Audio-GD Reference 7 - the new flagship DAC

[haloxt]

I hear a difference between optical cables. I think optical has less detail and vividness than coax but it has blacker background and less stridency. But I've only tried cheap transports, I bet hifi coax transports could have as black background as optical trannsports.

 

[pasgod]

Strange and good news. This Dac seems to be a little capricious. I suppose that PRAT is better now, which is very important for the music you listen to.

 

[Dynobot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parafeed /img/forum/go_quote.gif
My conclusion, the optical input is preferable to RCA, BNC, XLR. (Preferable is probably the understatement of the year.)
 
 
 
Question: How many Ref7 owners use the optical input in preference to COAX or AES/EBU?

So the pendulum swings back to optical....Like they say, The more things change, the more they stay the same.  I remember years ago optical was all the rave putting the Van den Hul OPTOCOUPLER on the map.  Now more and more people are preferring optical vs. other methods. 
 
For the record, yes I have used it on my Ref 7 and in fact I'm using it on my Ref 5 right now....the difference in a word...sweeter.
 
Guess it wasn't the Dac's problem after all but what it was being fed.  Higher-End everything seems to be very picky about the circumstances that require it to operated optimally.  Cars = premium shocks, gas, tires, etc...

 

[IPodPJ]

Quote:

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?

Optical won't give you the b.s. variance that other cables will, but it doesn't always sound as clean because it has higher jitter levels.  Perhaps you like the way more jitter sounds, some people do.  But from my experience on my Transporter, I prefer AES.
 

 
Quote:

I hear a difference between optical cables. I think optical has less detail and vividness than coax but it has blacker background and less stridency. But I've only tried cheap transports, I bet hifi coax transports could have as black background as optical trannsports.

Must be in your head.  There is no difference between optical cables.  Light is light.  If it gets to the other end of the cable and works, you'll hear sound.  If it doesn't work, you won't hear sound.  There is no partial changing of time domain information with optical.

 

[Pacha]

 
Quote:

 
Quote:

I hear a difference between optical cables. I think optical has less detail and vividness than coax but it has blacker background and less stridency. But I've only tried cheap transports, I bet hifi coax transports could have as black background as optical trannsports.

Must be in your head.  There is no difference between optical cables.  Light is light.  If it gets to the other end of the cable and works, you'll hear sound.  If it doesn't work, you won't hear sound.  There is no partial changing of time domain information with optical.

 
I'm not arguing you're wrong, just questionning, but why wouldn't that be possible scientifically speaking? Light is an electromagnetic wave, is there really no chance to alter an optical signal like an electrical one can be within a conductor like Ag or Cu?

 

[haloxt]

THIS IS SPARTA AUDIOPHILIA, where everything has an audible difference . There have been measured jitter differences between optical cables. The lengths and materials we usually use haven't been proven to be audibly different yet though, but I do feel there's a difference between different lengths and materials.

 

[vrln]

Been listening to my Audio-gd rig with my new studio monitors for a few days now... Genelec 8040´s. Perfect size for a small apartment Don´t be fooled by the fairly small (~8-9kg per speaker) size though, they pack a serious punch. I just did some listening with very different material: a mix of Mark Knopfler (100% fan here, same @ Dire Straights), Porcupine Tree and Kanye Wests new album. Headphones can´t really convey the soundstage speakers can. While the REF7 was a good purchase right from the start, I have a feeling only now I´m seeing the full power. Or at least it´s in a much easier to understand form. The REF7 with the Phoenix goes extremely deep - the track "Monster" by Kanye West has a nice pulsating extremely low and loud bass drive that runs during the majority of the song. It´s just stunning with this combo. It´s 100% in control and just sounds huge. It´s like in the movies when sometimes all the subwoofers keep doing a low frequency for ambience, when the room feels as if everything shakes a bit. Can´t do any demos with bass heavy material in the evening though, I´m pretty sure my neighbors wouldn´t be delighted.
 
If I move to the nearfield (~0.5meters) and turn the right EQ switches on (comes with a guide how to use them in different situations), the sound quality is really off the charts (even better) as the room accoustics are minimized. That said, traditional audiophile records like Diana Krall are amazing too. I can´t see myself listening to headphones that much anymore, but I won´t abandon them either. The two actually compliment eachother very well. It´s a very different experience, but if I´d have to chose one it´d definately be speakers.
 
It´s also been quite interesting to play around with the hardware EQ built into the monitors. The results match the theory perfectly: turn on a -2 treble tilt and bang, you have more "body" in the sound at the expense of sparkle. If  you want "delicacy", just turn down the bass while keeping treble high enough. This actually has lead me to think that I wouldn´t be suprised if some highly regarded audiophile gear actually had a secret hardware EQ chip doing the sound signature "magic". 

 

[Charnwood]

Quote:

 
Quote:

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

I agree, definitely.

 
[size=10pt]I totally agree. Mine are DoubleHelix "Double Strand" cables with ACSS connectors and the difference they made over the standard cables was immediately obvious. Gives me a real sense of 'being there'. Now I just need another set for the C-3 to C-1 Masters link.[/size]
 

 

[SilverCans]

To the comment that optical cables make no difference, I respectfully disagree. The material lining the cable have different index of refraction properties, also different material leads to different scatter patterns of the light. 
​

 

[IPodPJ]

Quote:

THIS IS SPARTA AUDIOPHILIA, where everything has an audible difference . There have been measured jitter differences between optical cables. The lengths and materials we usually use haven't been proven to be audibly different yet though, but I do feel there's a difference between different lengths and materials.

