Audio-GD Reference 7 - the new flagship DAC

[vrln]

Looks a lot more professional than the old website. The clean minimalistic design works great!

 

[Dynobot]

No information about how bypassing the 2 [size=10pt]"Built-in two groups high performance PLL ," that "supports low jitter Master-Clock output." will result in high jitter at the Dac chips.[/size]
 
 
[size=10pt]"Clock Autodivide Circuit Supports four Master-Clock Frequencies : 256Fs[/size][size=10pt]、384Fs、512Fs、768Fs"[/size]
 
[size=10pt]48Hz x 512Fs = 24.576MHz[/size]
[size=10pt]96Hz x 256Fs = 24.576MHz[/size]
 
I'd be willing to bet he uses a 24.576MHz oscillator...if that is the case, then 48Hz or 96Hz would be the ideal sample rate.
 
44.1Hz x 384Fs = 16.934MHz
44.1Hz x 768Fz = 33.868Mhz/2 = 16.934MHz
 
Otherwise he would have to use both a 24.576MHz oscillator and a 16.934MHz oscillator to get perfect synchronization.
 
[Its inferred that if there were two oscillators that there would also be a need for something to direct the signal between them depending on the frequency.]

 

[Currawong]

 
Quote:

Is the dac of Cambridge Audio 840C as good as Reference 7 ?

No. The DSP in the 840c is excellent, as good regardless of the input and seeminly unaffected by using my Ref 3 or DI before it, but at least my Ref 1 with DSPv5 is a noticeable step above it in resolution.
 
Quote:

Finally, I got my Ref-1 a DSP V5 chip.  Some quick compare with Ref-7 shows similar but still slightly different SQ.  That is quite improvement over Ref-1 with V3 chip.  When I just got Ref-7 and compared it with Ref-1, I immediately turned off the Ref-1.  Now, with V5 chip Ref-1 sounds very similar to Ref-7.  But actually I like Ref-1 a little better due to slightly "fresher" sound.  This may be due to other components and my Ref-7 is only a month old.
 
I was very happy to bring this Ref-1 with V5 DSP home to join my home setup: DT800/600 + DLIII + CSP2+.  Originally, I planed to replace DLIII with Ref-1.  But the Digital Interface improves the DLIII's sound quite a bit during the waiting period.  So now I was eager to have some quick comparison between DLIII and Ref-1 again.  DI was used to feed both simultaneously (RCA to DLIII and BNC to Ref-1).  My tube amp CSP2+ has dual RCA input with a switch so I can switch between DLIII and Ref-1 on the fly if I want to.
 
Since there has been quite discussion on the bass attack on Ref-7/1.  I put my focus mainly on that to see what will happen in my system and my music genre.  I don't listen much of rock or pop music but mostly classical, new age, and soundtrack stuff.  I picked the 
* Pet Shop Boy's "Please" to test the rapid drum beats,
* soundtrack "The Big Blue" to test some very low bass (This was commonly used for that purpose in Hi-Fi). and
* Michael Ponti live on Klavins Mod. 370. The Klavins Mod. 370 is a very interesting piano with extraordinary sound.  The vibration of the bass string can be clearly heard in the recording, soI think it may be a good testing sample.
 
After some listening, it was clearly to me that there is no bass problem in my Ref-1 with my music.  The bass texture and tightness was better on Ref-1.  The amount was very similar but Ref-1 was tighter (quicker attack) and has better bass texture and soundstage.  The sensation of listening to Klavins Mod was greater with Ref-1 compare to DLIII.  I will say that DI does improve DLIII quite a bit and reduce the gap.  However, Ref-1 has slight edge even just compare the bass performance.
 
But to me, most of my music information was in mid and high freq where Ref-1 has quite superiority over DLIII in terms of rich reverberance, transparency, pin-point imaging, impact, and sonic finesse.
 
So I was pretty happy!  And just provide another data point...

Thanks for the comments. I feared at one stage I might want to upgrade to a Ref 7, but, as Kingwa told me, it's unnecessary.

 

[vrln]

I was browsing this thread and noticed the posts about the musical line being an easier choice for the random Head-fier interested in Audio-gd products. Actually Kingwa has posted a "selection guide" on the chinese Audio-gd forum:
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=fi&ie=UTF-8&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&u=http://bbs.audio-gd.com/dispbbs.asp%3Fboardid%3D2%26Id%3D21989&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&usg=ALkJrhjYuH7rt-CXakZY87uVpUaqnWDRMw
 
It´s just a flaky Google translate, but I´m assuming the main point is still there: he recommends people to start with the more colored entry level gear in the lineup, and then moving up as the audiophile "fever" (the word probably is wrong) catches on. Before the final ACSS stage, he recommends the musical lineup as a compromise between high fidelity and the colored sound most are used to.

 

[haloxt]

I agree with his buying advice. A lot of people who own upper tier neutral audio-gd gear have given their opinion that it is revealing of recordings etc, but the message often gets lost in discussions about how "good" the gear sounds. Imo upper tier audio-gd neutral gear do not try to sound "good", they try to sound "faithful", with only as much, not more and not less, technical performance and neutrality/musicality as in the recording. Since the upper tier neutral gear try to walk such a fine line, the end result can be ruined by bad gear matching, album selection, or user expectation.

