Audio-GD Reference 7 - the new flagship DAC

[axw]

Quote:

Did you compare [some DAC]=>ASCC=>Phoenix=>XLR to [another DAC, DA-10?]=>XLR ???
 

 
No, there's no point in plugging another DAC to Phoenix outputs. The comparison was as follows:

[Audio GD DAC-19] -> ACSS -> Phoenix -> XLR -> Adam Audio S3X-V
vs:
[Audio GD DAC-19] ->  XLR -> Adam Audio S3X-V
 
where ACSS cable was the default one from Audio GD. The difference was not subtle: it's rather difficult to convince myself to daily listening knowing that so much better setup is obtainable by simply skipping Phoenix. I don't know how to explain that. Perhaps Phoenix is not optimized for transparency of XLR outputs. Probably C-3 would be better off here? Would it be transparent? Did anybody compare Reference 7 XLR outputs versus XLR outputs from top Audio GD C-3 preamp connected by ACSS?
 
My experiences with preamps so far are rather pessimistic, they all degraded sound quality. Some months ago I purchased a Proceed Pre (rebranded Mark Levinson) to discover it was not transparent and sell it afterwards.

 

[axw]

Quote:

Yup, they are between the REF7 and Phoenix.

very interesting, you happen to be using very similar setup to the one I tested. I also happen to use active speakers. Don't you find Phoenix degrading sound clarity of Reference 7?

 

[Dynobot]

Quote:

Quote:

Did you compare [some DAC]=>ASCC=>Phoenix=>XLR to [another DAC, DA-10?]=>XLR ???
 

 
No, there's no point in plugging another DAC to Phoenix outputs. The comparison was as follows:

[Audio GD DAC-19] -> ACSS -> Phoenix -> XLR -> Adam Audio S3X-V
vs:
[Audio GD DAC-19] ->  XLR -> Adam Audio S3X-V
 
where ACSS cable was the default one from Audio GD. The difference was not subtle: it's rather difficult to convince myself to daily listening knowing that so much better setup is obtainable by simply skipping Phoenix. I don't know how to explain that. Perhaps Phoenix is not optimized for transparency of XLR outputs. Probably C-3 would be better off here? Would it be transparent? Did anybody compare Reference 7 XLR outputs versus XLR outputs from top Audio GD C-3 preamp connected by ACSS?
 
My experiences with preamps so far are rather pessimistic, they all degraded sound quality. Some months ago I purchased a Proceed Pre (rebranded Mark Levinson) to discover it was not transparent and sell it afterwards.

You used a AGD Dac 19 with XLR cables....?  Interesting
 

 

[Dynobot]

This is transparent...I used it between a Ref 5 and Dynaudio powered speakers
 
AND
 
a Ref 7 and a pair of Xindak mono-blocks to Dynaudio full range speakers.  No difference in sound with it in place vs. without.
 
Either way, if you are using a computer as a source that is your weakest link, I tried every OS with every software and configuration known.  Only to have an old Adcom cpd best everything...I can only imagine what a good transport would sound like.
 
 

 

[IPodPJ]

Better ACSS cables definitely do make a difference over the stock ones.

 

[axw]

Quote:

You used a AGD Dac 19 with XLR cables....?  Interesting

 
you are very right that I made a small but obvious mistake, the exact schema of the comparison should be as follows:
 
 
[Audio GD DAC-19] -> ACSS  cable-> Phoenix -> XLR cable -> Adam Audio S3X-V
vs:
[Audio GD DAC-19] ->  (RCA-2-XLR-converter) -> XLR cable -> Adam Audio S3X-V
 
 
I typed "XLR" meaning the same pair of XLR cables was used for both listenings.
 
I compared that also vs Lavry DA-10 dac. Tested two transports: M2tech Evo vs Squeezebox Receiver. But this should go into a separate thread probably, because the conclusions aren't much related to Reference 7.

 

[axw]

Quote:

Better ACSS cables definitely do make a difference over the stock ones.

