advertisement


At last... (Audiolab) - part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Calvin&Hobbes said:
Sorry, my last posting (#1043) was already answered by John in reply to Cloth-ears (posting #436).
After giving technical reasons John mentioned: "Despite what some other’s would like you to believe (and invest in), technically unless your clock-locking the Transport to DAC, integral CD servo section is the best solution - so the CDQ over DQ if CD is still your main source."
AND: "Absolutely, I would recommend an “all in one” CD, DAC + Preamplifier… it’s the shortest and cleanest “Signal” path!"
ALSO: "The OPU is a Sony unit with onboard I/V conversion and Gain for increased RF dynamic range and cleaner recovery of the CD RF information."

Thought I had read through this thread carefully! It's simply becoming too long.

@sq: now that CDQ's start arriving in the shops, perhaps a good idea to start a new thread where listening experiences can be posted? (and keep the current one for technical issues, i.e. those not already answered ;-)

@Nikos: what is your opinion on the CDQ?! Certainly, it must be run in by now. Greece, may we have your votes, please?
Click to expand...

Hi once more,

my vote for the CDQ will have to wait for the weekend.

I had a major "upgrade" to my house for the last 2 months and i am getting all my cds from my brother's house this evening.

I will do some extensive listening over the weekend and let you know early next week.
I am still breaking-it-in (and i can tell you it sounds quite better now ) :)

Cheers,

Nikos
 
wouter said:
CDQ is running here since yesterday, unfortunately have not had the time to do extended listening. I'll post some more detailed info over the weekend.

Some immediate remarks:
- it does sound really good, very musical sound that is not fatiguing at all. I think it is one of the most 'analogue' sounding designs but one that still provides good detail.
- i have not been able to compare filter settings, but after a fast cycle through the optimal transient and minimum phase settings seamed the most pleasing

- based on very preliminary listening - i will confirm this the next couple of days:
- very natural sounding, superb for jazz, sax sounds awesome - and so does melody gardot right now
- nice detail but a little more laid back/reclined vs the benchmark. This player will not sound harsh to any ears imo. I do miss some 'crispness/forwardness' esp. in male voices like Cash, Cohen but this is maybe a personal preference.
- incredible resolution, e.g separation of voices in Tallis Scholars tracks is best I've ever heard. I think the CDQ will shine on complex recordings in this matter.
- it seems a bit warmer sounding/heavier on the base vs. the benchmark. For me it's different but not better/worse
- soundstage is good but actually not up to par with the rest for me. I'll investigate further.

It will be at least level with the benchmark HDR but it doesnt blow it away or better it on all fronts. For the price, it's a killer product imho. I'll be listening to classical piano/violin, soul/r&b and some rock later on.

Note: I must say the CD player sounds awesome - seems to add some extra rest/stability vs my flacs over sonos. Will need to investigate.
Click to expand...

Hi Wouter,

my initial listening impressions somehow match yours, except the "crispness/forwardness" that you mention which i belive i get form my set-up...
Also i believe that the soundstage will get better with break-in and different interconnects.
I somehow feel the same ( i would like more width/depth ) but i belive it is too early to judge.
I will get back to this early next week.

Please let us have your further listening impressions.

Nikos
 
Its amazing how we are all holding out for reviews and impressions of the CDQ!, I think it will be quite a bit different for all of us depending on system, but what I have red thus far seems to reach up to the expectations, most folks will have about this product .
 
Thanks nikos and wouter for your first impression...
will be waiting for more impressions during and after burn-in
best regards
André
 
Tks Nikos & Wouter for the 1st impressions indeed CDQ seems very impressive.
My local agent called me "all CDQ sold out even my demo set sold".
Next batch will be after the Chinese Lunar New year. :(
 
JohnW said:
Anyway, better news from China - thanks to a herculean effort by Dominik (and Peter our Chinese Mechnical guy) they have managed to get a MDAC ready for CES - it's on it's way over in hand baggage (I hope) as I type this....
.... has led to the delayed launch of MDAC / QDAC. But it's now also a much better product with it's larger OLED display and other fine tunings (also a late but nice new feature on QDAC).
Click to expand...

