or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Burson Conductor - DAC/amp successor to the HA-160D
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Burson Conductor - DAC/amp successor to the HA-160D - Page 75  

post #1111 of 1991
Quote:
Originally Posted by RubyTiger View Post
 

Oh well, I should have waited. I went with the Audiophilleo2 and pure power. It's everything I've read and then some. A perfect match for the mod's done by pcx and the best sound I've heard yet. Thanks' to all the reviewer's. And it's definitely not putting lipstick on the pig as commented in a different thread about other's.underwhelmed by the (lack of) engagement with music.

 

Great to hear you're enjoying. I still expect the Audiophilleo (or any other rly good interface for the matter) will be above a 60$ USB module. Marketing aside, I see the new module as what the Tenor should've been. Hopefully it will be stable and bug free.

 

Other than that to answer the question above, the Conductor DAC is capable. It's what you should expect for the money and in a neat package. If you work around the Tenor USB, the Conductor DAC will reward you even more.


Edited by negura - 10/12/13 at 4:48pm
post #1112 of 1991
Quote:
Originally Posted by barid View Post
 

Question for you all:

 

How good would you rate the DAC portion of the conductor?  I've seen a few comments indicating that it's the weak point of the unit.  Currently I'm using a DACmini PX, because of a need to drive passive speakers and I'm finding that my DACMini PX can be a bit harsh and flat.  How would you say the Conductor's DAC compares to something like Burson's old DA160?  Benchmark DAC2?  or anything else that sub $2k range of DAC offerings.  More laid back and forgiving or is it a detail monster?

 

Previously I had a been using the Soloist / DA160 together and was pleased, but did not have the desk space for that and a power amp for speakers.  This situation is changing so I've been considering the Conductor again.


I guess it's as good as any other under $1K DAC, thus don't expect miracles

http://www.head-fi.org/t/613800/burson-new-soloist-headphone-amp/720#post_9169250

http://www.head-fi.org/t/613800/burson-new-soloist-headphone-amp/720#post_9169327

I found it quite aggressive and digitally sounding with closed in soundstage. But that was comparing against Chord DAC64. I think Soloist and good separate DAC might be sonically better package, can't beat convenience and price of one box solution though.

post #1113 of 1991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT View Post
 


I guess it's as good as any other under $1K DAC, thus don't expect miracles

http://www.head-fi.org/t/613800/burson-new-soloist-headphone-amp/720#post_9169250

http://www.head-fi.org/t/613800/burson-new-soloist-headphone-amp/720#post_9169327

I found it quite aggressive and digitally sounding with closed in soundstage. But that was comparing against Chord DAC64. I think Soloist and good separate DAC might be sonically better package, can't beat convenience and price of one box solution though.

Ditto. One thing though, if the Audiophilleo made such a difference then perhaps Burson's newest offering could sound quite better. I hope somebody tries it soon.


Edited by RubyTiger - 10/13/13 at 12:54pm
post #1114 of 1991
Quote:
Originally Posted by RubyTiger View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT View Post
 


I guess it's as good as any other under $1K DAC, thus don't expect miracles

http://www.head-fi.org/t/613800/burson-new-soloist-headphone-amp/720#post_9169250

http://www.head-fi.org/t/613800/burson-new-soloist-headphone-amp/720#post_9169327

I found it quite aggressive and digitally sounding with closed in soundstage. But that was comparing against Chord DAC64. I think Soloist and good separate DAC might be sonically better package, can't beat convenience and price of one box solution though.

Ditto. One thing though, if the Audiophilleo made such a difference then perhaps Burson's newest offering could sound quite better. I hope somebody tries it soon.


The thing is, it didn't. You would have to really listen to that, I mean like really concentrated, closed eyes, switching tracks back and forth to spot the difference. Not sure about others but if I have to strain to hear the difference, the upgrade is not worth it in my book.

The DAC itself is the bottleneck, not the receiver. But again, it all depends on your point of reference. It's surely better than most $500 DACs, I liked it slightly better than AKM based Stello DA-100, but I really didn't give it (Stello) a chance with AP+PP, that could have changed things.

post #1115 of 1991

Didnt check inside the Conductor but is this new usb board soldered in or inserted in ?

post #1116 of 1991
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIKELAP View Post
 

Didnt check inside the Conductor but is this new usb board soldered in or inserted in ?


My understanding that it doesn't come as a default option even on new Conductors, so you would have to order it separately and install itself. No soldering required.

post #1117 of 1991

There is one just listed on audiogon at a stellar price.

http://app.audiogon.com/listings/da-converters-burson-conductor-dac-pre-headphone-amp-2013-10-13-digital-07670-tenafly-nj

Not mine, mine is long gone. :p 

post #1118 of 1991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT View Post
 


The thing is, it didn't. You would have to really listen to that, I mean like really concentrated, closed eyes, switching tracks back and forth to spot the difference. Not sure about others but if I have to strain to hear the difference, the upgrade is not worth it in my book.

The DAC itself is the bottleneck, not the receiver. But again, it all depends on your point of reference. It's surely better than most $500 DACs, I liked it slightly better than AKM based Stello DA-100, but I really didn't give it (Stello) a chance with AP+PP, that could have changed things.

 

There I disagree. The differences are immediate and very convincing. They were so clear to me that it didn't even require detailed analysing to know what sounds better. I guess we all hear differently or it must be something else at play there. /shrug.