Ah. Thanks for the input. Apparently, current domain conversion aka ACSS is not sufficient to get rid of cabling issues at all. I could easily agree with your statement given the sonics of phoenix via default AGD's ACSS cable.

 

[IPodPJ]

Quote:

Quote:

Better ACSS cables definitely do make a difference over the stock ones.

Ah. Thanks for the input. Apparently, current domain conversion aka ACSS is not sufficient to get rid of cabling issues at all. I could easily agree with your statement given the sonics of phoenix via default AGD's ACSS cable.

 
Also, I felt that the XLR inputs on the Phoenix had a more natural and dynamic sound than the ACSS inputs.  ACSS might be technically more refined as it has a slightly better SNR.
 

 

[SP Wild]

The Phoenix has landed.
 
I am using BJC XLR at the moment as my repeated attempts to try and get a 2 metre ACSS cable sent with the Phoenix was ignored.  A little scuff mark/scratch on the input selector.  Hmmm, lets see now.  It seems to me that Audio GD gears were voiced together...the Reference 7 amongst the brightest DACs I have heard...and the Phoenix supposedly slightly dark.  It seems to me there is no substitute for power and all my amps are only adequately, not exceptionally powered.  Suddenly I have no desire for a tube amp.  No hum with the SE530 IEMs audible until after 60/70 in the volume control...this is quite a remarkable achievement.

 

[haloxt]

Quote:

 

Quote:

Custom ACSS cables by Norse Audio (if you are interested, message TigzStudio on these forums... he´s already selling some stuff before his official site launches, with discounts). And no, I don´t have anything to do with his business.  Just a happy customer. Stylish high end cables at reasonable prices - not very common.
 
Only had them plugged in for 15 minutes so far. Sounds awesome, but I´m listening from new active monitors anyway, so I can´t say how much they changed the sound.

Sounds awesome compared to what exactly? Default audio-gd ACSS cables? If such is the case, I am beginning to loose my confidence in ACSS.. isn't the whole point of it and current domain transmission idea to minimize losses and distortions to the point that cable choice becomes less (ir-?)relevant?
 
Somehow related: I verified today that Audio-GD Phoenix is pretty far from being a transparent device even using ACSS. Compared to xlr outputs on the dac (19, have to order a REF7 yet), music from Phoenix is significantly less alive and transparent, there's less details. So maybe hi-end ACSS cables may help.
 
Is there such a thing as fully transparent preamp anyway?
 

For almost a year I used dac19mk3 rca to phoenix and the sound felt lopsided, phoenix was trying to amplify microdetail that the dac19 wasn't fast or accurate enough to do. Using single-ended headphones would make the soundstage seem smaller but fuller.

 

[vrln]

Quote:

The Phoenix has landed.
 
I am using BJC XLR at the moment as my repeated attempts to try and get a 2 metre ACSS cable sent with the Phoenix was ignored.  A little scuff mark/scratch on the input selector.  Hmmm, lets see now.  It seems to me that Audio GD gears were voiced together...the Reference 7 amongst the brightest DACs I have heard...and the Phoenix supposedly slightly dark.  It seems to me there is no substitute for power and all my amps are only adequately, not exceptionally powered.  Suddenly I have no desire for a tube amp.  No hum with the SE530 IEMs audible until after 60/70 in the volume control...this is quite a remarkable achievement.

Congrats! Send Kingwa an email about that ("Send to Kingwa only" in the subject) - I´m sure he´ll send you a perfect volume knob and the ACSS cables too. I got broken Phoenix DC cables with my order, and Kingwa sent me at least 3 when I told him about it
 
The REF7 and Phoenix are a fantastic combo - on some albums they sound bright, sometimes relaxed and dark... Well, they sound as the record sounds! I´ve also tried with the Shure IEM´s, it´s pretty amazing it makes less noise than a small iPod. That´s some serious engineering, especially as it was NOT made for running supersensitive gear. Quite the opposite in fact - almost 3 W per channel in many popular OHM-ratings in pure class A is not something you´ll see every day. It eats 50W power, which is pretty hardcore for a headphone amp!
 
