Quote:

audioexcels said:

Maybe it's just me, but I found the Young driver to be just about an opposite of the stock driver in the sense that it is shouting out the treble/midrange, and loses the bass response vs. the stock Hiface that sounds WAY more mellow likely due to much more bass filled in.  But the most problematic thing I have with the Young driver is the soundstage seems to shift to the left too much.  That center of focus for the music information like vocals that should be dead center are now off a bit. The sound is also a bit computerized or that someone is trying to alter the sound of the natural flow of the original and forcing it to sound different and unlike the original.
 
I would say the dvd is more natural, but the Hiface with that hot signal is able to get the detail hotter to the ears, so it's really a give/take type of a situation where musical pacing with both is quite even, though I think I could really choose either...soundstage again, very even.  Detail just a bit more on the Hiface due to more signal (i.e. I turn my preamp up more since it was late last night and I didn't have a chance to get the music louder), and I can match that level the Hiface is putting out so the dvd player sounds identically detailed/clear in that treble/mid region.
 
All in all, I have to say the external dac has the majority of what we hear and the transport is only there to relay the feed...any differences we hear are just differences rather than one transport being better than another, etc.  But on the dac side of things, if that is not working correctly, I'm certain one could hear differences in transports VERY EASILY.  

This all said, both Drez and Shahrose heard a more mellow sound with the Young driver vs. me hearing a far more in your face with treble/midrange and weaker/lesser bass sound with the stock driver.  

Click to expand...

How do you account for such radical differences?
 

Finally got around to trying the young driver. The preliminary is I like it a lot.
 
To me it is more fluid, less digital sounding. Complements my sometimes overly eager sabre sound nicely.
 
...Of course give it a couple of days and I'll probably hate it, but the honeymoon gets the thumbs up.

Quote:

upstateguy said:

How do you account for such radical differences?
 

Click to expand...

Maybe having a high end two channel system vs. headphones?...having a completely different sound vs. what they have out of their speakers/system components?  I have no idea.  I can try the driver again and see what I am hearing, but it's definitely more detailed (sounds more pronounced), but the imaging is shifted to the left.  If the imaging was better, I would consider it.  I'll install it once again and see if I come up with the same results...but I know for certain the details like treble is far more intensified over the standard hi-face driver, the bass very nice, but thinner, and midrange sounds come through quite a lot.  I'm certain one could simply apply some software (equalization) to the standard driver to make it sound identical to the Young one and vice versa.

Quote:

audioexcels said:

Maybe having a high end two channel system vs. headphones?...having a completely different sound vs. what they have out of their speakers/system components?  I have no idea.  I can try the driver again and see what I am hearing, but it's definitely more detailed (sounds more pronounced), but the imaging is shifted to the left.  If the imaging was better, I would consider it.  I'll install it once again and see if I come up with the same results...but I know for certain the details like treble is far more intensified over the standard hi-face driver, the bass very nice, but thinner, and midrange sounds come through quite a lot.  I'm certain one could simply apply some software (equalization) to the standard driver to make it sound identical to the Young one and vice versa.

Click to expand...

I feel there may actually be something wrong here. For one, there shouldn't be any channel imbalances no matter which driver you're using.
 
About your last line...I wonder...the differences I heard were beyond the capacity of an EQ to fix, since it wasn't just tone that changed.

Quote:

shahrose said:

I feel there may actually be something wrong here. For one, there shouldn't be any channel imbalances no matter which driver you're using.
 
About your last line...I wonder...the differences I heard were beyond the capacity of an EQ to fix, since it wasn't just tone that changed.

Click to expand...

You are right, but the imaging shifting has nothing to do with channel imbalance.  Have you ever heard an extremely revealing home audio rig and you put in a cd source that isn't so good and the imaging literally shifts all over the place?  I have heard so called "hi-end" stuff literally sound like garbage, from amps-preamps-you  name it.  Hard to believe some of this stuff can sell upwards of 100K!  At any rate, I will definitely get the driver back into the system and listen to it first, then I will listen to a transport I have on hand that will allow me a quicker transition in order to hear what exactly I am hearing differently since the other transport I have is more similar to the Hiface stock driver.

