At last... (Audiolab) - part I
- Thread starter sq225917
- Start date
- Status
I'm not John, but I guess the Audiolab 8200 CD has a pretty good CD drive from Sony inside - at least that was the one used in one of the prototypes.
JohnW
pfm member
Still cowering under an unbelievable work load and relentless issues… as it takes me such an exurbanite amount of time to write anything, I’ve just not had the time to compose replies, sorry, I ask for your understanding and I’ll try and answer as much as I can, and Pls. forgive me if I’ve missed anyone.
CDQ software has finally been released to the production line yesterday and now includes a host of extra features, so units will now be finally shipped out from China in the coming days.
OK, after “Mimoklepes” posting concerning the 12V Trigger operation, we could not allow our “Feeble effort” to remain, and redesigned the DQ Mainboard and Trigger PCB to faclitate more control over the pair of 12V Trigger outputs (The first production batch’s of CDQ do not include the trigger option, it will be added as a running change from the Dec / Jan production onwards):-
1. While using headphones, you can now select via the software Menu the option to auto power down the amps when the headphone jack is inserted.
2. Selectable “Auto Standby” and Power-off delay times can be selected via Menu options.
3. The DQ has a button on the front panel & Remote control to toggle the Trigger output(s) in additions to the above options.
Concerning the Audiolab Amplifiers – you can “read” into this how you wish, but I’ve had nothing to do with the design of the “New” 8200 range of Amplifiers…
A while back, someone stated that it was a shame that we don’t support “HDCD” decoding otherwise it would be an ideal product… We can “Decode” HDCD recordings in a “round about way” if they are replayed within Windows Media Player, using the USB connection and insure that the “allow 24 Bit mode” in WMP is enabled. WMP will decode HDCD recordings (at least the Dynamic range extension feature), and you will see 17 or 18 Bits being displayed on the (C)D(Q) LCD as the extra dynamic range of the HDCD recording process is being decoded. Use the “Optimal Transient” filter mode, and you need not worry about HDCD's "on the fly" dynamic “Filter Mode Selection”…
The DQ / CDQ have extra Filter options, including an additional two extra “Optimal Transient” modes…
ATM, only DQ has a Balance (L/R) control, although we could add “Balance” option to the CDQ via software at a later date (although setting the balance would be via the Menu system), owners of earlier units can have their units software updated via there dealer (or most likely sent back to Audiolab service centre). This is also true for all units, so early 8200CD owners can have there units updated to latest software “Free of Charge” (with any future new “software” features etc), excluding shipping cost, so you need worry, or feel left out…
Naptrel,
We hear you…..
Paul666,
ATM you cannot control the unit via the Host PC as we do not have the resources to write the software that would need to be installed on the Host PC – We cannot afford to get involved with the “PC environment” anymore then our current “Driverless Plug and Play” USB implementation. Our Hardware could support external Host control via a software update if we had the need in the future.
CDQ has Digital CD output ONLY – although you would really want to route the AV system to the (C)DQ via the “Home Theater mode”, rather then route the (C)DQ’s outputs to the AV system for best 2 Channel Stereo performance.
Pound0Sound,
The (C)D(Q) easily outperforms the humble IsoMagic – the new CDQ / DQ is the best digital replay I’ve heard from a production design… They really are that good…
MDAC / QDAC support ClockLock inputs, although no current plans to make a matching “Small Format” CD transport – although obviously the option is there…
Amdismal,
Depends how tight your funds are and if your looking for a standard “HiFi sized unit” or a smaller footprint unit, if your just looking for a DAC without CD transport, you will not be disappointed with the DQ.
MDAC / QDAC will have a nicer display, but then the DQ’s internal PSU is higher quality then the MDAC / QDAC’s external “inline” power brick…
It’s almost 2am here in China, and I’ve only got to the bottom of Page 31, so I’ll try and answer more and the remaining two pages of posts tomorrow...
(Edit, Oh Dear make that 5 Pages of postings left to reply too!!)
GN from China,
John
CDQ software has finally been released to the production line yesterday and now includes a host of extra features, so units will now be finally shipped out from China in the coming days.
