[325xi]

Thinking about DAC for Squeezebox. Planned to get Lavry DA10, but after hearing that CrystalLock mode appears to be non-existant, started to consider other options as well.

Most appealing to me DACs are Stello and Transporter. Both reported to sound very good.

Transporter is more expensive, and may be technically superior. But for jitter coming from the external source it totally rely on word-clock link as the only option - and I don't have sources with word clock input. Also, being integrated device, it won't let me use Behringer DEQ2496 for room correction.

Stello is a dark horse, with very little technical details available, but it has stellar feedbacks. Good look and flexible connectivity options don't hurt either.

What do you say?

 

[slwiser]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 325xi /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thinking about DAC for Squeezebox. Planned to get Lavry DA10, but after hearing that CrystalLock mode appears to be non-existant, started to consider other options as well. What do you say?

Why not ask this question to Dan Lavry over on his forum directly and see how he will respond to you assertion about CrystalLock? Instead of a back-handed accusation!

 

[mofonyx]

If you want no jitter, why isn't there a Benchmark DAC1 option?

 

[325xi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by slwiser /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why not ask this question to Dan Lavry over on his forum directly and see how he will respond to you assertion about CrystalLock? Instead of a back-handed accusation!

There's long enough discussion about this finding on that very forum. I read it all, and the one on the original forum as well. Enough.

Also, I don't think Dan will advise me on Stello vs. Transporter anyways.

As for Benchmark, it most probably won't sound well in my system. Too bright.

 

[Lord Chaos]

I'm using a Benchmark DAC1 with my Squeezebox, and the combination is wonderful. Cheaper than a Transporter, too.

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

If you need the room correction, then you have to go with an external DAC. As it happens, I've recently heard a Benchmark DAC1 against a modded DEQ 2496. Personally I'd take the modded DEQ, which sounds VERY similar, but costs half the price.

 

[fierce_freak]

How was the DEQ2496 modded?

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fierce_freak /img/forum/go_quote.gif How was the DEQ2496 modded?

It was completed by a group called Audiosmile.

 

[fierce_freak]

Makes the Ultramarch (SRC2496) perhaps an attractive unit for modders, then. Afaik, same DAC section without EQ...only ~$130.

 

[mofonyx]

Perhaps you could settle with DA220 and get a Squeezebox.

I'm not too keen on a USB connection. Moreover, if you hadn't noticed, it's not USB 2.0

 

[Grahame]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr_Sukebe /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you need the room correction, then you have to go with an external DAC.

Not true.

There are hardware based Digital Room Correction (DRC) solutions. e.g. TacT.

The same processing can be done in software. If you have a Windows PC ( or one that can run Windows in a VM) you can use the inguz audio DRC plugin for slimserver.

This plugin performs DRC in software on the server PC, so that the "Corrected" output can be played back directly on a standalone SB3 or Transporter, or via a DAC connected to them.

 

[325xi]

Well, having DRC unit in the chain is not a requirement, but rather nice-to-have kind of thing. However as long as Transporter doesn't allow a signal loop, it gives Stello few extra points. I'm not thrilled by Inguz plugin - too much hassle with the files. DEQ2496 also makes a so nice toy

What I really want to know is what sounds better for those who listened... The fact that Transporter doesn't offer ANY jitter reduction mechanism, not even PLL, scares me.

I just realized that Lavry Blue costs less then any of the above, and it seem to have everything as advertised. It might make one very good DAC... On the other side its connectivity options are very limited, and its look... I'm not sure it would pass WAF approval...