Still have not gone back and tried the drivers just yet, but has anyone owned the Audiophilleo 2 and the MKIII and can make "better" assessments than the below?))  
 
I have to love reviewers that seem so hogwashed to state well, totally different.  Not only did Drako edit out important info about the MKIII, but you can "obviously" tell in the more recent review of the DAC*iT just what he edited out of his review on the Audiophilleo.  Does this guy get paid tor free toys o do reviews?...hmmm...
 
Drako's review on the Audiophilleo:
 
"Over a number of weeks, the Audiophilleo was compared to John Kenny battery-fuelled Hiface, now in Mark 3 iteration and henceforth known as the JK MK3. Readers hoping for advice on which way to swing will be disappointed. There isn't much to split them. The Audiophilleo possibly pulls ahead with more transparent acoustic bass texture, but only with some material. The bass that anchors Elvis Costello's Cohen-esque "After The Fall" is one example where the lower frequency definition of the Audiophilleo2 is more obvious. With the electronic kick drums of Extrawelt remixes the differences don't manifest themselves so obviously. The JK MK3 might just have the better way with smoothness, the Audiophilleo cleaner and more lively. These differences are anything but cut and dried."
 
Anddddd....
 
In the more recent review of the DAC*iT:
 
"With this in mind, DAC*iT/Audiophilleo pairing was pitted against the 9022-ing JKDAC.  The latter might be USB-only but it is LifePO4 battery powered with an M2Tech Hiface baked right into the DIY design.  The DAC*iT/Audiophilleo concedes some musical insight to the single box rival - the JKDAC digs much deeper for details - but the DAC*iT/Audiophilleo reveals an instrumental body with a greater meat-to-bone ratio.  Here, the DAC*iT is pudgier, the JKDAC a bone-lean athlete. The JKDAC's soundstage is a shade wider and deeper; those musical layers working in an illusory three dimensional space that's more easily 'seen'.  The Audiophilleo was then substituted out for the JKMK3 USB-S/PDIF converter.  Also from the John Kenny's stable, it's a battery-powered Hiface flying solo (without the digital-analogue conversion).  The results were both surprising and unexpected:  here was a sound with all the detail of the JK DAC running free BUT with greater warmth and liquidity.  Vocals also take half a step further forward enhancing the illusion of front to back movement.  This certainly mirrors my results of Audiophilleo vs JK MK3 pushing the ones and zeroes into a Metrum Octave.  I prefer the JKMK3 with the Octave because of a palpable tenderness.
 
 
It's obvious that Drako does not pay attention to his reviews because things are NOT "anything but cut and dried".  The MKIII doing what it did for this DAC*iT (that the Audiophilleo did not do) says enough about what is really going on between the two, even inside John's own DAC's.  
 

By the time you spec all the options off ramp 4 gets pretty expensive, plus off-ramp 5 is just around the corner.  Not sure how a stock off-ramp compares.
 
I highly recommend trying JPlay which comes discounted with the JK mk3 though - it is amazing how much the front end can hold things back.

Quote:

drez said:

By the time you spec all the options off ramp 4 gets pretty expensive, plus off-ramp 5 is just around the corner.  Not sure how a stock off-ramp compares.
 
I highly recommend trying JPlay which comes discounted with the JK mk3 though - it is amazing how much the front end can hold things back.

Click to expand...

The OR5 is $1099. For what it's worth, Steve believes it outperforms anything else on the market. At the very least for those with a $1K budget, I don't think it makes sense to spend that on the AP1 or the WaveLink when you have the superior OR5 for similar money, and of course you can always further improve the OR5 with the available upgrades from Empirical, or just by adding something like a Hynes linear power supply in place of the wall wart. At the $500 level, the JKMK3 is probably the one to beat.
 

Quote:

davebsc said:

The OR5 is $1099. For what it's worth, Steve believes it outperforms anything else on the market. At the very least for those with a $1K budget, I don't think it makes sense to spend that on the AP1 or the WaveLink when you have the superior OR5 for similar money, and of course you can always further improve the OR5 with the available upgrades from Empirical, or just by adding something like a Hynes linear power supply in place of the wall wart. At the $500 level, the JKMK3 is probably the one to beat.
 

