AUDIO over IP - REDNET 3 & 16 Review. AES67 Sets A New Standard for Computer Audio

[Roseval]

The only “domesticated” version I know is the Merging Technologies NADAC.
At $10,500 it not only has an audiophile price tag but is more than the double of the pro-version (Hapi). 
Better stick to the pro-version including all those things we don't need!
http://www.thewelltemperedcomputer.com/HW/Connect/Ravenna.htm

 

[jabbr]

Mivera Audio is going to release a combination of a Streamer and an Interface Box, or interface card to be built into your DAC or a Mivera DAC, that will be using the Ravenna protocol.
Check out their site if your interested in high end devices for consumer use, using Ravenna AOIP protocol.

 

[mourip]

Hi Mourip

It is not a "rumour", but a statement from FocusRite product development. Read the complete statement again here: http://www.head-fi.org/t/806827/audio-over-ip-rednet-3-16-review-aes67-sets-a-new-standard-for-computer-audio/930#post_12697204

It is a change made in the Focusrite Rednet Control software, which is why the answer by Audinate is so confusing, because they are not the company delivering this change.

I you want I can give the name of the person at Focusrite making this statement

Cheers

 
Thanks. You are right. I asked the wrong folks. Since August is nearly over I was wondering if the plan was still in place...

 

[jabbr]

Hi Mourip


It is not a "rumour", but a statement from FocusRite product development. Read the complete statement again here: http://www.head-fi.org/t/806827/audio-over-ip-rednet-3-16-review-aes67-sets-a-new-standard-for-computer-audio/930#post_12697204


It is a change made in the Focusrite Rednet Control software, which is why the answer by Audinate is so confusing, because they are not the company delivering this change.


I you want I can give the name of the person at Focusrite making this statement :rolleyes:


Cheers

Thanks. You are right. I asked the wrong folks. Since August is nearly over I was wondering if the plan was still in place...

I'll ask him again when I'll be back from my trip. Will be early September though (don't have his email with me).

 

[prot]

The only “domesticated” version I know is the Merging Technologies NADAC.
At $10,500 it not only has an audiophile price tag but is more than the double of the pro-version (Hapi). 
Better stick to the pro-version including all those things we don't need!
http://www.thewelltemperedcomputer.com/HW/Connect/Ravenna.htm

Thx for reminding me of that welltempered website. One of the best resources for all sorts of computer audio. And cool trivia like: "RAVENNA was named after the Italian town of the same name where the poet Dante died…"

 

[rb2013]

For me the Rednet by itself is more than enough straight to my MHDT Pagoda. Now I'm looking into better speaker amps and possibly better speakers... more the former.

Those KEF 105.2's I sold you could benefit from some crossover mods - nothing to expensive and the crossover boards are easy to reach.  Don't overlook the importance of good speaker cables.  That said - I have heard and read so many goods things on the new ELAC speakers - very reasonably priced.  Check out the F6's.  Amp wise - highly recommend going integrated.  Check out the Bada 3.3SE.  Class A to 30 watts then switches to A/B to 145W, Dual output tord trannies, R-core for pre, 12au7 tube output, built like a tank, etc...
http://www.cattylink.com/purer3309.html
 
I think that's a good call - as the refinement of the downstream will help discern the upstream improvements.

 

[rb2013]

  The only “domesticated” version I know is the Merging Technologies NADAC.
At $10,500 it not only has an audiophile price tag but is more than the double of the pro-version (Hapi). 
Better stick to the pro-version including all those things we don't need!
http://www.thewelltemperedcomputer.com/HW/Connect/Ravenna.htm

Not true - the BURL B2 Bomber DAC has Dante BK2 slot built right in, only $250 for the Dante BK2 card.  DAC is $2300.
 
This is one killer good setup with a few PS mods.  NO need for a SPDIF relcocker - as the AOIP AES67 is built in at board level.

 

[mourip]

 
Not true - the BURL B2 Bomber DAC has Dante BK2 slot built right in, only $250 for the Dante BK2 card.  DAC is $2300.
 
This is one killer good setup with a few PS mods.  NO need for a SPDIF relcocker - as the AOIP AES67 is built in at board level.

Vintage King has it for $2049 currently...
 
How does it sound stock with the Dante card compared to the RN3?

 

[rb2013]

  Vintage King has it for $2049 currently...
 
How does it sound stock with the Dante card compared to the RN3?

The B2 DAC fed by SPDIF from the Mutec is very good.  The Dante direct makes this one of the best DAC's I've heard (bypass stock PS and using a custom LPS).
 
