romaz
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2013
- Posts
- 1,182
- Likes
- 1,267
It's quite a bit of fun watching how other people have set up their DAVE. It really is a personal statement. Mine has nearly 300 hours on it now and has settled in nicely into my system. I thought I'd share a few things I've found. Some of these things I discovered when I first had a DAVE in my home back in November but after more time with it, I have solidified certain opinions.
First, Rob pointed out that DAVE, like all things, benefits from good mechanical isolation. My DAVE sits on my desk where its compact size and attractive aesthetics are very much a plus. I have near-field Omega monitors also sitting on my desk along with a powered subwoofer on the floor and so when music is playing through these speakers, isolation does make a difference. I have a quad of Black Raviolis that are low profile and do make a difference but I found a more elegant solution that looks like it is custom tailored for the DAVE. It is the Acoustic Revive TB-38H and is designed to provide isolation for small pieces of equipment like power supplies and I will say that it not only looks good but is very effective. It is also not very expensive and can be purchased directly from Japan via EBay. Highly recommended.
Second, I cannot overstate how good a job Rob has done isolating the DAVE against almost everything else. It seems to be immune and even impervious to all the things that significantly impact just about every other DAC I have experienced. When I first had the DAVE in my home in November, I had noticed quite oddly that my "dirty" Mac Pro plugged into the wall with a standard 18g computer power cord and connected to the DAVE via optical cable sounded as good as my highly optimized CAD CAT which was grounded to an Entreq grounding box and connected to an Audience aR6 line conditioner. I wasn't sure what to think of this back then and whether I could believe what I was hearing but because my time with the DAVE was so brief (only 48 hours), I convinced myself that I could have imagined it. Those of you who know me know that I am heavily into music servers and have researched and compared them extensively because with my TotalDAC d1-monobloc and every other DAC I have had, they made a VERY large difference:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/787020/review-comparison-of-5-high-end-digital-music-servers-aurender-n10-cad-cat-server-totaldac-d1-server-auralic-aries-audiophile-vortex-box
I was even in the process of building what I called the "Super CAT" comprised of very specialized parts from Paul Pang and would include no less than 4 OCXO clocks as well as an optical LAN adapter. I had commissioned Phil Hobi in Switzerland to personally install and optimize Windows Server 2012 and Audiophile Optimizer, one of Phil's IT colleagues in Florida to build this machine and painstakingly apply RF shielding to strategic areas of the server and Paul Hynes of Scotland to build a custom quad-transformer, multi-rail linear PSU. By all accounts, this was to be the best music server that could be built because with each expert I enlisted, my instructions were to compromise nothing for the sake of ultimate sound quality. Well, it was around this time that the DAVE first came into the picture and as you can imagine, upon discovering that the source may not matter at all, I put this project on hold until my DAVE arrived. Some here who already have a DAVE have suggested that their specialized servers sound better than their basic laptops but this is what I found this past week:
With the help of an audiophile colleague and my wife (3 sets of ears total), we blind tested several music sources including (1) my "noisy" 12-core Mac Pro with its standard mains cable plugged directly into the wall with no power conditioning, connected to network via wifi and connected to the DAVE either via $10 USB cable or $120 Mapleshades optical cable, (2) Sonore Sonicorbiter SE, a $300 Roon Endpoint that utilizes a Cubox processor connected to mains via linear PSU and to the DAVE either via Curious USB or Mapleshades optical, (3) a $3,000 custom-built Windows music server with specialized motherboard with TCXO clock, Paul Pang V4 USB with OCXO clock, connected to network via optical LAN, Windows Server 2012 R2 Core with Audiophile Optimizer and Bug Head Emperor, (4) a $3,500 Aurender X100L with $1,200 custom-built Kenneth Lau linear PSU connected to network via optical LAN and to the DAVE via Curious USB cable and (5) an $8,000 Aurender N10 connected to the network via optical LAN and to the DAVE via Curious USB cable. All of these devices, except the Mac Pro were connected to mains using expensive power cords (either the Audience AU24SE or a $3,500 Dynamic Design Challenger AE15 cord with an active RF shield) and further aided by a Son of Q balanced power supply by Equi=Tech which is effectively an isolation transformer and RF filter. In a separate setup with a different DAC (which shall go nameless), I have validated that these power cables and balanced power supply are quite effective in what they are designed to do without any negative impact on dynamics. The bottom line is that the Mac Pro connected directly to the wall with its cheap power cord and directly to the DAVE with a $10 USB cable represented my "worst case scenario" while every other music source was heavily advantaged in one way or another.
