[laxx]

I'm a new believer to source first. I went from

Audigy 2 -> headphone
Aria -> headphone
Sony DVP-NC685 -> Aria -> headphone
Sony DVP-NC685 -> MHDT Labs Constantine+(with and without for SACD) -> Darkvoice 332 -> headphone
Shanling CD-3000 -> Darkvoice 332 -> headphone

There is a huge difference from the $299 MSRP Sony that I got for $40 used compared to the $1600 Shanling CD-3000. =]

 

[wakeride74]

I just posted a Amps vs. DAC's thread in the amps forum asking about the stuff discussed here. I'm toying with the idea of buying a decent DAC like a Stello to connect via usb to my PC at home but I was worried about diminishing returns on such a DAC if I was using a less expensive amp like the Hornet or Lisa III.

I do a lot of listening at work so my amp has to be a go between until I can pick up a nice home amp down the road.

 

[rincewind]

I found the Hornet to be more than capable with my HD650 and K701. Good enough to easily tell the differences between the two cans. Go for it! BTW, hope you mean the DA220 MkII

 

[boomana]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wakeride74 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I just posted a Amps vs. DAC's thread in the amps forum asking about the stuff discussed here. I'm toying with the idea of buying a decent DAC like a Stello to connect via usb to my PC at home but I was worried about diminishing returns on such a DAC if I was using a less expensive amp like the Hornet or Lisa III. I do a lot of listening at work so my amp has to be a go between until I can pick up a nice home amp down the road.

I'd get the best DAC you can afford. You can, and probably will, buy, sell, upgrade, downgrade, switch, and try out different amps as need, interest and mood strikes. How will you know what the amp can do without a stable, decent source? Obviously a Hornet isn't even the same as an SR-71, let alone a home amp, but why give it a lesser source, especially since you plan on getting a home amp someday?

 

[wakeride74]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boomana /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'd get the best DAC you can afford. You can, and probably will, buy, sell, upgrade, downgrade, switch, and try out different amps as need, interest and mood strikes. How will you know what the amp can do without a stable, decent source? Obviously a Hornet isn't even the same as an SR-71, let alone a home amp, but why give it a lesser source, especially since you plan on getting a home amp someday?

My only concern is having the Hornet or Lisa bottleneck the SQ potential of the Stello. I don't know how long it will be until I snatch a Raptor or WA5 and I have owned and heard several good home amps so I know how much of a difference they can make. Again, my main concern is popping for a nice DAC like the Stello when the amp I'm using is more on the level of a $300 DAC.

Will I still benifit from the quality of a more expensive DAC or would I be better off to start small and build later? How much SQ will be lost by pairing the Stello with a Hornet or Lisa vs. what it could do with a Raptor, GS-1, WA5, etc.

 

[PFKMan23]

I have no doubt that the Hornet would be the bottleneck for something like a Stello, Benchmark, etc.. That being said I do feel that it is a worthy investment that can grow with you as you upgrade your rig, especially in terms of stationary components. I personally would find that preferable to having the source being the limiting point, especially given that with respect to the DAC seemingly being comparable to that of various high level home decks.

That being said I do not feel that what is lost of gained to be so easy quantifiable. Moreover I find it funny, because for the most part it seems that this hobby overall deals with the last 15% overall of the experience.

 

[boomana]

Well, my thinking still says buy the best source you can. Why buy lesser and then have to spend more money down the line if you can afford it now? Wouldn't you rather spend later money on amp improvements, not both amp and DAC? You'll be asking a similar question then: should I buy a better amp or DAC?

Naturally, you won't get the full benefit using a portable amp, but it doesn't change the quality of the source, and will bring the amp to its best. If I plug my Larocco PRII into my main home source, it doesn't sound as good as if I'm using my main home amp. It shouldn't. BUT, the Larocco sounds better with that source than an imod, which, in turn, sounds better than with an ipod. I've never tried it with my Hornet, and I've never used a stand-alone DAC, so I can't answer to your specific situation, but it would seem that general principles apply.

