Ok, yes, I hear it also with my HE-1000 if I go to +19 dB.  I didn't try going beyond 0dB before.  Very interesting.

romaz said:

Ok, yes, I hear it also with my HE-1000 if I go to +19 dB.  I didn't try going beyond 0dB before.  Very interesting.

Click to expand...

So, ahem, now you know how loud you have to set the volume to hear the "dynamic range" in your recordings

jawed said:

So, ahem, now you know how loud you have to set the volume to hear the "dynamic range" in your recordings

Click to expand...

So if we set the volume so we just hear the (pip) 1khz sine wave, then we know that its on full DR range if i have understand it correct.

beolab said:

jawed said:

So, ahem, now you know how loud you have to set the volume to hear the "dynamic range" in your recordings

Click to expand...

So if we set the volume so we just hear the (pip) 1khz sine wave, then we know that its on full DR range if i have understand it correct.

Click to expand...

Sorry, what I wrote is meant as a joke. I'm pretty sure if you listened to a normal recording with the volume setting that high you'd get clipping and you'd hurt your ears.

People like to talk about the dynamic range of 16-bit or 24-bit formats, but forget just how ridiculously loud you have to set the volume control to be able to hear the quietest parts of the recording - if there is anything there - at -90dB or -100dB etc.

jawed said:

Sorry, what I wrote is meant as a joke. I'm pretty sure if you listened to a normal recording with the volume setting that high you'd get clipping and you'd hurt your ears.

People like to talk about the dynamic range of 16-bit or 24-bit formats, but forget just how ridiculously loud you have to set the volume control to be able to hear the quietest parts of the recording - if there is anything there - at -90dB or -100dB etc.

Click to expand...

Okay then i understand

romaz said:

   
Slightly off topic but I presume you're joking about your upper limit of hearing although if you're a musician or you listen to your music very loud, maybe you're not.
 
As a physician in my real job, I can tell you that by age 25, most of us are unable to hear signals above 15 kHz.  I know I can't and it's just a fact of life.  As we age, this gets worse but depending on your line of work or routine behaviors (musician, military, construction, frequent IEM user), some of us lose our hearing more drastically.  Sounds discouraging but there's another way to look at it.
 
The frequency range of hearing, from 20-20,000 Hz encompasses 10 octaves.  From 10,000-20,000 Hz represents only 1 octave.  If you can only hear down to 11 kHz, that represents 0.9 octaves of high frequency hearing loss.  If you are a "glass half full" type of person, that means you can hear 9.1 octaves out of the 10 that are available.  That means you still have 91% of your hearing.  Doesn't sound as bad, does it?
 
If you guys are wondering what your upper limit of hearing is, here's a simple way to check:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNf9nzvnd1k

Click to expand...

This is also a good test: http://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_frequencycheckhigh.php
 
Could hear up to 19khz, even 20khz a little bit.
 
I've seen lots of friends that don't give too much importance to their hearing, this being one of the reasons I wrote this article.

I have also made som testing and tried out the stock C13 IEC power cable and another "stock" C15 IEC cable connected to a Isotek Sirius -40db RF mains filter with isolated outlets Vs a AQ NRG-1000 0,9 m with active DBS 72v RF shield and a NRG-10 1.8m DBS 72 v
( NRG-10 is the same as NRG-1000 but with Different power plugs just) also connected to the Isotek filter, and i think i can hear a difference i think.
Very subtle, but maybe slight better less numb feeling in the bass and overall fluidness maybe. Then i tried a Nordost Valhalla 1.8 m passive power cable i have connected to one of my ATC speakers usually, and i couldn't hear any big difference either to the AQ cables, and i like the Active RF shielding idea of the AQ cables, so i think i stick with one of them for the DAVE and the 1.8 m NRG-10 for the Isotek so i use the same brand on every digital cable and on the power side. Looks better
So it is not the first upgrade i will recommend if you are on a tight budget.
Maybe i can recommend a slight better one , than the stock C13 IEC China cable, with better connecting power plugs wouldn't hurt.
A cheap upgrade can be the C15 IEC cable with better connector plugs than the C13.
The budget C15 IEC cable did maybe sound less numb in the bass than the C13 stock one.

Maybe romaz with his more exotic cables / power filter does a slight subtle more difference for the sound, but it doesn't feel that it is any huge gain on the power side for DAVE to achieve either from my impressions.

So DAVE is pretty much immune on power also. This is a remarkable DAC i have to say.

Have not tested the power cables direct from the wall mains to DAVE without the Isotek filter yet like romaz though.

Then i feel that every time im listening to the DAVE you hear different and new qualities, so its not just the break-in for the DAVE, it is a break-in procedure for your ears also k_hand_tone1:

Ah yes that is a better test, about 16KHz for me versus 15 KHz with the other test that I linked to as being more likely correct.

While we're on that website, this is fun:

http://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_16vs8bit_NeilYoung.php

Can you tell the difference between 8-bit Neil Young and 16-bit Neil Young? I got 5/10 correct

jawed said:

Ah yes that is a better test, about 16KHz for me versus 15 KHz with the other test that I linked to as being more likely correct.

While we're on that website, this is fun:

http://www.audiocheck.net/blindtests_16vs8bit_NeilYoung.php

Can you tell the difference between 8-bit Neil Young and 16-bit Neil Young? I got 5/10 correct

Click to expand...

