Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Beresford TC-7510 DAC MKII
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Beresford TC-7510 DAC MKII - Page 11

post #151 of 338
Courious about the op-amp of the HEADPHONE AMP part.

Anybody here know what the op-amp is ?
post #152 of 338
Thanks for conducting and posting the interview with Stanley, Herandu. I think it is now clearly established that the Phonopreamps TEC TC-7510 and the Beresford TC-7510 MkII are the same unit. And I'm still very pleased with my TEC!

And thanks to both Ed and Stanley for being forthcoming with this information.

Russell
post #153 of 338
I think it would be good to try to see things from Ed's perspective. As we have seen in the discussion on this forum, there is a widespread perception that the product he sells is inferior to the "MkII" product Beresford sells, even though the two are identical, and this perception derives from the branding strategy of Beresford. Additionally, Stanley has not exactly gone out of his way to dispel this perceptioin, even though it clearly is a consequence and arguably an intent of his branding strategy. So as a result we have Canadian members of this forum ordering Beresfords from England because they think it's superior to the Phonopreamps product, when in fact they could order the same thing for less expense and wait time from Phonopreamps. If I were Ed I think I might be a mite perturbed about this myself. Considering the circumstances I found him to be remarkably circumspect.

Russell

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herandu View Post
Before I officially start at 9.00AM and that new IT guy start logging network traffic during working hours Ijust want to slip in a few words.

Ed doesn't. I also suspect that he is back tracking after having consulted TCC and they put him straight on a couple of things. Stanley did seem very unwilling to criticize Phonopreamps in any way.
post #154 of 338
The unit arrived today, directly from the factory in Taiwan. First impressions are that the bass and treble are excellent (tighter and more bass than the RME Digi96, and the treble doesn't have any harshness), but the mids are recessed and grainy with no detail. I'll give it some time to see if this improves.

Note that I'm using the included Toslink cable, which someone said can cause a "coarse" sound. Is this true? Note that my source (RME Digi96 PST) has a much better Toslink output than coax (100ps jitter as opposed to 600+ ps for coax, according to one review). I also don't have a coax cable.

Could the recessed mids and lack of detail be caused by a too little power? I noticed the volume is quite low as well (on the analog outputs). Where would I find a better power supply? Radio Shack ("The Source" in Canada) only carries wallwarts up to 1.5A. The US version has this, but I can't find it locally. I'd like to avoid ordering online if possible, but I will if necessary.
post #155 of 338
What is said off record can sometimes be the answer others seek. Before we jump to any conclusion about whether the two units are identical, we should perhaps take note of what Stanley said about the MKIII, and its divergence from the TCC version. I personally got the feeling that Stanley appeared to be under some kind of restrictions to criticize Ed in public. He did however point out that we should remember who brought the TC-7500 to the market, and answered the request of potential buyers to have a headphone amp and more modern looks. After seeing some odds and sods that look like early prototypes of various units, and a number of TC-7510 in various stages of modifications, it is clear to me that R&D is being done in the UK. PCB etching tools etc are not the tools of a trader, but of an engineering facility.

I am waiting to see who is going to start a "Mod your TC-7510" thread. But Stanley had a wry smile when he pointed out that there are two sides to a PCB, and double sided board can have numerous layers. Not sure what he meant, but it might be a cryptic clue.
post #156 of 338
I'm confused. You quoted Stanley as saying exactly what Ed at Phonopreamps says -- that the latest updated TEC TC-7510 sold by Phonopreamps and the Beresford TC-7510 MkII are the same unit. Now you're saying that off the record Stanley said something different? This is precisely why I can understand why Ed would be upset. We have people who appear to be connected to Stanley going on line and making overt or implied claims that the Beresford unit is "better" than the one Phonopreamps sells, even though they present no evidence of such. These are in some cases the same people who have been hyping the Beresford on this and other forums. Not only does this put a crimp in Beresford's credibility, it is also quite unfair to people like me who would simply like to know whether the Phonopreamps updated TEC-7510 is the same unit as the Beresford 7510, so they can decide which to order. It is also unfair to Phonopreamps, who are possibly losing business from what is beginning to have the appearance of innuendo.

