Thanks Gremlin for the test with the LPSU. I’m going to try the DAC route first and see what that gives in terms of performance, managed to get a great deal on an Audiolab M-Dac plus so I’ll see how that goes with the Zen.it’s been really useful to hear everyone’s experience with the zen mini, thank you all!
Innuos Zen mini mk3 - linear psu worthwhile upgrade?
- Thread starter Mark McA
- Start date
Mullardman
Moderately extreme...
I have no hum issues with my PSU.
I'm running my Mini with a 17 yr. old old pre USB Benchmark DAC1, bought from new, though to be frank I'm simply doing that for two reasons:
1. Because I haven't yet been 'ar**d to do a serious comparison between the DAC1 and the Innuos' internal DAC.
2. Because I can.
I'm a bit of an external DAC sceptic. I believe that they can be made to sound different, according to the way the DAC chips are implemented within the associated circuitry. But that still leaves the issue of which implementation is 'correct', which then takes us into the realms of taste, system matching 'synergy' etc.
Part of the reason for the rise in interest in DACs, seems to me to stem from the general decline in sales, of CDPs and standalone CD Drives, so that it's a shrewd marketing move to call into question the quality of built in DACs in assorted streaming/storage etc., devices.
I bought my Benchmark DAC to go with a huge TEAC 'P-30' CD drive. and consigned my beloved Rotel RCD 965 -BX to the loft. Eventually, I decided to create space by moving the TEAC on. At the time I had the TEAC, the Rotel and my Yamaha CDR. Asking myself "how many CD players do I need?" and after properly comparing, concluded that the TEAC/Benchmark combo wasn't actually 'better', than the Rotel, at least within my system. That's not to 'dis' the Benchmark. It's a fine DAC and also makes a nice pre, and headphone amp, but as a simple DAC, IME it sits alongside, but not necessarily above, many others.
I'm running my Mini with a 17 yr. old old pre USB Benchmark DAC1, bought from new, though to be frank I'm simply doing that for two reasons:
1. Because I haven't yet been 'ar**d to do a serious comparison between the DAC1 and the Innuos' internal DAC.
2. Because I can.
I'm a bit of an external DAC sceptic. I believe that they can be made to sound different, according to the way the DAC chips are implemented within the associated circuitry. But that still leaves the issue of which implementation is 'correct', which then takes us into the realms of taste, system matching 'synergy' etc.
Part of the reason for the rise in interest in DACs, seems to me to stem from the general decline in sales, of CDPs and standalone CD Drives, so that it's a shrewd marketing move to call into question the quality of built in DACs in assorted streaming/storage etc., devices.
I bought my Benchmark DAC to go with a huge TEAC 'P-30' CD drive. and consigned my beloved Rotel RCD 965 -BX to the loft. Eventually, I decided to create space by moving the TEAC on. At the time I had the TEAC, the Rotel and my Yamaha CDR. Asking myself "how many CD players do I need?" and after properly comparing, concluded that the TEAC/Benchmark combo wasn't actually 'better', than the Rotel, at least within my system. That's not to 'dis' the Benchmark. It's a fine DAC and also makes a nice pre, and headphone amp, but as a simple DAC, IME it sits alongside, but not necessarily above, many others.
I’ve had the Audiolab M-Dac PLUS in place for less than 24hrs but have to say it already seems like a huge upgrade on the Innuos internal DAC, connected using the coaxial input to the Zen, it sounds more detailed, better soundstaging and vocals are just brilliant - perhaps it will wear off or just sounds different but for now I’m surprised at how much of an uplift it’s given my system
TheFlash
Reiki Audio
What Woodface says. And you do need to do some serious external comparisons if you basically think a DAC is a DAC... IMHO and all that!
Mullardman
Moderately extreme...
Nowhere did I say 'a DAC is a DAC.'
Please read and comprehend what I wrote.
Please read and comprehend what I wrote.
Last edited:
I don't think it was aimed at you
Mullardman
Moderately extreme...
I'll leave that to Flash to clarify.
As for the Innuos internal DAC being basic. I'm not disputing what you say, but can you point to your source?
I have read somewhere....possibly somewhere on here, that some regard the Innuos DAC highly.
Oddly, I have no view on this because I've never heard the internal DAC. Due to my continuing knee issues, I find it very difficult
to mess about with kit, so it's just been set up and left alone.
One day, I'll get around to doing some proper auditioning and maybe even servicing and changing the springs on my Orbe. FWIW, my Benchmark is connected to the Innuos co-ax out via a Nordost Moonglo, which I acquired somewhere along the way.
As for the Innuos internal DAC being basic. I'm not disputing what you say, but can you point to your source?
I have read somewhere....possibly somewhere on here, that some regard the Innuos DAC highly.
Oddly, I have no view on this because I've never heard the internal DAC. Due to my continuing knee issues, I find it very difficult
to mess about with kit, so it's just been set up and left alone.
