Last edited:
Audio-GD DI-20
- Thread starter soundlogic
- Start date
Hi Jimmychan,
You mean to check afterwards of update?
jimmychan
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2009
- Posts
- 372
- Likes
- 244
Yes, you notice the checksum has changed.
Very good sound coming from the latest beta firmware using the inside clock.
Robertson Audio is making me a reference Master ACSS cable for the pre- amp to Master 3. I’m using the agd cable but using Robertson ACSS reference cable in R2RHE to the pre-amp. Looking forward to any coming new firmware.
Robertson Audio is making me a reference Master ACSS cable for the pre- amp to Master 3. I’m using the agd cable but using Robertson ACSS reference cable in R2RHE to the pre-amp. Looking forward to any coming new firmware.
Jackula
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2012
- Posts
- 276
- Likes
- 317
From memory Robertson ACSS used to be a thicker AWG which is why I opted to buy the eBay Invictus cable. But now at the smaller 24 AWG, looks like I'll be buying a pair too.
I have just had a quick audition after 4.07 FW update, it's quite different from the original FW. It seems volume is up, more open, articulate. Doesn't mean the original FW is inferior, just different interpretation and taste to match with individual audio system I guess.
I'll need to try more this weekend.
I'll need to try more this weekend.
4.07= ultimate transparency and resolution so far. I cannot go back...
+1 - but still P mode is not as open as S mode in my system....
P mode is fuller. S mode is rawer (perhaps a drop more truthfull)-- can't think of a better word to describe it right now.
Oepsie
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2012
- Posts
- 44
- Likes
- 41
Interesting.. this is not entirely my experience. To me, P mode is a bit leaner than S mode. I agree that S is rawer but with my dac it has more weight and sounds more natural. P mode almost sounds ‘pretty’ and a bit dull (sorry for lack of better words).
but its a strange difference, not sure what is supposed to be better from a technical perspective?
I agree S is more natural- less coloured, more raw- but to my ears- leaner.
But- I like P better in my current setup. I do not find it dull- I do find it fuller without loosing detail.
No question- the differences in S and P are dependant on many other variants in components, cables and our ears....
But- I like P better in my current setup. I do not find it dull- I do find it fuller without loosing detail.
No question- the differences in S and P are dependant on many other variants in components, cables and our ears....
In P mode, the soundstage is imho not as wide as in s mode...maybe it is also a question of the source. My laptop is not the fastest one.
S mode and nos on the r8 is for me the perfekt setting, someone could feel that the image of details might be overly sharp but this is how i like it and it is always a question of gear synergy. I leave the r8 and di20he powered on most of the time and after 12 hours, the r8 changes in sound dramatically....the sound is completely decoupled, holographic and unbeleavable wide and deep....amazing for an item with such bad measurements
S mode and nos on the r8 is for me the perfekt setting, someone could feel that the image of details might be overly sharp but this is how i like it and it is always a question of gear synergy. I leave the r8 and di20he powered on most of the time and after 12 hours, the r8 changes in sound dramatically....the sound is completely decoupled, holographic and unbeleavable wide and deep....amazing for an item with such bad measurements
What is an R8, an external clock? And I want to try the newest firmware update but it looks like I need a special cable, where do I get that and is there any other hardware needed? Thanks
newabc
100+ Head-Fier
Here's my brief impressions on the DI-20 after owning mine for 3 weeks.
I went for the upgraded 90/98M version and no external clock so far and I'm coming from an early 1st-gen Singxer SU-1 DDC. My source is Win. laptop out to a series of both Schiit Wyrd USB 'cleaner' and iFi iPurifier 2 cleaner before going into this DDC; numerous tests tests with many DAC's and both DDCs with all styles of music have unwaveringly been in favor of using both components beforehand. My DAC is Chord Qutest and I'm using a decent DC LPS to further improve its' performance. Amp is Quad PA One +, headphones are HD-600 with upgraded silver cable (or) Stax electrostat system.