OK, after “Mimoklepes” posting concerning the 12V Trigger operation, we could not allow our “Feeble effort” to remain, and redesigned the DQ Mainboard and Trigger PCB to faclitate more control over the pair of 12V Trigger outputs (The first production batch’s of CDQ do not include the trigger option, it will be added as a running change from the Dec / Jan production onwards):-
1. While using headphones, you can now select via the software Menu the option to auto power down the amps when the headphone jack is inserted.
2. Selectable “Auto Standby” and Power-off delay times can be selected via Menu options.
3. The DQ has a button on the front panel & Remote control to toggle the Trigger output(s) in additions to the above options.
Concerning the Audiolab Amplifiers – you can “read” into this how you wish, but I’ve had nothing to do with the design of the “New” 8200 range of Amplifiers…
A while back, someone stated that it was a shame that we don’t support “HDCD” decoding otherwise it would be an ideal product… We can “Decode” HDCD recordings in a “round about way” if they are replayed within Windows Media Player, using the USB connection and insure that the “allow 24 Bit mode” in WMP is enabled. WMP will decode HDCD recordings (at least the Dynamic range extension feature), and you will see 17 or 18 Bits being displayed on the (C)D(Q) LCD as the extra dynamic range of the HDCD recording process is being decoded. Use the “Optimal Transient” filter mode, and you need not worry about HDCD's "on the fly" dynamic “Filter Mode Selection”…
The DQ / CDQ have extra Filter options, including an additional two extra “Optimal Transient” modes…
ATM, only DQ has a Balance (L/R) control, although we could add “Balance” option to the CDQ via software at a later date (although setting the balance would be via the Menu system), owners of earlier units can have their units software updated via there dealer (or most likely sent back to Audiolab service centre). This is also true for all units, so early 8200CD owners can have there units updated to latest software “Free of Charge” (with any future new “software” features etc), excluding shipping cost, so you need worry, or feel left out…
Naptrel,
We hear you…..
Paul666,
ATM you cannot control the unit via the Host PC as we do not have the resources to write the software that would need to be installed on the Host PC – We cannot afford to get involved with the “PC environment” anymore then our current “Driverless Plug and Play” USB implementation. Our Hardware could support external Host control via a software update if we had the need in the future.
CDQ has Digital CD output ONLY – although you would really want to route the AV system to the (C)DQ via the “Home Theater mode”, rather then route the (C)DQ’s outputs to the AV system for best 2 Channel Stereo performance.
Pound0Sound,
The (C)D(Q) easily outperforms the humble IsoMagic – the new CDQ / DQ is the best digital replay I’ve heard from a production design… They really are that good…
MDAC / QDAC support ClockLock inputs, although no current plans to make a matching “Small Format” CD transport – although obviously the option is there…
Amdismal,
Depends how tight your funds are and if your looking for a standard “HiFi sized unit” or a smaller footprint unit, if your just looking for a DAC without CD transport, you will not be disappointed with the DQ.
MDAC / QDAC will have a nicer display, but then the DQ’s internal PSU is higher quality then the MDAC / QDAC’s external “inline” power brick…
It’s almost 2am here in China, and I’ve only got to the bottom of Page 31, so I’ll try and answer more and the remaining two pages of posts tomorrow...
(Edit, Oh Dear make that 5 Pages of postings left to reply too!!)
GN from China,
John
mimoklepes
Member
I think I love you
. Now I only have to wait for a DQ or an updated CDQ, whichever gets here first. Thanks!!hi everyone,
I'm a newbee here but I'm following that thread for a couple of month now from the DIY super dacapo to this "almost there" final product state of frustration. I have right now three questions that I'm not sure have been answered yet and I'm deeply sorry if it is.
