Submitted by The Computer Au... on Tue, 12/08/2009 - 03:48
Ah, the life of an audio writer. Receive the best components money can buy. Use the components for a couple months. Send aforementioned components back to manufacturer. Hang head low for a week while getting used to the real world again. I'm in the sulking phase right now as the dCS stack is in boxes awaiting pickup. The last several weeks were pure sonic bliss, as evidenced by my Twitter post from 11:22 PM November 12, 2009. "I've never had better sound in my listening room. Ever. I believe I've found a winning combination of components. Articles to follow :~)" It's finally time to spill the beans and let Computer Audiophile readers in on the best sound I've ever heard in my listening room. Here is my review of the dCS Paganini DAC, Paganini Upsampler, and Puccini U-Clock.
Intro
Most CA readers know I sold my last CD Player years ago and never looked back. While working with dCS and its U.S. distributor we toyed with the idea of throwing a transport into this mix of components, but decided against that as it's really not my cup of tea. It would have been nice to play some SACDs, but in my book physical media is to be ripped and stored incase of an emergency. We settled on a review of the Paganini DAC, Paganini Upsampler, and Puccini U-Clock. This combination offers so many input, output, and clocking options I highly recommend working with a local dCS dealer until one has an understanding of everything these components can accomplish. Luckily David Steven Jr. and Andy McHarg from dCS headquarters in the United Kingdom, and John Quick the U.S. distributor where an easy phone call away during this review period. I liken this dCS stack to a high performance Formula 1 race car. An F1 car is capable of incredible performance but a pit crew is needed to get the car to the starting line. Fortunately the dCS stack does not need intermittent pit stops. Most users will set it and forget it.
The Three Amigos
Paganini DAC
The Paganini DAC is unique among its competitors in the industry. According to dCS, "Our products use both discrete and software configurable approach to digital signal processing. While most audiophile DACs are based on standard DAC chips from one of approximately six manufacturers, our patented dCS Ring DAC circuit uses around 40 chips, none of which are DAC chips. Our digital processing circuitry is based around Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) chips, Digital Signal Processing (DSP) chips and a microcontroller system, all of which runs code developed and maintained by dCS. Our PCM interface and Phase Locked Loop (PLL) circuitry are essentially discrete. This means our hardware is completely controlled and reconfigurable by software." In addition to the dCS Rind DAC there are a few R2R Ladder DACs available today but most DACs are the Delta-Sigma type. Manufacturers often use ΔΣ (Delta-Sigma) DACs because they are very linear and inexpensive. Attaining the highest levels of quality in digital to analog conversion is not easy. Few manufacturers have the ability to develop something as high performance and complex as the dCS Ring DAC. The Paganini DAC has four digital inputs that accept a range of sample rates. Two AES/EBU inputs accept from 32 to 192 kHz. Note that dual wire AES is required for sample rates of 176.4 and 192 kHz. Readers with a Lynx AES16 card need to connect outputs one and two from the card to the corresponding Paganini AES inputs and enable dual wire in the Lynx Mixer software for these higher sample rates. Currently the Lynx / dCS combination does not support external clocking at sample rates of 176.4 and 192 kHz. I've been told Lynx may offer an easy solution to this incompatibility via software or firmware upgrade at some point it the future. The reason for the incompatibility is that dCS components send what is called a base-rate clock signal of 44.1 or 48k to external devices. The Lynx internal digital I/O audio cards do not currently have the capability to multiply that base rate by 4x to achieve higher sampling rates. My understanding is that external lynx devices such as the Aurora line do support multiplying a base-rate word clock and would work perfect with the dCS components. The Paganini has two coaxial S/PDIF inputs that accept from 32 to 96 kHz digital audio. An IEEE 1394 (FireWire) interface is used only for an encrypted DSD signal. Users will not be able to connect a computer to this port via FireWire cable to play music. Analog outputs are single-ended RCA and electronically balanced XLR connections. The analog output stage is discrete Class A. The output levels can be adjusted from 2v rms to 6v rms via the Paganini's menu system. During this review I used the Paganini DAC set at 6v rms output directly into to my McIntosh MC275 tube amplifier driving a pair of Verity Fidelio loudspeakers. 2v rms just was not enough "juice" for my liking because I did not use any preamplifier during the review. The Paganini DAC's digital volume control is implemented extremely well and, to my ears, has no sonic degradation. As I eluded to previously the Paganini DAC also has word clock in and out allowing it to be a slave or master clock.
Paganini Upsampler
The Paganini Upsampler is really a digital to digital converter that accepts sample rates from 32 to 96 kHz. The device can output this digital signal at an equivalent or higher sample rate than the incoming data. A standard 16/44.1 audio signal can be output to the Paganini DAC at 16/44.1, 24/88.2, 24/176.4, or DSD. 24/96 material from sites like HDtracks and Blue Coast Records can be output at 24/96, 24/192, or DSD. This Upsampler has three types of digital inputs and three types of digital outputs. The outputs are standard coaxial S/PDIF, AES/EBU single and dual wire, and IEEE 1394. Dual wire is required to output a digital signal at 24/176.4 and 24/192 kHz. The digital inputs are two coaxial S/PDIF RCA connections, one single wire AES/EBU XLR connection, and one asynchronous USB connection. Yes, this is the highly desirable asynchronous USB technology like Wavelength and Ayre use. Note this is not to be confused with asynchronous sample rate conversion. ASRC is completely different and does not play any part in the dCS USB implementation or in the Paganini Upsampler. dCS is not licensing anything from anyone for its USB interface. Its asynchronous implementation was created completely in-house by its highly skilled team of engineers. Using the Paganini asynchronous USB input will be a popular option for those who want to set it and forget it. Using a Mac Mini or MacBook with Amarra outputting via USB to the Upsampler allows one to play anything up to 24/96 and take advantage of the upsampling settings of their choice. Upsamplers have a fair share of skeptics and "purists" who don't believe in the technology. During the review period I used every possible configuration with the Paganini Upsampler. I will share my preferred Upsampler settings a bit later in this review.