If the two units are different, let's see the evidence.

Russell

[QUOTE=Herandu;2632787]What is said off record can sometimes be the answer others seek. Before we jump to any conclusion about whether the two units are identical, we should perhaps take note of what Stanley said about the MKIII, and its divergence from the TCC version.
post #157 of 338
Well, problem solved - apparently the first RCA interconnect I selected out of my huge storage box of cables was terrible quality. I switched it to a better one and the sound is excellent! It has the great mids of the RME Digi96 PST, with better bass extension/control and no treble harshness. This is with less than 2 hours of burn-in.
post #158 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by thubble View Post
but the mids are recessed and grainy with no detail. I'll give it some time to see if this improves.
Yup - that's how it sounds before a day or 3 of run-in. A little patience is required here - you really don't want to make any judgements yet!

Quote:
Originally Posted by thubble View Post
Note that I'm using the included Toslink cable, which someone said can cause a "coarse" sound. Is this true? ....... I also don't have a coax cable.
It's certainly my experience that the co-ax connection is substantially better in terms of midrange openness and sweetness. I'd guess that even using a standard analogue interconnect as a digital connector would be an improvement - a good digital co-ax lead would be even better.
post #159 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by hortiholic View Post
These are in some cases the same people who have been hyping the Beresford on this and other forums.
Oh dear - we're not going back to this "shill" business are we? - I had hoped that was all sorted & laid to rest by now.

And the whole tenor of some recent posts has leaned toward the unpleasant and judgemental - if not downright nasty and personal.

Just cool it, huh?
post #160 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by jandl100 View Post
Yup - that's how it sounds before a day or 3 of run-in. A little patience is required here - you really don't want to make any judgements yet!



It's certainly my experience that the co-ax connection is substantially better in terms of midrange openness and sweetness. I'd guess that even using a standard analogue interconnect as a digital connector would be an improvement - a good digital co-ax lead would be even better.
Using a better RCA cable has improved the mids a LOT. There's still a bit of grain - I'll give it a few days.

I actually tried using an analogue interconnect as a digital connector, and switched back and forth between the inputs using the buttons on the front of the unit, and couldn't notice any difference at all. I'll see about getting a real digital coax cable in the next few days.
post #161 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by jandl100 View Post
Oh dear - we're not going back to this "shill" business are we? - I had hoped that was all sorted & laid to rest by now.
Just cool it, huh?
I would like to add with illustration:
Do you expect Sony to say Dell is crap?
Hint: Dell use Sony's batteries....
post #162 of 338
Oh really. The fact is that it is continuing to be suggested in this discussion that the Phonepreamps TC-7510 is "inferior" to the Beresford TC-7510. The fact is that some of these suggestions come in the wake of conversations with Stanley Beresford. The fact is that Ed and Stanley Beresford (as quoted by Herandu) both say that the two dacs named above are identical. The fact is that people who are choosing between the two deserve an answer. This is not crying "shill" -- or "judgmental". I would rather we discuss the topic at hand and not use labels.

Russell

Quote:
Originally Posted by jandl100 View Post
Oh dear - we're not going back to this "shill" business are we? - I had hoped that was all sorted & laid to rest by now.

And the whole tenor of some recent posts has leaned toward the unpleasant and judgemental - if not downright nasty and personal.

Just cool it, huh?
post #163 of 338
Gave it quite a bit of listening the past couple of days, and have started to write a review. Still not sure on some points, at times it may seem a tad too sibilant and edgy in the highs but then on the next song it's gone. Overall a good sounding thing, especially regarding price. It sounds quite a bit like my reference cd player.
post #164 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by hortiholic View Post
Oh really. The fact is that it is continuing to be suggested in this discussion that the Phonepreamps TC-7510 is "inferior" to the Beresford TC-7510. The fact is that some of these suggestions come in the wake of conversations with Stanley Beresford. The fact is that Ed and Stanley Beresford (as quoted by Herandu) both say that the two dacs named above are identical. The fact is that people who are choosing between the two deserve an answer. This is not crying "shill" -- or "judgmental". I would rather we discuss the topic at hand and not use labels.