One day, I'll get around to doing some proper auditioning and maybe even servicing and changing the springs on my Orbe. FWIW, my Benchmark is connected to the Innuos co-ax out via a Nordost Moonglo, which I acquired somewhere along the way.
Mullardman
Moderately extreme...
Yep, I read it, and several others last night.
I'd say that the majority quite like the internal DAC, or at worst damn it with faint praise.
One gave the impression of being unable to accept that the internal DAC could be any good, and pointing to expensive DACS, which would probably better suit the sort of system budget which would hardly include the Zen Mini in the first place and more likely include a Zen or Zenith.
Exactly, the Zen Mini is a finely judged product for those who want to start with streaming etc direct into an amp they already have. I would like to try a Zenith at some point but in no real rush, will upgrade speakers first.
TheFlash
Reiki Audio
Sorry if I’ve misunderstood but you said you were a bit of an external DAC sceptic, as quoted. I interpreted that as suggesting that all DACs were the same so you might as well use whatever comes in your streamer, CD player or whatever.
Could you please explain what you really meant by your scepticism about external DACs?
Thanks
I believe the internal DAC in the Zen Mini was designed by M2Tech, so if that's true then it has the heritage. I put it up against an old Micromega stage 2 (or 5, I forget which one it was) and playing a couple of CDs through my headphone system I couldn't tell them apart. They both sounded very pleasant.
Mullardman
Moderately extreme...
First, let's be clear that I don't think all DACs sound the same..
Possibly 'wariness' is more accurate than scepticism. It's based on a few things.
I'm no electronics expert but as I understand it, all commercial audio DACs are implementations of DAC chips. Also as I understand it, the sound can be made to vary according to the circuitry/filters etc., used with the DAC. This, as I pointed out above, begs the question..what is the 'correct' implementation of the chip?'
Even decades ago I recall Pink Triangle coming up with a DAC with multiple filter modules. Was it the Ordinal ? Hold that thought. I did.
Slight sideways step.. Also decades ago, the first flush of DACs were sold either for use with CD drives, or as potential upgrades for integrated CDPs. I well recall a group review in one of the mags, which revealed that some were quite literally very basic DACs 'buried' inside fancy cases.
Fast forward to the fading of CDPs and rise of streaming. This saw revived interest in/ marketing of DACs and suddenly there were loads about..many from previously unheard of makers and with prices from a few quid up to the tens of £k.
Next. I just searched RS Components for Audio DACs. They carry about 40 chips with prices ranging from pennies up to £80+. This includes stuff from Texas Instruments, who bought out Burr Brown.... Of course there will be other suppliers, but you get my drift?
So, multiple prices/ qualities of DAC chips with seemingly endless choices around implementation.
A bit of a minefield?
Finally add in that the Audiolab M DAC, which seems a bit of a winner by common consent, features, multiple choices of filter...
Something doesn't add up.
OK.. If I want, I can go out and compare DACs within my budget and hopefully find something which sounds better to me than my Benchmark or my onboard Innuos DAC, or my Yamaha CDR in 'DAC mode'.
But will it be 'correct'?
I'm not stressing over this and until I can get round to comparing, I'm happy with my Benchmark.
EDIT: But.. if Digital Audio is so 'perfect', why is it so difficult and expensive to do and why are there multiple correct answers ?
TheFlash
Reiki Audio
Thanks. Wariness is indeed a better description than cynicism! A fine exposition.
The short answer to all of the above is that digital is not entirely digital and within that digital is far more than the DAC chip. To suggest or presume, as you appear to (NB. that’s a caveat!) is like asking why all turntables which use the same cart probably sound the same: there is obviously a lot more to a turntable than the cart fitted to it and there’s a lot more to a DAC than its chip.
Even in a purely digital device like a streamer or switch, there is more happening than 1s and 0s being turned into other 1s and 0s and more components involved than the chip(s). Think power supplies and circuit layout to minimise noise, think shielding.
A DAC is obviously a digital to ANALOGUE converter, so that’s a further clue. Someone who knows far more than me will be along shortly to mention op amps and stuff. Even if two manufacturers were to use not only the same DAC chip but the same DAC circuit board, the sound each device produces could be very different due to what’s happening in the analogue domain.
I use a dCS Puccini+U-Clock. Even before dCS introduced the Apex changes to the RingDAC (first major change in decades), there was and is a ladder of models up to the 4-box Vivaldi. Every dCS owner who has heard and/or bought the higher models will attest to their sonic superiority. Obviously not blind so obviously worthless
.Not sure this helps. I think your wariness is understandable but you might still enjoy involving your ears in a little exploration. If you’re anywhere near Leicestershire, PM me. A fellow audiophile popped in a couple of months ago; he is an analogue only diehard but really enjoyed the sound of my system and wants to bring a similarly analogue-only friend to hear what’s possible in digital. I have a very analogue kettle.
I some ways you have entirely reinforced Mull’s point, DCS will engineer differences into the models as you go up the range. Whether they ‘need’ to charge what they do, whether they could get the same results out of one box etc is all rather moot.Thanks. Wariness is indeed a better description than cynicism! A fine exposition.