Listening to a variety of lossless files from 16/44 to 24/384 to DSD128 with genres ranging from large orchestral symphony to small ensemble jazz to intimate vocals to bass-heavy pop, while sighted, some of us imagined we could detect a subtle difference in favor of USB over optical and some of us felt the Aurender N10 perhaps layered a little better but once blinded, while we could hear very subtle differences, none of us could really state a preference for one source or another. To put it bluntly, the Mac Pro with its noisy switching PSU and no special RF shielding and using a $10 USB cable sounded as good as the other servers and this was a unanimous finding. In case anyone is interested to know, we also tested the USB Regen and the newer W4S Recovery with the Curious USB cables and compared this setup against the $10 USB cable by itself and once again, there was no difference. Those who are hearing significant differences between sources, all I can say is your DAVE must be different than mine. To be thorough, we then substituted the DAVE for another DAC and without question, the Mac Pro on USB was the poorest sounding source. The W4S Recovery (more than the USB Regen) with Curious USB cable also noticeably improved the sound. With the other DAC, blind testing wasn't necessary because the differences were so stark.
I have noticed some are earnestly in search of that "perfect" optical cable and some have refused to look at USB at all based on prior experiences. My comment to you is you should leave all of your preconceived ideas at the door when it comes to the DAVE because the DAVE will probably change many of your core beliefs about proper system setup and tuning. First of all, back in November when I first came into contact with the DAVE, my dealer and I did some testing. Something must have changed because we were able to directly connect an AQ Diamond optical cable directly into the DAVE back then and we compared it to my $120 Mapleshades optical cable alongside a $2,000 digital coax cable (I have forgotten which one). Back then, my dealer and I both agreed that optical sounded a little better than digital coax and that the less expensive Mapleshades sounded identical to the more expensive AQ Diamond. As I now compare my Mapleshades optical to the standard "made in China" optical cable that comes with the DAVE, I can detect no difference at all. If it makes you feel better to spend a lot of money on something like an AQ Diamond or Wireworld SuperNova because they are glass cables, just know that the optical connectors in the DAVE are not glass, they're plastic. If you are going out of your way to hunt for a special optical cable to make the DAVE sound as good as possible, I suggest you listen and compare before you buy because there's a very good chance you won't notice a difference. With regards to USB vs optical, while I am unable to detect any significant difference between USB and optical in my system, I personally prefer USB because of the ability to transfer DSD512 and PCM up to 768kHz oversampling. As I am listening to files recorded natively in DXD and DSD256, I am just stunned by what I am hearing. Rob has already said he is less fond of digital coax and AES/EBU. I believe this is because you cannot galvanically isolate these types of connections and especially with an unbalanced digital coax cable, RF noise can more freely penetrate the DAVE.
As it has become clear to me that what is connected before the DAVE has become less important, what is connected after the DAVE has become even more important. Because the output of the DAVE is so pure and rich and faithful to the recording, it would make sense to use the most transparent analog interconnects, headphone or speaker cables, and headphones or speakers you can afford. While expensive, I can vouch for the DHC Silver Spore4 if anyone is on the fence about this cable. The difference in sound quality is there and it is easily the finest headphone cable I have heard.
First, Rob pointed out that DAVE, like all things, benefits from good mechanical isolation. My DAVE sits on my desk where its compact size and attractive aesthetics are very much a plus. I have near-field Omega monitors also sitting on my desk along with a powered subwoofer on the floor and so when music is playing through these speakers, isolation does make a difference. I have a quad of Black Raviolis that are low profile and do make a difference but I found a more elegant solution that looks like it is custom tailored for the DAVE. It is the Acoustic Revive TB-38H and is designed to provide isolation for small pieces of equipment like power supplies and I will say that it not only looks good but is very effective. It is also not very expensive and can be purchased directly from Japan via EBay. Highly recommended.
Second, I cannot overstate how good a job Rob has done isolating the DAVE against almost everything else. It seems to be immune and even impervious to all the things that significantly impact just about every other DAC I have experienced. When I first had the DAVE in my home in November, I had noticed quite oddly that my "dirty" Mac Pro plugged into the wall with a standard 18g computer power cord and connected to the DAVE via optical cable sounded as good as my highly optimized CAD CAT which was grounded to an Entreq grounding box and connected to an Audience aR6 line conditioner. I wasn't sure what to think of this back then and whether I could believe what I was hearing but because my time with the DAVE was so brief (only 48 hours), I convinced myself that I could have imagined it. Those of you who know me know that I am heavily into music servers and have researched and compared them extensively because with my TotalDAC d1-monobloc and every other DAC I have had, they made a VERY large difference:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/787020/review-comparison-of-5-high-end-digital-music-servers-aurender-n10-cad-cat-server-totaldac-d1-server-auralic-aries-audiophile-vortex-box
