[Articnoise]

No the cable does not matter as such - what matters is nett current into Dave's ground plane, and this effect is completely independent of coaxial cable construction.

Ferrites work as they provide high impedance for nett current going into Dave's ground plane, and so reduces the actual value of the current going into the ground. In short, they supply greater isolation. Coaxial cables can't do this at all.

Either DAVE is immune or it’s not. Not all coaxial cables have the same shielding.

 

[HeeBroG]

I had to wait 8 months for my Blu2 and so I know your pain but now that I have it, I can assure you, it's worth the wait. It makes a much bigger difference than DAVE did against my previous TotalDac. There's simply no substitute for resolution and the Blu2 provides it more than any other digital source in the world. Moreover, Blu2's filters have greater musicality.

I just received my Hugo2 and it is every bit as good as I recall when I first heard it. While not as good as DAVE, it is closer to DAVE than it is to the original Hugo. I have now paired it with Blu2 and just like with DAVE, its impact is massive. I would take Hugo2 + Blu2 over DAVE by itself if forced to choose although Blu2 + DAVE will take you to the very top of the summit.

Hi Roy.

Why would you chose Hugo2 over DAVE if pushed?

 

[HeeBroG]

Duplicate

 

[romaz]

Why would you chose Hugo2 over DAVE if pushed?

I never said that. I said I would take Hugo2 + Blu2 over DAVE by itself if forced to choose.

 

[HeeBroG]

I never said that. I said I would take Hugo2 + Blu2 over DAVE by itself if forced to choose.

Thanks for clarifying.

 

[Articnoise]

If you put 44.1KHz music into Davina and set it to output 44.1KHz music, is it possible that it could be "better"? I'm thinking that Davina would do 1M-tap upsampling to 705.6KHz then dither/decimate to 44.1KHz and in the process produce a file with "superior" encoding at 44.1KHz due to improved dithering.

This might have to be a two-step process, producing a 705.6KHz intermediate file at step one, to be dithered/decimated to 44.1KHz in step two.

In theory it would be simpler to use Davina to decimate to 24-bit and that would sound better. Dither is simply a "partial fix" for the resolution lost in 16-bit encoding (and decimation, if there is any), versus the "24-bit" input.


There is, unfortunately, one more element in this chain of logic: the difference may not arise with insufficient ferrites (or if they're badly configured - they should all be as close to DAVE as possible), because there's a threshold effect. And because the resonant frequency of the ferrite(s) alters how much filtering occurs in your particular system.

So, while it's possible to hear an improvement with some ferrites on the cabling, some people might not hear a difference because their existing cable is actually good. In that case they would need to use more ferrites, and they might run out of cable length before hearing a difference.

Now playing: Ani DiFranco - Amazing Grace

I’m not debating the merits of ferrites or that it can be a very good way of getting better or equal sound (for less money) than the very best digital cables provide. It’s the logic of that it’s totally immune to the digital cable and then calming big pros by using ferrites on a digital cable.

It’s not the first time the claimed immunity of power and upstream gear comes up and am sure not the last.

 

[lojay]

Forgive my ignorance but doesn't the use of cheap BNC cables limit the sound quality with headphone use as well?
If so, is the sound via headphones now still superior with the audiophile quality BNC cable?

I have not compared the two. It will require me to lug 15 kg worth of equipment being the BluDave back to my office which I haven’t done yet. My post was not intended to compare my headphone system to my speaker system, it was purely to clarify an earlier post of mine that the effect of the BluDave on my speaker system is less profound. Of course it is possible that the effect of the BNC cables on my headphone system is equally significant.

 

[Rob Watts]

Either DAVE is immune or it’s not. Not all coaxial cables have the same shielding.

But all coaxial cables, no matter how they are screened, have the same inductance per unit length. And it's the ground inductance that provides the isolation... This is why a 2M cable sounds better than a 1M BNC cable.

Ferrites work by increasing the common mode inductance without affecting the differential inductance (as current going into Dave is balanced by current coming out via the 75 ohm termination in Dave, so no net flux and the ferrite has no effect on signal currents) but ground currents that are not balanced by the signal current produce a net flux which the ferrites will then prevent. That's how it works; and ignore high end audiophile BNC cables until they start addressing this problem with the use of ferrite materials.

 

[Articnoise]

But all coaxial cables, no matter how they are screened, have the same inductance per unit length. And it's the ground inductance that provides the isolation... This is why a 2M cable sounds better than a 1M BNC cable.

Ferrites work by increasing the common mode inductance without affecting the differential inductance (as current going into Dave is balanced by current coming out via the 75 ohm termination in Dave, so no net flux and the ferrite has no effect on signal currents) but ground currents that are not balanced by the signal current produce a net flux which the ferrites will then prevent. That's how it works; and ignore high end audiophile BNC cables until they start addressing this problem with the use of ferrite materials.

A 2M cable does not sounds better than a 1M BNC cable, I have tried!

You may have missed all the people in this tread that have reported superior sound with better digital cables….

 

[Rob Watts]

A 2M cable does not sounds better than a 1M BNC cable, I have tried!

You may have missed all the people in this tread that have reported superior sound with better digital cables….

We are only talking about the specific case of BluDave.

 

[Articnoise]

We are only talking about the specific case of BluDave.

The reported superior sound with better digital cables are with BluDave.

 

[Rob Watts]

But what about your assertion that a 2M cable does not sound better than a 1M? Was that on a BluDave?

I can only comment on what my listening tests have found - BNC cable construction so far makes no difference with a BluDave, but length matters, and ferrites make a huge difference.

If somebody thinks differently, then I would be delighted to hear the cables, just send me a PM and post me the cables...

 

[lojay]

I am comparing the Dave alone with the BluDave and I find consistently that while dynamics and overall sound quality are improved, the volume I am getting out of the BluDave is a few dB less than straight through the USB. Anyone have the same observation? I am connecting my Dave/BluDave from my SOtM sMS1000SQ.

 

[Articnoise]

But what about your assertion that a 2M cable does not sound better than a 1M? Was that on a BluDave?

I can only comment on what my listening tests have found - BNC cable construction so far makes no difference with a BluDave, but length matters, and ferrites make a huge difference.

If somebody thinks differently, then I would be delighted to hear the cables, just send me a PM and post me the cables...

No I don’t have BluDave. I have a DAC with galvanic isolation on all inputs, still not better with longer cable. The opposite is more likely that a longer BNC cable start to act like an antenna and pick up RFI.

I am sure you will be able to test different digital BNC cables then visiting romas. Don’t forget to report back!

 

[Rob Watts]

I am comparing the Dave alone with the BluDave and I find consistently that while dynamics and overall sound quality are improved, the volume I am getting out of the BluDave is a few dB less than straight through the USB. Anyone have the same observation? I am connecting my Dave/BluDave from my SOtM sMS1000SQ.

Yes you need to increase the volume by 3dB to cover the insertion loss of the WTA filter. This loss provides headroom so that the filter never clips under transient conditions.