[Audioexcels]

Quote:

question to audiophilleo users:
is there any change after i.e 100hrs of burn in period?  I mean: is there any gain of sound weight and body and overall musicality?
 
I know that some of you added aquvox psu or battery power. could you provide me some feedback if this PSU upgrades provided improvement in terms i mentioned above?
 
all sugestions are welcome.

Neither my friend or myself heard it, but we had more than 300 hours on ours.  I would highly consider looking back in the thread around page 5-7? where Pompon? says how the hub setup did the trick.  Previously, he was not able to get a sound even as good as his Xonar sound cards, but once he got the hub in there, it became a new beast.  I don't know the logic in how a device is able to honestly improve 10 fold via some hub thing, but whatever.  Battery supply supposedly gives you a bit more additional benefit, but is nothing like the Hub mod.
 
Currently Philip is working on a battery pack, so it may be worth your time to simply hold out and if that proves to be the trick for this device, well, it'll be $450 more, but if it can be implemented to customers even at a discount and give a sound superior to that hub trick or anything else that can be done to it, it's $450 well spent IMHO.

 

[Audioexcels]

Quote:

 
I think those comparisons done using an Offramp with turboclock upgrade, which pushed it to around $1.5K

The new Off Ramp 5 is superior to ANYTHING Off Ramp 4 and prior, so $1.2K gets you clearly superior sound to anything you have ever seen in a review.

 

[Audioexcels]

Quote:

Sorry can't see the article - can you paraphrase re the spdif output.
 
AFAIK there is also only a single frequency clock and the card is powered off motherboard rails, has no BNC socket as standard, I2S output requires mod.  IMO plenty of room to improve.
 
Many USB devices have improved in these areas with the sole restriction of the USB interface.  IMO its not that clear cut.

I think you put it correctly just in stating the not clear cut thing.  IMHO, I know a person that used the AP2 and likes his Xonar ST card MUCH MORE than the AP2, both via analog and coax out.  As much as 99 people out of 100 may say the USB interface is the best, that 1 will say they think not.  It's not saying the USB interface vs. another interface, but to say the USB based device that gets PC audio to your outboard dac or not, via USB rather than SPDIF or I2S, etc.  The more I listen to the latest and greatest players, like Jplay, for example, it's intention is no different than what I have heard with a lot of the USB converters=very aggressive, made for either people that have a horrid two channel home system, one that is geared towards a one dimensional soundstage where all they care about is hearing the resolution (can care less about soundstage depth/sense of venue/live music/list goes on), and so on.  This said, and no offense, but 99 out of 100 systems I have heard are literally crappy even if they are 100-500K systems...money matters not.
 
In the end, the USB converters, a sound card, whatever it may be, along with whatever player, etc. etc. is, IMHO, extremely dependent on listener preferences.  This is where that no clear cut comes into the equation because as Dave argues about the USB converters having superior jitter control, that's nice and all, but it means nothing if the sound is not very good or one can get as good or better sound out of something that maybe has more jitter, but sounds great to that user.
 
I think computer audio has come a LONG way, but as fast as it is progressing, I still feel it has a long ways to go.  Good thing is, EVERYTHING is pushing computer audio like digital cameras, so expect in months, year by year, etc. etc. that we will be increasing sound 10 fold with how much technology/money makers are in the field knowing this is what people from the AV world to the highest end audio world is wanting.  Nothing nicer than your entire ripped library of music right at the fingertips vs. tossing in cd after cd from a massive rack of cds!

 

[AppleheadMay]

Is the OR5 out yet, since I can't see it on the site.
 
And does one still need an OR when using an Overdrive Dac?
 

 

[DaveBSC]

Quote:

Is the OR5 out yet, since I can't see it on the site.
 
And does one still need an OR when using an Overdrive Dac?
 

I think it's just starting production. You don't need an OR with the Overdrive. Its USB input was upgraded around the same time that the OR4 was released, and so its basically the same thing.
 

 

[AppleheadMay]

Ah, but it will be different from the OR5 then? So an upgrade for the Overdrive will be coming?
 
I thought of using the OR + OD in a way it wasn't meant to be used.
If I connect an OR via USB to my computer at my desk and then run a netowrk cable from the I2S connection to the OD connected to the amp in the living room, thus kind of using it as a streamer, would that be possible?
The length would be about 10m, the cable is already installed in the walls. It's Cat 6 cable.
Does this cable have to be terminated as a normal Cat 6 Ethernet cbale or is the wiring different?

 

[DaveBSC]

Quote:

Ah, but it will be different from the OR5 then? So an upgrade for the Overdrive will be coming?
 
I thought of using the OR + OD in a way it wasn't meant to be used.
If I connect an OR via USB to my computer at my desk and then run a netowrk cable from the I2S connection to the OD connected to the amp in the living room, thus kind of using it as a streamer, would that be possible?
The length would be about 10m, the cable is already installed in the walls. It's Cat 6 cable.
Does this cable have to be terminated as a normal Cat 6 Ethernet cbale or is the wiring different?

Steve could better answer that, but you're unlikely to get any improvement from having the OR5 plugged in to the Overdrive. You can't just any old network cable you want with I2S. The jack may be RJ-45, but I2S is not Ethernet. You need an I2S cable, not a computer network cable. The I2S cable that Empirical sells is $450/m. A 10M cable would be frightfully expensive, and probably ill advised as I2S was not designed for long runs. Your best bet for a long length of digital cable is the ST glass fiber (AT&T) format - which would mean either an M2Tech EVO or Bel Canto Light Link paired with one of the Bel Canto DACs, some of the Wadia stuff, or one of the many vintage DACs that have ST inputs.
 

