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 7

post #91 of 642
Thanks for the info. I would only need to do one analog out and one digital out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by endless402 View Post
^ yes. you can do rca out, xlr out, and 1 of the coaxial or optical digital out all simultaneously

though on mine, wheni use both the rca and xlr out, theres a bit of buzzing on the rca's
post #92 of 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceClass View Post
I'm using both sets of outputs from my DacMagic.
Single ended goes to my nearfield speaker rig preamp while the balanced output is connected to my SP PPX3 via XLR to RCA cables.

Works well so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by endless402 View Post
^ yes. you can do rca out, xlr out, and 1 of the coaxial or optical digital out all simultaneously

though on mine, wheni use both the rca and xlr out, theres a bit of buzzing on the rca's
IceClass and endless402, what XLR to RCA cables are you all using?

Would these suffice?

Hosa XRF-305 | Sweetwater.com

or

For only $5.49 each when QTY 50+ purchased - Premier Series XLR Female to RCA Male 16AWG Cable - Gold Plated - 3ft | XLR Female to RCA Male

Thanks
post #93 of 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeatFan12 View Post
dude, when are you going to do those comparisons on the DacMagic vs. V-Dac?

btw, Odom to the Heat? I'm not sure if that's the answer to the Heat's whoas.
post #94 of 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by roker View Post
dude, when are you going to do those comparisons on the DacMagic vs. V-Dac?

btw, Odom to the Heat? I'm not sure if that's the answer to the Heat's whoas.

Hey roker

I have been doing some comparisons and some notes but have not had the time to put them head to head in depth. I'll see if I can spend a good amount of time this weekend and wrap it up.

I think Lamar would make a good fit. Michael B. needs to step up, Jermaine and D. Wade stay healthy, D. Cook more minutes.....We might just give the Cavs, Magic and Celtics a run....
post #95 of 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by phototristan View Post
I want to send the audio out to my powered speakers (via the RCAs) as well as to another device (via the optical out). Can this be done? I don't care if the optical out is just a passthrough.
From my DACmagic booklet:

If it is desired to loop out the currently selected digital audio for recording on a suitable device (MD, CD-R, etc.), you can connect either an S/P DIF co-axial or TOSLINK optical cable to the digital outputs, each type being of equal quality. Both output types are active concurrently and both can
be used simultaneously to run equipment.

Note: There is no upsampling performed on the digital output pass-through.

Output is pass through only
post #96 of 642
I got my dacmagic today and I've been listening to it for a couple hours and so far the difference is not that obvious to me...
post #97 of 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by advan031 View Post
I got my dacmagic today and I've been listening to it for a couple hours and so far the difference is not that obvious to me...
I had the same experience. It took a couple of hours or more listening to hear what it was actually capable of, and the difference came through in the well-recorded stuff.

This is my first decent DAC, so depending on what you've come from the improvments I've experienced may be less noticeable. Plus, from your sig, if you're only listening via speakers, any improvements will be a lot harder to discern.

The quality of the instrument seperation and the clarity of both the overall sound, and audibility of all the music, where I could hear everything, regardless of volume level of the different instruments, was very apparent. And really enjoyable.

Then I was able to hear what it was doing to all the music, but clarity and seperation improvements were variable across differnt genres and recording quality; this would be true of any DAC.

Also bear in mind, this is not fear of buyers remorse that led to my late attuning to its capability, as I had one lent to me beforehand. So for 3 weeks I was able to give it a really good audition, and decide whether I felt it was worth it.

Your ears get pampered very quickly though, and after a while I again thought it wasn't that great. Then I checked back with my Corda 3move, and well, the difference is very noticeable.
post #98 of 642
Does the Mac Pro (tower Mac) have better line out quality than the Macbook Pro? I wonder if I will notice much improvement with a DacMagic over just using the built-in line out on my Mac Pro? I also will be using AudioEngine speakers.