Puccini U-Clock
The Puccini U-Clock is perhaps my favorite component in the dCS line. This "favored component status" stems from my experience using external word clocks and realizing the benefits such clocking can have in a high performance audio system. Plus the Puccini U-Clock contains an asynchronous USB to coaxial S/PDIF converter. Again, the same highly sought asynchronous USB implementation that's contained in the Paganini Upsampler using the TAS1020B chip. The U-Clock's USB board layout was designed with an eye on the future. When the inevitable higher sampling rates are available via USB the U-Clock's USB board is designed to be swapped out by a local dealer saving the expense of over seas shipping back to dCS in the UK. dCS had no comment on the availability of a 24/192 USB interface for its components. As its name suggests the U-Clock is an external master clock for any component that accepts an industry standard word clock signal via 75 ohm BNC connection. The Puccini U-Clock has four word clock outputs. During the review period I clocked everything with the U-Clock when possible. When using a Lynx AES16 card connected to the Paganini Upsampler I used the U-Clock to send word clock signals to the Lynx, the DAC, and the Upsampler. Thus all components had the same clock source. According to the dCS product manuals the best sound quality comes from a configuration where the U-Clock is the single clock source for the complete digital front end. After weeks of listening to many different clocking schemes I agree with dCS. In its system sending word clock from the U-Clock to all components pushes performance to another level. There are other schools of thought when it comes to external clocking. One common clock scheme is using the clock source that is as close to the DAC chip as possible. This would mean sending clock from the DAC to the front end components. On other systems that may work best, but with the dCS stack in my listening room the best performance came when word clock was sourced from the Puccini U-Clock.
Music Servers
Music servers used during this review include the following.
- Mac Pro, OS X Snow Leopard, Dual 2.8 GHz Intel Xeon Quad core CPUs, 10GB RAM, 64GB SSD, iTunes & Amarra, Lynx AES16e digital I/O
- Mac Pro, Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit, Dual 2.8 GHz Intel Xeon Quad core CPUs, 10GB RAM, 64GB SSD, MediaMonkey, Lynx AES16e digital I/O
- Mac G5, OS X Tiger, Dual 2.0 GHz PowerPC CPUs, 3GB RAM, 64GB SSD, iTunes & Amarra, Lynx AES16 digital I/O
- Custom Linux server - Details withheld at this time.
- Thecus N5200B Pro NAS
- MacBook Air Remote Control
- Paganini DAC (PDC) - $17,999
- Paganini Upsampler (PUP) - $10,499
- Puccini uClock (PUU) - $4,999
- Paganini DAC Manual
- Puccini U-Clock Manual
High Performance
This dCS stack unequivocally gave me the best sound I've ever heard in my listening room. Period. It produced the most refined and natural sound I've heard in recent memory. This natural sound was most apparent with acoustic music. I've been on a Jack Johnson kick for a while. I listened to his albums a few times each through the dCS components and through other components I currently have available here. No other components gave me goose bumps like the dCS stack. I certainly was not in the studio for a Jack Johnson recording and do not know what his guitar is "supposed" to sound like, but the sound in my room had to be pretty close. The resonance of his guitar was so real the musical illusion was incredible. As I stated earlier, I used the Paganini Upsampler in every conceivable configuration and with many different types of music. After tens of hours comparing all the Upsampling options I wound up preferring no Upsampling at all. Oddly enough this doesn't mean I prefer no Upsampler at all. Over the last few days I discovered that I like the sound of the Upsampler via USB better than the U-Clock via USB. I was very surprised that I heard any difference whatsoever. I sent an email to dCS detailing the configuration and my preference for the Upsampler USB input. I received a response from Andy McHarg, one of the brilliant digital engineers at dCS, stating, "...the two *should* sound identical with the same settings..." It's entirely possible my preference for the Upsampler's USB input over the U-Clock's USB input could be based on psychoacoustics. Right now I don't think that's the case. When I switched USB inputs I was not looking to compare the sound quality rather I was going to test a different clocking configuration. The sonic difference was immediately noticeable to me. I had been using the Upsampler's USB input exclusively for a couple weeks so I was intimately familiar with the sound. It was like placing a new component into one's system after years of listening to one set of components. Differences are easily noticed. A possible explanation for this sonic difference could involve cabling. Using the U-Clock's USB input I used a WireWorld USB cable and a Kimber Select coaxial S/PDIF digital cable for the output to the DAC. Using the Upsampler's USB input is used the same WireWorld USB cable, but I used a pair of Tera Labs AES/EBU digital cable from the Upsampler to the DAC. I don't want to make a mound out of a mole hill. This USB sonic difference was such a tiny part of the whole review period and overall experience I really could have written it in a side-note. Anyway, my preference for no upsampling was readily apparent after an evening listening to Frank Sinatra's Only The Lonely (Mobile Fidelity UDCD 792). The last track on the album, One For My Baby (And One More For The Road) sounded vastly different when I passed the 16/44.1 signal straight through the Upsampler at 16/44.1 versus when I upsampled from 16/44.1 to DSD. This difference in sonics was expected, but the outcome was unexpected. Without upsampling Sinatra's voice had wonderful reverb and space surrounding it. When I upsampled to DSD I lost the reverb trail. His voice sounded a bit tighter, but thinner and less full. The following day I talked to the US Distributor about what I heard. He relayed his honest opinion to me that detailed vastly different results. He'd heard increased reverb with the Upsampler and much better sound on a wide array of audio systems. Granted this was with different albums and much different audio equipment, but it's another data point for CA readers to consider. Back to overall performance. I punched up one of my favorite, Grammy nominated, Classical albums more than a few times throughout this review period. The Minnesota Orchestra's Bolero! Orchestral Fireworks (Reference Recordings RR-92 HDCD). I'm no classical aficionado but I was immediately sucked into the concert hall with the awesome power of the transients on this album. I've never heard this album sound better anywhere. The highest highs and the lowest lows were reproduced faithfully and the critical midrange was the most realistic I've heard to date. I can't complete this review without mentioning Shelby Lynne's album Just A Little Lovin'. This album was recorded by world-class engineer Al Schmitt on a two inch Studer tape machine. Like the previous albums mentioned above, I've never heard this recording sound so real. I must have played it over and over about twenty times this month alone. Through the dCS stack Shelby's voice didn't emanate from the speakers. It was right between the speakers, not to far back or forward. Her voice just hung there transparently in space. On the title track the sparse cymbals were so realistic it was hard to believe a 16/44.1 recording could sound so good. The decay of the cymbals from the left speaker to the right was dead-on. There are many more superlatives to describe what this album sounded like thought the dCS stack but I'm sure CA readers get the point without dragging this one out any further.