Early testing actually had me a little disappointed, seeming like a bit fatiguing with extra treble emphasis. I also wasn't convinced about the bass or soundstage. Letting it burn in with music for about 8 hours / day usually when I wasn't in front of it (in addition to the 100 hrs. factory burn-in), somewhere I became more pleased with the result, probably around week two.
Fresh off the heels of a critical comparison between the DI-20 vs. SU-1, and vs. a CD transport via Toslink optical directly into my DAC, here are my findings:
The SU-1 gave me more of a sense of 'immediacy', as if it could be giving better sound. But several more A/B's had shown that to me that was more of an edgy character giving a false impression of good performance... switching back to the DI-20 (both using the same well-mastered test song and same digital coax cable), it became evident that the DI-20 has a better resolution to the low-end, smoother highs and an overall more realistic sound. Another switch back to the SU-1 made it sound as if some elements of the resolution are a bit 'smeared'; still sounding competitive but just not as well presented and with lower sense of resolution. I'm lucky that the DI-20 has smoothed / balanced out fairly well because I was beginning to question the FR towards the beginning, and now I can listen largely without fatigue and sometimes even experience too much bass, and thankfully that is just due to the occasional recording itself.
Next I put it up against my CD transport (Teac CD P650B) directly to my DAC via top Toslink optical cable instead of going through my laptop - USB chain - DDC route. I was playing the same song at the same time on both units, CD on the transport and FLAC on my PC. I was quite impressed: It took several A/B's before being able to detect any differences! I was able to instantly switch between the two sources with the DAC input button. Perhaps I was getting texture that was a nuance more detailed and bass with a very very slight edge in resolution on the CD transport, but that was all I could notice thus far in that comparison. And that is quite the testament to the performance of the DI-20, being able to sound virtually identical to the CD transport of a fairly good brand name, bypassing its' internal DAC with a direct to DAC optical connection of good quality.
I'm happy to say it looks like the DI-20 is a keeper and has improved over time. There are unfortunately several draw-backs: It does not support DSD over SPDIF (both coax) outputs, which for me means I have to physically move the USB cable to my DAC instead of the DDC when I want to listen to those; being that coax is the only common connection type between the the DI-20 and the Qutest DAC. Also I occasionally get a high pitch buzzing sound when stopping audio.
RE the P(arrellel) vs. S(serial) modes. Dozens of A/B comparisons has me going for the S mode, sounding to me a very small nuance smoother with relaxed treble. It really is nuanced however to the point where it may be nothing more than a placebo. I even went as far as to measure it today before writing this, thinking I can post a graphic showing how S mode has lower treble response than P mode. However NOPE! I was astounded to see such an utterly minuscule difference on my visual spectrum analysis that it literally would not even be noticeable to the eye. The process I used was playing white noise through a DAW that I EQ'd to ensure for a flat FR curve before going out, recording the output from my amp into my A/D converter (opposite of a DAC), then analysing the recording of both P / S modes visually with a VST plugin. Even zooming into only 10Khz-20Khz the difference was small enough to fool the eye.
I would be interested to try an external clock sometime down the line, but I would wonder if it's even theoretically possible for a DDC to further improve the sound from a laptop via USB above that of a CD transport via optical connection. I've heard the HDMI connection type is the best however that's not compatible with my DAC.
PS - I've noticed the R8 refers to one of Audio-GD's DAC's. For me I've already tried a new R-1 but even after several weeks burn-in, to me it was not even distantly comparable to the Qutest DAC, also not even to an entry-level DAC I had. I haven't tried the R8 however.