1/- looking for a new dac in the entry/middle budget arena, lots of new intresting products seems to pop up everywhere. it seems two me that currently two "ways" are being opposed: there is the ess sabre32 chip way; ultra detailed, high fidelity, highly revealing and all in one package; opposed to the wolfson way, mono or dual WM8741 (or even nos dacs), descriebed as more fluid, forgiving and engaging. So the triky question might be for john: Did your magical skills of designer managed to merge both worlds as you seems really enthousiast and impressed of the forthcoming products -CDQ, DQ, Qdac and Mac? beside the fact, that it seems to undoubtly sound incredible, will I have to only keep flac or hi-res audio files and forget about internet radios (high fidelity= hard on bad recordings) or ...not really
2/ looking at small footprint unit dacs, with external "power bricks", lots of options seems to be available to "upgrade" the psu with various effect on the sonics of the units.
So the question might be: stricticly soundwise, would you guys advise to go with the DQ with the internal "higher quality" psu or wait and go with the M or Qdac with aftermarket chokes or linear or ultra linear psu like teddy reg or little pinkies? Not to mention the fact that separated box for dac and power supply seems to be a better option.
and finaly (and sory guys if the question seems really stupid for most of you) but you taked all about the Digital (simpler pathway, better sound) vs analog (more complicated pathway, slightly lesser sonics) pre amp part of the products. In the case of the digital preamp, does it mean that you HAVE TO connect it to de DIGITAL amp or power amp or can you choose the digital preamp and connect it to your old friend beloved integrated using rca cables? I think I might mistaking somewhere :-(
Thanks in advance for the possible answers and sorry for my bad english.
respectfully
I'm a newbee here but I'm following that thread for a couple of month now from the DIY super dacapo to this "almost there" final product state of frustration. I have right now three questions that I'm not sure have been answered yet and I'm deeply sorry if it is.
1/- looking for a new dac in the entry/middle budget arena, lots of new intresting products seems to pop up everywhere. it seems two me that currently two "ways" are being opposed: there is the ess sabre32 chip way; ultra detailed, high fidelity, highly revealing and all in one package; opposed to the wolfson way, mono or dual WM8741 (or even nos dacs), descriebed as more fluid, forgiving and engaging. So the triky question might be for john: Did your magical skills of designer managed to merge both worlds as you seems really enthousiast and impressed of the forthcoming products -CDQ, DQ, Qdac and Mac? beside the fact, that it seems to undoubtly sound incredible, will I have to only keep flac or hi-res audio files and forget about internet radios (high fidelity= hard on bad recordings) or ...not really
2/ looking at small footprint unit dacs, with external "power bricks", lots of options seems to be available to "upgrade" the psu with various effect on the sonics of the units.
So the question might be: stricticly soundwise, would you guys advise to go with the DQ with the internal "higher quality" psu or wait and go with the M or Qdac with aftermarket chokes or linear or ultra linear psu like teddy reg or little pinkies? Not to mention the fact that separated box for dac and power supply seems to be a better option.
and finaly (and sory guys if the question seems really stupid for most of you) but you taked all about the Digital (simpler pathway, better sound) vs analog (more complicated pathway, slightly lesser sonics) pre amp part of the products. In the case of the digital preamp, does it mean that you HAVE TO connect it to de DIGITAL amp or power amp or can you choose the digital preamp and connect it to your old friend beloved integrated using rca cables? I think I might mistaking somewhere :-(
Thanks in advance for the possible answers and sorry for my bad english.
respectfully
JohnW
pfm member
Grubyhalo,
+15dB max for the Analogue Line level inputs.
Dookie182,
Yes you could describe the CDQ / DQ sound as ultra detailed, high fidelity, highly revealing – but above all else it has a very “pleasant” sound.
My main workbench is located behind our speakers in our lab, yet when the system is playing and I’m working away at the bench, I sometimes stop work and think to myself, Wow that really sounds good, and that’s listening from behind the speakers.
Likewise, Dominik has a pair of small Bose “PC” type speakers hooked up to a CDQ while he works on the software, and the number of times we have commented to each other how unbelievable it sounds – and that’s on small “cheap” Bose powered PC speakers.
