TP1 Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 I love the sound of both players and in all honesty, I could sell either the Accuphase or the TDA1541 depending on the time of the day and the position of the moon and stars... ... Steve, you are being very diplomatic - I guess someone should! BUT, the Accuphase also has 24/192 DACs and can accept 96/24 input from coax connection - higher with an option board ( i think). And best of all is the SACD high bitrate playback. This is all before you consider the superb build quality. But having different CD players/DACs for different moods is fine. I still have my Shanling CDT-300 "Omega Drive" which sounds very good indeed with Redbook jazz CD's, and its the funkiest looking player as well. BTW, how did the Yamaha SACD player sound?
TP1 Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 I am not a manufacturer but i know how to put together a kdac confidential agreement is based on knowing what makes it tick.......... Will there be a 24 bit KillerDAC?
techspurt Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 Well there are some very competent people out there who have met all the challenges.. And selectively quoting a detractor of DSD does not constitute a scientific approach, nor does refusing to listen to a decent SACD player or even a DSD DAC. Based on your complete lack of experience in this area ( by your own admission) , you are therefore nowhere near a position where you can give people an opinion of the efficacy of DSD/SACD as a format. Oooh far too many non-sequitors this time to respond to. Enjoy your imagined world
Monkeyboi Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 Hi Folks, Ahh well, I might as well enter the fray as I am the 'mystery owner' of both the TDA1541 (sort-of Kdac) + the Accuphase DP-77 SACD/CD player RRP $12.8K. All of you guys are too unequivocal and set along whatever paths or technologies that you are using or take sides with and this includes the computer audio geeks. Maybe I'm getting old, but I think all of it sounds good or near enough to each other (at this level of digital replay) so as to be splitting hairs, when you talk about differences. Just to clarify, that I don't really have a significant preference over my well implemented TDA1541 S2 Double Crown dac and my Accuphase DP-77, both have their merits. The TDA1541 is tonally excellent and has a niceness about it that keeps me engaged and listening to the music, it is also very detailed at the same time. I suspect that the listenability factor has got more to do with the valve output stage rather than the dac chip itself, but of course I acknowledge that the TDA1541 is famous for its tone so adds something. The Accuphase has obvious superiority in the top end and bottom end, while the midrange is not quite as projected, the player is obviously very technically accomplished and it is difficult not to like it. It juggles the line beautifully between technical ability and musicality and I have a great respect for it. I love the sound of both players and in all honesty, I could sell either the Accuphase or the TDA1541 depending on the time of the day and the position of the moon and stars... I have had Tuyen over for a listen and he is a good guy with not too much bs about him, his comments were quite telling, and he said "...depending on the music and your mood you could prefer either kd with I2S or the Accuphase player, they are just a bit different and you could flip a coin??". I guess the star of the show might be the kd because it has the ability to keep up with a $12.8K RRP player like the Accuphase. Thomo & Tasso: when you heard the kd at my place I don't think I had the I2S implementation in place - it took the kd+transport to another level. I'll throw a cat amongst the pidgeons and say that regardless of the best of CD/SACD/CA replay that I have tried, I still have a preference for vinyl. I hear a more vivid 3D hear-through character on vinyl that I don't quite get with digital whether its cdp or ca. The Killerdac & Accuphase gets close and makes me question vinyl at times, but not always? I just took delivery of Nickel Creek original self titled vinyl from CDWow, a very transparent sounding recording. Well all I can say, WOW! The liquidity and extension in the treble is something else, spatial clues are more developed than the CD (which is a very good CD btw), and there's a very real sense of natural acoustic over the digital. Although, I would admit that my use of CA with Squeezebox is fledgling at this stage. If you can't hear the obvious difference with vinyl and use all the technical arguments in the world to convince yourself about digital, then live long and prosper. To my ears there's still a significant gap ...I realise that this is probably going to get me in trouble Regards, Steve. A pic of the system as I am listening to it right now ... Thanks Steve for posting your most interesting observations and insight. What tends to happen in threads like this is that in all the heated debate of one technology over the other IMHO simply takes us further away from what I believe we are all seeking, and that is a system which takes us closer to the music. In my system I use and support most of the audio formats. Albeit I'm very much interested in the technology behind the reproduction and recording of music I wouldn't dismiss a recording of a great performance simply because it wasn't available on one of my prefered formats. Cheers, Alan R.