Russell
Open up your TC-7510 and look at the location of your DAC from the same position that Gone4T has taken a picture of his TC-7510
Now compare them and see if they are the same.
Going purely by the eBay dates either of them started selling the TC-7510 it is quite clear that Stanley was well ahead of anyone else. Ed started several weeks later at a far much lower price of U$109. That price has increased since then by about 50%. What would have warranted such a massive price increase? Taking into account that Stanley is talking about a massive price increase of the MKIII in order to pay for the changes to the product ( which he jokingly called the early 2008 model), I draw my own conclusions about a possible change to a more expensive internal set of components at some stage between the early and later stock form Ed. I have no proof of course, but it kind of fits in.
Mind you, I personally think this is all irrelevant. And anyone looking for a MKII going cheap please let me know. I have two of them, but I need the space from one to put my MKIII when it does arrive. Listening to prototypes doesn't necessarily mean listening to the finished item, but I'll take my chances.
It's nearly 9.00 so I must abort before I get done by the boss for not working hard enough.
post #165 of 338
[QUOTE=Herandu;2634417]Open up your TC-7510 and look at the location of your DAC from the same position that Gone4T has taken a picture of his. Now compare them and see if they are the same. [END QUOTE]

This has been addressed in posts number 132 and 141 and elsewhere. As Gone4T clearly stated, he has an early 7510 (aka Mk1), before TEC specified and began implementing the mods that led to the updated 7510 (aka Mk2). The mods (as Ed thoroughly documented in his message to me), comprised a change in several resistors. I have photos from Ed (the ones from TEC recommending the mods) that clearly describe the changes. The reisistors in my TC-7510 from Phonopreamps have indeed been upgraded from those in Gone4T's unit (as pictured in posts 3 and 5 of this thread), precisely as specified by TEC in the photos sent by Ed.

The photo of Gone4T's unit to which you refer is a later photo than the ones in posts 3 and 5 and includes Gone4T's own mods, so of course it is not the same as either my unit or the Beresford unit.

As for the lower price on Phonopreamps' initial E-Bay listing, the first units sold by Phonopreamps were (according to Ed) sold BEFORE TEC recommended the upgrades to the TC-7510 (which according to Ed was in November 2006). The ones sold at the higher price include the upgrades, which Phonopreamps makes themselves, following and in fact apparently exceeding the specifications and recommendations from TEC.

Stanley apparently sold the pre-update model as the Mk1, and the post-update as the MkII. Quotes from Stanley ("So the later TCC and MKII are indeed the same" -- post 149) and the email from Ed to me both state that the MkII is the post-upgrade TEC TC-7510. That is, it is identical to the TC-7510 unit sold by Phonopreamps.com. Neither Stanley nor Ed say that any other upgrades from the pre-upgrade, "MK1" model are contained in their units.

[QUOTE=Herandu;2634417] Mind you, I personally think this is all irrelevant. [END QUOTE]

You and others on this forum have repeatedly suggested that the "MkII" and the TEC-7510 sold by phonopreamps ARE different (posts Nos. 125, 127, 128, 129, 131, 136, etc.). Many of these posts cite Stanley as the source of this claim.

This couldn't be more relevant to someone trying to choose between these units. Are they or are they not the same? If I'm in the U.S. do I buy the Phonopreamps unit or do I fork over the extra money and wait the extra few weeks for the Beresford unit?

At this point, unless someone comes up with some actual evidence to the contrary, I'm going with the evidence from the photos I've seen and from the quotes from Stanley (direct and attributed) and the email from Ed -- that the two are the same.

Russell
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Beresford TC-7510 DAC MKII