The reason there are very few brands of optical cable manufacturers is because A) they know there is no difference between them, and B) because of this they can't charge ungodly amounts for a cable that will have no sonic difference.  I am the first to tell you there are big differences in my system between power cords, interconnects slightly less; but I have tried various optical cables from plastic to glass at different lengths and I have never been able to detect any difference.

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

Quote:

THIS IS SPARTA AUDIOPHILIA, where everything has an audible difference . There have been measured jitter differences between optical cables. The lengths and materials we usually use haven't been proven to be audibly different yet though, but I do feel there's a difference between different lengths and materials.

The reason there are very few brands of optical cable manufacturers is because A) they know there is no difference between them, and B) because of this they can't charge ungodly amounts for a cable that will have no sonic difference.  I am the first to tell you there are big differences in my system between power cords, interconnects slightly less; but I have tried various optical cables from plastic to glass at different lengths and I have never been able to detect any difference.

So they know optical cables are the same as all other cables with regards to sonic colouration, or lack thereof?
 
 
Fascinating.
 
It is probably more to do with the fact that optical cables are even cheaper to produce and the market would not bear such unfathomable prices the same way they do with metals... not to mention they are viewed as inferior to coax which just about any hi-fi system with a DAC can make use of.

 

[puretokyo]

hi all - i've just created an account because i'm particularly interested in this question that's come up about using the ref-7+phoenix combo to drive active speakers.  
 
i have a pair of active ADAM Tensor Gammas, which are reasonably high-end, and am looking for a dac and attenuation for them.  i have been torn between combining a ref-7 and an optical preamp for maximum transparency, or getting a dac with well-implemented digital attenuation (eg weiss or sabre-based dacs) for gain control.  
 
it just occurred to me that i could use a phoenix as a pre for the ADAMs, with the bonus of driving my HD650s, and lo and behold here is the discussion!  
 
however, i'm concerned that the phoenix may not be sufficiently transparent or that there may be impedance issues with it driving the ADAMs.  does anyone have any insight on my dilemma?

 

[Parafeed]

 
Quote:

Strange and good news. This Dac seems to be a little capricious. I suppose that PRAT is better now, which is very important for the music you listen to.

PRAT is much, much better on "heavier" tracks. Although most listening (in the last 24 hours) has been to Dee Dee Bridgewater, Carla Bruni and Reba Mc Entire. Content/genres where the Ref7 really does shine.
 
Quote:

Guess it wasn't the Dac's problem after all but what it was being fed.

Hmmm. Not sure I agree with that. Feed it crap over optical and it sounds good? Feed it with a low jitter source over an electrical connection and it sounds bad?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by IPodPJ /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Optical won't give you the b.s. variance that other cables will, but it doesn't always sound as clean because it has higher jitter levels.  Perhaps you like the way more jitter sounds, some people do.  But from my experience on my Transporter, I prefer AES.

I do not like listening to jitter! It's quite obvious when I feed the Paganini from COAX on a second gen SB, compared to COAX from a Transporter or Touch. Soundstage collapses.
 
Quote:

THIS IS SPARTA AUDIOPHILIA, where everything has an audible difference . There have been measured jitter differences between optical cables. The lengths and materials we usually use haven't been proven to be audibly different yet though, but I do feel there's a difference between different lengths and materials.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion! (Except for anyone who believes in the "magic" audio properties of pebbles/crystals/rocks.)

 

[axw]

Quote:

hi all - i've just created an account because i'm particularly interested in this question that's come up about using the ref-7+phoenix combo to drive active speakers.  
 
i have a pair of active ADAM Tensor Gammas, which are reasonably high-end, and am looking for a dac and attenuation for them.  i have been torn between combining a ref-7 and an optical preamp for maximum transparency, or getting a dac with well-implemented digital attenuation (eg weiss or sabre-based dacs) for gain control.  
 
it just occurred to me that i could use a phoenix as a pre for the ADAMs, with the bonus of driving my HD650s, and lo and behold here is the discussion!  
 
however, i'm concerned that the phoenix may not be sufficiently transparent or that there may be impedance issues with it driving the ADAMs.  does anyone have any insight on my dilemma?

If you wait two weeks I will tell you more. One thing: I have ordered one of the last sabre dacs from Audio GD and it should reach me about the end of this month. The other: phoenix will have passed the 300 hours mark, some people suggest that it may improve after that burn period. 
 
Generally I have an impression that highly resolving, detailed, airy, light and quick dacs (such seems to be the signature of Sabre) may be more appropriate for ADAM speakers than rich texture but slower R-2R designs, as from pcm1704 for example. Dac 19 is like a full bodied wine, it has the depth and fullness, instantly pleasant to listen, but not quite fast, separating and resolving. Therefore I suspect, but this is very unconfirmed, that even top pcm1704 designs may be unable to squeeze the full potential of ART ribbon tweeters. Yet I am planning to get the REF7 in not too distant future, for certain kinds of music it sounds better regardless of its lackings.

 

[Dynobot]

 
Quote:

 
Quote:

Guess it wasn't the Dac's problem after all but what it was being fed.

Hmmm. Not sure I agree with that. Feed it crap over optical and it sounds good? Feed it with a low jitter source over an electrical connection
and it sounds bad?
 
Perplexing isn't it...it might sound even better if you feed it MP3's instead of lossless.