[flyte3333]

Yes I have the camera adapter and will try with my iPad.
Not sure however how that will work as the music is stored on the Mac mini, so why connecting the iPad to Dave? Will that work only for streaming?
I’m confused

Your Mac Mini will remain your Roon Core.

Your iPad will then be seen on your Mac Mini as an endpoint, the same way your SMS-200 shows up as a RoonReady endpoint, wirelessly.

You use your existing USB 2.0 cable to connect the Apple adapter to Dave's USB input.

You just need to setup the iPad as an endpoint and in it's settings (in Roon device settings) disable 'private zone'.

Play around with it. It's not too difficult to setup fortunately. When you're playing music, just turn your iPad to 'Do No Disturb' mode

Why connect the iPad to Dave this way? It's now a low power consumption battery powered USB audio source that's disconnected from mains power. If you have all the bits already, it's free to try.

 

[doraymon]

Your Mac Mini will remain your Roon Core.

Your iPad will then be seen on your Mac Mini as an endpoint, the same way your SMS-200 shows up as a RoonReady endpoint, wirelessly.

You use your existing USB 2.0 cable to connect the Apple adapter to Dave's USB input.

You just need to setup the iPad as an endpoint and in it's settings (in Roon device settings) disable 'private zone'.

Play around with it. It's not too difficult to setup fortunately. When you're playing music, just turn your iPad to 'Do No Disturb' mode

Why connect the iPad to Dave this way? It's now a low power consumption battery powered USB audio source that's disconnected from mains power. If you have all the bits already, it's free to try.

Got it thanks!
Will try and report back!

 

[jarnopp]

Sorry, it is a F1J. I'll edit my original post to correct (thank you)

Comparing the BluDAVE + F1J + Omega SAMs to BluDAVE + F1J + Voxativ 9.87's is quite interesting actually. For folks that have been tracking some of my recent investigations, I've been quite keen on unwinding the output section of the DAVE and understanding what impact power can have on dynamics and imaging with same. This test has been quite informative in that quest.

With the SAMs + F1J, dynamics and speed and fullness are way beyond what I've heard going direct from BluDAVE to the SAMs. This is a huge (but very pleasant) surprise. There is a general loss of transparency and imaging (depth esp.) but a lot less than I've experienced with other amps. The transparency and sound stage of the SAMs + F1J is still miles better than what I've heard with my B&W 802d3's, and the presence is within respectable (long) spitting distance (pretty incredible for a single driver speaker that costs 10x less). This combination is a phenomenal "traditional" two channel setup.

With the BluDAVE + F1J + Voxativ, speed and dynamics actually seem to be going backwards from the baseline of BluDAVE direct to Voxativs (and detail/soundstage/imaging even more backwards). This is all normal behavior that I would expect when putting an amp between BluDAVE and high efficiency speakers. Huh.

So early hypothesis: is DAVE direct not able to keep up with the more demanding Omega SAMs (98dB sensitivity), but has no issue keeping up with the higher sensitivity Voxativ's (104dB sensitivity)? That would point to the output stage of the DAVE being not being able to fully drive the current the Omega needs for dynamics, but having a lot easier time driving the Voxativ's. How much is the DAVE switching supply supply being able to drive current to the op amps, and how much is the op amps themselves? If someone has access to a prototype of Rob's digital amp, I'd be delighted to put this hypothesis to the test

So based on my listening tests today, here are my take aways:

* For those that appreciate Chord "realism" but still want that visceral impact from music (what I think of as "power" or presence centric listeners), the combination of DAVE + a high brow current amp + single driver speakers is incredible. I would take BluDAVE + F1J + Omega SAMs over BluDAVE + big amp + B&W 802d3's any day of the week.

* For those of us that are more imaging/detail centric (what I think of "phase" or space centric listeners), the F1J still takes away a lot of that wonderful magic going DAVE direct gives you. Get more sensitive and faster transducers (like the Voxativ drivers) and enjoy.

Now where can I get my hands on that prototype Chord digital amp so I can see if one can get "power" and "phase" at the same time?

Thanks for the impressions. I hope to get to SoCal to take you up on your offer. Not sure if I’m more excited about your kit or your wine cellar!

 

[flyte3333]

1) Again the differences are not night and day but indeed solution 3 offered the most enjoyable, full and non-fatiguing sound.

This is how I described Toslink a few pages ago - over a long listening session (over an hour) there's no listening fatigue and there's always the desire to turn up the volume.

With all the USB mains sources I've tried, they sound great but I don't have the same desire to crank the volume up and actually over a long listening session, I kind of want to drop the volume a few dB, probably a little more listening fatigue.