Quote:
Originally Posted by advan031 View Post
I got my dacmagic today and I've been listening to it for a couple hours and so far the difference is not that obvious to me...
post #99 of 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by phototristan View Post
Does the Mac Pro (tower Mac) have better line out quality than the Macbook Pro? I wonder if I will notice much improvement with a DacMagic over just using the built-in line out on my Mac Pro? I also will be using AudioEngine speakers.
I think it's arguable whether any of the audio related components in Macs are that much different in quality, regardless of the differences between Macs themselves.

I'm running my DACmagic out of a iMac, and found the onboard to be very average.
post #100 of 642
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by advan031 View Post
I got my dacmagic today and I've been listening to it for a couple hours and so far the difference is not that obvious to me...
The DacMagic sound changes considerably during burn-in.
Initially it sounded flat and uninvolving and I really couldn't see what
the buzz wall about.

Let it burn in as much as you can (with breaks) and you'll soon start
noticing positive changes.

I'd say 200+ hours for burn-in on this DAC but you will hear the sound
changing for the better much before that.
post #101 of 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by thathertz View Post
The DacMagic sound changes considerably during burn-in.
Initially it sounded flat and uninvolving and I really couldn't see what
the buzz wall about.

Let it burn in as much as you can (with breaks) and you'll soon start
noticing positive changes.

I'd say 200+ hours for burn-in on this DAC but you will hear the sound
changing for the better much before that.
200 hrs?

I got a 6 month old one to audition for 3 weeks, and then when I bought a new one it sounded just the same.

Given I'm a burn in heretic on headphones, never mind gear with no moving parts, around 2 hours is what it takes to adjust, and a good range of music, to hear what the DAc is capable of.

It can do more with well recorded music than poorer quality, and I'm not talking bit rate.
post #102 of 642
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drubbing View Post
200 hrs?

I got a 6 month old one to audition for 3 weeks, and then when I bought a new one it sounded just the same.

Given I'm a burn in heretic on headphones, never mind gear with no moving parts, around 2 hours is what it takes to adjust, and a good range of music, to hear what the DAc is capable of.

It can do more with well recorded music than poorer quality, and I'm not talking bit rate.
I'm not discounting what you're saying. That was my experience with the
DacMagic. I've read accounts from many other people with similar stories
regarding burn-in for this DAC.
post #103 of 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by thathertz View Post
I'm not discounting what you're saying. That was my experience with the DacMagic. I've read accounts from many other people with similar stories regarding burn-in for this DAC.
If your experience was the same as mine, trust your own ears, and not the experience of others.

I've no wish to bring up the burn in issue again, as it just spirals down very quickly - people can believe whatever they wish. I've pegged out my tent as a burn in heretic and leave it at that.

The problem I have is the people who present it as everyone else's reality as well, as if burn in hours are carved in stone.

THe fact is, I came from a portable amp/dac to the DACmagic, so it didn't take long to hear it do its thing. Those who may have had a better source than mine, or side-graded from something comparable to the magic, may well take longer to tease out the sound, and its differences.
post #104 of 642
Really? I thought the MacPros used better built-in audio or something. I could be mistaken.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drubbing View Post
I think it's arguable whether any of the audio related components in Macs are that much different in quality, regardless of the differences between Macs themselves.

I'm running my DACmagic out of a iMac, and found the onboard to be very average.
post #105 of 642
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drubbing View Post
If your experience was the same as mine, trust your own ears, and not the experience of others.

I've no wish to bring up the burn in issue again, as it just spirals down very quickly - people can believe whatever they wish. I've pegged out my tent as a burn in heretic and leave it at that.

The problem I have is the people who present it as everyone else's reality as well, as if burn in hours are carved in stone.

THe fact is, I came from a portable amp/dac to the DACmagic, so it didn't take long to hear it do its thing. Those who may have had a better source than mine, or side-graded from something comparable to the magic, may well take longer to tease out the sound, and its differences.
I'm not here to argue but you are totally wrong.

Just joking

I had my first DacMagic for a few weeks before I swapped it for a new
unit due to a fault. The new unit sounded flat again for a good while
until it reached the point at which I was happy with the sound.

I'm not discounting what you are hearing, I'm just saying that perhaps
people shouldn't discount the DacMagic if they don't immediately like
the sound out of the box.
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)