I love my tube DAC's but this baby really has me thinking.
 
The class A discrete solid state opamp output stage of the B2 DAC is very 'tube' like with a rich natural tonality.  Still exploring bypassing the SS with a true tube regulated tube output stage.
 
Ideally it would be great to have the choice or either.  Looking at using a B2 DAC board + Dante BK2 card in a ground up design.
 
Kinda of what Bill Hobba did in his 'Killer DAC' project
http://killerdac.com/index.php?topic=932.20

 

[mourip]

 
The B2 DAC fed by SPDIF from the Mutec is very good.  The Dante direct makes this one of the best DAC's I've heard (bypass stock PS and using a custom LPS).
 
I'm love my tube DAC's but this baby really has me thinking.
 
The class A discrete solid state opamp output stage of the B2 DAC is very 'tube' like with a rich natural tonality.  Still exploring bypassing the SS with a true tube regulated tube output stage.
 
Ideally it would be great to have the choice or either.  Looking at using a B2 DAC board + Dante BK2 card in a ground up design.
 
Kinda of what Bill Hobba did in his 'Killer DAC' project
http://killerdac.com/index.php?topic=932.20

 
Any idea what DAC chip it uses?

 

[rb2013]

   
Any idea what DAC chip it uses?

Good question - one of the best D-S multi segment DAC chips made - the AKM 4399.  Same as the ones APL uses in their $25K NWO DAC (in a multi DAC configuration) - and in my APL NWO jr.
 
The BURL B2 DAC has compared very favorably with the $10K+ DCS R2R Ladder DAC.  Without the recent Dante BK2 board upgrade.
 
http://www.masteringmansion.com/common/reviews_d/reviewd_1007.pdf

One of the things I immediately like about Burl as a company is that they openly embrace that fact. Check out what the Burl literature says. “The B2 Bomber DAC delivers sonic purity and dynamics thus far unheard of. As a complement to the B2 ADC, the B2 DAC punches you in the chest with low end while the 3D spaciality and stereo spread give you amazing detail throughout the spectrum. Add to that a sweet tone that is easy on your ears, and you have a unit that you will instantly fall in love with.” Sweet tone? Easy on your ears? Falling in love? This is not the kind of language one usually finds when reading about a pro-audio DAC, yet Burl is claiming that they can do sonic purity and sweet tone at the same time. It’s an unconventional and gutsy claim more likely to be pitched at the home audiophile market. 

Next the B2 DAC travelled uptown to the mastering room of Howie Weinberg at Masterdisc to spend time with Matthew Agoglia. Matt ran the Burl through its paces against their DCS DAC, which they clock off of an Antelope Audio 10M (Tape Op #68). Keep in mind that the DCS cost about $10,000 fifteen years ago and has been a standard in mastering studios for well over a decade. (Many of your favorite records from the CD era have likely been mastered on DCS converters.) On top of that, the Antelope system runs close to $8000. Considering that the Burl B2 DAC sells for $2500, Matthew’s feedback is particularly interesting. Here’s what he has to say: “Overall, the Burl (whether clocked to the 10M or internally) has a more neutral, smooth and transparent character compared to our DCS. The DCS has a color in its midrange, a tightness in the bass, and a subtle crispness in the highs. We could say that the DCS is more curvy, sounding different in different areas of the frequency spectrum, while the Burl is very smooth and linear, sounding very similar throughout the frequency spectrum. In particular, the Burl’s low end was actually a bit more extended, with sub frequencies a bit clearer, while the DCS had a very pleasant low end focused around 80–120 Hz. The Burl also sounds a bit wider than the DCS. “When clocking the DCS off the Antelope 10M, we get that larger-than-life sound that some describe as “hype” — not necessarily a bad thing in mastering because you don’t end up adding too much EQ or other processing to achieve your results. I wondered if I might be inclined to EQ/process more 

 
http://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/burl-b2-bombers

My overriding impression of the Bomber converters is that they really do sound a lot more 'analogue' than most. We're talking about the deliberate inclusion of some 'nice' and subtle distortion artifacts, but there's also something smoother and more natural‑sounding about the top end, while the bottom end is very tightly controlled but still larger than life, and the mid-range gives the impression of being slightly more expansive and dynamic than expected. None of these subtle characteristics were revealed in my bench tests, but they add up to a very nice style of presentation that addresses the 'sterile' nature of ultra‑clean digital systems rather well. First and foremost 'musical' rather than 'transparent' converters, they have a kind of tape‑like ability to handle transients in a very flattering way, and the power to make a mix sound glued together in a way that I usually associate with top‑flight analogue systems.   