 

The DAC is much more capable with a good interface. But again, you shouldn't expect a PWD2 level DAC. It does scale though. And that's not only limited to the AP2, there are other good ones.

post #1119 of 1991
Quote:
Originally Posted by negura View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT View Post
 


The thing is, it didn't. You would have to really listen to that, I mean like really concentrated, closed eyes, switching tracks back and forth to spot the difference. Not sure about others but if I have to strain to hear the difference, the upgrade is not worth it in my book.

The DAC itself is the bottleneck, not the receiver. But again, it all depends on your point of reference. It's surely better than most $500 DACs, I liked it slightly better than AKM based Stello DA-100, but I really didn't give it (Stello) a chance with AP+PP, that could have changed things.

 

There I disagree. The differences are immediate and very convincing. They were so clear to me that it didn't even require detailed analysing to know what sounds better. I guess we all hear differently or it must be something else at play there. /shrug.

 

The DAC is much more capable with a good interface. But again, you shouldn't expect a PWD2 level DAC. It does scale though. And that's not only limited to the AP2, there are other good ones.


I can't explain this phenomena, except that perhaps we set it up differently, or I had exceptionally good or somehow modified USB receiver, mind you mine was from the most recent batch from Australia.

BTW, DarKu in his review commented that Conductor USB is just as good as M2Tech EVO.

So no, I didn't hear that immediate and obvious difference, sorry. Difference between iLink and AP on Chord DAC64 was more audible, not saying that great by any means, than between Conductor internal USB and AP.


Edited by Andrew_WOT - 10/13/13 at 2:54pm
post #1120 of 1991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT View Post
 


I can't explain this phenomena, except that perhaps we set it up differently, or I had exceptionally good or somehow modified USB receiver, mind you mine was from the most recent batch from Australia.

BTW, DarKu in his review commented that Conductor USB is just as good as M2Tech EVO.

So no, I didn't hear that immediate and obvious difference, sorry. Difference between iLink and AP on Chord DAC64 was more audible, not saying that great by any means, than between Conductor internal USB and AP.


I'm in the same camp as Darku.  The difference I experienced using the YellowTec PUC2 with the Conductor was immediately identifiable as compared the the included Tenor USB receiver.  Darku aptly identified the differences.  Just check back a day or two in this thread for his commentary.

post #1121 of 1991
Quote:
Originally Posted by germay0653 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT View Post
 


I can't explain this phenomena, except that perhaps we set it up differently, or I had exceptionally good or somehow modified USB receiver, mind you mine was from the most recent batch from Australia.

BTW, DarKu in his review commented that Conductor USB is just as good as M2Tech EVO.

So no, I didn't hear that immediate and obvious difference, sorry. Difference between iLink and AP on Chord DAC64 was more audible, not saying that great by any means, than between Conductor internal USB and AP.


I'm in the same camp as Darku.  The difference I experienced using the YellowTec PUC2 with the Conductor was immediately identifiable as compared the the included Tenor USB receiver.  Darku aptly identified the differences.  Just check back a day or two in this thread for his commentary.


I personally give more weight to my own experience than anyone else comments. I have made one mistake buying Conductor based on glowing comments on how great its DAC is in this very thread, then the second one buying quite expensive USB/SPDIF converter to make up for so called USB receiver deficiency.

Helped just as much as lipstick on the pig.

For me the lesson learned - get a better DAC and don't fall for that "better cable/converter/power supply" tweaks, in the end you'll spend more for a very marginal improvement.


Edited by Andrew_WOT - 10/13/13 at 7:13pm
post #1122 of 1991

http://bursonaudio.com/6631USB_PCB.htm            With installation guide and driver download.http://bursonaudio.com/Downloads.html                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  


Edited by MIKELAP - 10/14/13 at 6:19am
post #1123 of 1991
Looks simple enough. Might get it for my Conductor.
post #1124 of 1991

I see 3 clocks on the new C-Media module, compared to just one clock on original Tenor module.

My predictions for newest module: lower noise floor (blacker background) and of lower incoming jitter due to dedicated clocks for 41, 88 and 192 khz.

So far this module sound promising.

 

However I don't think this module will be better than top of the line S/PDIF converters, I highly doubt that, but we shall see.

 

PS: Andrew_WOT (ex cheburashka - friend with crocodile Ghena :regular_smile :)

I feel sorry now that I recommended Conductor to you and it wasn't on your expectation level. However DAC64 and Vega are top of the line DACs, Conductor is not really there on DAC part, but I feel that it is very good for what it is and at that price level.

I'm sure DAC64 and Vega are better, I heard newest QBD76 HDSD and was blow away by its performance, if DAC64 is at least 85-90% from that, then it should be really good.

post #1125 of 1991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT View Post


I personally give more weight to my own experience than anyone else comments. I have made one mistake buying Conductor based on glowing comments on how great its DAC is in this very thread, then the second one buying quite expensive USB/SPDIF converter to make up for so called USB receiver deficiency.

Helped just as much as lipstick on the pig.

For me the lesson learned - get a better DAC and don't fall for that "better cable/converter/power supply" tweaks, in the end you'll spend more for a very marginal improvement.

 



In the end, it's what works for you regardless of what everyone else perceives. Please don't take offense as none was intended. I, like Darku, was only conveying what I heard with external USB to S/PDIF compared to the included Tenor USB receiver. I would LOVE to try the AURALiC Vega with a Bakoon headamp but it's a little out of my reach at this point in time.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphone Amps (full-size)
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Burson Conductor - DAC/amp successor to the HA-160D