[oatmeal769]

Thanks guys...
I know what you mean about the Zep CD. I brought it (Phys. Graffiti) because I'm intimately familiar with what it sounds like on my rig, and the other gazillion systems I've heard it on over the years.

I'm always glad to hear an ultrasone disc or something, but those are tough to make sound bad. I'm a musician, and former audio engineer. What I want from a rig, is to reproduce as accurately as possible the information on the source media. If the recording is bad, I want to hear it. I don't want something that colors, or makes it 'better.' The better the resolution, dynamic ability, lower the noise floor etc., the more I'm likely to dig it.
With the Zana rig, I heard some overtones to the fundamental notes of the clavinet on the opening track I'd not heard as clearly ever, if at all. Then it practically startled me with the immediacy of some transient stuff, I think it was a jazz drummers kick drum or something...Pretty cool.

I want something that can handle the amazing transients of a Crystal Method CD, slamming my head with digitally created bass notes, (because it's in the recording) and then go right to an excellent recording of a string quintet, where I can tell the species of horse used for the bowstrings, and how thick the cello player's callouses are. After that, it's the thickest Melvins recording, where I want to really get what each instrument is doing, rather than be caught in a mosh...

If I can get that with a $300 DAC, and not bottleneck a Zana, DNA, or B22, Great. If I need to spend a grand to get it, well then I'd better save some more.

 

[Currawong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Audio-Omega /img/forum/go_quote.gif What do you mean by crap ?

Similar to what happened after I listened with a Nakamichi Dragon, then switched to my Northstar. Though day to day I had been happy with the Northstar, after the experience with the Dragon, the Northstar sounds like crap. I can't go into specifics sorry, as I wasn't listening critically, except to say that the Benchmark sounds digital to me. It is a case of, the higher up the chain you go, the less tolerant you are of stuff lower down.

 

[Pricklely Peete]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oatmeal769 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks guys... I know what you mean about the Zep CD. I brought it (Phys. Graffiti) because I'm intimately familiar with what it sounds like on my rig, and the other gazillion systems I've heard it on over the years. I'm always glad to hear an ultrasone disc or something, but those are tough to make sound bad. I'm a musician, and former audio engineer. What I want from a rig, is to reproduce as accurately as possible the information on the source media. If the recording is bad, I want to hear it. I don't want something that colors, or makes it 'better.' The better the resolution, dynamic ability, lower the noise floor etc., the more I'm likely to dig it. With the Zana rig, I heard some overtones to the fundamental notes of the clavinet on the opening track I'd not heard as clearly ever, if at all. Then it practically startled me with the immediacy of some transient stuff, I think it was a jazz drummers kick drum or something...Pretty cool. I want something that can handle the amazing transients of a Crystal Method CD, slamming my head with digitally created bass notes, (because it's in the recording) and then go right to an excellent recording of a string quintet, where I can tell the species of horse used for the bowstrings, and how thick the cello player's callouses are. After that, it's the thickest Melvins recording, where I want to really get what each instrument is doing, rather than be caught in a mosh... If I can get that with a $300 DAC, and not bottleneck a Zana, DNA, or B22, Great. If I need to spend a grand to get it, well then I'd better save some more.

Sounds to me like you would appreciate the RE1 and what it can do or something similar (RE2 perhaps ?). What do you think Dro ?

I think he's ready or willing to make that leap by the sounds of what he wants and is describing. You'll not get that level of resolution from a 300 dollar DAC Oatmeal, sorry to say. You can come close but it won't even be in the same league to a true high end unit. It's something you have to hear for yourself, similar to your experiences of late with the great tube gear. Did you make note of what sources were being used at that time ?

Peete.

PS: Another Melvin's fan ? Excellent (as Mr Burns would say).

 

[Happy Camper]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong /img/forum/go_quote.gif Similar to what happened after I listened with a Nakamichi Dragon, then switched to my Northstar. Though day to day I had been happy with the Northstar, after the experience with the Dragon, the Northstar sounds like crap. I can't go into specifics sorry, as I wasn't listening critically, except to say that the Benchmark sounds digital to me. It is a case of, the higher up the chain you go, the less tolerant you are of stuff lower down.