While its is very high fidelity its not in anyway sterile – I understand what your saying about the two different “Styles” of sound – and how sometimes Hi-Fi system due to no fault of there own, make “poor” recordings sound unbearable – but the (C)D(Q) selectable filter options goes someway to allow fine “tuning” of the sound. If it’s enough to recover poor sources, it’s hard to say…
However at the end of the day, a true HiFi system should just be a transparent “Window” – you cannot blame the clarity of the window if you do not like what you see behind… Off course you could always “Rose Tint” the window, but then that’s a dangerous slippery slope.
It would appear that no matter how good a PSU already is, improving the PSU always seems to reap benefits in audio quality! And for 100% sure, upgrading the quality of the “Brick inline” PSU on the M/QDAC will also reap benefits – I’m happy to help “DiYers” to this end (at there own risk)…
This fact has not escaped our attention, and it would not be for no reason that we have separate power connections for each channel and the digital section – even included a bi-directional serial bus to enable communications with the M/QDAC MCU – it does not leave much imagination to consider the future “Upgrade” possibilities via the PSU power socket…
Concerning the Digital verses Analogue Pre-Amplifier, just to clarify in both modes, the output is always “Analogue” so you can connect to your “Conventional” amplifiers. Digital verse Analogue mode simply refers to the domain the Gain control (Read Volume Control) is performed. In Digital Mode, it’s performed in the ESS DAC within the Digital Domain and in “Analogue Mode” in the analogue domain via a balanced Analogue stepped attenuator IC for each channel.
Your English is fine, I must apologies for mine!!!
rbrierle,
Price is normally determined by “supply and demand” and we cannot meet demand so I would be surprised if you found discounts on the CDQ ATM.
sq / naptrel,
An episode I would rather not recall, very sad indeed…
Dick,
Since I first passed my driving test, I’ve owned Range Rover or Mercedes vehicles. I fondly remember my old (pre 95) Mercedes and the constantly leaking oil land rovers (I would be too embarrassed to park it on anyones driveway)… sadly despite there very solid build quality they lacked “Modern” conveniences such as Airbags, ABS, Traction & Stability control systems, independent fuel injection, GPS etc. Recently, I purchased the top of the line S Class Mercedes – apart from the Maybach’s, this is Mercedes Top car – there’s no denying that it’s a very nice car with all its electronic convinces, but its build quality is TOTAL crap. It already rattles, has constant error massages and open the fuel flap cover and you can see “sprayed over” sealant between the joints in the body work – how I miss the solid build and feel of my old SL’s & 420SEL etc…
The same can be said of today’s laser mechanisms, long gone are the heavy precision engineered OPU loaders and nice Swing Arm OPU (Optical Pick Ups) etc, you know what I mean…
But don’t be fooled into today’s few and far between “Over engineered” heavy tray loaders (TEAC VRDS) comes to mind. To understand, you need to appreciate that the “Tray loader” only loads the CD onto the Spindle and OPU. It’s this Spindle / OPU block that influences the playability of the CD – the “fancy” loader serves no function other then loading and unloading the CD. What everyone see’s from the “Outside” of a unit is the tray loader – the Spindle / OPU block are hidden within.
Now here comes the crutch of the matter, it’s the quality of the OPU block that matters – and EVERY manufacture sources “off the shelf OPU units” from Sony, Sanyo etc, even if they are “dressed up” in fancy dia-cast loaders etc. So, a Dia-Cast Brick loader will recover the audio data no better then a cheaper “plastic wonder” – the rest is pure marketing bull.
People like to romanticise about the quality of the CD drive, with some irrelevant notations based upon “Turntables” of years gone by, but in reality it’s solely the spindle motor & Disc clamp and more critically the OPU block that matters – these are hidden from view and romance.
We use a Sony OPU (not that we have much choice in this day and age) as it has onboard RF I/V converters and amplifiers for each detector diode, thus facilitating the best recovered signal from the Disc.
Sure we would like to have used a CDM9Pro for its quality build, just as much as I wish I still had my 420SEL (it was wrapped around a tree in Ireland by a friend many years ago) – instead I will have to suffer the modern day “plastic” wonder S600.
