Everybody is getting new sources (new DAC)

[deepak]

Nice Nate looks great.

[Thelonious Monk]

great looking transport. clean build as always, n_maher.

[n_maher]

Thanks for all the kind compliments. It was a pretty brutal build as the instructions that came with the kit were pretty lacking. I would like to take a moment to thank Legos for teaching me to learn visually, without that ability this thing would just be a pile of parts and some pcbs. I hope to work with DIY Hifi to create a better set of instructions as right now I'd be hard pressed to recommend the kit to anyone. The technical aspect is simple as can be (well, mostly) just plug parts in where they go, but taking that stack of stuff and getting it all to fit together as intended was a doozy.

is it for redbook cds? it looks small.

She's small, but don't let it fool you, I'd be the thing weighs in the neighborhood of 20lbs. And yeah, it's redbook only as far as I know.

Wow that looks very nice, what's the kit called?

You can find more information on the kit here. The chassis alone is probably worth half the cost of the kit, the remote is milled from a solid chunk of aluminum (no joke) and all of the buttons used are turned aluminum bits.

that does look great. how big is it?

It's roughly 91/2" wide, 3-1/2" tall and 14" deep. I really like the fact that it, plus my DAC should be able to share shelf.

And Haj, given what your current source is you can hardly expect me to feel for you, right?

[hungrych]

So what DAC are you building? Is it also from that site? Looks sweet!

[n_maher]

So what DAC are you building? Is it also from that site? Looks sweet!

Nah, all their DAC's are NOS-type stuff. The DAC is code named Voldemort, the DAC that shall not be named. Seriously, when I can post details about the DAC I will.

[Dusty Chalk]

Someone who has the dosh should buy the EMM Labs single-box player and report back.

[Dusty Chalk]

That DIY jobber looks real good. Do you know what kind of jitter specs it has? Or is that variable, depending on which clock chip you select?

[Nanoha]

Whoa, nate, that looks beautiful!

According to your signature you have four sources...no need to upgrade

Heh.

[Salt Peanuts]

And Haj, given what your current source is you can hardly expect me to feel for you, right?

Good point.

[n_maher]

Do you know what kind of jitter specs it has? Or is that variable, depending on which clock chip you select?

Don't know about the jitter specs but it shouldn't matter all that much since my DAC uses an asynchronous sample rate converter that is supposed to greatly reduce (if not eliminate) jitter.

[Dusty Chalk]

Don't know about the jitter specs but it shouldn't matter all that much since my DAC uses an asynchronous sample rate converter that is supposed to greatly reduce (if not eliminate) jitter.

Yeah, but I'm not (and I don't trust claims -- I've heard at least one DAC that claimed to be impervious to jitter, and it still improved with better sources), so the question stands.

[deepak]

edit, woops wrong thread meant to post in my attenuator thread

[Thelonious Monk]

anyone have links to anything that proves jitter as diminutive as a few hundred picoseconds can really effect sound at all? i can understand nanoseconds but picoseconds are like really really small. imagine this except smaller. any ramblings are appreciated, although peer reviewed stuff is appreciated more.

edit: for any blind people, that was a single pixel.

[Dusty Chalk]

Nope, I got no proof. I just know I can hear the difference, and that's good enough for me.

[Thelonious Monk]

isn't that argument sort of pointless if you're comparing different dacs? adds in a whole lot more variables as far as sound goes.

[Dusty Chalk]

What argument? Who's arguing? I could care less what the naysayers think.

[Thelonious Monk]

arguing is presenting reasons for or against an idea. you were defending it. i was not naysaying, just asking a question; i don't disagree with the "if it sounds better i will take it, fuck numbers" philosophy but not in the context i was talking about. i was talking about a very specific specification of a complex piece of machinery, and you're referring to the overall sound. comparing different dacs and coming to the conclusion that dac a is better than dac b because it has lower jitter is somewhat illogical. if you came to your conclusion differently (creating more jitter somehow?) then nevermind.