8/10, but I think the sample was poorly chosen for this test.

esimms86 said:

  Romaz's DHC cable is very tempting but I'm hoping that once I hear my stock HE1000 through Dave I will be cured of upgradeitis forever(yes, I can hear you now). Then there's also the notion of spending 2800 dollars on a headphone that already costs 3000 dollars in an effort to squeeze out that last few per cent of sound improvement.

Click to expand...

Don't feel you have to spend $2,800 for a Silver Spore4.  Mine was more expensive because I needed a 10 foot long cable and continuous cast UP-OCC silver at that length is unfortunately crazy expensive.  Because you won't need the more expensive XLR terminations for the DAVE and if you can get by with a more standard 5 foot long cable, it is only $1,600.  If you get the Silver Complement4 which has the exact same UP-OCC grade silver and cotton primary dielectric (minus the heavy shielding), it is only $1,000.  I believe I would be equally happy with the Silver Complement4 if I didn't need a long cable length.  The biggest problem is that it could take months to get one but I would be surprised, should you get one, if you didn't find it worth every penny because both the DAVE and HE-1000 will scale beautifully with this cable.  You should only have to buy this cable once and with adapters, you should be able to use it with any headphone.

Sorry, I don't want to hijack this thread, but since I bought a BHSE to jump into the Electrostatic word, I sell my Eddie Current 445 tube amp. If someone is interested...

christer said:

 
But via every thing else I have heard including Hugo 16/44.1 sounds better than ever via Hugo but still not as  good as  well recorded DSD64 IMHO. The timing and flow of DSD wins clearly for me over even interpolated 44.1 as with Hugo.

Click to expand...

Chris, I don't disagree with you. You are obviously passionate about the music you love and know well and who am I to tell you what sounds best to you.  When I suggested 16/44 is better than DSD64, I was speaking from a technical standpoint based on the flaws of DSD that Rob described.  Having said that, I find DSD playback on the DAVE superb.  DAVE seems to fix many sins, both with DSD and Redbook.  I have CDs that were barely listenable with my previous system that are more than tolerable now.
 
What I find true, however, is that it's best to purchase a file in the original format it was recorded in.  If the original source file is 16/44, I'm sure I don't have to convince anyone that there would be no advantage in buying an upsampled version of that file.  It's also a shame if something is well recorded using a DSD recorder to down-res it to 16/44 or to transcode it to PCM of any type.  By all means, keep it DSD.  At the same time, If something is recorded in DXD, I don't know that I see any advantage at all converting it to DSD.  As the DAVE can play it all but more importantly, play it all superbly, then buy it in its native format.
 
In my personal library, Roon is telling me I own more than 1,500 CDs and so I'm not ready to throw those away based on the fact that it's old technology.  With DAVE, I am enjoying these CDs more than ever.  Moving forward, however, I try to buy only hi-res files when I can, whether they are analog-sourced or digital-sourced and based on the principles that I posted, I generally look for a minimum of 24/192 PCM.  It seems DXD recordings are more common and so I expect my purchases will be largely PCM but if DSD is all that is available, then so be it.  At the end of the day, I don't really want to fuss about whether something is PCM or DSD, I just want to enjoy my music and fortunately, since my DAVE has arrived, these distinctions matter less.
 
For those that are interested in comparing how well DAVE handles different formats of the same recording, check out 2L's site that contains free downloads of files of varying bitrates, from 16/44 to 24/352 and even DSD256.  Most were originally recorded in DXD and so as I have done comparisons, native DXD (24/352) sounds best with 24/192 being almost indistinguishable to my ears.  DSD sounds good and while 16/44 potentially sounds the worst, all formats are very enjoyable.  There is really no losing proposition here when played through the DAVE.
 
 http://www.2l.no/hires/

To add to my comments above, as we know, very few DACs decode DSD natively but rather rely on DoP and Rob has already discussed elsewhere why this is the best way to handle DSD.  DSD 64 (as DoP) has a PCM equivalency of only 24/88 and even DSD 128 is only 24/176.  If you recall, the sampling rate we should ideally target so that our ears are unable to tell that data is coming in as discrete bits interposed with blank gaps is 192 kHz.  Even without the flaws of DSD that Rob described, based on the auditory time resolution principles I described previously, while DSD 128 gets you pretty close, it would appear you would need to record in DSD 256 before you reached the full equivalency of analog media.  Based on what you have to pay for DSD 256 vs 24/192 PCM masters and based on the greater abundance of recordings mastered as PCM, it would seem that PCM is the easier target.  Finally, as both DAVINA and MQA will be operating soley in the PCM realm, DSD may have a difficult future ahead.

Struggling to upload images but it's DAVE-day!
Right out of the box it sounds so good-all my music is on CD now and "even" at 16/44.1, it sounds so right. Just together and coherent. Musical and easy. Detailed spacious and clean. Finally CD had come of age, perfect sound forever...

I'm awaiting an acoustic revival stand and am currently using the chord supplied toslink for the Rega and a custom chord cable RCA to BNC spdif for the Bryston bcd1. Can't really tell any difference between the different transports/digital cables-whatever I listen to seems the best lol
Vocals are so clear and harsh discs are far far more listenable now. I have the Dave as pre but should I set it to DAC only and use my BP26 volume? If I commit to one transport then I'll try a direct feed into my 14B