Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Audio-Gd Master 7 - Discrete Fully Balanced DAC (PCM1704)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audio-Gd Master 7 - Discrete Fully Balanced DAC (PCM1704) - Page 4

post #46 of 2115

That initial sterile sound does go away after some extensive burn in.  I've had mine for 5 days now.  To me, its definately an improvement over the Ref7.1 but is heaps more 'cleaner' and transparent sounding than the Ref7 and a bit more than the Ref7.1  Improvements was very noticable around bass and highs over its predicessors.

 

It may or may not be to your liking, if you prefer the more 'rounded' sound of the Ref7, then this may not be the dac for you.  Personally, i think this is the most neutral sounding dac that Kingwa has built to date.  The USB-32 chip worked very well for me.  The ViA drivers installed without issues for me on Win8 Pre-release.  Also installed it on my Win7 64 laptop and it did it without issues.  As Kingwa said, best to configure it to run in 32bit mode and also set your choice of player (Jplay/Foobar/Jriver) to output at 32bit. 

 

The 300hour burn in doesnt do it justice.  It does need quite a bit of warm up to sound good as with all other A-GD dacs and equipment.  For those who have a DI-DSP could get a I2S output that is pin compatible to be used with the Master 7. 

post #47 of 2115

Kingwa says the Master 7 with the PCM1704UK chips are more musical that the NFB 7.32 with the Saber ES9018 chips.  He says the Saber chip is the more neutral sounding chip / DAC.

 

I see this may not be the case when out in the real world.  Does anyone have any listing time with the Saber chip imp lamented by Audio-GD?

 

As I understand it the imp lamentation of the same chip set by different companies with different output stages will sound different.

 

Anyway I got my eye on one of these.

post #48 of 2115
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

Kingwa says the Master 7 with the PCM1704UK chips are more musical that the NFB 7.32 with the Saber ES9018 chips.  He says the Saber chip is the more neutral sounding chip / DAC.

 

I see this may not be the case when out in the real world.  Does anyone have any listing time with the Saber chip imp lamented by Audio-GD?

 

As I understand it the imp lamentation of the same chip set by different companies with different output stages will sound different.

 

Anyway I got my eye on one of these.

I never think the Master 7 is more musical than the NFB7.32.

I always consider musical in the gear, is mean the coloration.

I statement in the Master 7 web page is

Master 7 has extremely high fidelity and monitor especial the BNC and I2S / USB input ,allow users hear anythings in the records .With match source and amp, Master 7 have better dynamic and detail than the NFB-7.1HE, the topics  ES9018 DAC design from us .
 

post #49 of 2115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingwa View Post

I never think the Master 7 is more musical than the NFB7.32.

I always consider musical in the gear, is mean the coloration.

I statement in the Master 7 web page is

Master 7 has extremely high fidelity and monitor especial the BNC and I2S / USB input ,allow users hear anythings in the records .With match source and amp, Master 7 have better dynamic and detail than the NFB-7.1HE, the topics  ES9018 DAC design from us .
 

 

 

OK - you never wrote it.  I see.  However, another person seems to think so as well "see below"  So KingWa in your own word.

 

What DAC is more neutral \ musical than the other.

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve2151 View Post

According to Kingwa, the Sabre is most neutral and revealing while the PCM1704 is the most musical. Wolfson should be somewhere in the middle. I own the PCM1704 based SA-1 and it does a good job of warming up my HD 800. Bass quantity is boosted and the background seems darker than it was previously. Soundstage is more 3D as well.

 

The SA-1 is specially tuned for musicality. The Reference 5.2 should be a bit more neutral, but Kingwa does provide directions on how to improve dynamics and detail at the cost of warmth by cutting a few cables.

 
post #50 of 2115

The DACs of SA1, Reference 5(7.1) and Master 7 are same based on the PCM1704 built in but have total different sonics.

The Master 7 is total different to other our PCM1704 DACs, I think the users who have upgrade from Reference 7(7.1) can get the sense.

I am ensure not every users likes the Master 7 sonics.

post #51 of 2115

Kingwa,

Do you know if the CD7SE can be improved by using the DI-DSP (via I2S output) as a reclocker to the Master 7's I2S input?
 

post #52 of 2115

I still keep one CD7SE and CD7FV in factory for the listen.

I consider the DI can't be a upgrade for the CD7 both version in any cases apply.

Some days ago several hifiers go to here have the compare with the different DACs, some one change the CD 7 to Master 7 from standard coaxial to ACSS coaxial connect without notice , several minutes later other hifiers wonder why the sound have the large different.

post #53 of 2115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingwa View Post

I still keep one CD7SE and CD7FV in factory for the listen.

I consider the DI can't be a upgrade for the CD7 both version in any cases apply.

Some days ago several hifiers go to here have the compare with the different DACs, some one change the CD 7 to Master 7 from standard coaxial to ACSS coaxial connect without notice , several minutes later other hifiers wonder why the sound have the large different.

 

 

 


Thanks for the info Kingwa. 

 

As Kingwa mentioned above, the ACSS and Non-ACSS spdif both outputs a noticable difference in the sound to the Master 7.  Now whether or not one likes the difference, thats up to the listener.   I personally do because the BNC input is much more transparent but it never sounds <insert audiophile colouration here : - bright/clinical/cold etc> 

We now wait for a for a possible A-GD transport that will output I2S to the Master 7.   Possibly one that uses a computer transport with SSD and A-GD's excellent power regulation. beerchug.gif

post #54 of 2115

I'm trying to decide which would be better more transparent less noise / jitter.

 

laptop USB > USB Converter I2S output > I2S input on DAC

 

or 

 

laptop USB > USB Converter AES output > AES input on DAC

post #55 of 2115
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

I'm trying to decide which would be better more transparent less noise / jitter.

 

laptop USB > USB Converter I2S output > I2S input on DAC

 

or 

 

laptop USB > USB Converter AES output > AES input on DAC

 

I2S in most cases.

post #56 of 2115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shahrose View Post

 

I2S in most cases.

 

But why?

 

When there are limits in length.  What does it do better?

 

The AES is made to cancel noise and there is no limit in length.

 

I guess I just don't know the benefits of I2S in a converter box.  

 

Could someone please educate me.  biggrin.gif

post #57 of 2115
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

 

But why?

 

When there are limits in length.  What does it do better?

 

The AES is made to cancel noise and there is no limit in length.

 

I guess I just don't know the benefits of I2S in a converter box.  

 

Could someone please educate me.  biggrin.gif

I2S is generally better in dealing with noise. Lower jitter compared to AES should provide a smoother sound. Everyone's system is different though.

post #58 of 2115
Quote:
Originally Posted by paradoxper View Post

I2S is generally better in dealing with noise. Lower jitter compared to AES should provide a smoother sound. Everyone's system is different though.

 

 

What's the ideal length I2S?

post #59 of 2115
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

 

 

What's the ideal length I2S?

I can't say there is a rule to that. Keep it short and shielded. 1-1.5 m


Edited by paradoxper - 9/29/12 at 10:57am
post #60 of 2115

I2S uses two separate streams to send clock and digital data. The separation means less jitter. Critics argue that I2S is designed for short distances reflective of PCBs, but in practice, even longer transmission wires seem to produce great results. From all the impressions I've seen, I2S sounds best to the overwhelming majority of those who've compared with other inputs.

 

I'm sure there are other benefits to I2S that I just don't know about. Best to ask someone like Steve Nugent or John Kenny and the like.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Audio-Gd Master 7 - Discrete Fully Balanced DAC (PCM1704)