D P C
New Head-Fier
Also do they do a balanced input version? And anyone in the UK got one? If so what was it like to import it
Been looking at these myself just lately and thinking is a kit for me or just buy one done? Thats the question
Anyone here have experience rolling different bypass caps for the Crack's last power supply cap? With this extra time at home, I spent hours switching out and listening with the two bypass caps I have: Jantzen Superior Z-cap 0.68uF 800V & Audyn Tri-Reference 0.68uF 600V ($15 & $25, respectively...neither grossly expensive).
This obviously isn't ideal because it's not a blind test, and there's a good chunk of time between listening with each bypass cap. Also, I am a highly skeptical person and am constantly questioning things to make sure I'm not fooling myself. Yet, every time I switch to the Audyn Tri-Reference, I am confident there is a noticeable tone and quality shift for the better. Specifically, the Audyn allows for a larger and deeper soundscape, precise placement of instruments within that soundscape, and a delicately handled treble with no loss of tantalizing bite. So, I soak in the sonic pleasure...then my skepticism cuts in again. I proceed to unplug everything, take my amp downstairs to the garage, and switch the cap back to the Jantzen again. And again, the sound is comparatively closed in, the distinct placement of instruments not so apparent, and treble a bit screechy...or so I think.
At this point, I feel like I'm going nuts... On one hand, I feel nourished and enthralled by my music in a substantial way with the Audyn, but, on the other hand, I know that there's nothing easier than fooling oneself. Another reason to think it's placebo is that I adore the marketing of the Audyn caps. Audyn's description of their True Copper Cap on Hificollective's website states that there is "no contamination by strange mixture of various metals and fairy like oils (LOL)," and the Tri-Reference is very similar with its copper-foil construction. Conveniently, the Jantzen is "made from polypropylene film metalized with aluminum and zinc particles (from partsconnexion)," i.e. a stange mixture of various metals haha. So those descriptions could be swaying my thoughts. But, Jantzen does go so far as to describe what their cap's sound is like, saying it has "good detailing and soundstaging with natural tone reproduction," but that's what I hear with the Audyn, not the Jantzen. But that is likely my bias towards Audyn, and trusting their marketing more to begin with. Buttttt maybe marketing and truth are not always mutually exclusive! AHHHHHHHHHHfjodyasknfd456%$^#5njkfbnas###!!
If anyone has done similar tests or has other opinions, I'd love to read about them as I gather more info about this mystique of judging musical reproduction.
(For reference, my Bottlehead Crack specs can be found on my profile page: About > Audio-Related Tweaks.)
I hope all of you and your loved ones are staying safe and doing okay amid our physical social distancing. Cheers
Been looking at these myself just lately and thinking is a kit for me or just buy one done? Thats the question
Hi bagwell359,I think I've looked at every Crack build on the net. This is one of my favs. Clean, organized, and chock full of great pieces.
Hi bagwell359,
Thanks so much, your comment means a lot. I see you have a BH Crack too...have you done any upgrades? If so, what did you choose?
Hi GreenNeedle!
First off, congrats on deciding to build a Crack! I've built three since 2010 and can sincerely say, it's a staple in my audio life. Plus, I use them with Sextetts and it achieves my favorite type of sound I've expereienced: smooth and present with plenty of lush body and a bit of lifelike bite. Here's my answers to your questions:
1) Here is a 2008(!) post of different DACs' specs (from audioholics):
"Flagship Burr-Brown DACs: PCM1792 (THD 0.0004%, SNR 129dB, Crosstalk -124dB).
Second Burr-Brown DACs: PCM1796 (THD 0.0005%, SNR 120dB, Crosstalk -119dB).
Flagship Analog Devices DACs: AD1955 (THD 0.0006%, SNR 120dB, Crosstalk -125dB).
Flagship Cirrus Logic DACs: CS4398 (THD 0.0007%, SNR 120dB).
Flagship Wolfson Microelectronics DACs: WM8741 (THD 0.001%, SNR 128dB).
