Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Cambridge DACMagic, anyone? (THREAD II)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Cambridge DACMagic, anyone? (THREAD II) - Page 41

post #601 of 642

I'm pretty, sure I'm going for a Dacmagic.  Now the plus looks very, interesting...........

 

http://www.cambridgeaudio.com/summary.php?PID=872&Title=Summary

post #602 of 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by lextek View Post

I'm pretty, sure I'm going for a Dacmagic.  Now the plus looks very, interesting...........

 

http://www.cambridgeaudio.com/summary.php?PID=872&Title=Summary



Ah, they've finally updated their web page and have included it... the "leaked" photos and rumblings have been out for a while.

 

Anyone know about it's availability?

 

post #603 of 642

The DacMagic Plus has a very nice feature set, but I'm disappointed that they still use a wall wart. To be honest it is really the only reason why I'm looking at switching to another brand of DAC's. But when it comes to sound and functionality I'm confident that the DacMagic Plu will deliver.


Edited by Sesam - 11/12/11 at 12:36pm
post #604 of 642
So far, the only thing that is putting me off the DacMagic Plus is the fact that it's using a wall wart. Do you guys think that this is a big issue for an amp/DAC in this price range?
post #605 of 642

It's not your run of the mill DC wallwart - this is an AC wallwart, which feeds unrectified AC to the DAC, where it passes through caps/regulators ect...

If the transformer was inside the box instead of in the plug, nobody would bat an eyelid...

post #606 of 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willakan View Post

It's not your run of the mill DC wallwart - this is an AC wallwart, which feeds unrectified AC to the DAC, where it passes through caps/regulators ect...
If the transformer was inside the box instead of in the plug, nobody would bat an eyelid...

So it's not a problem then?
post #607 of 642

Functionality and performance wise it is not a problem, it's just that it looks tacky tongue_smile.gif
 

post #608 of 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sesam View Post

Functionality and performance wise it is not a problem, it's just that it looks tacky tongue_smile.gif

 
Oh, ok, nice! Sounds good then, really looking forward to this biggrin.gif Hope that its fully discrete headphone amp can stack up to my Burson.
post #609 of 642

Haven't had a bit of problem with mine.

post #610 of 642

Just added a DACMagic.  So far very, nice addition.  Using Toslink haven't tried the USB yet.

post #611 of 642
Looks the DacMagic Plus is due to come out in early December, according to WhatHiFi!
post #612 of 642

Would i have any problems is if i use the DACmagic on Windows 7 64bit?

post #613 of 642

^ No, Windows 7 64bit has native support, you don't even need to install any drivers :)

post #614 of 642

^ Thanks for that :D

post #615 of 642

Finally tried the USB from my Macbook to the DACMaigic.  I was using Decibel.  It seemed like it sounded "better" than the optical.  Neither cable I use was anything special.  Anybody else find USB better?  I know better really doesn't describe anything.  Think of it as I would prefer to listen to USB over optical in this case.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Cambridge DACMagic, anyone? (THREAD II)