I've seen the dragon for $1500 recently. Any comment between the Ref 1 and it?

 

[Drosera]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pricklely Peete /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sounds to me like you would appreciate the RE1 and what it can do or something similar (RE2 perhaps ?). What do you think Dro ?

Well, even apart from musical tastes I would of course also say that, when you get something of the level of the Zana Deux, you need a source that really matches it.

It's unfortunate that there are no impressions of the Reference Two anywhere, apart from the Audio-gd website. I would guess that it should at least sound somewhat similar to some of the more expensive Marantz cd players (since it uses the same DA chipset). And I would think, based on my very limited experience with those, that the Ref Two is slightly on the coloured and warm side compared to the Reference One (only slightly though). You could mail Kingwa with your preferences and taste in music and ask him for advice. After all, he's apparently the only person to have heard both extensively.
But yeah, I would agree with Peete, it does sound like the Reference One would be exactly what you're looking for.

 

[sandchak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drosera /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's unfortunate that there are no impressions of the Reference Two anywhere, apart from the Audio-gd website. I would guess that it should at least sound somewhat similar to some of the more expensive Marantz cd players (since it uses the same DA chipset). And I would think, based on my very limited experience with those, that the Ref Two is slightly on the coloured and warm side compared to the Reference One (only slightly though). You could mail Kingwa with your preferences and taste in music and ask him for advice. After all, he's apparently the only person to have heard both extensively. But yeah, I would agree with Peete, it does sound like the Reference One would be exactly what you're looking for.

I agree with you Dro, its quite unfortunate that there are no impressions on REF2, according to Kingwa it has a ratio of 10:1 when it comes to the sale of REF1 and 2, and also not a single REF2 has been sold overseas. I was myself in a dilemma for quite a while, whether to go for REF1 or 2, since I mostly listen to Jazz (although of late I have started to listen and enjoy some classical music..

).

Anyway, the reason why I finally decided to go for the REF1 (shipped today -

) is because I have the CD7, and the RCA output from CD7 sounds quite different from the BNC (CAST) output - in fact the RCA out sounds slightly warmer and close to my Marantz CD17 which is more suitable for my tastes when I listen Jazz, but somehow I feel its losing some dynamics while listening to classical music through the RCA out, in this case the BNC CAST does the trick ( it has more clarity and dynamic) and much suited for classical music (I enjoy more). Which is why I decided to go for a neutral DAC rather than something musical, and in any case I love the sound of my DAC19SE, which according to Kingwa shares the same neutrality as the REF1 - although at the bottom of the table.

So yes, choice of DAC depends on personal tastes (music) and the source, which in my case I personally believe its the CD7.

 

[oatmeal769]

Ahh yes... Melvins. Sludge rock at it's finest! I have quite the collection going.

I'm watching this pretty closely:

Viewing a thread - Little Dot DAC_I Digital to Analog Converter

Very interested to see if it will beat the modded Zero, and possibly offer me a good source to a future high end amp.

Here's what is bothering me about the Reference 1. Holy smokes that's a WHOLE LOT of electronics for such a simple task!!

How can any signal remain pure and uncolored when it has to go through or is affected by all that stuff!

The gear I have always liked best for the longest has always been a simple robust time tested design, made with the best components, as simply as possible. I'm a minimalist and a purist. I can't imagine all that stuff is in there to simply provide an uncolored conversion from ones and zero's to an analog signal.
In short, I want a DAC I DON'T hear.

 

[Drosera]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oatmeal769 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ahh yes... Melvins. Sludge rock at it's finest! I have quite the collection going. I'm watching this pretty closely: Viewing a thread - Little Dot DAC_I Digital to Analog Converter Very interested to see if it will beat the modded Zero, and possibly offer me a good source to a future high end amp. Here's what is bothering me about the Reference 1. Holy smokes that's a WHOLE LOT of electronics for such a simple task!! How can any signal remain pure and uncolored when it has to go through or is affected by all that stuff! The gear I have always liked best for the longest has always been a simple robust time tested design, made with the best components, as simply as possible. I'm a minimalist and a purist. I can't imagine all that stuff is in there to simply provide an uncolored conversion from ones and zero's to an analog signal. In short, I want a DAC I DON'T hear.

