aardvark baguette Posted December 2, 2008 Report Share Posted December 2, 2008 This is the update to the Dac3 that allows for high rez playback. Its a lot steeper than I thought it would be. Still, I'm tempted. I think someone on the Computer Audiophile forums was going on about how it uses a better USB chip too. (as opposed to what the Dac3 uses) I'd have to get an explanation as to what it does better than the M Audio transit via toslink before buying. Someone talk me out of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hopstretch Posted December 2, 2008 Report Share Posted December 2, 2008 Someone talk me out of it. Dew note dew eet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBLoudG20 Posted December 2, 2008 Report Share Posted December 2, 2008 Hammond 1455 epic fail on a $500 unit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pars Posted December 2, 2008 Report Share Posted December 2, 2008 Hammond 1455 epic fail on a $500 unit. Yes, but hopefully they put the money inside? Better than some vendors with a $300 case on a $500 $25 unit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n_maher Posted December 2, 2008 Report Share Posted December 2, 2008 Hammond 1455 epic fail on a $500 unit. Pretty much what I was thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBLoudG20 Posted December 2, 2008 Report Share Posted December 2, 2008 Yes, but hopefully they put the money inside? Better than some vendors with a $300 case on a $500 $25 unit. Not a bad way to look at it, but I still want more out of commercial offerings. The Bel Canto doesn't even have the metal endcaps! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aardvark baguette Posted December 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 2, 2008 I'm trying to figure out why I would take this over the M Audio transit. Is there any reason to assume it would transfer digital better over the BNC cable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrice Posted December 2, 2008 Report Share Posted December 2, 2008 Not a bad way to look at it, but I still want more out of commercial offerings. The Bel Canto doesn't even have the metal endcaps! Yeah, seems unlike them.... they have a certain aesthetic to their cases and this seems to go against that. I can understand saving money, but this seems uncharacteristic... perhaps it's a photo of a demo/prototype unit? I don't see anything official on their site yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBLoudG20 Posted December 2, 2008 Report Share Posted December 2, 2008 Or maybe that is the metal endpanel. Kinda looks blackish, but then again, maybe silverish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aardvark baguette Posted December 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 2, 2008 Computer Audiophile said this was a prototype. http://www.computeraudiophile.com/files/11152008/belcantousblink/full2.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knuckledragger Posted December 2, 2008 Report Share Posted December 2, 2008 I'm trying to figure out why I would take this over the M Audio transit. Is there any reason to assume it would transfer digital better over the BNC cable? BNC offers true 75-ohm termination, while RCA can at best approximate that. BNC is also easier to attach and remove, and stays secured better. It's a pro standard and a much nicer to work with. I cannot argue that any of this will have an effect on sound quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justin Posted December 4, 2008 Report Share Posted December 4, 2008 i'm working on one of these except it uses asynchronous USB (I'm assuming this one is adaptive mode since they don't specify) and will have RCA + optical output Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
postjack Posted December 5, 2008 Report Share Posted December 5, 2008 i'm working on one of these except it uses asynchronous USB (I'm assuming this one is adaptive mode since they don't specify) and will have RCA + optical output neat! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voltron Posted December 5, 2008 Report Share Posted December 5, 2008 Funny that a noob posted this yesterday by linky only and got shat upon. Rightly so, but still funny. Justin's sounds cool. There are also some similar products to these from Steve Nugent at Empirical Audio, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBLoudG20 Posted December 5, 2008 Report Share Posted December 5, 2008 Funny that a noob posted this yesterday by linky only and got shat upon. Rightly so, but still funny. Justin's sounds cool. There are also some similar products to these from Steve Nugent at Empirical Audio, right? This thread was here before the noob's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voltron Posted December 5, 2008 Report Share Posted December 5, 2008 K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cclragnarok Posted December 5, 2008 Report Share Posted December 5, 2008 i'm working on one of these except it uses asynchronous USB (I'm assuming this one is adaptive mode since they don't specify) and will have RCA + optical output Does yours do 24-bit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knuckledragger Posted December 5, 2008 Report Share Posted December 5, 2008 How well does USB2.0 handle 24bit/192KHz stereo audio? I wish more high end DACs/converted used FireWire. How much is a FW400 port going to add to the cost a $2500 DAC? Yes, I know, spoken like a true Mac twit. A Macbook-Jan2008-equipped twit, at that. Doesn't change the fact that FW is a more robust spec, with better sustained throughput. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deepak Posted December 5, 2008 Report Share Posted December 5, 2008 (edited) How well does USB2.0 handle 24bit/192KHz stereo audio? I wish more high end DACs/converted used FireWire. How much is a FW400 port going to add to the cost a $2500 DAC? Yes, I know, spoken like a true Mac twit. A Macbook-Jan2008-equipped twit, at that. Doesn't change the fact that FW is a more robust spec, with better sustained throughput. USB 2.0 can do 24/96 without a problem. The FW port might be pretty cheap, but the circuitry to convert FW to digital in the DAC might not be... And Apple is changing their FW spec so frequently, I'd rather do USB. I'd like to see a USB to AES/EBU converter. But that's only because all the DACs I've owned had that connection Edited December 5, 2008 by deepak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilikebananafudge Posted December 5, 2008 Report Share Posted December 5, 2008 I'm trying to figure out why I would take this over the M Audio transit. So am I. Anyone know? Just in terms of sound quality, besides what Knuckledragger said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted December 5, 2008 Report Share Posted December 5, 2008 How well does USB2.0 handle 24bit/192KHz stereo audio? Yeah, it shouldn't be a problem theoretically -- you only need USB1.0 for 24/96. I have had other problems though (not with USB, the bottleneck was the bus). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZephyrSapphire Posted December 6, 2008 Report Share Posted December 6, 2008 Funny that a noob posted this yesterday by linky only and got shat upon. Rightly so, but still funny. Justin's sounds cool. There are also some similar products to these from Steve Nugent at Empirical Audio, right? I should check this section more often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poo Posted December 13, 2008 Report Share Posted December 13, 2008 ^ Fuck em Zeph - I'd rather hear about something like this regardless, so thanks. Now if Justin could just get one or two ready to sell... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knuckledragger Posted December 14, 2008 Report Share Posted December 14, 2008 Slightly cheaper option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justin Posted December 14, 2008 Report Share Posted December 14, 2008 pcm2902 is from the plug-and-play (both for designer and user) family of USB audio chips. it wont support anything over 16/48 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.