles Can Prove ...
You could win a cool $1 million. Certainly a cable that costs $7,250 (which contains copper stock that tops out at about 40 cents a foot :rolleyes:) can be shown to be superior by your standards. But watch out, both the cable manufacturer and the "audiophile" critic backed out of the challenge. I wonder why that was? 😃
All a speaker cable has to do is conduct electrons from one end to another. Nothing better than copper, for this, and the technology to make decent copper cables is not rocket science, which is why decent copper cables are now a commodity.
There are some speaker cables that have things added on to them that alter/shape the signal - by definition, these are not hifi. And if one were to want cables with built in tone controls, a better way to the same result is to have tone controls where they belong, in the amplifier. Seeing the prices at which these cables are sold, it would be cheaper too.
Funnily enough, audiophiles that fall for these cables also end up buying "purist" amps - those that don't have tone controls.
+8
Actually silver is a better conductor..
Thankfully, this forum is run by technically literate mods who discredit this sort of ignorance, which is, unfortunately, rampant on most audiophile fora.
+8
Docmark.. this is not an audiophile forum.. There are 3 basic types here: Sonos fanboys, that believe that Sonos can do no wrong. Those that need help with their Sonos setups of one sort or another. And those that believe if it can't be measured, or DBT'ed or ABX'ed then it doesn't exist or it's the placebo effect..
You're going to have to do a lot better than that.
Unless I'm going a considerable distance, lamp cord is exactly what I use.
If it can't be ABX'd then the listener is unable to distinguish it anyway. Whether it's technically measurable or not is academic.
Page 6 / 11
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.