Comparing the dCS stack to other components is a bit difficult because it includes an external clock, DAC, and Upsampler. Nonetheless I did swap the Paganini DAC with a few DACs I had on hand. Most of the comparisons weren't very useful as the cost of the sales tax for the dCS stack is more than the total price of some of these DACs. The comparison I was most interested in was the dCS Paganini DAC and the Alpha DAC. The Alpha DAC is still my reference DAC because it's relatively inexpensive and I own an Alpha. In my listening room the dCS Paganini was sonically superior and would be my DAC of choice could I afford the purchase price. Compared to the Paganini the Alpha sounded a bit forward, a tad less natural and a tad less coherent. Don't get me wrong, the Alpha is still one of the best DACs on the market and has received many accolades to that affect. It's just not quite up to the level of the dCS Paganini DAC.
Conclusion
The dCS Paganini DAC, Upsampler, and Puccini U-Clock is the best digital front end I've ever heard in my listening room. Since the dCS components are boxed up Jack Johnson, Shelby Lynne, and the Minnesota Orchestra have left the building. The dCS stack not only made the Computer Audiophile Suggested Hardware List, these components are exactly why the CASH List was created. Well done dCS.
Manufacturer: dCS (Data Converson Systems)
Prices:
Prices:
Availability: Dealers and Distributors
Documents:
Associated Equipment: Kimber USB cable v1 & v2, Benchmark DAC1 PRE, Kimber Select cabling, Verity Audio Fidelio loudspeakers, McIntosh MC275 amplification, Richard Gray's Power Company cables, Berkeley Audio Design Alpha DAC, Wavelength Audio Proton & Cosecant, Ayre AX-7e Integrated Amp, Windows XP "Music Server for a Song," Focal Diablo Utopia loudspeakers, Bel Canto USB Link, Antelope Audio Isochrone OCX Master Clock.
Click to enlarge
__________________
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
As a virtuoso Paganini was a real showoff as he performed throughout Europe. He was always striving to be the best violinist and he took the instrument to new heights. He particularly enjoyed out playing other violinists of the time. His passion for music drove his dedication to the violin and to the art of performance.
The dCS units have the looks and the sound to be comfortable in the finest salons of Europe. Just like their namesake.
Fine review.
Regards,
James
Just in case any one is interested ... in my research looking at the dCS Kit, I have discovered that the RME HDSPe AES card (used as an alternative to the Lynx) should be able to accept base level (44.1 or 48) word clock and multiply it for 88.2 / 176.4 / 96 and 192 sample rates. The RME card is also compatible with dual wire mode.
Now Chris ... when do you get the Scarlatti stack to review?
Eloise
PS. Were you able to compare the single and balanced outputs as I've read they have independent paths and one may be better than the other?
Mac OSX 10.5 with iTunes (mostly ALAC) --USB--> Musical Fidelity A1008 --> B&W CDM 7NT (iPhone remote)
... is happy with all clock rates... and is switchable between single- and dual-wire modes.
Mani.
"Science is at no moment quite right, but it is seldom quite wrong, and has, as a rule, a better chance of being right than the theories of the unscientific." - Bertrand Russell (1959).
XXHighEnd -> W7 -> Zalman TNN300 with i7 -> RME AES-32 -> Pacific Microsonics Model Two
dCS is great but it also seems to be the most expensive gear you have reviewed...so the findings should not have been totally unexpected. If you are able to do a comparative review with other devices in the same price range, say Boulder or Wadia 9 Series it might be more meaningful.
Nevertheless, your other comments about this fine product on USB have been enlightening.
Kamil
Hi Chris,
I couldn't wait for this article to be released :)
Glad to read you've joined the dCS (fan) club.
About upsampling, my own experience with my dCS stack (delius + purcell, previous gen) indicates better reverbs. Funny you got opposite results, but that's definitely not the must have part of the stack (the dac is really incredible).
As soon as the clock gets the 24/192 usb input and dual/aes output, I'll buy it (your recommandation is most welcomed).
Many thanks Chris.
Elp
Chris,
Could you elaborate a bit more on how the Paganini DAC connected to the PC via U-Clock compares the Paganini DAC connected to the PC via Lynx soundcard? It would be great to have this comparison to get an idea which computer interface is superior.
Thanks!
Hi Chris,
after reading your review and coming to the point where you state the price of the Paganini DAC (17,999 US$) I pause. The best sounding device I have ever heard, Metric Halo's ULN-8 (http://tinyurl.com/ye9q8tb) retails for 6000,- US$. It is the heart of my 5.1 mixing & mastering space (http://levingroom.blumlein.net/) and I hear all there is to hear in my recordings, which I know for a fact because I did them and was in the same space at the time the music was created :-)
So you can get three ULN-8's for the price of one Paganini, and that'd give you 24 channels of 92.5 dB gain mic-pres (or separate line-inputs), ADC, DAC, analog sends, three front panel controls etc. Which means that if you need "only" stereo you could feed 12 pairs of loudspeakers all over your house, remote controlled from one to three locations. How is that for the bargain of the century? And don't get me started on the 80 bit signal path and flexible DSP-matrix ;-)
BTW, the ULN-8 is the same machine as the Sonic-branded 305 (http://tinyurl.com/ykhwnen)…
Regards,
blumlein records - Andrew Levine
(who has been lucky to beta-test the ULN-8 from late 2006 on)
Andrew, have you compared the ULN-8 to any of the dCS gear? I wonder how they compare directly.
Cheers.
Chris-
Enjoyed your review, but I think you miss an opportunity to compare
one of the last remaining hi end transports to your computers.
I'd like to know if SACD playback via the Paganini Transport can outperform hi rez playback from a PC.