I went for the upgraded 90/98M version and no external clock so far and I'm coming from an early 1st-gen Singxer SU-1 DDC. My source is Win. laptop out to a series of both Schiit Wyrd USB 'cleaner' and iFi iPurifier 2 cleaner before going into this DDC; numerous tests tests with many DAC's and both DDCs with all styles of music have unwaveringly been in favor of using both components beforehand. My DAC is Chord Qutest and I'm using a decent DC LPS to further improve its' performance. Amp is Quad PA One +, headphones are HD-600 with upgraded silver cable (or) Stax electrostat system.
Early testing actually had me a little disappointed, seeming like a bit fatiguing with extra treble emphasis. I also wasn't convinced about the bass or soundstage. Letting it burn in with music for about 8 hours / day usually when I wasn't in front of it (in addition to the 100 hrs. factory burn-in), somewhere I became more pleased with the result, probably around week two.
Fresh off the heels of a critical comparison between the DI-20 vs. SU-1, and vs. a CD transport via Toslink optical directly into my DAC, here are my findings:
The SU-1 gave me more of a sense of 'immediacy', as if it could be giving better sound. But several more A/B's had shown that to me that was more of an edgy character giving a false impression of good performance... switching back to the DI-20 (both using the same well-mastered test song and same digital coax cable), it became evident that the DI-20 has a better resolution to the low-end, smoother highs and an overall more realistic sound. Another switch back to the SU-1 made it sound as if some elements of the resolution are a bit 'smeared'; still sounding competitive but just not as well presented and with lower sense of resolution. I'm lucky that the DI-20 has smoothed / balanced out fairly well because I was beginning to question the FR towards the beginning, and now I can listen largely without fatigue and sometimes even experience too much bass, and thankfully that is just due to the occasional recording itself.
Next I put it up against my CD transport (Teac CD P650B) directly to my DAC via top Toslink optical cable instead of going through my laptop - USB chain - DDC route. I was playing the same song at the same time on both units, CD on the transport and FLAC on my PC. I was quite impressed: It took several A/B's before being able to detect any differences! I was able to instantly switch between the two sources with the DAC input button. Perhaps I was getting texture that was a nuance more detailed and bass with a very very slight edge in resolution on the CD transport, but that was all I could notice thus far in that comparison. And that is quite the testament to the performance of the DI-20, being able to sound virtually identical to the CD transport of a fairly good brand name, bypassing its' internal DAC with a direct to DAC optical connection of good quality.
I'm happy to say it looks like the DI-20 is a keeper and has improved over time. There are unfortunately several draw-backs: It does not support DSD over SPDIF (both coax) outputs, which for me means I have to physically move the USB cable to my DAC instead of the DDC when I want to listen to those; being that coax is the only common connection type between the the DI-20 and the Qutest DAC. Also I occasionally get a high pitch buzzing sound when stopping audio.
RE the P(arrellel) vs. S(serial) modes. Dozens of A/B comparisons has me going for the S mode, sounding to me a very small nuance smoother with relaxed treble. It really is nuanced however to the point where it may be nothing more than a placebo. I even went as far as to measure it today before writing this, thinking I can post a graphic showing how S mode has lower treble response than P mode. However NOPE! I was astounded to see such an utterly minuscule difference on my visual spectrum analysis that it literally would not even be noticeable to the eye. The process I used was playing white noise through a DAW that I EQ'd to ensure for a flat FR curve before going out, recording the output from my amp into my A/D converter (opposite of a DAC), then analysing the recording of both P / S modes visually with a VST plugin. Even zooming into only 10Khz-20Khz the difference was small enough to fool the eye.
I would be interested to try an external clock sometime down the line, but I would wonder if it's even theoretically possible for a DDC to further improve the sound from a laptop via USB above that of a CD transport via optical connection. I've heard the HDMI connection type is the best however that's not compatible with my DAC.
PS - I've noticed the R8 refers to one of Audio-GD's DAC's. For me I've already tried a new R-1 but even after several weeks burn-in, to me it was not even distantly comparable to the Qutest DAC, also not even to an entry-level DAC I had. I haven't tried the R8 however.
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