Arguably the S600 as a better “Car” over the more solid built cars of old, and despite its cheap “plastic” build – it scores where it really counts and that’s its Engine. The same can be said for the "plastic loader" with Sony OPU used in the CD (Q) as it does a better job at recovering the RF data from the disk with its onboard RF Amps then the CDM9Pro could despite the CDM9Pro’s more solid and inspiring build quality.
John
+15dB max for the Analogue Line level inputs.
Dookie182,
Yes you could describe the CDQ / DQ sound as ultra detailed, high fidelity, highly revealing – but above all else it has a very “pleasant” sound.
My main workbench is located behind our speakers in our lab, yet when the system is playing and I’m working away at the bench, I sometimes stop work and think to myself, Wow that really sounds good, and that’s listening from behind the speakers.
Likewise, Dominik has a pair of small Bose “PC” type speakers hooked up to a CDQ while he works on the software, and the number of times we have commented to each other how unbelievable it sounds – and that’s on small “cheap” Bose powered PC speakers.
While its is very high fidelity its not in anyway sterile – I understand what your saying about the two different “Styles” of sound – and how sometimes Hi-Fi system due to no fault of there own, make “poor” recordings sound unbearable – but the (C)D(Q) selectable filter options goes someway to allow fine “tuning” of the sound. If it’s enough to recover poor sources, it’s hard to say…
However at the end of the day, a true HiFi system should just be a transparent “Window” – you cannot blame the clarity of the window if you do not like what you see behind… Off course you could always “Rose Tint” the window, but then that’s a dangerous slippery slope.
It would appear that no matter how good a PSU already is, improving the PSU always seems to reap benefits in audio quality! And for 100% sure, upgrading the quality of the “Brick inline” PSU on the M/QDAC will also reap benefits – I’m happy to help “DiYers” to this end (at there own risk)…
This fact has not escaped our attention, and it would not be for no reason that we have separate power connections for each channel and the digital section – even included a bi-directional serial bus to enable communications with the M/QDAC MCU – it does not leave much imagination to consider the future “Upgrade” possibilities via the PSU power socket…
Concerning the Digital verses Analogue Pre-Amplifier, just to clarify in both modes, the output is always “Analogue” so you can connect to your “Conventional” amplifiers. Digital verse Analogue mode simply refers to the domain the Gain control (Read Volume Control) is performed. In Digital Mode, it’s performed in the ESS DAC within the Digital Domain and in “Analogue Mode” in the analogue domain via a balanced Analogue stepped attenuator IC for each channel.
Your English is fine, I must apologies for mine!!!
rbrierle,
Price is normally determined by “supply and demand” and we cannot meet demand so I would be surprised if you found discounts on the CDQ ATM.
sq / naptrel,
An episode I would rather not recall, very sad indeed…
Dick,
Since I first passed my driving test, I’ve owned Range Rover or Mercedes vehicles. I fondly remember my old (pre 95) Mercedes and the constantly leaking oil land rovers (I would be too embarrassed to park it on anyones driveway)… sadly despite there very solid build quality they lacked “Modern” conveniences such as Airbags, ABS, Traction & Stability control systems, independent fuel injection, GPS etc. Recently, I purchased the top of the line S Class Mercedes – apart from the Maybach’s, this is Mercedes Top car – there’s no denying that it’s a very nice car with all its electronic convinces, but its build quality is TOTAL crap. It already rattles, has constant error massages and open the fuel flap cover and you can see “sprayed over” sealant between the joints in the body work – how I miss the solid build and feel of my old SL’s & 420SEL etc…
The same can be said of today’s laser mechanisms, long gone are the heavy precision engineered OPU loaders and nice Swing Arm OPU (Optical Pick Ups) etc, you know what I mean…
But don’t be fooled into today’s few and far between “Over engineered” heavy tray loaders (TEAC VRDS) comes to mind. To understand, you need to appreciate that the “Tray loader” only loads the CD onto the Spindle and OPU. It’s this Spindle / OPU block that influences the playability of the CD – the “fancy” loader serves no function other then loading and unloading the CD. What everyone see’s from the “Outside” of a unit is the tray loader – the Spindle / OPU block are hidden within.