Aloha,
Dan
Hi Thomas,
I have not had the chance to try out any gear by dCS. Also my budget is limited to the price of top pro audio gear--which strangely enough is less expensive than a lot of high-end audio equipment. My listening forays into that realm have not impressed me so far though, and I know that the people who develop & build the tools I use daily always strive for the optimum.
Regards,
blumlein records - Andrew Levine
It’s a lonely road researching, confirming, and anticipating purchases based on vicariously reviewing the reviews of our silver-tongued audiophile pundits. And just before taking the plunge—making the commitment—with heart in mouth, weak knees, and justification for selling my two kids to pay for the indulgence, I now find that I must sell my wife as well!!! Is life fair?
Chris, you noted some time ago that you had a Antelope Isochrone OCX which you were testing. Can you comment on these tests, particularly if you had a chance to use the OCX with the Alpha DAC or any of the other DACs you have on hand? Also, you noted some time back that you preferred the Alpha DAC to the ULN-8....can you comment a bit further on that comparison.
Thanks,
David
Mac Mini / Pure Music > Firewire > Metric Halo LIO-8 > Atma-Sphere M60 Mk3.1's > Geddes Abbey Speakers > Rythmik Servo Subs // ASI Liveline Cables, HRS MXR Isolation Rack, PurePower 2000, Elgar 6006B
@Andrew
Ah, the old argument : I can't buy it so it can't be good !
Yes, audiophile products are outrageously overpriced.
Back then when dCS was making pro gears, they were significantly less expensive than their audiophile counterparts.
CA is a yet a world apart, but most audiophiles investing even the 6k$ for the UNL-8 would want it to match their needs, and to look like something that can be shown, and not a cold war styled product.
Plus there is the inevitable difference of domestic vs foreign products prices.
Most american electronics are costing twice their domestic price here in europe (and still I am buying american products, based on listening tests).
Finally, as far as reaching the best possible implementation is concerned, this is definitely something that can be credited to dCS guys. Everything is built from scratch, with dedicated solutions. This is a huge effort that can only lead to somehow "big" prices from a small company.
Elp
Hi Elp,
> Ah, the old argument : I can't buy it so it can't be good !
Did I say that? No, and if I did it is not true.
What I did say is that I know what happens at the concerts & sessions I record, and that is what I want to hear, which is what I get--and more--using the ULN-8. And I am glad it is in the affordable bracket of pricing (which of course is highly subjective) because for me it is a must have.
> audiophile products are outrageously overpriced.
IMHO "you get what you pay for" is true for the lower half of the price range while the upper half is dominated by "they take as much as you can pay". Not that I don't estimate the amount of R&D that goes into many fine tools nor the difficulty of affixing a price tag to a finished product.
> most audiophiles investing even the 6k$ for the UNL-8 would want it [...]
> to look like something that can be shown, and not a cold war styled product.
According to my blog-entry on the sonophiles (http://sonophile.blumlein.net/) this is attributable to the "Touch&Feel"-component. I personally care foremost about what I hear, then again I don't mind the design of the ULN-8. It's handling is functional and the metering outstanding.
Regards,
blumlein records - Andrew Levine
I had the Scarlatti set up here last year and just playing cd's I didn't think it was as good as my reference dac and 'cheap' Tascam spinner, but I haven't heard the Puccini here and certainly not through my mac.
£32k is an awful lot for a cd player imho.
Keith.
http://www.puriteaudio.co.uk/
What is your "reference" DAC? And what's its retail cost?
You know the Paganini is lower in the dCS range than the Scarlatti don't you?
Eloise
Mac OSX 10.5 with iTunes (mostly ALAC) --USB--> Musical Fidelity A1008 --> B&W CDM 7NT (iPhone remote)
Eloise Hi, i did like the dacs very much, I was seriously thinking of selling it, hence the extended home loan, I compared it to lavry 924 Prism DA- ? and Mike Stahl's dac which I had over to evaluate, the Scarlatti was the full set ,three boxes ( I think ) the other dacs just used my Tascam cdp.
I preferred the Stahl-Tek and the DCa went back, I remember being much more impressed with the previous DCS reference the Elgar plus ,Verona etc when that was here a few years back, I guess things move on and the competition catch up.Keith.
Haven't heard the Puccini here,just as shows.
http://www.puriteaudio.co.uk/
@Andrew
I've discovered your blog entry just after posting, and agree with most of it (and with the fact that I tend to belong to several categories, in different times).
> Did I say that? No, and if I did it is not true.
Without being too insightful that's not so hard to deduce from your 2 preceeding posts.
But that's ok, I misunderstood, and I apologize.
> I personally care foremost about what I hear, then again I don't mind the design of the ULN-8.
Me too, my personal case (delius + purcell) is rather ugly to look at.
I meant that at a certain price tag (depends on your wealth), most people also want something that looks good. For instance, the high-end case body of Linn products costs 1500€ alone. You won't expect the product to be cheap in that case, and I'm pretty sure this would be far more difficult to sell it as top of the line without it.
You're also not mentioning the question of the needs. At this price tag, I would more gladly pay for the Alpha dac, than something that provides me with an awful lot of functions I would never use.
On another ground, is there no way to buy "your" music outside iTunes and the mp3 club ?
@Keith
> £32k is an awful lot for a cd player imho.
I agree with you. Someone would have to be very wealthy and in love with the spinning technology to buy such an expensive drive. On the other hand, I you can buy it...
> I remember being much more impressed with the previous DCS reference
Funny, most reliable people I know tell me so.
Elp
Yeah £32,000 is a lot for a CD player ... but take the Scarlatti DAC at £13000 (or Paganini at £9600) and add a computer with Lynx / RME HDSPe / Weiss AFI1 and I think you'll get a rather good outcome - of course you'll also need suitable power amp and speakers...
Eloise
Mac OSX 10.5 with iTunes (mostly ALAC) --USB--> Musical Fidelity A1008 --> B&W CDM 7NT (iPhone remote)
Andrew - A couple things here, I don't want the comments following the review of dCS components to drift into the Metric Halo v. dCS or the Metric Halo fanboy club discussion. There is plenty of room in the forum for this discussion. Also, I don't want this to turn into the Blumlein advertisement You may do great work, but a this is not the place to publish links to your work. Note: I unpublished your post with several links to your downloads. Lastly, I find it very odd that you're using yourself as a reference -> "According to my blog-entry on the sonophiles". The article may be good or bad, but citing yourself as a reference doesn't really count.