In my experience XLR and ACSS sound a bit different. What I can´t say is that if one of them is better. I like both equally - right now I´m running ACSS though. XLR to me sounds clearly more musical, while ACSS is very pure. Kingwa used the words "coca cola vs water". I think it´s pretty fitting. Listening to Diana Krall right now through the Phoenix + Genelec active monitors. Sounds very relaxing while staying hyperdetailed. I can highly recommend Kingwa´s XLR cords too, they are very nice. A little smooth in sound signature, the are a fantastic match for my analytical monitors.

 

[Pacha]

 
Quote:

Better ACSS cables definitely do make a difference over the stock ones.

I agree, definitely.

 

[.Sup]

Quote:

The Phoenix has landed.
 
I am using BJC XLR at the moment as my repeated attempts to try and get a 2 metre ACSS cable sent with the Phoenix was ignored.  A little scuff mark/scratch on the input selector.  Hmmm, lets see now.  It seems to me that Audio GD gears were voiced together...the Reference 7 amongst the brightest DACs I have heard...and the Phoenix supposedly slightly dark.  It seems to me there is no substitute for power and all my amps are only adequately, not exceptionally powered.  Suddenly I have no desire for a tube amp.  No hum with the SE530 IEMs audible until after 60/70 in the volume control...this is quite a remarkable achievement.

Ref7 the brightest DAC? Then Ref5 must be the opposite as its very dark sounding.

 

[Currawong]

ACSS (or rather, CAST as Krell call it) should eliminate any need for expensive cables to a considerable degree. 
 
As for the Phoenix being transparent, using it with active monitors you're adding a gain stage that may make it less electrically compatible than the DAC.  I'm still thinking to get a pair of active monitors, so if using a passive volume control will work better, I might just do that. 

 

[Parafeed]

The night before last I finished building a tube amp for a friend. Normally after checking out voltages I'd connect up a dummy load and burn-in for 24 hours using a frykleaner before even bothering to listen or connect up a scope. Except that I couldn't find the wall-wart to power the frykleaner. So having a spare shelf on the rack beneath the Ref7, I figured I'd just use the Ref7, plonk a spare Squeezebox on top of it, and loop a burn-in track on the server. Job done! Oh, one last thing. I'd need a digital cable to connect the SB to the Ref7. Just as I was about to go to the other room, (where I have a drawer full of cables), on the floor beside the rack I see an optical cable that I can't even remember the last time I used. (As a general rule I'd never use optical given the choice of coax or AES/EBU. I can't think of any kit with a choice of electrical or optical input where the optical sounded "better". But this is for burn-in not listening, so lazy wins.) Anyway, having connected up I wasn't sure which input to select on the front of the DAC (1,2,3, or 4) for the optical input, so to check I plugged in a pair of phones rather than the dummy load. Now curiosity gets the better of me, so I listened. Primarily curious about how bad the amp would sound until a few hours had been put on the stupidly expensive pair of Mundorf Silver/Gold/Oil caps in the amp. (Not my choice, and erring on the side of "rich" rather than neutral, but the choice of the person I built the amp for.)
 
Back on topic, I wasn't prepared for what I heard. Possibly the best I've heard the Ref7 sounding! Driven by a not particularly low jitter source, via an optical cable, and using an amp with zero hours on it. The issue I'd flagged with the leading edge of bass notes - gone! I listened to a few tracks while I pondered. Then I started fiddling. With coax, AES/EBU, different transports, another amp..... My conclusion, the optical input is preferable to RCA, BNC, XLR. (Preferable is probably the understatement of the year.) I notice a slight lack of air and transparency when using the optical input but the benefit on bottom end definition is a revelation. I've since tried several other optical cables, (ranging from a pro studio lead to a "piece of junk" that was supplied with an old Sony minidisc player), and can hear no difference in SQ. Same goes for optical source. Better/worse jitter specs. Makes no difference, or none that I can hear. The clear difference is the optical input compared to any of the electrical inputs.
 
Question: How many Ref7 owners use the optical input in preference to COAX or AES/EBU?