Now here comes the crutch of the matter, it’s the quality of the OPU block that matters – and EVERY manufacture sources “off the shelf OPU units” from Sony, Sanyo etc, even if they are “dressed up” in fancy dia-cast loaders etc. So, a Dia-Cast Brick loader will recover the audio data no better then a cheaper “plastic wonder” – the rest is pure marketing bull.
People like to romanticise about the quality of the CD drive, with some irrelevant notations based upon “Turntables” of years gone by, but in reality it’s solely the spindle motor & Disc clamp and more critically the OPU block that matters – these are hidden from view and romance.
We use a Sony OPU (not that we have much choice in this day and age) as it has onboard RF I/V converters and amplifiers for each detector diode, thus facilitating the best recovered signal from the Disc.
Sure we would like to have used a CDM9Pro for its quality build, just as much as I wish I still had my 420SEL (it was wrapped around a tree in Ireland by a friend many years ago) – instead I will have to suffer the modern day “plastic” wonder S600.
Arguably the S600 as a better “Car” over the more solid built cars of old, and despite its cheap “plastic” build – it scores where it really counts and that’s its Engine. The same can be said for the "plastic loader" with Sony OPU used in the CD (Q) as it does a better job at recovering the RF data from the disk with its onboard RF Amps then the CDM9Pro could despite the CDM9Pro’s more solid and inspiring build quality.
John
russel
./_dazed_and_confused
Quick, hopefully! question. I will most likely wait for the MDAC and like the idea of losing the wall wart. Would replacing the wall wart with a lead acid cell pack make it equal to the performance of the CDQ? or is a transformer and say 100KuF of smoothing as good?. T network caps?, a fave of mine.
I guess the lead acid cell would be better from a noise and isolation POV. I think there is some Ardino stuff out there for an intelligent charger.
Without giving too much commercially sensitive information away what are the power requirements of the MDAC?. Thanks in advance.
Russel
thanks a lot for the answer john, and clear explainations.
I guess I'll then go for the mdac option and bevore then, search for a bad/kick ass psu to feed the long awaited Mdac.
I then guess that like russel I'm also interested into the mdac power requierement.
but as I don't have any diy skills (yet?) I may need some advises on after market psu: teddy prado? little pinkie? channel island audio psu? but maybe it's not the right place to ask?!
thanks for all the hard work you've done and are doing. thanks for everyone to help keeping the wait barable.
best regards.
I guess I'll then go for the mdac option and bevore then, search for a bad/kick ass psu to feed the long awaited Mdac.
I then guess that like russel I'm also interested into the mdac power requierement.
but as I don't have any diy skills (yet?) I may need some advises on after market psu: teddy prado? little pinkie? channel island audio psu? but maybe it's not the right place to ask?!
thanks for all the hard work you've done and are doing. thanks for everyone to help keeping the wait barable.
best regards.
JohnW
pfm member
Russel, dookie182
I dont have a fully built MDAC or QDAC on Hand to measure the exact current requirements, but its PSU requirements are more complex as it requires symmetrical supply rails.
The 8 Way Mini DIN (+ Outer Shield) has the following Pinning:-
+15V Digital
Gnd (Shield)
+15V Left
Gnd
-15V Left
+15V Right
Gnd
-15V Right
CBUS (Bidirectional Communication BUS to M/QDAC MCU) for PSU status etc.
The BUS connection does not need to be used, and the power requirements for the QDAC are much higher due to its 16 extra Class A Stages in its Analogue Preamplifier section.
I will post current requirements later once we have completed units.
I dont have a fully built MDAC or QDAC on Hand to measure the exact current requirements, but its PSU requirements are more complex as it requires symmetrical supply rails.
The 8 Way Mini DIN (+ Outer Shield) has the following Pinning:-
+15V Digital
Gnd (Shield)
+15V Left
Gnd
-15V Left
+15V Right
Gnd
-15V Right
CBUS (Bidirectional Communication BUS to M/QDAC MCU) for PSU status etc.