Please take this in the spirit in which it's intended.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Eloise Hi, don't get me wrong DCS sounds good, but I seem to remember that the upsampler is in the box with the transport? I am sure it sounded best as a complete three box unit.
Keith.
http://www.puriteaudio.co.uk/
Hi Chris,
> I don't want the comments following the review of dCS components to drift [...]
well, I felt they were appropriate, but obviously that is not the issue here.
> There is plenty of room in the forum for this discussion.
I'd appreciate it if you pointed me in the "right" direction--if there is any interest in the readers of this forum regarding my thoughts on the matter.
> Also, I don't want this to turn into the Blumlein advertisement
Neither do I. I just thought I'd do the questioner a favor, and since I don't know how else to contact him or her I took the chance.
> Note: I unpublished your post [...]
I'd have thought a personal reply would have been more appropriate than a public display, but then this is your forum.
> Lastly, I find it very odd that you're using yourself as a reference [...]
I didn't intend to cite myself as a reference. I just didn't want to restate my original writing.
Regards,
blumlein records - Andrew Levine
The transports (both Scarlatti and Paganini) have built in upsamplers (to DSD only IIRC).
There is also available a separate upsampler box for both systems which is more versatile and can upsample to DSD or 88/2 / 176.4 PCM.
Alternatively the DACs can be used without upsamper.
Eloise
Mac OSX 10.5 with iTunes (mostly ALAC) --USB--> Musical Fidelity A1008 --> B&W CDM 7NT (iPhone remote)
Andrew,
Chris is referring to the 'Forum' itself - click on the link on the left hand side of the home page - for posting comments. While Chris' moderation style allows wide ranging discussions relative to a given post subject, he, rightfully in my opinion, wants to contain 'comments' on equipment reviews to the subject of his review.
Said another way, it is considered rather poor form here to throw in a comment about a completely different product, esp. along with the acknowledgement that you'd never heard the product under review.
clay
PS, I'm not aware of any use of the term 'fanboy' that is not considered perjorative in nature, so I was a little surprised to see it pop up in Chris' comment relative to Metric Halo (for the second time, as I recall), as it conjures up images of overtly biased commentary.
PPS, also Chris, please allow me to comment on your recently used phrase: "please take this comment in the spirit it was intended". Absent specific knowledge of the spirit intended, it's difficult to do that. Allow me to provide an analogy - I once was the ass't coach of youth girls soccer team - utilizing a former member of the NY Cosmos as a trainer. When the girls performed a play exceptionally well (i.e., exactly according to script), he would exclaim "how good was that!". The girls had no idea. :)
Perhaps this post would also be better served in the 'forum', and if so, perhaps Chris will re-direct it (or delete as appropriate).
Hi Clay - I certainly did not mean to offend anyone here with a pejorative use of the term fanboy. I was quite surprised to see the post talking all about the MH product as if the review was all about MH. In addition this was the first time I have ever used that term on the site, and maybe ever. The above post may have been easier to understand if it actually compared personal experience with the MH gear and dCS gear.
I did make a comment a week ago about the intensity of posts or number of posts not being equivalent to the quality of a piece of equipment. That was in a post referencing MH gear. I've received many personal emails from people asking what is going on with all the MH related posts when the topic is seemingly unrelated or the OP is uninterested in the features such a component offers. In that thread I was only trying to ad a bit of balance. Fortunately I've listened to a few MH products and have a good feel for where they fall on the continuum of DACs I've used.
Again, no harm was meant. Nothing is accomplished by bashing one's own readers :~)
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
"I was quite surprised to see the post talking all about the MH product...."
As was I.
"I did make a comment a week ago about the intensity of posts or number of posts not being equivalent to the quality of a piece of equipment. That was in a post referencing MH gear."
This was the previous instance I was imagining had been a fanboy reference. Thanks for clarifying my mistake. And in retrospect, your use of fanboy above probably also surprised me given that it doesn't seem like the type of thing 'Chris' would say.
"Again, no harm was meant."
And none taken. I was just 'surprised' that's all.
cheers,
clay
PS, don't hesitate to expunge these posts from the dCS review thread.
Chris, not sure if your saw my earlier post so am reposting....it might have gotten lost amidst the banter on the ULN-8.... :-)
Based on your review of the DCS components and naming the clock as perhaps your favorite of the bunch, raised in my mind again the importance of optimal clocking to obtaining the optimal SQ in one's system.
You noted some time ago that you had a Antelope Isochrone OCX which you were testing. Can you comment on these tests, particularly if you had a chance to use the OCX with the Alpha DAC or any of the other DACs you have on hand? I would think that if the DCS gear is at its best when used with its master word clock, other DAC's, particularly synchronous DAC's, might also be at their best with such a clock in the system.
I have a Isochrone DA coming tomorrow which I'll be inserting into my Lynx AES16/BADAC system and will report back on the results. I hope to realize similar improvements to what Happy reported in another thread.
Thanks,
David
Mac Mini / Pure Music > Firewire > Metric Halo LIO-8 > Atma-Sphere M60 Mk3.1's > Geddes Abbey Speakers > Rythmik Servo Subs // ASI Liveline Cables, HRS MXR Isolation Rack, PurePower 2000, Elgar 6006B
Hi Clay,
> it is considered rather poor form here to throw in a comment
> about a completely different product, esp. along with the acknowledgement
> that you'd never heard the product under review.
I was merely using one box that I personally know to relate with regards to functionality & pricing of the DAC under discussion. Since I have not heard the Paganini I quite obviously can't compare it's sound with what I know.
Regards,
blumlein records - Andrew Levine
Ridiculous. The main point of getting into computer audio is a very modest outlay that blows most £10k cd machines out of the water. This set-up misses the point entirely. I really don't want to see £35k computer audio solutions...when you can get amazing results at a fraction of that. Of course it sounds great.. But personally I think this is not what this site is about and I don't like the commercial angles creeping in here. What's next £10k USB cables?