I was even in the process of building what I called the "Super CAT" comprised of very specialized parts from Paul Pang and would include no less than 4 OCXO clocks as well as an optical LAN adapter. I had commissioned Phil Hobi in Switzerland to personally install and optimize Windows Server 2012 and Audiophile Optimizer, one of Phil's IT colleagues in Florida to build this machine and painstakingly apply RF shielding to strategic areas of the server and Paul Hynes of Scotland to build a custom quad-transformer, multi-rail linear PSU. By all accounts, this was to be the best music server that could be built because with each expert I enlisted, my instructions were to compromise nothing for the sake of ultimate sound quality. Well, it was around this time that the DAVE first came into the picture and as you can imagine, upon discovering that the source may not matter at all, I put this project on hold until my DAVE arrived. Some here who already have a DAVE have suggested that their specialized servers sound better than their basic laptops but this is what I found this past week:
With the help of an audiophile colleague and my wife (3 sets of ears total), we blind tested several music sources including (1) my "noisy" 12-core Mac Pro with its standard mains cable plugged directly into the wall with no power conditioning, connected to network via wifi and connected to the DAVE either via $10 USB cable or $120 Mapleshades optical cable, (2) Sonore Sonicorbiter SE, a $300 Roon Endpoint that utilizes a Cubox processor connected to mains via linear PSU and to the DAVE either via Curious USB or Mapleshades optical, (3) a $3,000 custom-built Windows music server with specialized motherboard with TCXO clock, Paul Pang V4 USB with OCXO clock, connected to network via optical LAN, Windows Server 2012 R2 Core with Audiophile Optimizer and Bug Head Emperor, (4) a $3,500 Aurender X100L with $1,200 custom-built Kenneth Lau linear PSU connected to network via optical LAN and to the DAVE via Curious USB cable and (5) an $8,000 Aurender N10 connected to the network via optical LAN and to the DAVE via Curious USB cable. All of these devices, except the Mac Pro were connected to mains using expensive power cords (either the Audience AU24SE or a $3,500 Dynamic Design Challenger AE15 cord with an active RF shield) and further aided by a Son of Q balanced power supply by Equi=Tech which is effectively an isolation transformer and RF filter. In a separate setup with a different DAC (which shall go nameless), I have validated that these power cables and balanced power supply are quite effective in what they are designed to do without any negative impact on dynamics. The bottom line is that the Mac Pro connected directly to the wall with its cheap power cord and directly to the DAVE with a $10 USB cable represented my "worst case scenario" while every other music source was heavily advantaged in one way or another.
Listening to a variety of lossless files from 16/44 to 24/384 to DSD128 with genres ranging from large orchestral symphony to small ensemble jazz to intimate vocals to bass-heavy pop, while sighted, some of us imagined we could detect a subtle difference in favor of USB over optical and some of us felt the Aurender N10 perhaps layered a little better but once blinded, while we could hear very subtle differences, none of us could really state a preference for one source or another. To put it bluntly, the Mac Pro with its noisy switching PSU and no special RF shielding and using a $10 USB cable sounded as good as the other servers and this was a unanimous finding. In case anyone is interested to know, we also tested the USB Regen and the newer W4S Recovery with the Curious USB cables and compared this setup against the $10 USB cable by itself and once again, there was no difference. Those who are hearing significant differences between sources, all I can say is your DAVE must be different than mine. To be thorough, we then substituted the DAVE for another DAC and without question, the Mac Pro on USB was the poorest sounding source. The W4S Recovery (more than the USB Regen) with Curious USB cable also noticeably improved the sound. With the other DAC, blind testing wasn't necessary because the differences were so stark.
I have noticed some are earnestly in search of that "perfect" optical cable and some have refused to look at USB at all based on prior experiences. My comment to you is you should leave all of your preconceived ideas at the door when it comes to the DAVE because the DAVE will probably change many of your core beliefs about proper system setup and tuning. First of all, back in November when I first came into contact with the DAVE, my dealer and I did some testing. Something must have changed because we were able to directly connect an AQ Diamond optical cable directly into the DAVE back then and we compared it to my $120 Mapleshades optical cable alongside a $2,000 digital coax cable (I have forgotten which one). Back then, my dealer and I both agreed that optical sounded a little better than digital coax and that the less expensive Mapleshades sounded identical to the more expensive AQ Diamond. As I now compare my Mapleshades optical to the standard "made in China" optical cable that comes with the DAVE, I can detect no difference at all. If it makes you feel better to spend a lot of money on something like an AQ Diamond or Wireworld SuperNova because they are glass cables, just know that the optical connectors in the DAVE are not glass, they're plastic. If you are going out of your way to hunt for a special optical cable to make the DAVE sound as good as possible, I suggest you listen and compare before you buy because there's a very good chance you won't notice a difference. With regards to USB vs optical, while I am unable to detect any significant difference between USB and optical in my system, I personally prefer USB because of the ability to transfer DSD512 and PCM up to 768kHz oversampling. As I am listening to files recorded natively in DXD and DSD256, I am just stunned by what I am hearing. Rob has already said he is less fond of digital coax and AES/EBU. I believe this is because you cannot galvanically isolate these types of connections and especially with an unbalanced digital coax cable, RF noise can more freely penetrate the DAVE.
As it has become clear to me that what is connected before the DAVE has become less important, what is connected after the DAVE has become even more important. Because the output of the DAVE is so pure and rich and faithful to the recording, it would make sense to use the most transparent analog interconnects, headphone or speaker cables, and headphones or speakers you can afford. While expensive, I can vouch for the DHC Silver Spore4 if anyone is on the fence about this cable. The difference in sound quality is there and it is easily the finest headphone cable I have heard.