Monkeyboi Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 (edited) Hello Doesn't sound right ,confidentail agreement I could understand if you were a manufacturer but someone that just diy's . yassou Hi yassou, In the past I've asked kajak12 (Mario) why he has used certain components in the various devices he's put together (and not just limited to his KillerDAC either) and was unsuccessful in opening any meaningful dialogue. From what I've been able to gather from the limited info he has revealed is that he has selected specific parts. If indeed these are HIS modifications (and they are the primary reason for determining the "sound" and unbeatable performance of his KillerDAC) one could only speculate as to the reasons as to why he is not revealing what makes his KillerDAC so special. The Colonel's eleven herbs and spices? Whatever the reason(s), we need to respect kajak12's decision and the rationale behind it as to why he won't reveal his secrets of audio and simply speculate as to what that "confidentiality" might be. After all if you have the "...best system in Australia" I guess you'd want to keep your cards close to your chest. Cheers, Alan R. Edited September 14, 2012 by Monkeyboi 2
wis97non Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 Very good response SteveM. (Pretty system too). You need to try a tubed digital tansport though. ..makes a big difference...perhaps more squared up digital signal?
Steve M Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 Cool words Alan ...you get it. Drop in for a listen if you are up Joondalup way. Steve.
Steve M Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 (edited) The thing I like about Mario is that he is passionate and has a good set of ears, his music selection aligns with mine so that is a good sign (for me). Helpful guy too ... Steve Edited September 14, 2012 by Steve M
Steve M Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 (edited) BTW, how did the Yamaha SACD player sound? The Yamaha S2000 SACD player is quite good, not in the league of the Accuphase but good sounding. That's what people don't realize, SACD does not take a big jump until you get a REALLY GOOD player like the Accuphase. Steve. Edited September 14, 2012 by Steve M
NIKO Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 has a good set of ears, Steve Hello Steve Don't we all ,or we wouldn't be in this hobby . yassou
Steve M Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 (edited) .............. Edited September 14, 2012 by Steve M
wis97non Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 The thing I like about Mario is that he is passionate and has a good set of ears, his music selection aligns with mine so that is a good sign (for me). Helpful guy too ... Steve #I love the back and forth with Kayak. I think he is a fun guy.....
NIKO Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 Sounds elitist, sorry for that. Steve. Hello Steve It sure does , but its nothing that can't be learnt . yassou
Monkeyboi Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 The thing I like about Mario is that he is passionate and has a good set of ears, his music selection aligns with mine so that is a good sign (for me). Helpful guy too ... Steve I don't think anyone here doubts Mario's passion for audio albeit he has an extraordinary liking for a specific DAC. I would suspect that anyone who contributes to this forum is generally passionate about this hobby of ours and would have had a bias towards at least one product their during journey to audio Nirvana. Cheers, Alan R.
Monkeyboi Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 Cool words Alan ...you get it. Drop in for a listen if you are up Joondalup way. Steve. Thanks Steve, Those Naka' Dragons look uber cool. Cheers, Alan R.
Jventer Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 I was privileged to listen a system two weeks ago where we used the same songs and played it through two dacs in pcm in different formats. We did dsd to pcm on the fly and then just dsd on the two dac's In both instances DSD was better. I am not going to change my system which is based on redbook cd and higbres downloads, but I wanted to say that I could hear that dsd was better on a specific system. I have a basic vinyl system and collection. I dont know what the best is. Value for money and ease of use IMO is Redbook Cd or high res downloads.