Hey John, could you please post a picture when you get a chance? Thx
 
My CDQ is on order. It comes when it comes.

I have questions about use with my Exposure New Classics 28 power amplifiers.

Background

I have considered changing to higher end amplification but the 28 ( retail about £1500 ) is a good power amp and I've been happy with it ( them ) with my Spendor S8e. Also I have the AV side to think about , which involves Exposure amps all round ( controlled via 8000AP ) so a change of main speaker power amps would kind of pox up the homogeniety. So, for now anyway, I'd like to carry on using the 28's.

Connectivity of Exposure amplifiers

The 28's offer both RCA and XLR. However the XLR is wired without the negative so it isn't actually balanced connection , merely uses XLR ( as Exposure say is a better connection ).

In cases of bi-amping from the 23 pre amp, you can use XLR to one 28 power amp and RCA to the other simultaneously. The electrical values are the same, only the cables are different.

Having XLR but it's not balanced, always seemed somewhat bizarre to me and it can give rise to confusion in people's heads and you are also left wondering, what's the point ?


Now to my Questions

1) Would there be an issue in using my XLR leads, which don't have the negative connected, with the XLR outputs of the CDQ ? ( Exposure say no )

2) Would the voltage into the Exposure therefore be half of what it would be if "properly" wired ? i.e. the same as if from the RCA's.

3) From the Exposure 23 pre to two 28 power I can use XLR for one and RCA to the other.

Would there be an electrical issue in doing this from the CDQ to two 28 power ? I'm thinking there, the XLR's output at double the RCA's ( unlike the Exposure pre ), therefore yes, a problem. On the other hand, since the XLR lead I'd be using isn't actually wired for balanced would the outputs effectively be the same as asked in Q2 above ?

I'm confused here as to how it would actually work in practice !



Of course, I could simply use RCA only and indeed I could use a split interconnect for the purpose of bi-amping if I were to continue bi-amping - that's no problem. But since I keep seeing people cite a benefit in using the XLR's, I'm thinking I ought to look into it. On the other hand as I say, it wouldn't be true balanced. :confused:


Thanks for addressing, much appreciated. :)
 
Hi Cloth-Ears.

Use this link about balanced output (CDQ) to your unbalance XLR inputs on the Power amps.

http://www.rane.com/note110.html

Use connection style 1 below the chart - you will be using the same output voltage as the RCA's AFAIK.

Just recheck that the +ve and ground on the Exposures matches the correct pins on the wiring shown on the Rane site.

Regards
Dave.
 
Wilky said:
http://www.rane.com/note110.html
Click to expand...

Even the pro-audio experts can't seem to agree what "balanced" actually means. Personally I think Bill Whitlock is correct:

http://www.jensentransformers.com/an/an003.pdf
when he makes this statement in section 1 about balanced impedances (i.e. not neccessarily anti-phase signals - which is what most people seem to think balanced means).

In ClothEars' (not Wilky's - see post #1088) situation I would just use the phonos. If you really want to use the XLR 2-wire input then use a phono to XLR cable. Connecting a 3-wire output (anti-phase signals) to a single ended input is likely to be unsatisfactory unless details of the circuits are known and a lot of care is taken.

Maybe John W will be along soon to put me straight?
 
Thanks.

But one of the questions remains would there be any benefit left, if not sending over an actual balanced signal. Might I not as well just use the RCA's ?
 
Hi Cloth-Ears,

The output stage on the Audiolab is a true balanced cross-coupled design. The RCA output is actually the positive XLR output. If you say the Exposure merely takes the positive signal of the XLR input, then using the Audiolab's XLR or RCA outputs will be electrically equivalent - almost. With the XLR cable connected, you will be presenting the parasitic cable loading equally to both positive and negative outputs, helping keep things more balanced. It is also quite likely that that the Exposure terminates the negative input of the XLR with the same input impedance as the positive input, again balancing the loading on Audiolab's output stage. To what degree do these effects play role is up for discussion, in any case comparing the XLR to RCA connection will inevitably lead to comparison of the two interconnects. Try both, see which one you like better. Measurement-wise both would give the same results.