 

[Rdr. Seraphim]

I find your description interesting. I posted elsewhere that the AP2 into a near 6-figure system with a Wyred 4 Sound DAC-2 was so transformative, the soundstage was expansive, illumined and highly refined. Out of the box the AP2 was a revelation, but (and that's a big but), letting it sizzle for 200+ hours opened up the soundstage and relaxed the overall presentation. Digitization? Hmm... It was anything but! With the AP2 It's so much easier to listen to long sets, literally 4 - 6 hour long sets! 
 
Phillip has an interesting article (here: http://www.computeraudiophile.com/files/Audiophilleo%20vs%20Evo-%20Part%20%202%20and%203.pdf) from a 'phile at Computer Audiophile, that believes the AP2 is closer to his 24/96 master recordings than the comparative unit.  
 
I haven't listened to any of Steve's stuff. However, I'd love to see his specs more clearly defined. I believe, as far as jitter is concerned, that Phillip provides more thorough, comprehensive specs than anyone at this time. However, in that Steve hasn't provided any specs on his devices, doesn't mean his are less effective; it just means that there isn't anything to provide a direct comparison with other units.
 
Phillip plans to provide a battery power supply this month that I hope to give a try. So, if there are any differences due to power supply anomalies, maybe this will be an equalizer?
 
BTW, my buddy and I may already be realizing improvements since we have everything plugged into balanced power supply's from BPT and Equi=Tech, including the computing infrastructure. 
 
Quote:

I've been listening to the Audiophellio direct into my pre-dac, and using the USB cable (standard setup and no hub setup).  Sound has a lot more "digitization" than what I am used to with other converters.  A bit more of the mids/treble intensity.  Besides this, and it's subtle, the "most noticeable" thing is the lack of any soundstage depth.  I can literally sit next to my speakers and when the Audiophellio is inserted, the soundstage depth is so non-existing vs. my other transports that it literally sounds like there is no soundstage depth.
 
Has anyone else using this in a solid two channel system heard the same?  I can see people with speakers that don't have much depth to begin with not hear it...people using headphones, especially, would have a hard time hearing it.  But people with excellent soundstage depth, it would be interesting if you are hearing what I am too.

Thanks!
 
 
 
 

 

 

[DaveBSC]

Quote:

 
I haven't listened to any of Steve's stuff. However, I'd love to see his specs more clearly defined. I believe, as far as jitter is concerned, that Phillip provides more thorough, comprehensive specs than anyone at this time. However, in that Steve hasn't provided any specs on his devices, doesn't mean his are less effective; it just means that there isn't anything to provide a direct comparison with other units.

That would be nice, although if you ask Steve would probably be willing to fill you in on most of the details. If I remember correctly, he said in another forum that the OR4 with the Hynes regulator has around 150ps P-P jitter on its S/Pdif output.
 

 

[AppleheadMay]

Quote:

Steve could better answer that, but you're unlikely to get any improvement from having the OR5 plugged in to the Overdrive. You can't just any old network cable you want with I2S. The jack may be RJ-45, but I2S is not Ethernet. You need an I2S cable, not a computer network cable. The I2S cable that Empirical sells is $450/m. A 10M cable would be frightfully expensive, and probably ill advised as I2S was not designed for long runs. Your best bet for a long length of digital cable is the ST glass fiber (AT&T) format - which would mean either an M2Tech EVO or Bel Canto Light Link paired with one of the Bel Canto DACs, some of the Wadia stuff, or one of the many vintage DACs that have ST inputs.
 

 
10m of that cable is a bit silly indeed!  
Thanks for the info. I was aware of the Bel Canto system but I don't have fiber cable running in the wall.
I just took a quick glance at the Wadia/QSonix gear and that seems interesting. Will read up on it tonight, might be the solution I'm looking for.
 
Edit: Or not, seen the QSonix prices. 
 

 

[Rdr. Seraphim]

Here's the AP1/2 jitter spec, although it's not clear that jitter is the entire story:
 
 
[size=medium] [size=0.7em]

2.6 ps RMS phasejitter 10 Hz to 100 kHz.  < 5 ps RMS period jitter.

[/size]





[/size]
It's worth noting that Phillip provides the most comprehensive jitter specification of any of the S/PDIF transports currently available.
 
EDIT: To qualify, "Audeophilleo provides the most comprehensive jitter specification of any of the S/PDIF transports currently published." 
 
Quote:

That would be nice, although if you ask Steve would probably be willing to fill you in on most of the details. If I remember correctly, he said in another forum that the OR4 with the Hynes regulator has around 150ps P-P jitter on its S/Pdif output.
 

 

 

[Rdr. Seraphim]

An excellent article by Steve Nugent (linked from Phillip's Audiophilleo site) about jitter: http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue43/jitter.htm
 

 

[Szadzik]

Subscribed.

 

[AppleheadMay]

I am wondering about the USB-hub mod for the AP.
Is the better sound one gets with that hub compared to the sound used through a standard computer hub or even compared to straight from the computer?

 

[drez]

Quote:

An excellent article by Steve Nugent (linked from Phillip's Audiophilleo site) about jitter: http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue43/jitter.htm
 

Thanks for the link - it goes some way toward explaining why transports are not so straightforward.  I agree with the author though that the transport should not be used to colour the sound, rather to ensure that as much intact digital information is passed onto the DAC as possible.  I like also how the article points out that measurements can be misleading, and I think this is especially the case with computer based transports.