Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › New Audiolab DAC
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Audiolab DAC - Page 26

post #376 of 851

To gain more detail out of MDAC, you could try these settings.

 

Filter: Optimum spectrum

D3E: unmodified (some prefered full supression but on my ipad as transport, unmodified has more dynamics)

 

Those with a Ipad, just upload your song in MP3 320mbps or lostless acc with camera connection kit and usb cable, you are ready to try out the MDAC.

 

MDAC mid will be fuller than CDQ due to its cross output stage (MDAC)

 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riker View Post

I am in the same boat. I've been researching and wanting to buy a DAC for over 2 years ! Other "toys" kept getting in the way of the DAC, but now is the right time for me and I don't really want to wait until the end of the year or longer to see what the Schiit statement will be about. The Anedio D2 is very high on my list of wants, but the MDAC is cheaper and said to be quite good indeed.

 

Last Friday I went in to a local shop and listened to the Audiolab 8200CD and 8200DQ to get a feel for the sound of ESS. Both those units apparently have the same DAC chips, but the MDAC is supposed to be "tweaked" to sound better, that's what I was told anyways. I compared both units agains each other, against a new TEAC DAC and the WeissD2 unit.

 

Bottom line, the Audiolab gear sounds very nice to me and in line with what others have said ie: detailed, excellent sound stage both in width and depth, excellent bass, great dynamics etc..I did however find the vocals somewhat recessed and overall mids slightly dark, but still very enjoyable. Of note is that with different cables, they sounded different from each other, but with the same cables they sounded exactly the same.

 

The WeissD2 was remarkable in that it reached deeper and pulled up more detail, more information, it extracted every bit of sound that was there. It was a little lighter in Bass than the AL units, but I sitll preferred the overall sound of the Weiss, I just don't have the budget for it !

 

The TEAC was decent for the price, but no where near the same SQ as the AL and obviously not even close to the WeissD2. But on a thight budget, it's woth a listen with other DACs in same price point.

 

One issue I have with the MDAC is availability !.. it's currently back ordered until mid May possibly longer.. and because they sell out even before they are in stock, there is no demo on the shelf to listen to. Like he told me, they are all sold before they even reach the store..so no need to have one out on the shelf at this point.

 

P.S has anyone seen any internal pictures of the MDAC ? I can't find any.. and it would be nice to see the insides..

Cheers

 



 

post #377 of 851

I own a M-DAC myself and recently got to spend a week with a friend's W4S DAC2.

 

Both these DACs utilize a Sabre ESS 9018 chip and both has balanced outputs.

Cost price, DAC2 costs more than twice of M-DAC, but performance wise, I would say DAC2 beats M-DAC by around 40%.

 

Both sound great, but DAC2 sounds amazing. More natural sounding with better details and staging.

But I'm very happy with my M-DAC for now. It's great sounding at that price point and is rather feature packed.

post #378 of 851

Interesting but surprised by your 40 % estimate as I found differences between all the DAC I owned to be extremelly subtle at best.  Will have to give the W4S a listen. Which M-DAC settings and which amp did you use to compare them?

post #379 of 851

If there's indeed a "40%" [wth does this mean?] difference between a $900 DAC and a $2,000 DAC.  This whole industry is a crapshoot, and manufacturers, along with their fanboys, deserve ridicule and widespread questioning.

post #380 of 851

Weird. I found that  optimal transient (Any) + D3E  usually sound more detailed and dynamic (with a PC). D3E should really be left on, unless it causes problems, according to the designer as it improves the digital and analogue signal of the DAC.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavwong View Post

To gain more detail out of MDAC, you could try these settings.

 

Filter: Optimum spectrum

D3E: unmodified (some prefered full supression but on my ipad as transport, unmodified has more dynamics)

 

Those with a Ipad, just upload your song in MP3 320mbps or lostless acc with camera connection kit and usb cable, you are ready to try out the MDAC.

 

MDAC mid will be fuller than CDQ due to its cross output stage (MDAC)

 


 



 



 

post #381 of 851

D3E setting I suspect is recording dependent. Its really up to individual to experiment to find the setting you like. That's why I said 'you could try' :)

 

For filter, I always find consistence result, ie opt spectrum more dynamic and clean sounding than the rest. Again, it might by personal preference and definition. You could certainly not agree with me.

