it's pretty much just a list of your songs, i don't see how it is that ugly.

In a Winamp 2.0 sort of way maybe it isn't. It's also different using it, vs screenshots IMO.

it's pretty much just a list of your songs, i don't see how it is that ugly.

No worse than iTunes.

Asynch USB gangbang.

forget about the Ayre and Wavelength, tell us how the dCS combo sound

Like I wouldn't have mentioned it if I'd got one!

Picture is from Computer Audiophile.

Like I wouldn't have mentioned it if I'd got one!

Picture is from Computer Audiophile.

You've been looking at it and you're interested in it

Join the gang of DAC

I haven't purchased a DAC today...

Asynch USB gangbang.

Its customary to link to such pictures of hot sweaty pr0n, with a NSFW tag, rather than plop it right into the thread.

Those pr0nstars are all very attractive. I wish other audio companies cared more about looks, like these guys do.

Stereophile sez it's the best thing since sliced bread.

Not that we care about Stereophile.

Except when they say shit we own is the best thing since sliced bread.

I read that review tonight as well Stretch, looks like you've got yourself a nice piece of kit there. Well, pending jitter results anyway.

It's so microscopic they can't measure it!

OK, I just made that up.

Why am I having trouble locating that review?

Must be the current issue that just came out (I haven't been to my PO box since Thursday).

Since the asynch implementation is probably the biggest point of interest, here's John Atkinson's conclusion on that front.

'stretch, my Stereophile just came today and I just read the article. I agree it's a generally good review, especially explaining the tech stuff without getting too complicated. However, I didn't get an idea of the sound signature of the damn thing from the review, which always annoys me. Also, the reviewer basically says, oh yeah and it sounds the same as the Bel Canto. I agree with you that it's a rave, but Stereophile just makes me go . Except when I see my NAD C372 on the recommended list--just like you said.

Also, the DAC looks TEH SEXY TIME in black.

I agree with you there, Dinny. He's all, like, "hi-rez is teh awesome, OMG my eyes are opened!" but doesn't really ever get down to a review of the sound like he would with any other "conventional" component. Most egregiously, he has the top-of-the-line Ayre disc player as his reference and can't be arsed to give us the obvious assessment of how the computer-based system compares to that.

I think it comes back to the fact that most of these old-line audio guys still find this sort of stuff a bit of a mind fuck and they don't really know where to slot it into their personal frame of reference. So its OK to compare two PC playback chains but we don't want to get into whether this is a good as a real hi-fi source.

Whatever, they made it an A+ recommended component, which ought to sell a few.

Chris Connaker's review is out.

I think he cops out a bit by not really articulating the Alpha DAC/dCS comparisons, but I understand why.

The Bryston BDA-1 is a really good DAC, but I favor the Ayre QB-9's sound in my system.

you bought a bryston? or now you have to buy an Ayre?

I have the Bryston. Now I need the Ayre. But not really. I got a great deal on the Bryston.

But I need the Ayre.

No I don't.

The Ayre only makes sense if you only use a computer as a source. So don't torture yourself.

Plus, isn't it about time for you to move on up to the $3K price point?

Chris Connaker's review is out.

I think he cops out a bit by not really articulating the Alpha DAC/dCS comparisons, but I understand why.

Connaker's review is pretty good. But I agree that he should have expanded on the above, especially w/r/t the Alpha. That seems like a fair comparison. At least Connaker was able to get past the fact that this is (gasp!) a USB DAC--as one would expect given the context in which he is reviewing. Too many reviewers are reviewing it as a DAC that can't be compared to others that use more "traditional" digital inputs.