Click to expand...

What precisely will the OR5 offer that will be superior to the OR4 and "standard version" vs. the MKIII, which do you feel will be "noticeably" superior?  I don't think $1.1K, let alone $800 (for the OR4) is much of a difference vs. the cost of the MKIII, especially if there is that great a difference to be had.  There's no way I would put money into the mega buck upgrades if I bought the off ramp though (1K clocks+$300 PS).

Quote:

audioexcels said:

What precisely will the OR5 offer that will be superior to the OR4 and "standard version" vs. the MKIII, which do you feel will be "noticeably" superior?  I don't think $1.1K, let alone $800 (for the OR4) is much of a difference vs. the cost of the MKIII, especially if there is that great a difference to be had.  There's no way I would put money into the mega buck upgrades if I bought the off ramp though (1K clocks+$300 PS).

Click to expand...

The standard $1099 OR5 gets the $300 Hynes USB regulator option from the OR4 as standard equipment (hence the $300 price increase). There's also some additional internal improvements IIRC. Steve said that this cuts output jitter in half, and he felt that it was such an upgrade that it should become standard equipment. He said that in this config, he believes it outperforms everything else on the market. To what degree, I don't know. You can further take the OR5 up with the $700 dual turbo clock, and an additional Hynes regulator on either the PS Audio type I2S output, or the S/Pdif output. Fully maxxed out I think it's around $2100, and then you could spend a few hundred more on your choice of linear or battery supply in place of the wall-wart AC adapter.
 
$2500 for an S/Pdif converter is getting kind of silly though, I would only recommend that to people with megabuck flagship DACs that don't otherwise have USB, like a Theta Gen VIII S2 or MBL 1511. If you don't have that level of DAC, you might as well just buy the Overdrive and skip the converter altogether.

Quote:

davebsc said:

The standard $1099 OR5 gets the $300 Hynes USB regulator option from the OR4 as standard equipment (hence the $300 price increase). There's also some additional internal improvements IIRC. Steve said that this cuts output jitter in half, and he felt that it was such an upgrade that it should become standard equipment. He said that in this config, he believes it outperforms everything else on the market. To what degree, I don't know. You can further take the OR5 up with the $700 dual turbo clock, and an additional Hynes regulator on either the PS Audio type I2S output, or the S/Pdif output. Fully maxxed out I think it's around $2100, and then you could spend a few hundred more on your choice of linear or battery supply in place of the wall-wart AC adapter.
 
$2500 for an S/Pdif converter is getting kind of silly though, I would only recommend that to people with megabuck flagship DACs that don't otherwise have USB, like a Theta Gen VIII S2 or MBL 1511. If you don't have that level of DAC, you might as well just buy the Overdrive and skip the converter altogether.

Click to expand...

I have pm'd Steve on Audiocircle so hopefully I'll hear from him soon enough.  I have a pretty reference level pre-dac in one unit.  DAC is not exactly top notch, but everything surrounding/driving it definitely is.  I know it recently beat out a $5K French device so it's up there in terms of sound quality is concerned.  I'm just still on the fence about how to transport my music, either with a standalone device like the Shigaclone, a cheaper device like the MKIII, or go for Steve's latest OR5, or even the standard OR4 for the matter.  Then again, Steve may offer a standard version that excluded the $300 Hynes USB regulator, but includes the rest of the nice implementation and stuff put into his OR5 device.  It sounds like it is awefully tough to beat the off-ramp regardless of price, though I'd really like to know just how much I am gaining with "any" computer based product vs. a solid standalone transport/cd platter.  Convenience is one thing sure, but final sound is worth my getting off the couch and walking for 10 seconds to put in another cd
 

Quote:

audioexcels said:

It sounds like it is awefully tough to beat the off-ramp regardless of price, though I'd really like to know just how much I am gaining with "any" computer based product vs. a solid standalone transport/cd platter.  Convenience is one thing sure, but final sound is worth my getting off the couch and walking for 10 seconds to put in another cd
 

Click to expand...