Keep it real chris
I get to hear a dCS stack regularly. I agree with Chris. I have heard no finer digital playback - not that I have heard as much as he has. But it is bloody good. No question.
Good on Chris reviewing it.
It's abit like Kondo amps (that I also get to hear fairly regularly). They have a magic about them which transcends the every day experience and seems to justify their very large price tags.
If it sounds better to you then it is better...
Opusover21, I take your point, but not all are purely motivated to pursue computer audio for cost reasons and what's the harm in showcasing the entire spectrum of available DAC options in the market anyway?
Mac Mini / Pure Music > Firewire > Metric Halo LIO-8 > Atma-Sphere M60 Mk3.1's > Geddes Abbey Speakers > Rythmik Servo Subs // ASI Liveline Cables, HRS MXR Isolation Rack, PurePower 2000, Elgar 6006B
Chris-
What is the reason that the review sample included the U-clock instead of the Paganini master clock? Is it because the U-cock is adequate in the absence of a transport?
Thanks,
Alan
Linn Klimax DS >>FM Acoustics 245 Preamp >>FM Acoustics 411 mkII Poweramp >> Magico Mini II Speakers
"I have not had the chance to try out any gear by dCS. Also my budget is limited to the price of top pro audio gear--which strangely enough is less expensive than a lot of high-end audio equipment."
Didn't dCS (still does?)make Pro Audio gear that was extremely expensive as well? I don't think this thread should turn into a pro audio vs. consumer audio. Perhaps the comments on the ULN-8 could be moved to the endless threads we already have on the Metric Halo. So far only one comment in 30+ other than Chris' on the dCs trio. Yes, its over the top expensive but its also over the top great from the 2 or 3 accounts I've heard. Anyone?
Forget the sound, on looks alone I wouldn't want the MH ULN-8 or Sonic Studio's version in my living room. I guess you could try to hide it but for $6 - 8,000 I'd rather show it off. It belongs in a studio IMO. But then again I'm just a misled consumer! ;^)
James
you're confusing us, James...
"I don't think this thread should turn into a pro audio vs. consumer audio. Perhaps the comments on the ULN-8 could be moved to the endless threads we already have on the Metric Halo."
followed by:
"Forget the sound, on looks alone I wouldn't want the MH ULN-8 or Sonic Studio's version in my living room. I guess you could try to hide it but for $6 - 8,000 I'd rather show it off. It belongs in a studio IMO. But then again I'm just a misled consumer! ;^)"
you comment on both the Metric Halo gear, and the studio versus living room (pro vs. audiophile) aspect of gear, after suggesting that neither belonged here.
;0
clay
"PS. Were you able to compare the single and balanced outputs as I've read they have independent paths and one may be better than the other?"
Hi Eloise - I liked the balanced outputs best in my system.
"Chris, you noted some time ago that you had a Antelope Isochrone OCX which you were testing. Can you comment on these tests, particularly if you had a chance to use the OCX with the Alpha DAC or any of the other DACs you have on hand? Also, you noted some time back that you preferred the Alpha DAC to the ULN-8....can you comment a bit further on that comparison."
Hi David - I put the OCX clock into the dCS system and the sound deteriorated a bit. I prefer the dCS U-Clock as the master, even clocking the Lynx. Using the BADA I've had very system dependent results. In some systems I love using the OCX while in others, mine included, it doesn't do it for me.
"Ridiculous. The main point of getting into computer audio is a very modest outlay that blows most £10k cd machines out of the water. This set-up misses the point entirely. I really don't want to see £35k computer audio solutions...when you can get amazing results at a fraction of that. Of course it sounds great.. But personally I think this is not what this site is about and I don't like the commercial angles creeping in here. What's next £10k USB cables?
Keep it real chris"
Hi Opusover21 - As previous reader(s) have said, not all of us are into computer based audio because it allows us to save money. That said, I think your comments seems a bit misplaced. The computers I used in this setup are thousands of dollars cheaper than the best disc spinners available. Computer based sources are not supposed to replaces DACs and the associated components. They replace the disc spinning source. I'm out to obtain the best sound possible at every price level. I welcome the forums posts that seek the best solution for under $200 and I welcome the personal emails from people seeking to upgrade their complete Esoteric front end. It's all relative and it's all about recreating the musical illusion in our homes. I a bit lost when it comes to your comments stating, "I don't like the commercial angles creeping in here." Not sure what you mean so I can really respond.
"What is the reason that the review sample included the U-clock instead of the Paganini master clock? Is it because the U-cock is adequate in the absence of a transport?"
Hi Alan - The U-Clock made more sense to me as it can also be used as a stand-alone asynchronous USB to S/PDIF converter. Some readers contacted me with questions about the U-Clock and it's value as a converter to go between their laptop the DAC they already own. These readers had been using TosLink from their laptops. I compared this TosLink output to the U-Clock's USB to S/PDIF conversion and the difference was wonderful. The U-Clock increased every sonic quality that audiophiles are looking for.
"Didn't dCS (still does?)make Pro Audio gear that was extremely expensive as well?"
Hi James - dCS was in the pro market, I'm not sure how its prices or performance compared to the other pro audio components.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Chris, thanks for the response. As I commented in the thread which Happy initiated, since I asked you about the OCX, I took delivery of an Isochrone DA unit on Friday and it made a very significant improvement in my sound quality which was not at all subtle. As you know, the DA is different from the OCX as it offers benefits both in terms of noise isolation and lower jitter via a reclocked signal from an excellent clock.
Mac Mini / Pure Music > Firewire > Metric Halo LIO-8 > Atma-Sphere M60 Mk3.1's > Geddes Abbey Speakers > Rythmik Servo Subs // ASI Liveline Cables, HRS MXR Isolation Rack, PurePower 2000, Elgar 6006B
hi chris,
Did you have a chance to compare the u-clock and the lynx as a computer interface. It would be great to get an idea how a 1000usd interface compares to a 4000usd device.
In general, there are more and more interesting computer interfaces coming out (pci to spdif, usb to spdif, firewire to spdif) and these are a very significant part of a computer audio chain. Would be great to have more input on this topic.
Thanks!!