The battery powered USB source has the same characteristics I described above for Toslink - musical, no listening fatigue over long listening sessions and there's that desire to want to crank the volume. I would probably fail a blind test every time between these 2 but I still refer to the battery USB source as my reference in a technical sense for critical listening only, because it by-passes the re-clocking stage before the nice extensive master clock right next to the FPGA. With a quality Toslink source, the difference is difficult for me to pick.

Curious to see if you find similar.

For anyone else reading this and who may get the wrong idea - you can enjoy every single input with Dave.

We are down in the weeds discussing technical differences and personal preferences here. Still fun to share though

 

[Jawed]

I would probably fail a blind test every time between these 2 but I still refer to the battery USB source as my reference in a technical sense for critical listening only, because it by-passes the re-clocking stage before the nice extensive master clock right next to the FPGA. With a quality Toslink source, the difference is difficult for me to pick.

It seems you need to be told, yet again, that USB timing from the FPGA is a red herring. Optical is the reference. USB can never be better.

For anyone else reading this and who may get the wrong idea - you can enjoy every single input with Dave.

We are down in the weeds discussing technical differences and personal preferences here. Still fun to share though

I disagree strongly. There is a huge gulf between DAVE with a noisy USB source versus optical. Much larger than the difference between Hugo 2 and DAVE (both with optical).

 

[flyte3333]

It seems you need to be told, yet again, that USB timing from the FPGA is a red herring. Optical is the reference. USB can never be better.

While I've said many times (to keep perspective) that the audible difference is almost non existent to my ears, from a technical sense this makes zero sense. Maybe the term 'red herring' is what's confusing me.

How can adding a stage (re-clocking) in the path be better or even equal?

Park RF aside for a second because that disappears with a battery powered USB source, and just look at timing:

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-dave.766517/page-232#post-12688589

And:

"There are two problems that USB has against toslink - and one benefit. The benefit is that timing comes from Mojo - but with toslink the incoming data has to be re-timed via the digital phase lock loop (DPLL) and this is not quite as good - but you will only hear the difference via a careful AB test, so it's in practice insignificant."

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-mojo-dac-amp-☆★►faq-in-3rd-post-◄★☆.784602/page-1521#post-12869495

It's a longer path. As they say, there's no such thing as a free lunch.

And back to RF with USB. From Rob:

1. battery mode operation should mean no ground loops, so no current flow into the ground planes, then no RF noise pick-up in the DAC and so no problem… This has been validated by listening tests.

2. As to external RF, it only matters if there is a ground loop, so battery operation should mean no currents flowing into the DAC ground plane…

3. We need current through the ground plane to set up voltages - and it is these voltages that the analogue electronics pick up. So no current, no voltage on the ground plane, no pick-up… The common mode noise, won’t affect the analogue electronics at all.

I disagree strongly. There is a huge gulf between DAVE with a noisy USB source versus optical.

I wouldn't consider a battery powered (disconnected from mains power) and power frugal (by design) mobile USB source 'noisy'. But I'm no expert.

To my ears (and connecting all the dots above) a battery powered and power frugal mobile USB source is the best SQ.

 

[HeeBroG]

Nearfield Omegas being driven by (Blu)DAVE is something extra special! I'd be loathe to diminish any of that remarkable holographic soundstage (phenomenal) with an amp, no matter what it added elsewhere.

Which model RELs have you found a good match? The JL Audio's are wonderful, but a bit impractical in a near field setup. My "someday" plan for my Omega SAMs (once I have a real office again) is to have them near field at work, and would love to pair them with a practical sub.

Hi Ray,

Why are the JL audio subs impractical for a near field setup?

G

 

[doraymon]

@Em2016 thanks for the tips on Roon!
I managed to setup my iPad mini as Roon End Point and I did the same with my MacBook Pro connected to the DAVE through Optical. So now all comparisons are consistent having Roon as a player.
This was indeed the ultimate test as it finally revealed the superiority of the Toslink input and of battery powered sources connected via USB.
MacBook on Optical: with a Sys.Concept cable I achieved a perfect connection up to 192KHz PCM and DSD64.
iPad on USB: the iPad connected to USB came second but very very close to the optical and completely smashed the USB out of the Mac Mini via SOtM chain!
That being said I agree with @Em2016, I would also probably fail a blind test between optical and iPad USB. They are very, very close and the only difference is difficult to put int words. It's a sense of relaxation probably linked to a total absence of "added" harshness or sibilance (added on top of whatever is already present on the recording obviously).