The short answer to all of the above is that digital is not entirely digital and within that digital is far more than the DAC chip. To suggest or presume, as you appear to (NB. that’s a caveat!) is like asking why all turntables which use the same cart probably sound the same: there is obviously a lot more to a turntable than the cart fitted to it and there’s a lot more to a DAC than its chip.
Even in a purely digital device like a streamer or switch, there is more happening than 1s and 0s being turned into other 1s and 0s and more components involved than the chip(s). Think power supplies and circuit layout to minimise noise, think shielding.
A DAC is obviously a digital to ANALOGUE converter, so that’s a further clue. Someone who knows far more than me will be along shortly to mention op amps and stuff. Even if two manufacturers were to use not only the same DAC chip but the same DAC circuit board, the sound each device produces could be very different due to what’s happening in the analogue domain.
I use a dCS Puccini+U-Clock. Even before dCS introduced the Apex changes to the RingDAC (first major change in decades), there was and is a ladder of models up to the 4-box Vivaldi. Every dCS owner who has heard and/or bought the higher models will attest to their sonic superiority. Obviously not blind so obviously worthless
Not sure this helps. I think your wariness is understandable but you might still enjoy involving your ears in a little exploration. If you’re anywhere near Leicestershire, PM me. A fellow audiophile popped in a couple of months ago; he is an analogue only diehard but really enjoyed the sound of my system and wants to bring a similarly analogue-only friend to hear what’s possible in digital. I have a very analogue kettle.
The TT analogy is completely bogus IMV, but I appreciate what you are trying to say.
I think I prefer digital to vinyl now, more accurate & reliable. Vinyl can sound great though.
TheFlash
Reiki Audio
And if my post can be interpreted as that then all is well.
I’m not sure what “need” to charge has to do with it and I suspect your inverted commas mean you don’t mean it literally either. I’m sure their exquisite casework doesn’t come cheap etc, but ultimately they will charge what the market deems the sound quality worth, and clearly there are enough people out there (a) with the money and (b) who appreciate the increase in sound quality as you move up the range.
I’ll stand by my TT analogy. No analogy is perfect of course, as the whole basis of an analogy is to draw comparisons between two things which are not identical.
I actually don’t think you can compare vinyl with digital in that way but I take your wider point.
I don’t have a problem with DCS, they have been at the forefront of digital for a very long time. I find it quite interesting what Linn have done whereby you can pay extra for nicer casework.
Mullardman
Moderately extreme...
Thanks. Wariness is indeed a better description than cynicism! A fine exposition.
The short answer to all of the above is that digital is not entirely digital and within that digital is far more than the DAC chip. To suggest or presume, as you appear to (NB. that’s a caveat!) is like asking why all turntables which use the same cart probably sound the same: there is obviously a lot more to a turntable than the cart fitted to it and there’s a lot more to a DAC than its chip.
Even in a purely digital device like a streamer or switch, there is more happening than 1s and 0s being turned into other 1s and 0s and more components involved than the chip(s). Think power supplies and circuit layout to minimise noise, think shielding.
A DAC is obviously a digital to ANALOGUE converter, so that’s a further clue. Someone who knows far more than me will be along shortly to mention op amps and stuff. Even if two manufacturers were to use not only the same DAC chip but the same DAC circuit board, the sound each device produces could be very different due to what’s happening in the analogue domain.
I use a dCS Puccini+U-Clock. Even before dCS introduced the Apex changes to the RingDAC (first major change in decades), there was and is a ladder of models up to the 4-box Vivaldi. Every dCS owner who has heard and/or bought the higher models will attest to their sonic superiority. Obviously not blind so obviously worthless
Not sure this helps. I think your wariness is understandable but you might still enjoy involving your ears in a little exploration. If you’re anywhere near Leicestershire, PM me. A fellow audiophile popped in a couple of months ago; he is an analogue only diehard but really enjoyed the sound of my system and wants to bring a similarly analogue-only friend to hear what’s possible in digital. I have a very analogue kettle.
None of what I have made bold and italic in your reply is news to me, not that I know much about switches. When I was selling kit for a major national chain, 20+ years ago, I was obliged to explain that stuff on a regular basis. Notable was the chap who came in with a Tandy portable CDP, looking for a replacement. He was looking at our cheapest CDP, a £100 NAD, but asked me why the NAIM CDS or somesuch was £6k. "It sounds better", I replied. "£6k better?" "Some people think so...". He quoted 0s and 1s, I quoted analogue outputs, filtering, sheilding etc., etc.
I actually demonstrated the improvement between the £100 NAD and something else. Most likely a Rotel or Denon at around £200 and he bought it. Subsequently he bought a whole new system from me, including a TT.
But none of the above is what my 'wariness' is about. I'm well capable of assessing kit for my own needs, when I can kneel enough to mess with kit. I was simply pointing out that there have been a lot of DACs thrown together in the last few years and they aren't all 'honest', or necessarily better than what's included with the kit.