 

[axw]

Perhaps this should go into a separate thread as it concerns all Audio GD dacs with USB input, not just Reference 7.
 
Did anybody here try to use Squeezebox Touch USB output to feed an Audio GD DAC? Such a tweak is described here by John Swenson:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82110
 
Stereophile review of Squeezebox Touch was overall rather positive but there was one place full of enthusiasm and raving -- and it was exactly when the reviewer tried USB connection into an Ayre DAC. The obvious temptation is to try that with Audio GD dacs. It may be even better than IPodPJ's I2S modded Squeezebox Transporter (btw, it appears it's back on sale as Transporter SE, for $500 less). Of course I am speculating here.

 

[IPodPJ]

Quote:

Perhaps this should go into a separate thread as it concerns all Audio GD dacs with USB input, not just Reference 7.
 
Did anybody here try to use Squeezebox Touch USB output to feed an Audio GD DAC? Such a tweak is described here by John Swenson:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82110
 
Stereophile review of Squeezebox Touch was overall rather positive but there was one place full of enthusiasm and raving -- and it was exactly when the reviewer tried USB connection into an Ayre DAC. The obvious temptation is to try that with Audio GD dacs. It may be even better than IPodPJ's I2S modded Squeezebox Transporter (btw, it appears it's back on sale as Transporter SE, for $500 less). Of course I am speculating here.

My Transporter is not I2S modded.  I'm not sure where you got that idea from.  It is modded with an R-Core transformer, two Audio-gd clocks, an Audio-gd power supply, Rubycon caps throughout, OCC silver wire for signal OCC copper wire for power.
 
The new Transporter is exactly the same as the old one, but with fewer available controls from the front panel.  I'm thrilled that they have re-released it.  I think they realized that they screwed up by discontinuing it, and see how many high-end transports are now becoming available.  I highly doubt the SB Touch compares in stock form, and would bet anything that it doesn't come anywhere near what my mod offers.  I used to have a SB Duet with upgraded power supply and custom cables and it didn't compare to the Transporter even in stock form.  After the mod, it's an entirely different beast.
 
"The Transporter SE has the exact same technical specification as the Transporter, and therefore it delivers the same level of sound quality audiophiles strive for. The only difference between these two models lies in the access of the system's functions. On the Transporter SE, many of the functions that were previously accessed by the TransNav™ controller on the front of the unit are now accessed through the included remote control."

 

[Nada]

Quote:

Perhaps this should go into a separate thread as it concerns all Audio GD dacs with USB input, not just Reference 7.
 
Did anybody here try to use Squeezebox Touch USB output to feed an Audio GD DAC? Such a tweak is described here by John Swenson:
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=82110
 
Stereophile review of Squeezebox Touch was overall rather positive but there was one place full of enthusiasm and raving -- and it was exactly when the reviewer tried USB connection into an Ayre DAC. The obvious temptation is to try that with Audio GD dacs. It may be even better than IPodPJ's I2S modded Squeezebox Transporter (btw, it appears it's back on sale as Transporter SE, for $500 less). Of course I am speculating here.

Id be interested to hear how the Touch USB sounds into a REF7 too but have doubts it would shine like the Ayre was reported to.
I understand that for the Audio-gd DAC's the SPDIF input is much superior to its USB implementation, so its a reasonable prediction is it wont sound any better. The Ayre's if i remember uses the jitter reducing asynchronous protocol which would then explain any reports of great sound quality. eg http://www.stereophile.com/images/archivesart/1009ayre.fig14.jpg    to fix the Touchs jitter  http://www.stereophile.com/images/archivesart/1010Logfig9.jpg  

 

[vrln]

I have a suprise for you all!
 
Here:
 

 
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.

 

[vilasn]

That sure looks awesome, I need to check with him.
 
Thanks.
 
Quote:

I have a suprise for you all!
 
Here:
 

 
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.

 

[axw]

 

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?
 

 

[vrln]

The system in general sounds fantastic - as I said I have no idea how much is due to a cable upgrade (if anything), as I just got new monitors as well. They look awesome though, and weren´t very expensive anyway. And yup, the point is to minimize cable effect on audio quality. Some have said that better cables do make a slight difference though, even then. No idea if that´s true though, but the custom cables are a nice collectable item at least if nothing else
 
What exactly did you compare? There is no XLR-out on the DAC-19... And an ACSS rig with the Phoenix is definately one of the most transparent systems I´ve hears so far. Do you mean you found the single ended RCA output more transparent than ACSS mode? The less alive thing sounds familiar though. ACSS doesn´t sound that "alive", it´s more of like a glass of water. Very pure sounding. My Genelec studio monitors are extremely transparent out of the Phoenix pre-amp mode.

 

[dukja]

Did you compare [some DAC]=>ASCC=>Phoenix=>XLR to [another DAC, DA-10?]=>XLR ???
 
What exactly were you comparing?
 
Quote:

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?
 

 

[.Sup]

Quote:

I have a suprise for you all!
 
Here:
 

 
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.

Do you use these to connect DAC to audio gd preamp?

 

[vrln]

Yup, they are between the REF7 and Phoenix.