"you comment on both the Metric Halo gear, and the studio versus living room (pro vs. audiophile) aspect of gear, after suggesting that neither belonged here."
My comments were to counter Andrews implications/ remarks that Pro Audio gear is superior and cheaper than consumer gear. I meant to point out that there are viable reasons why consumers would prefer consumer gear vis a vis pro audio. And that the thread should have been left to comments on the dCS Paganini et al. and not turned into a MH ULN-8 review. Hopefully, owners of the dCS gear weren't scared off from posting their knowledge and experience because not all of us think they are wasting their money as Mr. Levine did when he implied the MH ULN-8 was as good as it gets. I could see no way around addressing the reasons he tried to turn it into a Pro audio thread even though I wished he had stuck to questions and discussion of Chris' dCS review.
We don't need pro audio guys saving us "unwary" consumers/audiophiles. At least not in this thread. ;^)
Joking aside, my main point for the post was to show that there are those who think the dCS stack is a worthwhile product and are interested enough to invite posts/reviews from owners or those who have heard the product.
Regards,
James
Hi icebreaker,
> Andrews implications/ remarks that Pro Audio gear is superior and cheaper than consumer gear
I said that the box I talked about is less expensive than the Paganini. Obviously, since I have not yet had the chance to audition the latter (double blind), I can not comment on sound quality.
> not all of us think they are wasting their money as Mr. Levine did
> when he implied the MH ULN-8 was as good as it gets
What I said is that as a recordist I know what the acoustic event I am tracking sounds like live, and that's what I want to hear when I work on my recordings in stereo or surround. I try to recreate the sonics as they were (or could / should have been :-).
> We don't need pro audio guys saving us "unwary" consumers/audiophiles.
> At least not in this thread. ;^)
I have understood that much ;-)
Regards,
blumlein records - Andrew Levine
I have the 4 box Paganini set up (don't shoot me). I put up some comments under the following link a week or two back - http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/Room-Correction-without-downside. Hopefully it is not now heresy too to use room correction with such flash gear!
Chris's review is somewhat of a relief as reading of the wonders of much cheaper dacs, while not having the opportunity to actually hear them, you wonder if it really is a case of the Emperor's new clothes. But apparently not - whew :-) I've owned the early Delius/Purcell which was pretty good and later the P8i (a side wise step really), but I do find the the Paganini in a different league to the earlier ones. BTW I prefer balanced - using quite low cost Apogee Wide Eye cables by preference - eg over an expensive Acrolink and others. I also prefer non-upsampling, and as you will see if you read the link above, I'm sort of in two minds about the Transport vs computer. If the transport and computer both fed via the upsampler (set to output 44.1) they sound pretty similar, but the transport direct to dac sounds cleaner, clearer and more dynamic. If I forget audiophilia and just enjoy the music, the room corrected computer source wins though as it gives a better balanced and more natural sound. None of this is night and day stuff. Another point is that having had this gear for a while you get used to it and take it for granted until you go to a friends house, hear a familiar track and wonder where half the info has gone. It certainly gets more out of cd that I thought was in there. I find media players vastly different in their sound btw - prefer J River, though I haven't had the opportunity to try Mac or Amarra.
Murray
Murray
Sony Vaio / W7 / HQPlayer - Wasapi or J River - Asio4all(room correction impulse from Audiolense; or XXHE with KS/ asynch USB / dCS Paganini (non upsampled) / ASR Emitter 1 / B&W 801D
@murray,
I am also very much impressed with DCS equipment. I do not have the money for a full stack and only have an older elgar+ dac. I was surprised about the night and day difference between the pc- dcs setup vs. my linn unidisc universal player. an a/b comparison was not necessary, it was like the music came alive, the women vocalists started breathing in my room and the music became extremely realistic. please note, the unidisc is not a bad player - its sacd playback is among the best.
i also made the experience that players make a large difference. i would recommend, you try mediamonkey with the kernel plugin. to my ears it betters jriver!
As always, a well reasoned response
"I meant to point out that there are viable reasons why consumers would prefer consumer gear vis a vis pro audio."
Agreed, there are many: 1) extra 'stuff' that's not needed, esp extra front panel knobs, (which contributes to ->), 2) looks, 3) more complicated to setup and use, and, 4) lack of RCA outs which requires special cables, or use of adapters. And these are just for starters. :)
"We don't need pro audio guys saving us "unwary" consumers/audiophiles. At least not in this thread. ;^)"
I'd say it's probably too late for most of us, in any event. ;-0
clay
Hi Johniboy,
interesting about the experience vs the Linn player.
Can you point me to the media monkey kernel plugin please. I sure hope it doesn't sound better - I love the ease of the J River theatre interface with remote control ;-)
I've found MM to sound more dynamic and punchy, but give less micro-detail with that. On first listen much more exciting but a few comparisons later I started to realise I was missing something. I was using Asio4all.
Thanks for the hint
Murray
Murray
Sony Vaio / W7 / HQPlayer - Wasapi or J River - Asio4all(room correction impulse from Audiolense; or XXHE with KS/ asynch USB / dCS Paganini (non upsampled) / ASR Emitter 1 / B&W 801D
Here you go: http://www.stevemonks.com/ksplugin/
You will have to check whether this works for you. Not all soundcards support the kernel streamer plugin and if you are using the usb input of the dcs, maybe only asio4all will do the job.
Hi Andrew- I agree that having a DAC like the MH ULN-8 that can sound like a well set up live performance is undoubtedly a significant measure of the "ultimate" in performance. Enjoy!
Hi Murray - Thanks for the input on the dCS stack and the link. I admit that I passed by the thread when I saw "room correction without a downside" but I will revisit. :)
Regards,
James
Chris
I may have missed you saying, but when trying the upsampler did you just use Dual-AES link or did you also try iLink / Firewire? The reason I ask is (IIRC) with AES you only have option of 192/176.4 but with iLink you can upsampler to DSD which (according to dCS) is a good thing (for the RingDAC)
Eloise
Mac OSX 10.5 with iTunes (mostly ALAC) --USB--> Musical Fidelity A1008 --> B&W CDM 7NT (iPhone remote)
Hi Eloise - When upsampling I used the 1394 FireWire link to convert to DSD.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Hi Chris,
just wondered if you tried different USB cables at all and if you found any difference (eg between Kimber v1 and V2, Wireworld). One would sort of hope that any usb cable that performs correctly would be fine with asynchronous USB and there could be no sound difference with such a packetised system but ..........................