I guess you'll have to decide what upgrade path works best for you. From this thread alone, I've seen completely reasonable, but differing opinions, all based on personal needs. To each his own seems to be the way to go.

 

[Hi-Finthen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mogul /img/forum/go_quote.gif What are you doing with the other 10%?

Quote:

Originally Posted by d-cee /img/forum/go_quote.gif cables/tweaks/voodoo etc.

Cables, as well as some give and take on cost of each...

Of course some want to know exactly and perhaps argue the minutia ... Rather like arguing what's 'best'....

My contribution has been made to the thread, take from it what you will.....

 

[wakeride74]

I am leaning in the direction of putting more into the source and going for the Stello I just don't want to spend a lot on a piece of gear that will only be reacing a small percentage of its potential for however many months it takes me to give it a proper amp.

I was hoping the Lisa III would be a good middle road since it is transportable I can still take it to work and use it with iPod>ES2 via desktop but I could also connect it to the Stello at home when listening through my PC and messing around online. Based on what I've read I'd expect the Lisa to be a pretty solid amp for it's size, price and versatility and as such I'd hope that it would do the Stello some amount of justice.

 

[jpelg]

Back in the old days (for me, that's the 70's), the usual philosophy was to create a 'balanced' system. This meant to get all of your components within the same tier, so to speak, as to avoid one being far better or worse than the others.

So, if you had $1000 to spend on your system, the 40/30/30 rule dictated that you spend $400 on speakers, $300 on an amp/receiver, and $300 on a turntable. A small variation on this might include 5-10% on cables and/or power conditioning, with small deductions taken from the other components. This way, each component performed to the best of its ability within the tier for which it was probably designed.

That worked for people who didn't plan to upgrade every few weeks. However, around here, upgrade-itus strikes at every turn. Many of us are buying one component with the probably intent of upgrading it within the next few months or year. This is where the discrepancies come in.

Some people will elect to put more into their headphones first, in hopes of building up the rest of the components later. Others will get the best source they can afford, with the (correct) mindset that it will give their source material a better platform to start. Others may prefer (or have an opportunity) to get a better amp first, and build around that.

In my opinion, neither of those approaches are wrong, per se. It's up to the individual, the circumstances, & opportunities that present themselves. But I still have to think that the old 'balanced' approach gives each component their best shot at performing to their respective potentials.

 

[HiWire]

Yes, it's all about opportunities. I went for the amp first, then the headphones. Now it's a matter of time and $$$ for a high-end source and speaker system.

 

[Mindless]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpelg /img/forum/go_quote.gif Back in the old days (for me, that's the 70's), the usual philosophy was to create a 'balanced' system. This meant to get all of your components within the same tier, so to speak, as to avoid one being far better or worse than the others. So, if you had $1000 to spend on your system, the 40/30/30 rule dictated that you spend $400 on speakers, $300 on an amp/receiver, and $300 on a turntable. A small variation on this might include 5-10% on cables and/or power conditioning, with small deductions taken from the other components. This way, each component performed to the best of its ability within the tier for which it was probably designed. That worked for people who didn't plan to upgrade every few weeks. However, around here, upgrade-itus strikes at every turn. Many of us are buying one component with the probably intent of upgrading it within the next few months or year. This is where the discrepancies come in. Some people will elect to put more into their headphones first, in hopes of building up the rest of the components later. Others will get the best source they can afford, with the (correct) mindset that it will give their source material a better platform to start. Others may prefer (or have an opportunity) to get a better amp first, and build around that. In my opinion, neither of those approaches are wrong, per se. It's up to the individual, the circumstances, & opportunities that present themselves. But I still have to think that the old 'balanced' approach gives each component their best shot at performing to their respective potentials.