 
The B2 uses a unique Class A transformer-less - capacitor-less discrete opamp output stage:

 Internal construction is very similar to the A‑D, with the same Powdec universal PSU module and a large main PCB. Digital inputs are handled by AKM 4115 transceivers, while the D‑A converter is the AKM 4399 chip. The analogue stages are transformerless and employ one of Burl's proprietary BOPA1 all‑discrete op‑amp modules. Again, the circuitry is all class‑A, with no capacitors in the signal path, and it runs surprisingly hot. Good ventilation above the Bomber D‑A is probably a must.

 
 
More info on the AKM4399:
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/totaldac2/2.html
http://www.akm.com/akm/en/file/datasheet/AK4399EQ.pdf
 
I much prefer these DAC chips to the ones Merging Tech uses in the NADAC (ESS Sabre).

 

[jabbr]

How do you 'handle' the 4dBU output level? Or is your pre-amp made for that kind of signal level?
If not, how do you reduce the signal level without compromising the DAC design which doesn't contain capacitors and transformers in its output stages?

You need to like the sound of the the Burl though, as every DAC has its own sound. On a Tape-Op review I've seen it described as follows
"

"The sibling B2 DAC sounds great too — very full and thick. Next to my Dangerous DAC and my Lavry DA10, I would characterize its sound as “warm” or even “analog” — round and present in the mids, with a really nice, wide stereo image."

Does this description match your preferences?

 

[rb2013]

How do you 'handle' the 4dBU output level? Or is your pre-amp made for that kind of signal level?
If not, how do you reduce the signal level without compromising the DAC design which doesn't contain capacitors and transformers in its output stages?

You need to like the sound of the the Burl though, as every DAC has its own sound. On a Tape-Op review I've seen it described as follows
"
Does this description match your preferences?

I'm running XLR to RCA adapters and can attentuate the level is need be - I haven't found that needed.
 
Yes I like analog sounding DACs as opposed to those harsh, bright, brittle sounding ones.  Now the that review was done using AES - not AOIP.  And let me say AOIP Dante direct - no SPDIF transmitters, receivers and cables in between is like night and day.  The direct Ethernet Dante feed far superior then fed by the RN3/Mutec by AES.
 
Comes for my many decades long love of vinyl.  I have two tube DACs right now.  As always YMMV.
 
Would not have a Sabre DAC if you paid me - and yes I have owned them in the past - sold them not long after.
 
It does need to get rid of the SMPS Powdec universal PSU
 
For the money one killer great DAC with the Dante card (the Brooklyn II card is only $250).  Buyer beware the previous version does not have the Dante slot or Ethernet input. 

 

[jabbr]

How do you 'handle' the 4dBU output level? Or is your pre-amp made for that kind of signal level?

If not, how do you reduce the signal level without compromising the DAC design which doesn't contain capacitors and transformers in its output stages?


You need to like the sound of the the Burl though, as every DAC has its own sound. On a Tape-Op review I've seen it described as follows

"

Does this description match your preferences?

I'm running XLR to RCA adapters and can attentuate the level is need be - I haven't found that needed.

Yes I like analog sounding DACs as opposed to those harsh, bright, brittle sounding ones.  Now the that review was done using AES - not AOIP.  And let me say AOIP Dante direct - no SPDIF transmitters, receivers and cables in between is like night and day.  The direct Ethernet Dante feed far superior then fed by the RN3/Mutec by AES.

Comes for my many decades long love of vinyl.  I have two tube DACs right now.  As always YMMV.

Would not have a Sabre DAC if you paid me - and yes I have owned them in the past - sold them not long after.

It does need to get rid of the SMPS Powdec universal PSU


For the money one killer great DAC with the Dante card (the Brooklyn II card is only $250).  Buyer beware the previous version does not have the Dante slot or Ethernet input. 

I'm definitely no fan of Sabre chips either, but like to have a wide bandwidth, so with a proper top end and bottom end. A focus too much on the middle area puts me off somewhat.

Your XLR to RCA adapters are they just cables or is it a passive or active device?
I have been looking at the Jensen PC-2XR for example but am cautious if this compromises the sound quality obtained by using the output stages that are built without capacitor and transformers.

Cheers

 

[mourip]

Originally Posted by rb2013 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
I much prefer these DAC chips to the ones Merging Tech uses in the NADAC (ESS Sabre).

 
Thanks for all of the detail. I think that my Schitt Yggy uses an AKM DAC chip. I have owned three Saber DACs and I would not get another. I liked my Vega(Sabre) but the Yggy is much more musical.