DAC3SE vs DAC19 DSP vs everything else.

[haloxt]

Well a $715 dac isn't going to be much better than a $640 dac . I personally would never do such an upgrade. Since you have good cables and a power filter already, not much I can think of that might improve your sound in a worthwhile manner.
 
Are you listening to good cd quality music? Maybe go speakers?

 

[oqvist]

Why? The idea of getting another DAC is more variation and it to do things differently not necessarily better.
 
I would like the DAC combo that goes along as well as the LCD-2/ED 8 combo. Or my GHP/Head One combo.
 
I am not after  a 2 % better DAC19 or something

 

[haloxt]

Could you describe what you want improved on the dac19? If you already have a power filter, can you describe what sound effects it has on your audio chain?
 
If you want variation, I would suggest getting the audio-gd C2 amp, moon and earth hdam's, and acss interconnect. Audio-gd rolls off the upper highs faster in RCA than ACSS, and I remember you mentioned hearing rolled off highs in the dac19. Phoenix single-ended input and single-ended output is supposed to be about the same level as C2, and imo that sounds great and balanced with the dac19, enabling the dac19 to sound, not too thick and not too lean.

 

[oqvist]

What I want. Now you start with the really hard questions

It felt like I tried so many headphones and amps by now it would be fun to try out some new sources. I suppose I am after something Keces like but higher quality. Something more engaging, faster, more aggressive rather then more warm, relaxed and soft treble. I don´t find the DAC19 DSP the slighest bit unforgiving regarding poor recordings or such on the ED 8 and LCD-2. Both these let the music come through at all times. T1, Pro 900, DX 1000 then you want to fix things at times but then you can put them on the tube.
 
I had Kingwa replace the ACSS connection for RCA to get dual outputs. Very useful but can´t use any ACSS gear thus. You are right I complained about treble roll off. That was on my severr treble head days lol.LCD-2 was a nice reeducation. Feel the DAC19 is spot on but then that is the source I have used almost exclusively the last year or so

 

[tim3320070]

I'm not sure how you can get a DAC that is what you describe (certainly not from AGD). Wouldn't a different amp give you the sound signature you want?

 

[oqvist]

Maybe you are right KingWa has his idea he doesn´t stray to far from? and I should scrap audio gd totally? I am thinking of scrapping this idea entirely anyway. As for amps the late I have tried have all been good and not wildly different. Will see how the HA-160 goes as well.
 

 

[tim3320070]

Well, I meant getting a significantly different sound signature out of a non-tube DAC in general does not seem possible to me. This is based on my experience with the Ref-1 and Ref-8 which sounded very similar to me. I also had the VDAC and Musiland MD10- those sounded unrefined and small in comparison to the Ref dac's but did not have a significantly different sound signature.

 

[haloxt]

oqvist, I think it's kind of gambling, but audio-gd recently made some es9018 based dac's, NFB-1 and NFB-7, and the dac chips are supposed to be fully utilized in either balanced or single-ended output.
 
The difference between the pcm1704 in your dac19 and the es9018 in these two dac's is supposed to be SLIGHT, in other words both are close to each other and if you don't like the audio-gd house sound then these two newer dac's might not fix that. But the descriptions Kingwa gave seem to fit your preferences.
 
I translated this comparison by Kingwa with the help of a friend who said its meaning is accurate enough, but just some weird word choice.
 
 
In comparison to ref 5, the NFB-1 has the advantage of slightly better dynamics and slightly clearer sound, but without sounding bright or harsh.
The ref 5 has the advantage of a slightly warmer and slightly thicker sound.
For drums, NFB-1 has more impact, and ref 5 has more depth.
For female voices, NFB-1 sounds clearer and purer, while ref 5 sounds more mature and more persuasive.

In summary:

Ref 5 and NFB-1 do not sound very different from each other in tone or presentation.
NFB1 leans more towards sounding modern or contemporary, but not harsh in the high-frequencies or artificial-sounding like some delta-sigma DA chips.
RE5 has a bit of a nostalgic sound to it, a little like vinyl.

Both use ACSS, which transmits the audio signal in current mode which has minimal coloration.
Both use the same circuitry except for the different DA chips, so the sound difference is just the sound signature differences between the ES9018 and PCM1704uk DA chips.

 

[realmassy]

Quote:

In comparison to ref 5, the NFB-1 has the advantage of slightly better dynamics and slightly clearer sound, but without sounding bright or harsh.
The ref 5 has the advantage of a slightly warmer and slightly thicker sound.
For drums, NFB-1 has more impact, and ref 5 has more depth.
For female voices, NFB-1 sounds clearer and purer, while ref 5 sounds more mature and more persuasive.