Agreed. Best way is to keep everything within the same pricerange because then you can be pretty sure about what you get, which is why I got the Opera (and because it's good reviews) for $1100, GS1000 for $1300 (with recable) and a Linn Ikemi for $2100. Sure, the CD player deviates a bit from the others, but as mentioned earlier in the thread:

Crap in = crap out

If I have a solid base, there is vertically no limit to what my "output stage" can preform.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asr /img/forum/go_quote.gif And the top-tier headphones absolutely scale with high-end sources. I've been cumulatively blown away at how much more music the K701 reveals as I've upgraded my source. It's literally unbelievable - for those who've heard the K701 on lesser equipment you might think you're satisfied now, but all you need to do is hear it with a high-end amp AND a high-end source, and it'll scale right up there along with them. Same thing with the HD650 and AD2000 - these headphones are just amazing with the scaling they're capable of. I don't even know how high they scale - my wallet is too afraid to find out.

It's amazing really. When I got my Opera and plugged it into my old Denon DCD-1520 (transport) using the Opera's DAC, I thought it sounded amazing. It was beyond anything that I had heard previously. As I got this eargasm I started feeling that "Maybe the HD600 are beginning to hit the roof now.".

However, a few weeks before I got my Opera, I auditioned a few different sources using my brothers headphone amplifier. I looked mostly at Linn CD players (the shop was a Linn retailer so they promoted their stuff heavily), but I took a few looks at Rega and some others too. Then, I saw a pile of CD players and among thoes I saw my current Linn Ikemi. I asked the shop owner how much it was and he said "$2100.". I was like "Damn, that's steep." - but I gave it a shot and WOW. Never had HD600 sounded so great. I was hooked on getting the Ikemi from that moment. So, last friday I went to the shop again and bought it after listening to a few songs using my Opera. I haven't looked back since. I mean, $2100 isn't bad for a CDP that costs $3500 new, but it's not cheap in any way either.

I later found a auction on eBay where one was sold for $1400. Did I regret my purchase? Hell no. Sure, I lost (figuratively speaking) $700, but somehow the sound delievered from the Ikemi seems to justify that.

To me, sources now have incredible value. Going from my $100, 17 year old Denon (with some mods) to a $2100 state of the art, more or less high-end CD player was all worth it. When swapping between headphones and amplifiers I've gotten the feeling that you pay way too much for what you get, but with sources you get exactly what you pay for (at least I have that feeling).

Me and a friend have something like a rule of thumb when it comes to this. If $500 (note the if) is reference class, you will have to pay $100 more for 1% improvement in sound. So far, from my experience, it has been fairly correct. Of course, all sources are different and each have unique characteristics but the sound improvement will only be that big over a certain level because everything above that line is of such high quality.

 

[3x331m]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asr /img/forum/go_quote.gif "Buy used on Audiogon, sell used on Head-Fi!"

Sshheee... don't tell them where you've gone for fishing ....

 

[granodemostasa]

I'm more personally a fan of getting components that will allow you expand or upgrade your system in the future.
example: audiophile usb was once my amp/dac, then it was just my dac, then it was just my transport.
example 2: Zana Deux was my amp, but it's also my pre and source selector
example 3: HD650, it sucked at the beginning, but I've not had to change headphones since i started in the hobby.

 

[Spareribs]

This is kind of a difficult issue and it depends on what you prefer in sonics. In some ways it's like asking what's the most important thing in a city structure? the buildings? the streets? the location?

I do think source is very important for long term listening. A cheap DVD player may sound good but after a while, you start to notice the limitations especially if you are famialiar with better quality sources. This is from my experience.

I will have to say that the source is most important because I have listened to a great turntable with the Grado 60 and also cheap bookshelf speakers and it sounded wonderful.

On the other hand, I've listened to a $300 headphone with a mediocre CD player and it wasn't as satisfying. So source is most important and sounds pretty amazing even with a headphone that's less than $100.