To put it very succinctly: it usually costs quite a bit of money to make a DAC disappear.

DA-conversion done well is a delicate process. It not only needs good DA-chips but good power-regulation as well. I'm not saying you necessarily have to use as many components as are in the Reference One, but you need quite a few nonetheless. The problem with uncoloured sound is that doesn't hide anything. So all the other aspects of the DAC have to be very good as well otherwise their faults will show up in the sound. That's at least one of the reasons most sources don't have the level of neutrality that the Reference One has.

Signals won't be coloured necessarily by putting them through a whole lot of components. They might get degraded that way though. But here the Reference One has an excellent trick up its sleeve which is called CAST. By keeping the signal in the current-domain, instead of the voltage-domain (as 99% of audio equipment does) the signal is far less susceptible to interference and degredation. And most of those components in the Reference One are actually power rectifying circuitry, so the music signal doesn't even go through them.

To me it's obvious that the quality of the source matters. And that the degrees of possible improvements are virtually endless. You'll no doubt know that there are plenty of DACs that cost a multiple of what the Reference One costs. And I am sure that quite a few of them will sound even better than the Reference One does. But it's hard for me to convince you of this. That's why I said you might like to try some hi-end sources out for yourself at a good HiFi store to get an idea of the quality that's available.

Perhaps the Zero DAC is good enough for you, or perhaps you could be satisfied with something like the Little Dot DAC_1. Having heard neither I won't comment on them, but from what I can gather from other people's impressions, it's actually not such a big feat for a DAC to sound better than a modded Zero. It's just that you won't find those in that low a price bracket.

 

[vincponc2610]

Does anyone know if Kingwa plan to implement a high precision clock into a future DAC ?
Temperature Compensated Crystal Oscillators (TCXO) seems to be part of all high end DACs.

 

[sandchak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vincponc2610 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Does anyone know if Kingwa plan to implement a high precision clock into a future DAC ? Temperature Compensated Crystal Oscillators (TCXO) seems to be part of all high end DACs.

I think I had asked this question to Kingwa, and what he said, if I understand correctly is : a lot of DACs have these clocks but not used in audio circuits, to an extent that in some DAC it only adds to the specs (not SQ) unless the DAC uses programmable chips, especially in cases where it uses DIR9001 or CS8414/6, where the clock really is of no use..

 

[ServinginEcuador]

Peete et al,

Does anyone know if the Ref 1 reclocks the input signal? I'm looking at a jittery source that needs a reclock, but don't want to spend the money for it if the Ref 1 can accomplish this by itself.

Thanks! If no one knows I'll write Kingwa an email, but figured it would be faster this way.

 

[sachu]

The Ref1 is quite nice. I enjoyed it while I had it. It is off to its new owner today.

 

[Pricklely Peete]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ServinginEcuador /img/forum/go_quote.gif Peete et al, Does anyone know if the Ref 1 reclocks the input signal? I'm looking at a jittery source that needs a reclock, but don't want to spend the money for it if the Ref 1 can accomplish this by itself. Thanks! If no one knows I'll write Kingwa an email, but figured it would be faster this way.

I think it does a really good job of rejecting jitter but the best thing would be email Kingwa for the nitty gritty. In the meantime read the info on the RE1 page while you wait for a more comprehensive explanation.

н¨ÍøÒ³ 1

Peete.

 

[Audio-Omega]

Did you sell yours ?


Quote:

Originally Posted by sachu /img/forum/go_quote.gif The Ref1 is quite nice. I enjoyed it while I had it. It is off to its new owner today.

 

[atothex]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sachu /img/forum/go_quote.gif The Ref1 is quite nice. I enjoyed it while I had it. It is off to its new owner today.

Did you replace it with a $90 surround processor?