 
Thanks for this post haloxt.
More dynamics is something good, I felt the Ref.5 was slightly lacking of.
But I really don't think the Ref.5 has a thick or warm sound or even vinyl like. To me actually was more on the thin side...but I guess everyone's ears are different 

I'm really tempted by the DAC3SE, but I'm afraid it could sound too similar to the Ref.5

 

[Dynobot]

Can I ask, about how many hours did you have on your Ref5 before you sold it?
 
Can you tell me a little about what was feeding the Ref5, OS, software, digital method and cable, power cord.
 
Not trying to set you up for some crazy rebuttal, just curious....
 
 
Quote:

 
Thanks for this post haloxt.
More dynamics is something good, I felt the Ref.5 was slightly lacking of.
But I really don't think the Ref.5 has a thick or warm sound or even vinyl like. To me actually was more on the thin side...but I guess everyone's ears are different 

I'm really tempted by the DAC3SE, but I'm afraid it could sound too similar to the Ref.5

 

[oqvist]

Interesting. Yes what I am looking for is more in the NFB1 line compared to the RE5 going by that. Modern sound maybe more geared to electronic music rather then real.
 
The differences between my Elite Pro, Keces, and DAC19 I find really quite big in the audiophile world. Taking the LCD-2 bigger then the differences between different amps so far
I don´t feel the ED 8 is ultra demanding regarding amplification either.
 
But well as mentioned it´s not to change anything I don´t like it´s just nice with variation.

 

[realmassy]

Quote:

Can I ask, about how many hours did you have on your Ref5 before you sold it?
 
Can you tell me a little about what was feeding the Ref5, OS, software, digital method and cable, power cord.
 
Not trying to set you up for some crazy rebuttal, just curious....
 

 
I bought it on May, as soon as it was available, and used a couple of hours every day.
I had a Roc, connected with ACSS, Audio-GD exclusive power cables and ClearerAudio copper. The transport was a mac mini with pure music, all my library is AIFF, connected to the Ref.5 through the Halide Bridge.
Headphones: HE-5LE, K702 (balanced) and HD650 (balanced)
I guess the setup was good, definitely the best I've ever heard, but still it was missing something.
 
Using a Earmax as headphone amp was a big improvement over the balanced connection. But the Ref.5 to my ears still sounded thin compared to my 15years old old CD player (Audio Alchemist).
 
Yesterday I had to swap the driver tube of the Earmax, and use a Electro Harmonix, because the sound with the Mullard was very very dark. When I had the Ref.5 I simply couldn't listen to that tube, it was harsh and bright.

 

[Dynobot]

Thanks for the .02.....seems like you had all the top notch links in the chain.  Only thing I can see is the Dac seemed to only have 180-240 Hrs on it.  2hrs/day x 3-4 months.  I have to say mine sounded a bit iffy as well before the 300hr mark.  I've only had mine for a little over a month but it plays more than 12hrs/day and its really Lush sounding though still very clear.  Vinyl sounding is how I would describe the sound as well..

 
Quote:

 
I bought it on May, as soon as it was available, and used a couple of hours every day.
I had a Roc, connected with ACSS, Audio-GD exclusive power cables and ClearerAudio copper. The transport was a mac mini with pure music, all my library is AIFF, connected to the Ref.5 through the Halide Bridge.
Headphones: HE-5LE, K702 (balanced) and HD650 (balanced)
I guess the setup was good, definitely the best I've ever heard, but still it was missing something.
 
Using a Earmax as headphone amp was a big improvement over the balanced connection. But the Ref.5 to my ears still sounded thin compared to my 15years old old CD player (Audio Alchemist).
 
Yesterday I had to swap the driver tube of the Earmax, and use a Electro Harmonix, because the sound with the Mullard was very very dark. When I had the Ref.5 I simply couldn't listen to that tube, it was harsh and bright.

 

[realmassy]

Quote:

Thanks for the .02.....seems like you had all the top notch links in the chain.  Only thing I can see is the Dac seemed to only have 180-240 Hrs on it.  2hrs/day x 3-4 months.  I have to say mine sounded a bit iffy as well before the 300hr mark.  I've only had mine for a little over a month but it plays more than 12hrs/day and its really Lush sounding though still very clear.  Vinyl sounding is how I would describe the sound as well...although I think total break in is maybe 500hrs.
 

I do believe in burn in, but honestly I didn't notice any change. I did notice the amp and the amp sounded very bad if not warm enough, though.
I listened to them a couple of hours every day but I always left them on for at least 8 hours a day because of that.
And then add 100 hours played by Kingwa before shipping.
 

 

[vlach]

"2. Get a proper amp for the LCD2"
 
Slim.a: Out of curiosity, what is it about the C2 that makes you feel it isn't adequate for the LCD2?