Once was an audiophile Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 Hello How I'm reading this ,is you've made a confidentail agreement with yourself , strange but each to his own . I must come clean with you ,we must have have a mutual friend Scott Thomson . I have his dac and his amps ,his amps can be difficult to match with speaker's and pre amps . Next time I see him I must ask him for the circuit diagram ,did Sott send you a copy . yassou . I made a confidential agreement with stevenvalve who worked for a few years on the scott thomson boards......... No circuit diagram received from scott thomson
NIKO Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 I made a confidential agreement with stevenvalve who worked for a few years on the scott thomson boards......... No circuit diagram received from scott thomson Hello Thank you for the reply . yassou
Once was an audiophile Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 Will there be a 24 bit KillerDAC? Not that i know off, 16bit is all some need heard a few 24bit dacs and sacd players over my house and some a very good like http://www.emmlabs.com/html/audio/xds1/xds1.html give this one a run on your system a see what a discrete stage does...... No opamps
NIKO Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 (edited) .............. Hello Steve The old he has golden ears ,I know this because I have golden ears type post don't help much or add value . All's good Those dacs are easy to mod Scott done a very good job of them to get a dac into the the market @ 1500 bucks with C ticked certified . A complete IV stage design would alos go a long way . Pitty he didn't go ahead with the new boards . yassou Edited September 14, 2012 by NIKO
firedog Posted September 15, 2012 Posted September 15, 2012 (edited) From my perspective a well mastered SACD (DSD) still sets the standard for highest quality audio. I try to get as much as I can on SACD format. The DSD files available on the internet are 100% pirated from SACD's using hacked PS3's as a source. Playing it back with software conversion (foobar) isn't exactly ideal and in my experience it can't come close to a decent SACD player. You can burn the ISO files to a DVD-R but many SACD players won't recognise them ( such as my Accuphase). In fact the only reason I have ventured into the realm of computer audio /music server is to play 24 bit files that are not available on SACD, such as Melody Gardot's - "The Absence". I also have 24 bit files of SACD's that I own. The SACD's still sound better and that includes playing both sources through the Accuphase DAC's. Pretty much totally wrong. You are behind the times and out of date. Yes, there are direct to DSD recorndings available for download today. And lots of SACDs were made with direct to DSD recordings. And yes, some of us have DACs that can play native DSD without conversion to PCM. Example: I recently bought a direct to DSD recording of Dvorak's 8th and 9th Symphonies (Channel Classics- sound is amazing). Furthermore, ripping a DSD file from an SACD is no different than ripping a wav file from a CD. You are getting the actual music file on the disc. At the recent California audio show, an audience of 300 heard a demonstration: direct to DSD recording played back as a computer file vs. the same file made into an SACD (both products of Blue Coast records, source identical in both cases);. The computer feed of the DSD file was played back over a Mytek 192 DSD DAC ($1700) vs the EMM XDS1 SACD player playback of the SACD. (around $25K I think) So actually, the much superior equipment/DAC was used for the SACD playback. Rest of the chain was the same. See http://www.stereophi...arenco-dems-dsd for one writeup; other writeups are more detailed. The skeptical audience of audiophiles and audio professionals was shocked to hear that the DSD file was noticeably superior. See also this discussion: http://www.whatsbest...-than-from-SACD Reviews of the SACD player: http://www.theabsolu...player-tas-206/ and http://www.dagogo.co...PageOfArticle=1 As far as what sounds best, it is sort of a silly argument: sometimes vinyl, sometimes CD, sometimes hi-res. I love lots of my hi-res files and think many are wonderful, and are in no way inferior to analogue. But I also have some standard CD's that sound fantastic. And I have digitized vinyl that sounds identical to the source, IMO. I also have some recordings in every format that aren't very good. So it's really the recording and mastering that make the difference. The format is much less important. Edited September 15, 2012 by firedog 1
TP1 Posted September 15, 2012 Posted September 15, 2012 (edited) Pretty much totally wrong. You are behind the times and out of date. Don't be ridiculous firedog - You are misleading everyone. Sure, I stand corrected about the availability of DSD downloads to purchase - but there are thousands of SACD titles and a very small number of DSD- Hardly enough for a music library. And where did I say a DSD stream played through a DSD DAC sounded inferior? The answer is I didn't. And if you weren't so keen to disprove a point that wasn't made you would have noticed that. I only referred to foobar because it was mentioned earlier in the thread, and the issue at debate wasn't DSD playback methods, but that 16 bit redbook was superior to DSD. (where where you then?) I have heard DSD played through a dedicated converter and it was first class to be sure, but if you want to start a debate about it, maybe you should start a new thread on the issue. Edited September 15, 2012 by Tasso 2
Recommended Posts