Third Burr-Brown DACs: PCM1791 (THD 0.001%, SNR 113dB, Crosstalk -110dB)."
So, the PCM1791 is considered Burr-Brown's third-best back in 2008. While I suspect music through it will be enjoyable, we're 12 years moved on with advanced models for amazing prices.
2) The Pure Direct function is only to forgo any digital signal processing, such as bass/treble controls--it doesn't mean to bypass the onboard DAC. Simply using an external DAC will be what bypasses the onboard DAC--because, with the signal leaving your CD player through optical, it's still in digital form and hasn't undergone analog conversion yet. So, to send out an "untouched digital signal to the external DAC," simply use an external DAC in combination with the Pure Direct function.
3) Personally, I wouldn't want to have to unplug/replug different sources into my amp. I would buy a Schiit Modi, or something similar. That way, for $99, I'll have a source selector and will improve the sound of my CD player. If I bought the $80 Grace, my CD player will still have the ancient DAC and I'd have to tolerate unplugging/replugging things. I wouldn't buy a source selector and Grace because that would be very nearly the same price as the Modi, but the CD player won't have the improved sound. I say get the Schiit Modi, or look for second-hand DACs that have both optical and USB inputs.
Answer two I think should have cleared up the CD player to DAC part.
As for the USB cable question, the best I can do without debating is to simply state that I'm not one who thinks it would improve the sound in a double-blind test. Glad to hear you built Van Damme cables with Neutrik plugs, I love DIY too of course. Cheers and enjoy your Bottlehead build!
P.S. Just to share my opinion... For me, the most important mods for the Crack, to make it its best, are the Valab 23-step attenuator, Speedball upgrade, and a 6SN7-to-12AU7 6.3V adapter with American (or British ) NOS tubes. Once I build my 4th Crack, those three will be the first upgrades I do.
Thanks for your very detailed answers. Can I ask you to clear up a couple of further questions that have come up with another few hours of research...
1) Yes, there are of course exceptions. I myself prefer my older AudioQuest DragonFly v1.0 to both the v1.5 and Red. And I generally prefer vinyl over digital copies I've heard (though there are again exceptions, such as the DTS track on the Nirvana Unplugged DVD). Most people, in my experience, can tell the difference in tone and lack of compression of vinyl (vs digital) pretty reliably--I think placebo is more likely with USB cables ;P. The difference between your vintage Kenwood and modern Yammie receivers I think has more to do with the quality of vintage receivers (less-compromised designs, serious power transformers, and quality analog stages) vs modern AV receivers (generally, low-effort designs and low-grade components) than it has to do with what source is being plugged into it. If a signal is decent enough, like with your ancient DAC, then the drastic quality difference of the receivers will have more of a say in how good the system sounds. Same goes with the better Denon CD player (vs the Pio)--the unit itself is of such a quality that the inferior disc format doesn't matter as much anymore. Though this is a classic science mishap of having two independent variables. There should only be one independent variable (disc format) while everything else remains the same in order to see the real differences between the formats.
Other comparisons mentioned are also unfair. For example, vinyl may be older, but we have to remember that the trend for digital formats, in the beginning, was mostly convenience over quality. Vinyl is analog whereas digital formats started with pretty heavy compression. Digital has offered uncompressed options as we've moved along but it's not as if vinyl to CD to mp3 to SACD to Blu-ray audio was intended as being a linear increase in sound quality. This graph looks more like a valley. Whereas DACs are intended to be a linear increase in sound quality (in terms of improving THD, SNR, and crosstalk). The exceptions are not so much to do with what era a particular piece is from, but the implementation, engineering, and circuit design being so good that it may lead that component to having a lovers' club or cult following. For me, the DragonFly 1.0 is one such exception because even though the Red clearly has less distortion, the sound is presented in a way that doesn't cater to the sounds I prefer. The Red, in my system, is clearer but more closed in, prone to glare, and constricted.