I think the CD transport has gone pretty much as far as its going to go, while computer audio has improved by huge leaps over what was available even last year. The list of asynchronous, 24/192 capable DACs is starting to get pretty extensive. This list covers nearly all: http://www.audiostream.com/content/24192-usb-dacs-list
 
There's now several companies offering fanless, custom dedicated computers designed for audiophile playback which makes it easy for most people to start experimenting with computer audio. The Sonore server for example is $2K. The version with the SoTM USB card feeding an OR5 I think should easily take down CD transports costing at least $5K. I don't think computer audio is quite at the stage to take on something like a Boulder 1021 yet, but at the current rate of improvement, give it a few more years and it will get there at 1/10 the cost.
 

Quote:

davebsc said:

I think the CD transport has gone pretty much as far as its going to go, while computer audio has improved by huge leaps over what was available even last year. The list of asynchronous, 24/192 capable DACs is starting to get pretty extensive. This list covers nearly all: http://www.audiostream.com/content/24192-usb-dacs-list
 
There's now several companies offering fanless, custom dedicated computers designed for audiophile playback which makes it easy for most people to start experimenting with computer audio. The Sonore server for example is $2K. The version with the SoTM USB card feeding an OR5 I think should easily take down CD transports costing at least $5K. I don't think computer audio is quite at the stage to take on something like a Boulder 1021 yet, but at the current rate of improvement, give it a few more years and it will get there at 1/10 the cost.
 

Click to expand...

Very true, but CD's are 16/44 unless they are re-mastered or SACD, etc.  No point with high rez unless the companies start rolling out a LOT of very rare and random stuff I love that I highly doubt they would even know exists.  Not to start a debate, but I've heard higher rez material and it does not sound as good as the direct cd on the platter.  However, rips sound just as good=computer can take all of my cds and make them sound just the same as the cd AND for any of that SACD or higher rez recordings that may come out that would be something I'd like to have, I can then play them as well.
 
But yes, it's really like digital vs. film cameras...Vinyl will remain, just as large sheet film will remain, but one day...film will eventually be replaced, just as cd is being replaced by the computer.
 

Quote:

audioexcels said:

Very true, but CD's are 16/44 unless they are re-mastered or SACD, etc.  No point with high rez unless the companies start rolling out a LOT of very rare and random stuff I love that I highly doubt they would even know exists.  Not to start a debate, but I've heard higher rez material and it does not sound as good as the direct cd on the platter.  However, rips sound just as good=computer can take all of my cds and make them sound just the same as the cd AND for any of that SACD or higher rez recordings that may come out that would be something I'd like to have, I can then play them as well.
 
But yes, it's really like digital vs. film cameras...Vinyl will remain, just as large sheet film will remain, but one day...film will eventually be replaced, just as cd is being replaced by the computer.
 

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, Audioexcels, if this has been mentioned before, but it would be helpful if we knew exactly what your components are and the headphones you are using. 
 
It might be useful to post them in your Sig or in your profile.
 
Thanks
 
USG
 
 
Edit: apologies for not keeping up with the thread.

I feel rather stupid not knowing how to post what I have:
 
Speakers: Nomad Audio Ronin RMD w/custom rear firing pure ribbon tweeter along with the Plate Amp option.
Amplifiers: For Midbass/Tweeter only=Dynaco MKIII w/Oritek's modification.
Pre-Dac: Oritek OMZ Pre/Dac.
Cables: Oritek X-2 for analog, X-1 for digital.
Wiring is all Furetech (sp).  
Transport has varied from Squeezebox's-Hiface-PC cards, a few CD/DVD players, etc.  Have not established what transport I will use on a consistent basis.
 
Used to have a very very nice TT setup.
 
I only have multiple pairs of Koss KSC-75 headphones driven right off my laptop and used with Sansa/Cellphone/etc. portable devices.  Have owned the best Ety's, Shures, and Senns in past.  Have heard tons of others including Stax and other various stat and dynamic driver cans.  I would never put money into a headphone setup unless I lived in a situation that permitted me from listening to my two channel system, by which I never have either by virtue of the girlfriends or now wife, neighbors, or children.  I'm blessed NOT to have to have to listen to headphones unless it's very late and the KSC's will do plenty fine in spite others are obviously better.