 

 

 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zenpunk View Post

Weird. I found that  optimal transient (Any) + D3E  usually sound more detailed and dynamic (with a PC). D3E should really be left on, unless it causes problems, according to the designer as it improves the digital and analogue signal of the DAC.
 



 



 

post #382 of 851

The Decorrelator isn't recording dependent at all. John Westlake made clear that to obtain maximum performance out of the M-DAC is should be left on. It is the clever bit that's make this DAC different from other offerings. It minimize negative interactions between the analog and digital circuitry on the fly by analyzing the flow of data.

Now, filter choice will depends on everyone ears and systems.

post #383 of 851
Quote:
Originally Posted by zenpunk View Post

Interesting but surprised by your 40 % estimate as I found differences between all the DAC I owned to be extremelly subtle at best.  Will have to give the W4S a listen. Which M-DAC settings and which amp did you use to compare them?



Well, everyone do hear differently. And to my ears, it was subtle, it was indeed rather substantial. But considering the 2 difeerent price points of M-DAC and W4S DAC2, I would consider the M-DAC to punch above its weight.

 

I used optimal transient XD with Burson HA-160. RCA cables used are a pair of Silver Dragon.

post #384 of 851

I am been swimming (drowning?) in the wacky world of hi-fi long enough to realise that prices rarely relates to SQ. biggrin.gif

I  also hope you properly level matched within 0.5db before making any comparison?

post #385 of 851
Quote:
Originally Posted by zenpunk View Post

I am been swimming (drowning?) in the wacky world of hi-fi long enough to realise that prices rarely relates to SQ. biggrin.gif

I  also hope you properly level matched within 0.5db before making any comparison?



Hmm.. Most of the time pricces do relate to SQ. It's just that beyond a certain price point, the law of diminishing return sets in really steeply.

 

In this case, though I did not do any calibration, the difference was still substantial. The signature is there.

post #386 of 851

For those who haven't came across it another more in depth and balanced comparison between the M-DAC and W4S DAC:

http://www.head-fi.org/t/599218/m-dac-vs-mh-25-3-vs-w4s-dac-2

 

And somebody else who couldn't hear a difference in his system (speakers) between W4S DAC and the Nuforce HDP (£300):

http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showpost.php?p=1172894&postcount=37

 

Pick your poison.biggrin.gif

 


Edited by zenpunk - 4/3/12 at 9:28am
post #387 of 851
smily_headphones1.gif there isn't 'should' in my own experience. You are certainly welcome to follow the suggested settings. As I already did rounds on trial with my speaker setup and headphone I found leave it as it should sound more dynamic in my systems. In a way, Im trying suggest pp out there who found the mdac not enough detail or too 'dxxk' (hate to use this words as many pp misunderstand it) could try the above.


Quote:
Originally Posted by zenpunk View Post

The Decorrelator isn't recording dependent at all. John Westlake made clear that to obtain maximum performance out of the M-DAC is should be left on. It is the clever bit that's make this DAC different from other offerings. It minimize negative interactions between the analog and digital circuitry on the fly by analyzing the flow of data.

Now, filter choice will depends on everyone ears and systems.

post #388 of 851

No problem wink.gif. We all have our own preferences. Many  people enjoy the sound of NOS DAC or Vinyl and others enjoy messing around with equalizers. My suggestion was for those who want to get the best performance out of the M-DAC, which is not dependent on personal taste.

Your comment about details is interesting as that 's the first thing that I noticed when compared to my other Dacs. I mean the extra amount of it. I  was at first suspicious and wondered if the DAC kind of exaggerated those in an unnatural way.

On first listen I actually thought it was over detailed. confused.gif I have since changed my mind about it though biggrin.gif


Edited by zenpunk - 4/3/12 at 8:22am
post #389 of 851
Quote:
Originally Posted by zenpunk View Post

For those who haven't came across it another more in depth and balanced comparison between the M-DAC and W4S DAC:

http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showpost.php?p=1172894&postcount=37

 

And somebody else who couldn't hear a difference in his system (speakers) between W4S DAC and the Nuforce HDP (£300):

http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showpost.php?p=1172894&postcount=37

 

Pick your poison.biggrin.gif

 


Those two links are the same.

 

post #390 of 851

Fixed. cheers wink.gif

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › New Audiolab DAC