During the test the most immediate difference among the setups was the bass reproduction. I could clearly tell that optical and iPad USB had a fuller, punchier bass, simply fantastic.
Then the realism in terms of spacial positioning of the instruments was also a differentiating factor even though more difficult to spot.

Eventually I will probably use my iPad for every day listening and optical every time I want to touch base with the reference. I will buy a longer Sys.Concept cable to allow a more convenient placing of the laptop.

EDIT: now I can shift my $100 worth of ferrite clamps to Dave's power cable and continue the journey...

 

[marcmccalmont]

Hi Ray,

Why are the JL audio subs impractical for a near field setup?

G

They work fine in my set up. By definition subwoofers in a listening room are near field devices. 20hz = 55’ wavelength

 

[ray-dude]

Hi Ray,

Why are the JL audio subs impractical for a near field setup?

G

Geoff, my F112 is a BEAST of a sub. While awesome to fill (and shake) a 20x25’ room when watching a movie, it would be overwhelming under a desk in an office at work. I would personally lean toward a more modest 8” sub just to minimize the complaints To Marc’s point, there is nothing special about near field vs far field that would impact this sub.

 

[marcmccalmont]

Geoff, my F112 is a BEAST of a sub. While awesome to fill (and shake) a 20x25’ room when watching a movie, it would be overwhelming under a desk in an office at work. I would personally lean toward a more modest 8” sub just to minimize the complaints To Marc’s point, there is nothing special about near field vs far field that would impact this sub.

I’ve got a pair of 10” JL’s e110 which integrate well for music in a medium- large room the 12” would be more appropriate for movies. All full range speakers are near field/far field devices depending on frequency!

 

[elviscaprice]

Which model RELs have you found a good match? The JL Audio's are wonderful, but a bit impractical in a near field setup. My "someday" plan for my Omega SAMs (once I have a real office again) is to have them near field at work, and would love to pair them with a practical sub.

I'm using one REL t5i. What I like about the REL's is the simplicity in which they receive the signal and match up to your given speakers. The speaker level input is brilliant and doesn't hinder the low impedance from DAVE to the Omega's direct. I don't know how they do it, but it works very well with the Omega's. For my room size, the 125W (class AB) is plenty big on the t5i. I don't even get to mid point. This sub, only rated to 32hz, helps increase my low end and pick up the low/mids (level them out) without making it's presence known other than as an extension of the Omega's..
Obviously the bigger you go in sub, the lower you'll get in bass. I'm not a bass head at all, the 8" REL is more than enough.

 

[Jawed]

Maybe the term 'red herring' is what's confusing me.

Rob has said that optical is the reference. I have linked his posting for you in the past.

He was quite clear: clocking for USB does not make it superior to optical. It was an opinion he used to hold, but he has changed his mind. The effect he was hearing was RF induced distortion, which at low levels can sound attractive: enhancing the sense of clarity and detail.

This seems to be why a lot of people like a bit of RF in the mix.

To my ears (and connecting all the dots above) a battery powered and power frugal mobile USB source is the best SQ.

A bad USB source without ferrites (such as my computer) is a long way from optical. A battery powered USB source (such as you've been testing with) can at best match optical. It's really that simple.

There are no dots to connect. It should sound the same as optical

Rob spent years thinking (and saying on forums) that USB sounded better before realising that optical was the reference (seemingly due to the work he was doing on Hugo 2). I expect it'll be years before Rob's change of opinion will become dominant across forums

 

[elviscaprice]

Rob has said that optical is the reference. I have linked his posting for you in the past.

He was quite clear: clocking for USB does not make it superior to optical. It was an opinion he used to hold, but he has changed his mind. The effect he was hearing was RF induced distortion, which at low levels can sound attractive: enhancing the sense of clarity and detail.

This seems to be why a lot of people like a bit of RF in the mix.


A bad USB source without ferrites (such as my computer) is a long way from optical. A battery powered USB source (such as you've been testing with) can at best match optical. It's really that simple.

There are no dots to connect. It should sound the same as optical

Rob spent years thinking (and saying on forums) that USB sounded better before realising that optical was the reference (seemingly due to the work he was doing on Hugo 2). I expect it'll be years before Rob's change of opinion will become dominant across forums

LOL, so true, but a bunch of B.S. Far too many audiophiles disagree, from experience, and to say it is so, is an insult to their own ears. But I digress, if you get USB correct, optical can't match it, unless you go down the same path. A crappy clocked/powered labtop is going to give you just that, optical or USB.

 

[marcmccalmont]

Lets all agree to disagree!
But since it is all just ones and zeroes once an interface is optimized they should all sound the same. The key is optimizing the interface.