[yossi126]

Crossfeed is so useless with an average DAC. An average DAC makes the seperation and soundstage effect just as good. So in short, crossfeed should not entertain your choosings.

 

[oqvist]

Why is it useless? If you listen to really really old recordings it can come in handy surely when you simply get to much stereo separation otherwise.

 

[Audio Jester]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yossi126 /img/forum/go_quote.gif crossfeed should not entertain your choosings.

I partially agree yossi, but it does come in handy some times. I have enjoyed it on my current Meier amp, so it would be nice to have that feature. My main concern is that we are not comparing apples to apples with the Meier Concerto vs the AudioGD C2. I would have thought the Concerto is better considering the price.

 

[audiorapture]

Audio Jester: Just a thought but, (I am also considering the Concerto because of the ground and crossfeed function), if YOU want the SE and don't want to change anything, stay with what you like. My stating the obvious means you can be reading opinions for years, but what matters will be what your ears hear and what you pay for. If there were a chart that said this headphone goes best with this amp and DAC playing this type of music using this power cord, at such and such a price; it would already be printed, right?. If you get buyers remorse, sell what you don't like. I still like my Aria. So I kept it. But mainly, wouldn't you want to wait and go to a meet or two first and hear the amp with a hundred or more hours on it before you jump in? Then take the amp around and hear what the differences are with the headphones you usually listen to and the music you like. Most members do an excellent job with their recommendations. But since you have narrowed the field down to only a few, I would wait till the Concerto is broken in and then listen to the variations. There have been some very good suggestions here with what to match up with. I will probably be doing the same, so best of luck with your choice....

 

[Audio Jester]

Thanks audiorapture, sadly where I live it is very difficult (almost impossible) to audition the gear that I want. All of my purchses to date have been purely off peoples opinions and reviews and so far I feel that they do give you a relatively accurate description ( once you read a large number of comments

). If I was purchasing gear in the High-end realm then I would probably try and hunt one down to hear it, but at this mid-fi level I am happy to trust the words of others.

 

[Currawong]

Take one for the team and buy both, give them 400 hours then let us know how they compare.

 

[Audio Jester]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong /img/forum/go_quote.gif Take one for the team and buy both, give them 400 hours then let us know how they compare.

LOL, A true HeadFi response. The thought had crossed my mind.

 

[SoupRKnowva]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Audio Jester /img/forum/go_quote.gif LOL, A true HeadFi response. The thought had crossed my mind.

its a good idea, im doing the same thing with the Protector and the Pico Slim, couldnt decide so i decided to get both and compare myself

 

[littletree76]

I found following description of technical characteristic on output stage of DAC19-DSP DAC in Audio-GD website:
 
"A dual stages parallel connection cascode FET 0DB output buffers for RCA output. The ACSS and output buffers both are Zero feedback circuits. The DAC-19 supports ACSS output, can connect to Audio-gd ACSS input amps like C-2 headphone amp and CIA-400 power amp. The DAC-19  uses DC servo circuits to keep the output offset at zero, so there are no coupling caps in the analogy signal path."
 
And technical specification on output stage of StageDAC DAC in Meier Audio website:
"LM6171 opamps biased into class-A using LM334 current sources."
 
DAC19-DSP is built entirely of discrete components include the line output stage whereas StageDAC is built with off-the-shelf op-amp integrated circuit for the same line output. Products from these two companies seems adhere to these two different implementation principles. Do you always consider discrete component is always better than op-amp integrated circuit or the other way round ? Or choice of implementation is tied up closely with designer's experience/expertise and either way can achieve same result (analogy: different tennis players use different rackets but all of them have potential to become champion) ?

 

[FauDrei]

Let's put it this way - it depends on implementation. Discrete can better opamp, opamp can better discrete.
 
...it is just that discrete has much greater potential to be more adequately tuned to it's purposes, and if designer know what he is doing - it usually is.

 

[dura]

I had a Stagedac for a few weeks and now have an Audio-GD REF5.
The Stagedac had very deep bass and an spectacular sound stage, spreading out behind, before and outside of my speakers.
However, I did not like the tonality, voices and acoustic instruments sounded off tone, not believable at all.
The REF5 has an average soundstage, not much depth, reasonable width, but it's tonality is very very good. I absolutely love it, but then I seem to be allergic to the delta sigma sound of most digital sources.

 

[FauDrei]

My experience with A-GD gear teached me few things:
 

1. A-GD gear can sound mediocre on the first listen. Hundred factory hours or not, the ample capacitance in A-GD gear needs some run-in time to fully form. How much? It depends on total capacitance and on the capacitance of "biggest" caps inside.
2. If it isn't warm to the touch - give it few more minutes to warm up. It will sound better.
3. Their gear do scale up. Give it better transport, power conditioning, better cables, even vibration control... you will hear improvements.
4. Have means but uncertain? Go for their TotL gear. You will never look back.

 
Beside that, I have learned that "just better power supply" can mean means night and day difference in audio.
 
...just my 0,02€

 

[littletree76]

Quote:

I had a Stagedac for a few weeks and now have an Audio-GD REF5.
The Stagedac had very deep bass and an spectacular sound stage, spreading out behind, before and outside of my speakers.
However, I did not like the tonality, voices and acoustic instruments sounded off tone, not believable at all.
The REF5 has an average soundstage, not much depth, reasonable width, but it's tonality is very very good. I absolutely love it, but then I seem to be allergic to the delta sigma sound of most digital sources.

 
Do you achieve the spectacular sound stage produced by StageDAC by setting cross-feed to wide speaker option ? What are your settings for the rest of settings on StageDAC particularly tonal balance ? Have you made use of these settings to tweak the tonality since you do not like it ?

 

[dura]

Quote:

 
Do you achieve the spectacular sound stage produced by StageDAC by setting cross-feed to wide speaker option ? What are your settings for the rest of settings on StageDAC particularly tonal balance ? Have you made use of these settings to tweak the tonality since you do not like it ?

No, those settings did not do very much on a speakerbased system. Same goes for the other switches, those will probably be very useful on a headphone system, but on a speakersystem are less significant. I left the cross-feed off, since it add to give some 'pollution' on the treble.
My speakers (see sign) have a d'appolito configuration, and are capable of giving a very spatial sound stage. With the Stagedac that gives pinpoint images all over the place, the Audio-GD give more a kind of 'wall of sound', were every component can be easily distinguished, but not exactly placed. This sound more realistic to my ears, but the Stagedac can be spectacular with the right kind of recording.
Ultimately however, it sounded too 'digital' to my ears to be the real thing, studying treads here have me believe it is because delta-sigma DACs often add a kind of quantification noise I seem to be allergic too, and R2R DACs do not. Which is why I can listen for hours and hours to the Audio-GD, but not to the Stagedac.