Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Review: Benchmark DAC1 vs RME HDSP 9632 vs RME PAD vs EMU 1212M
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Review: Benchmark DAC1 vs RME HDSP 9632 vs RME PAD vs EMU 1212M - Page 4

post #46 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by ampgalore
Yeah, if memory serves, that XLR to RCA cable has to have the third pin floating.

Right now I am using a 3ft RCA to RCA radioshack fusion cable. Is this short enough?
No, not in my rig, but might be my cable.
A cheap and easy test:
1. All you need is a stereo 1/4 " to RCA adapter.I had one lying around, they cost about 2$.The cheapos are o.K. when new, their downside is the lacking long term durability(corrosion).
2. Plug the adapter into a headphone jack of the Benchmark.
3. Connect the DAC and your amp.
4. Listen.
In my case I'm hearing a clearly audible difference.
"Clearly" not in the sense of a day and night difference.
"Clearly" in the sense of turning very good into extraordinary.
Very desirable.
I'll order the parts for a XLR to RCA interconnect today, I don't like the additional pot in the chain.
post #47 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by ampgalore
Yeah, if memory serves, that XLR to RCA cable has to have the third pin floating.

Right now I am using a 3ft RCA to RCA radioshack fusion cable. Is this short enough?
If you are connecting the DAC1 to the Grace 901, then going with balanced XLR cables would be the best. Would be interesting to hear how much difference there is.
post #48 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by adhoc
cjr888, that lessloss site has, as far as i can tell, not a single real (ie not a render) photo of the actual dac!

Color images of the LessLoss DAC 2004 are now online at www.LessLoss.com
post #49 of 69
Seems like I need to check RME Digi96/8. Maybe it is a good card, but your other gear kills a good signal? I'm testing EMU 1212M now and can't imagine how things can be worse...
post #50 of 69
Sorry for bringing this up again but I have a feeling I might not be the only one who's interested.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron_Dreamer
I will find out soon how good the DAC1 does with a cheap source, the Chaintech. I think a cheap computer source with optical should still be great, since the DAC kills any of the jitter, optical kills the dirty ground, and ripping via EAC makes it essentially a perfect transport. Now as for CDP's as transports, that is up in the air, since who knows which CDP's output good enough to rival EAC secure mode
So how would you rank the chaintech as a transport now?

I am planning on upgrading to a Dialogue II Dac or similar in the future so I was wondering if the transport really makes a big difference. The dialogue II won't be so immune to jitter of course...
post #51 of 69
I've wondered about that before too :P
So I asked
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tachikoma
I suppose you like your dialogue II better than the EMU 1212m? >_> Have you tried running a digital out to the dialogue II with the emu? Does the sound improve significantly compared to the AV-710's digital out?

Hey,

Yeah, the Dialogue does sound significantly better than the EMU 1212m. I tried using the digital out on both the EMU and the AV710, and I found that the quality using the AV710 was perhaps slightly better than the EMU, surprisingly. I think the EMU Patchmix drivers somehow alter the sound, although the difference was not remarkable.

Cheers,
rogue
post #52 of 69
That's kinda preposterous, as long as you output a digital signal to the DAC it will sound exactly the same if you're using the same way to output (optical vs coaxial). Buy the cheapest soundcard with a digital output supporting ASIO and you will be outputing the best possible quality to your DAC.
post #53 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jashugan
That's kinda preposterous
Not exactly.
It depends on the DAC.Some DACs are relatively jitter immune, others are sensitive.
I own a DAC with bypass option for the jitter reducing circuit.The difference is easily audible in a DBT, and I'm utilizing a RME soundcard that outputs probably less jitter than e.g. a cheap AV-710.
post #54 of 69
Jitter wise indeed, although I have my doubts wether or not it makes really that big a difference, guess I'll have to run some tests with another DAC when I get my hands on one.

With the DAC-1 however, the 4-5 soundcards I've tried with it using optical output gave me the same results soundwise.
post #55 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jashugan
With the DAC-1 however, the 4-5 soundcards I've tried with it using optical output gave me the same results soundwise.
Ditto, but that doesn't apply to DACs without jitter reducing circuits.
Some time ago I've even tested a cheap 30' plastic fibre cable against an expensive standalone jitter reducing component connected via an expensive 6' coax cable to the DAC 1 : no audible difference, at least not to my ears.
post #56 of 69
But still, how is it possible that all of a sudden the Chaintech appears to sound better than the 1212 together with the Dialogue II??
post #57 of 69
well, i alredy said that anything sounds better than creative/emu
post #58 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjr888

I personally would like to slave the source to the DAC clock, and if I had the money, would probably go with a cheap RME, and LessLoss DAC 2004:

http://www.lessloss.com/

Can I borrow $2k from someone?
If you're using a PC as a source, you 'should' be able to do this for far less money. Most of the pro-style A/D-D/A combo units should use the A/D master clock for the DAC when set up that way. If so, then you can slave your soundcard from the A/D clock via the spdif input. The lessloss folks are targetting standalone CD players, which obviously is more complicated as they have no notion of an input.

I have a stock Art DI/O that I'm trying to find time to try this with. I'll be able to compare it to a stock Emu 1820M.
post #59 of 69
slaving source to dac is no panacea. if the sound was bad with dac in slave mode, it ain't gonna be much better with dac being master. i tried slaving my card with no palpable improvement
post #60 of 69
The dejitter mechanism in the DAC1 has been discussed in quite some depth recently.

The DAC1 uses an AD1896 asynchronus sample rate converter which maps jitter and clock skew into broadband noise. It also renders all signals at the frequencies derived from the oscillators of the source.

The net effect is that the DAC1 will sound different with different sources based on two main factors. jitter and clock skew.

Cheers

Thomas
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Review: Benchmark DAC1 vs RME HDSP 9632 vs RME PAD vs EMU 1212M