The BUS connection does not need to be used, and the power requirements for the QDAC are much higher due to its 16 extra Class A Stages in its Analogue Preamplifier section.
I will post current requirements later once we have completed units.
Cloth-Ears
pfm Member
The changes that were made into the CDQ design that were too late to be incorporated into the CD before it's production run - are they to be applied at a later date perhaps ?
John
I welcome your thoughts:
I have come to the conclusion that, at least in theory, the best possible sound quality is to be obtained by presenting bit perfect data to a seperate DAC via an asynchronous stream (I'm woolly on the technical details but firewire and Ethernet both seem to be well regarded; I presume asynchronous USB would also be in this category), which points to using a computer data source. The advantage here is that all the potential interference from the CD drive circuits are removed, and it should be possible to attain very low jitter through the DAC design. Do you agree with this perspective - which would point to your upcoming DAC is having the potential for best sound quality - or do you consider it more important to have a good CD drive within the unit to enable complete integration of the data stream? To put the question simply, which should give the better sq - the final revised CD player or the DAC (when matched to the right data stream)?
Mark
I welcome your thoughts:
I have come to the conclusion that, at least in theory, the best possible sound quality is to be obtained by presenting bit perfect data to a seperate DAC via an asynchronous stream (I'm woolly on the technical details but firewire and Ethernet both seem to be well regarded; I presume asynchronous USB would also be in this category), which points to using a computer data source. The advantage here is that all the potential interference from the CD drive circuits are removed, and it should be possible to attain very low jitter through the DAC design. Do you agree with this perspective - which would point to your upcoming DAC is having the potential for best sound quality - or do you consider it more important to have a good CD drive within the unit to enable complete integration of the data stream? To put the question simply, which should give the better sq - the final revised CD player or the DAC (when matched to the right data stream)?
Mark
Hi John (and Dominik)!
Thanks a lot for your patience and willingness to contribute so much of your knowledge (and ideas) to this forum/thread!
The upcoming DQ DAC would be just what I'm looking for since a long time, because of the features which combine the digital and analog worlds into one piece (the 21st century preamp *) ).
I have one idea, which might be of interest to all users who want to integrate computer-playback into their system, but would like to be on the safe side of knowing that the data, which is sent to the DAC, isn't mangled by the operating system or the software-player.
Danial Weiss (http://www.weiss.ch) has developed a feature to detect "Bit-perfect" playback in his newer units (the DAC2 and Minerva, and the new DAC202).
This feature utilizes special WAV (or FLAC or WavPack) files which can be played out from the choosen software, and the DAC (in a special operation mode) checks for the bit-integredity of the arriving data-stream.
I would LOVE to have such a feature in the upcoming Audiolab DACs too, because it is a very conveniant and safe way to ensure bit-perfect playback.
Maybe you (or Dominik) could think about implementing it?
Thanks, and take care!
Harald
*) if you might want to use this for advertising of the product, don't forget to send me a free unit ...
Thanks a lot for your patience and willingness to contribute so much of your knowledge (and ideas) to this forum/thread!
The upcoming DQ DAC would be just what I'm looking for since a long time, because of the features which combine the digital and analog worlds into one piece (the 21st century preamp *) ).
I have one idea, which might be of interest to all users who want to integrate computer-playback into their system, but would like to be on the safe side of knowing that the data, which is sent to the DAC, isn't mangled by the operating system or the software-player.
Danial Weiss (http://www.weiss.ch) has developed a feature to detect "Bit-perfect" playback in his newer units (the DAC2 and Minerva, and the new DAC202).
This feature utilizes special WAV (or FLAC or WavPack) files which can be played out from the choosen software, and the DAC (in a special operation mode) checks for the bit-integredity of the arriving data-stream.
I would LOVE to have such a feature in the upcoming Audiolab DACs too, because it is a very conveniant and safe way to ensure bit-perfect playback.
Maybe you (or Dominik) could think about implementing it?
Thanks, and take care!
Harald
*) if you might want to use this for advertising of the product, don't forget to send me a free unit ...
- Status