My point is, for similar money to the Grace, you can get an optical/USB DAC that does more for the money (source selection, CD player sound upgrade). Now, if your CD player's DAC was one of those pieces that had a cult following--that was designed in such a way that the sound presentation was a standout and outweighed its inferior specs--then I'd make the case to get the Grace and a source selector. But, as it stands, you're already planning on spending $80 for a DAC, and it makes more sense to me to utilize a modern DAC for both your sources for around the same amount of money.
2) What you say here is correct... "I am assuming from what you say r.e. external DACs is that if I am plugging my sources via digital into the Yamaha that it is the Yamaha DACs that are being used and not the source equipments?" The source won't convert from digital to analog then back to digital when it leaves optically. The optical output bypasses the source DAC entirely. And yep, the Yammie is doing what the external DAC would be doing.
3) I totally understand wanting to be frugal in this hobby; I try my best to as well. My point still stands though that you're already spending around $100 for a DAC, and in my opinion, spending a little more money for a multi-input DAC likely will give you more satisfaction, given your setup. But if you already have a source selector that can work for you, and you do enjoy the Denon's DAC... then you just need to decide if $20 more is worth it or not for the simplicity of one DAC and to see if the Denon's sound quality can improve. Previously, I didn't know you had a source selector... Your decision rests on spending or not spending $20.
4) The Topping D30 has a nice following too. There's also the SMSL M100 for $80. Obviously, more research will yield a mind-numbing number of results. I think you can save time and trust the many positive reviews for the D30, Modi, or M100.
5) Yeah, tube rolling can be daunting, but I went down that path...and I think researching a bit and trying out just a couple 6SN7 tubes is entirely worthwhile. To me, the sound is satisfyingly bigger, reaches deeper into bass frequencies, and sounds more true-to-life. Just know it's an option, and perhaps in the future you'll be interested in exploring it.
Decisions, decisions! Don't go too mad, but I hope you'll be mad about your system and enjoy it for years to come. Take care.
Again thanks for the detailed answer and humouring my questioning nature.
1 and 2 are put to bed there.
3. I need to be very frugal, not just in this hobby. I am a min wage earner with a wife and 3 kids in a country that is very expensive to live in. lol. Add on top that the current economic situation may well have effects for the next few years. If I spend money on things, they have to be keepers or hold their resale value. My nature is quite investigative anyway so I would probably still research like mad even if money were no object.
On the subject of the Denon. Would it be worth looking for a DAC that had analog inputs as well so I can decide whether the Denon sounds better with its onboard vs the external DAC? I assume from the above if I exit the Denon via analog into a DAC then the DAC does nothing other than pass the signal through to the amp it is connected to?
4) I will look into the M100. The D30 does look favourite at the moment.
5) I get what you;re saying here. barring some bad luck I will have years to buy a tube here and there. A slower "try tubes out" than most but still. Can you give a basic description what difference replacing the big tube with another small tube makes? I know this depends on what tube is used but in general.
And for 5) No worries there. I have always been proud of my setup. At each stage of progression it has improved. Within budget each upgrade has been very satisfactory and while the Yammie wouldn't get too many people in this hobby excited, it does its job very well. For films, TV, youtube etc it sounds exceptional and is very versatile. It plays music very well for people who aren't looking for perfection. After all we live in an age where people seem happy to listen to compressed music through the tinpot speaker of their phone, through a cheap bass overloaded bluetooth speaker etc. I think most people nod to humour me when I'm detailing the musical failings/limitations of parts of my equipment. I can't afford true audiophile setup from source to end but I do want to try and get as close as I can within a tight budget. For me the music is the key part. I'm not particularly bothered if everything else doesn't sound that good as long as the music does. For the rest of the household they wouldn't really notice the difference.
I splurge on audio equipment, then am dormant for a while. I suppose spread out I would average £300 to £400 a year on equipment but that includes audio, multimedia and audio. I'm looking here to get a separate headphone setup to keep for the next decade with minimal spend on top once it's done. Then I can enjoy that setup while the wife and/or kids are enjoying some other aspect of the "family" entertainment setup.
I am thinking of buying the crack kit this week. No idea about lead time or when it will arrive. Should be fun when it does though.