[en480c4]

I think he was talking about the same DAC w/ different transports... transports with different jitter specs. So if the source in question is changed with the same DAC, then yes, it wouldn't be a stretch to say that the jitter would be the cause of an audible difference. If that's not what he was saying, my bad...

[Dusty Chalk]

Yeah, that's what I was saying.

i was talking about a very specific specification of a complex piece of machinery, and you're referring to the overall sound. comparing different dacs and coming to the conclusion that dac a is better than dac b because it has lower jitter is somewhat illogical. if you came to your conclusion differently (creating more jitter somehow?) then nevermind.

I'm not sure I was saying this, perhaps you were responding to someone else? DAC's don't have jitter, per se, they can be more or less sensitive to jitter in their input stream, but they don't have jitter, themselves. It's one thing to compare two DACs and their sound on a perfect digital stream, but unrealistic. All real-world streams have jitter. It's more realistic to compare DAC's with the transports that you have, but it's not unrealistic to try to improve the sound with the transport if you are otherwise happy with your DAC.

Assuming you believe in jitter. Which I do. Was I defending its existence? I guess so. But the question arose because I asked about the jitter specs of the transport. At which point, I wasn't arguing with anyone about anything, I was just asking a question.

I think. I could be confused. What were you saying again?

[Thelonious Monk]

i think we both read eachother wrong. i'll just search head-fi, i am sure the local overzealous objectivists have the links i am looking for, and not derail the topic anymore

[deepak]

Better pictures on my newer camera

[deepak]

still liking it?

Very much, it's a great DAC.

I think I'll probably be going Emm Labs if I get a speaker setup. The preamp in the DCC2 is pretty convenient.

edit: I did sell the Lavry after comparing both of them side by side. The Northstar was a good improvement.

[deepak]

(for anyone that still cares)

Unfortunately I haven't had as much time as I would have liked to listen to my system recently but I thought I would add an update as I did spend a lot of time with my setup during the summer.

The M192 continues to impress me and remains one of the best sources I've heard.

The more I listened it the more I got used to its sound and the less it started to "wow" me. Instead the opposite happened where I started recognizing subtle things in music that I haven't heard before- not necessarily details because I don't think this is the most detailed DAC out there.

Like I mentioned in the previous posts the dynamics and holographic nature of the soundstage makes complex music much more layered and real. In live jazz pieces that I've heard countless times the recordings started to make more sense and an idea of real space started to become much more focused and clear. Since creating this thread my main headphone changed from the Grado HP-2 to the Audio Technica L3000 (in my was more resolving and detailed after a month of side by side comparisons), and even with the L3000's in between Grado/Sennheiser soundstage venue size started to take a small shape of its own.

And just like my profile states, I prefer gear that has natural tone and timbre, and the M192 does nothing short of amazing me in these two areas. I believe I mentioned these two particular instruments in the past, but I'm very familiar with the violin, acoustic guitar and sitar and all sound very real on well recorded material.

The only downside to growing so attached to a piece of gear is that if I were to upgrade now I would really need a source that could act as a preamp as well for my speaker setup. So it seems my next source upgrade won't be to replace my M192, instead it will be to start a speaker setup that can be kept separate from the headphones.

[n_maher]

The only downside to growing so attached to a piece of gear is that if I were to upgrade now I would really need a source that could act as a preamp as well for my speaker setup.

I don't understand why you couldn't use the same source with both your speaker and headphone rig? Most heaphone amps can be configured to act as a preamp or get a preamp with a loop out. Where's the difficulty in that?

[deepak]

I don't understand why you couldn't use the same source with both your speaker and headphone rig? Most heaphone amps can be configured to act as a preamp or get a preamp with a loop out. Where's the difficulty in that?

The speaker rig is going to be pretty high end so I'd rather not have any preamp in the signal path. Loop out of a headphone amp is an option, but I'd prefer to have my source/preamp in 1 to go straight to the speaker amps.

just buy an Audio Aero or an Accuphase or an Opus 21, problem solved.

Prima DAC SE and DCC2 SE are high on my list of sources I'd want to hear with the speakers.