Also which clock cables did you use?
thanks
murray
Murray
Sony Vaio / W7 / HQPlayer - Wasapi or J River - Asio4all(room correction impulse from Audiolense; or XXHE with KS/ asynch USB / dCS Paganini (non upsampled) / ASR Emitter 1 / B&W 801D
Hi Murray - I've tried many USB cables over the last couple years and I've settled on the Kimber v2 silver cable as my cable of choice. The clock cables used came stock with the U-Clock with the exception of my custom cable clocking the Lynx card.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Taking into account the price of the unit. I'm sorry to state something that seems to go against what everyone else is saying, but I hear what I hear, and I think it's important for others to know. I like most of you am a stereo nut, I guess audiophile is the right term. I have been around this hobby long enough to have learned a few things, one of them being that expensive things are sometimes much better than the inexpensive counterparts, but not always. 20 years ago I hoped that expensive things didn't sound better than cheap things, but a few choice auditions later and having my mind blown showed me that in order to get great sound, sometimes you have to spend some money. And I did!!! I also learned that as my purchasing power went up and I was able to audition ever more expensive gear, I found that sometimes you pay a whole lot more and you don't get anything other than a flashy case and a lot of promises from the manufacturer. This brings me to the dCS gear. It has been greatly reviewed, so they must be doing something right, however I think it is safe to say that it is VERY expensive costing many times more than the competition. Having said that, we are all free to spend our money as we wish, and people who have a lot of money have no qualms about spending 20, 30 or 40 thousand Dollars for a CD player. It's great because they like it and they are happy, so it's money well spent. Coming to this particular setup, I must say I heard it and I was not at all impressed regardless of how much or how little it costs. My concern is that most people auditioning it get caught up in the beauty of the product, the meticulous finish, and the good reviews, and when they hear it they convince themselves it HAS to sound good. I for one think you can get much better sound for much less, it's not bad but there are better things and at lower prices. If you are shopping for something in this price range do yourself a favor and audition a few other components in the $2,000 to $10,000 range and you may find you can save a lot of dough. For those of you who have heard it, make sure you compare it to something worthwhile. I'm sure it sounds better than a $299 add on DAC, or even a $999 DAC, but that ain't saying much is it?
Andrew \
Hi Andrew - Thanks for the honest comments. I obviously have an opposing view of the performance of this dCS gear, but you have some great points about high performing products at reasonable prices.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
I have said it before and I'll say it again, you run the best forum on the internet, and it's great to be able to be part of this forum run and frequented by people who are courteous and act like adults.
Andrew
Chris,
Did you get a chance to compare USB input on U-Clock with a Logitech Transporter slaved to the U-Clock (or any other clock for that matter) ?
I've been just wondering, how a well implemented Transporter setup (that is with an external clock, that would serve as a master clock for both the transporter an a DAC) would compare to the U-Clock USB input.
I have had a Puccini U-Clock on loan, and it sounded OK via the USB input, but I still preferred the dCS Puccini as a self contained CD/SACD player. Now thinking about trying Transporter + Antelope Trinity as a better sounding alternative.
Regards,
Adam
dCS Puccini -> Dartzeel NHB-108 Model One A -> Wilson Sophia II (with Wilson Sasha on order)
Hi,
I tried a clocked Transporter in my 3 box (clock, transport, dac) Paganini set up before the Paganini USB/Upsampler became available. It could not achieve the quality of the dCS transport, hence I tried the Paganini USB/Upsampler at much greater expense. I'm now happy that I'm getting as good quality via USB as from the transport (only with J River - not any other media player), and when you factor in some room correction virtues, it is clearly better. With the Paganini I have never had startling results from single ended cables, but even low cost (Apogee wide eye) balanced AES give quite excellent results. I think the Puccini Clock/USB doesn't support AES which is why I went the Paganini way. I guess you may like to try the Paganini USB but then you'd need the extra clock to and your half way to a Paganini set up so maybe these comments don't help so much.
best
Murray
Murray
Sony Vaio / W7 / HQPlayer - Wasapi or J River - Asio4all(room correction impulse from Audiolense; or XXHE with KS/ asynch USB / dCS Paganini (non upsampled) / ASR Emitter 1 / B&W 801D
Of course you hear the same at the end of your chain. Your using the same equipment to record and to listen.That not to say your dacs very good.
Art
Hi Art,
> Of course you hear the same at the end of your chain.
Is that so?
> Your using the same equipment to record and to listen.
I use my ears to compare what I hear live (with no ADC-DAC involved when I don't use headphones to monitor the recorded stream) with what I hear in the studio. My benchmark is the sound & feel of the real performance in the real space.
Regards,
blumlein records - Andrew Levine
I like the speakers you use for your system. No crossover single driver must be very fast and low coloration. I ordered a cd from your site.Your coment was well taken.I have a single driver speaker named Beauhorn Virtuaso.
Art
Chris, I love your site. great work, please continue!
Did you get a chance to drive the Paganini set through different inputs?
I am interested in a comparison between the USB input and driving the upsampler or dac with your Lynx card using dual AES and wordclock.
I have ordered the Paganini and look for the best, cost-no-object way to drive it.
Thanks,
Lex.
Lex ... If I understand correctly, the RME AES-32 (or PCI equivilent) is a better match for the dCS kit if using the separate clock as the RME card can multiply the base clock (i.e. 44.1k or 48k) produced by the dCS clocks where the Lynx card (last I heard) could not.
The limitation of using the u-clock (or Upsampler's) USB input is that it is limited to 24/96.
Eloise
Mac OSX 10.5 with iTunes (mostly ALAC) --USB--> Musical Fidelity A1008 --> B&W CDM 7NT (iPhone remote)
yes, that makes sense, Eloise.
Any idea how the comparison between RME card and USB works out when fed to the Paganini stack, both at 24/96 with the same server?