Torpedo

I use [] instead of () to avoid that.

It depends on whether you want SS or tubes and if looking for a certain sound signature or a rather neutral sound. I don't have the K1000, nor great experience with them, so any suggestion should be taken with a good handful of salt.

I've listened to an UR S2K at a friend's place. Nice sounding amp. However it had some noise -clicks and pfffzzzsss from the tubes- issues which made my friend ask for another unit, the second one had the same issues which didn't disappear after some burn-in, so he decided to return them. I've had at my place with my own speakers other UR amps, the Unico and the 845 based SET monoblocks... I didn't like them very much.

I'm not, but I could once I had the "proper" gear to do so. I'd like to be able to play in my main rig high resolution files that I download from HD Tracks, vinyl rips, etc. Having a "no problems" DAC which I could feed from a laptop wifi connected to the main computer, would be a nice first step.

Could be, but AFAIK the new Lavry DAC can do 24/192 over USB without custom drivers, just using the Windows' ones. Sorry Nate, I hadn't read your reply. If doing that requires a very expensive chip, then the description would be correct. It's a pity, it would be very handy a DAC working over USB to reproduce high resolution files. Doing high sampling rates over SPDIF requires some good sound card to output them from the computer.

I don't know either, but I think it's possible the description has mixed the inputs and what the DAC actually does is accepting any signal over USB and only 44/16 over SPDIF/Toslink. Tyll, are you there to clarify, please?

The DAC has interesting looks and features. It's a pity that it can't decode higher sampling rates and bit depths than 44/16 over USB, and leaves that only for the SPDIF inputs.

Yep, same opinion here, they're better performers than a portable use can let them show.

Maybe it's old news for many of you, but it arrived today. I've received the newsletter with the link to download legally and free a 6 tracks EP by NIN and the other two bands sharing tour with them. Check it here

Sorry Reks. Enjoy the wine, more for you

The LD III mk.. is the worst piece of audio junk I've ever listened to, despite the "great" -according to the owner- NOS tubes which supposedly were a huge improvement It was noisy, strident, bright, uninvolving... it managed to kill the music in more ways I can describe.

Great job mate, thanks for it

The Jam - All mod cons [1978]

How cool, another Bday on Friday! Have a great day Smeggy

Have a very Happy and Healthy Bday mate

Very nice mate, I hope you enjoy them a lot

Both

Dusty Springfield - A girl called Dusty [1964] When done planning to pay a listen to the last Decemberists release. Thanks Nate for the tip

I've been using one like that -not sure the very same model- for one year now. Quite happy with it, more robust than it seems. I liked better older models with shaving level adjustment and which could be used directly plugged into the AC power line, but this one feels gentler on the skin and catches better those damn hairs that grow into the skin plane. It's also easier and faster to clean.

For starters I'm posting some pics to show the size and shape differences between PS-1 and Picaudio's PS-225 (Picaudio Series) I've weighed both cans with a rudimentary kitchen scale. The PS-1 weigh 340 grs, the SR-225 380grs. I guess the PS-1's headband is heavier, so this accounts for even heavier ear-pieces, which is normal considering the difference of diameter and thickness between their cups. On my head the PS-1 feel way more comfy. Subjectively those 40grs difference seems larger, moreover the PS-1 stay in place when moving the head, while the PS-225 tend to fall out. The PS-225 are too bulky to use laying down on the coach. Regarding sound... well, I've not made an A/B comparison, but my impression is that there are more differences than just resolution. Tonally wise the PS-1 are quite right, they can render timbres with decent accuracy so voices and acoustic instruments timbres are portrayed with a natural believable tone. You need to work a bit on the position and clamping force to get there. On the other hand the SR225 are more "Grado", there's a tendency to enhance midbass and lower treble so things are a bit more etched, pure midrange is a bit less apparent so timbre suffers and is less natural. In fact I found their treble in the bright-piercing side of things, and only when matched with the B-22 I had a more relaxed experience. I'd say the PS-225 deliver more bass, which is less punchy (maybe a bit slower) and deep than PS-1's but more prominent, so if you use flats, it becomes quite unbearable to me. Overall I think the PS-225 are a very nice improvement over the stock SR-225. I haven't owned or used the SR-225 for much time, and only listened to them using bowls. My memories of them aren't fond, I recall them as bright cans, with a colored sound, not accurate rendering timbres and maybe just good for some rock. The PS-225 are more listenable, and I've been able to enjoy them with some jazz and even classical, not the best for those styles, but acceptable, which is more than I could say of the RS-1.

No Transporter here, but remote controlling the thing would be just awesome

You need a thick skin for that too. Having one is good for more things than just crawling Head-case. IME Philips razors are more gentle to the skin that the Braun type. I've been using Philips for more than 20 years.

Yep, that's the idea. If this can be done using the J4cbo controller then it'd be great. Otherwise we'd do it the old fashion system of using two separate volume pots which in balanced would control one channel each, and in SE mode (switchable) one separate amp each.

Maybe just having the option to tell the chip if you're turning the pot for amp1 or amp2? The same could be done for each channel on balanced mode. As I see it this could be just a software thing. You need to be able to tell the chip controlling things what are you using the pot for.