The interference rejection properties of balanced connection are due to the impedances being balanced, not the anti-phase voltages usually carried over balanced lines. Anti-phase voltages give more headroom & rejection of common mode noise that both positive & negative circuits are subject to.
 
So, are you saying within that, I can connect from the CDQ using both XLR and RCA outputs at the same time ( for bi-amping ) ?
 
Cloth-Ears said:
So, are you saying within that, I can connect from the CDQ using both XLR and RCA outputs at the same time ( for bi-amping ) ?
Click to expand...

I asked John about a similar thing he said that it wasnt recommended to have both XLR and Unbalanced connected at the same time unless both channels were providing a signal , I was going to output XLR into a balanced recording facility and unbalanced phono to my audiolab amp ( being used as a power amp )

he said it was potentially detrimental to the sound quality to have the unbalanced imput connected at the same time as the balanced and not providing a load from the unbalanced source ( power amp ).

I wish my amp had balanced inputs it would get rid of this headache
 
For bi-amping the best thing to do would be using say positive half of the XLR for low frequencies and negative for high frequencies. When connecting the speakers you would connect low freq. cable in phase and high freq. cable out of phase. This way you end up with optimal loading on the balanced output stage. All you need is an XLR to 2x RCA splitter - hardly an off the shelf item.

We don't recommend having both RCA and XLR connected due to the potential for sonic degradation. If nothing else, you are adding another length of interconnect with it's parasitics as a load on the output stage. Let your ears be the judge - try listening through the RCA connection w/ and w/o the XLR cables attached. If you can't tell a difference, then you probably shouldn't worry too much about it.
 
Come on John and Dominik, surely we can have a pic of the MDAC now that there's one on the way to CES? Please!!!

Any idea on shipping dates for the MDAC also (Sorry if this has been mentioned recently but I've been on holiday and am not up to date with this monster thread!)

Thanks,
Dan
 
Hi Dominik and John, I have just finished reading the thread, I am really tempted to wait until you break away from audiolab as your saving the best for then but I was on a pre-production list about 2 years ago like many others so I am just happy you have got something in the market!!!! Ive decided to go for the cdq without any home demo but i wondered if you could answer a question for me? Someone mentioned the Sqeezebox a few pages back and another member stated it doesnt output via usb, well I can confirm that there is a soft mod for the SB Touch that turns the usb input into an audio output, I have the unit and its how i intend to listen to my music collection provided the cdq is compatable, I havnt done the mod myself yet because I dont own a usb dac but I wondered if you could could tell me if it would work? Does the cdq rely on windows to act as a server or will it function as a normal usb dac? I am guessing it will work as the touch has its own interface and it surely just sends the data down the relevent pins but I would be much happier with a firm 'no problem' from yourselves. I wish you the best of luck with this and future products.

Alan
 
Hi Alan.

I think Dominik answered this in his first post here - http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?p=1154947#post1154947

Dominik said:
what software?
The chip is general purpose and without software it would be just sitting there doing nothing (OK, waiting for firmware upload to be precise). The firmware is my own work and implements Asynchronous Isochronous streaming of up to 24b/96k in accordance with USB Audio Class v1.0 specification which is supported by all major operating systems out-of-the-box. That means we're plug'n'play - no need to install any drivers.
Click to expand...

Driverless (UPNP) USB up to 24/96.

Regards
Dave.
 
Hi JohnW,

Just setup the CDQ last night and now running in. Have to say that it runs quite very warm. Almost hot actually.

Would like to know if there is any issue in using a XLR to RCA cable like this below to connect the XLR output to an int amp/power amp with only RCA input? How about using a XLR to RCA converter?

Have ruled out the 8200MB as the CDQ does not come with the 12V trigger output. Have a 8200A waiting to be open.

Any benefits in connecting this way compared to just using the RCA out only?

http://kindkables.com/catalog/popup_image.php?pID=4&osCsid=5ca2335ea5e

http://www.fullcompass.com/product_image.php?imageid=34750

Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top