[jrisles]

Trying to get my EMM Labs DAC2X to show up as a USB device when connected to my Mac Mini but for the life of me it won't show as a device to connect too? Are there any special drivers to install? I usually use my TSDX as a transport but want to start streaming also. I never remembered it being this difficult. And yes I have tested the USB cable as it works with another different DAC i have on my laptop. So nothing wrong with the cable. I have unplugged and re-plugged USB cable into different USB ports but no effect. I have rebooted DAC and Mac Mini but still nothing. I have reached out to emm labs for support a couple of days ago both via email and on their Facebook page but no response to date. Any advice or suggestions?

 

[chesebert]

Trying to get my EMM Labs DAC2X to show up as a USB device when connected to my Mac Mini but for the life of me it won't show as a device to connect too? Are there any special drivers to install? I usually use my TSDX as a transport but want to start streaming also. I never remembered it being this difficult. And yes I have tested the USB cable as it works with another different DAC i have on my laptop. So nothing wrong with the cable. I have unplugged and re-plugged USB cable into different USB ports but no effect. I have rebooted DAC and Mac Mini but still nothing. I have reached out to emm labs for support a couple of days ago both via email and on their Facebook page but no response to date. Any advice or suggestions?

I would call them around 10-11am Calgary time - I have had good luck getting to a real person during that time. They just got back from the Munich show so perhaps they are taking a bit of a break?

 

[2Maybe4]

Hey gang, I just acquired a DV2 and NS1. Before taking that plunge, I auditioned the combo in my system, against my dCS Rossini (which is Ethernet connectable). As can be gleaned from my purchase, the DV2/NS1 combo beat my Rossini & its outboard clock. It should be noted that I used both the Rossini and now the DV2 to directly drive my tube amps and speakers.

As I'm sure most of you know, Mr. Meitner was in the studio digital business before PC audio was a thing. Because of this and me being an early adopter of PC Audio, Ed and his products have always been on my radar and short list. Because I wanted Ethernet connectivity and a DAC with a pre-amp capable of superbly driving my amps, until the DV2, EMM wasn't in competition when I bought the Rossini. Now, I'm so glad I've had a chance to sample and own Ed's and EMM Labs' great work.

By comparison to the Rossini, the DV2 had a better and more immersive soundstage, it was more musical with greater detail retrieval. The latter two are oftentimes in competition -- i.e., you get one, but not so much the other. That wasn't so with the DV2. With DAC's at the dCS and EMM level, a great frequency response is a given. However, what for me separates a good DAC from a really great one, is how good the illusion is of being at the studio or hall -- i.e. the performance! Although it's obviously not possible, I liken the illusion to being in the music, verses simply being a voyer. The closer I feel like I'm in the hall, or the studio -- in the music, the better. After owning a Lampizator Big7 and then a Lampi Golden Gate and of course the Rossini for 3+ years, the DV2/NS1 are providing the best digital I have ever heard in my room!

Along the way, I had superb communications and support from John at AudioShield, EMM Labs' U.S. Distributor and the Director of EMM Lab's sales Shahin, along with communications with AudiophileStyle Forum's founder Chris.

Interestingly however, because you're talking about upgrades, that is what started me down the new DAC path. Before committing the sort of funds necessary to upgrade the Rossini, I thought why not take that money and see what else was out there? The DV2 was my reward in taking what turned out to be a prudent more reasoned approach, before again diving head first into the deep end.

 

[jrisles]

Hey gang, I just acquired a DV2 and NS1. Before taking that plunge, I auditioned the combo in my system, against my dCS Rossini (which is Ethernet connectable). As can be gleaned from my purchase, the DV2/NS1 combo beat my Rossini & its outboard clock. It should be noted that I used both the Rossini and now the DV2 to directly drive my tube amps and speakers.

As I'm sure most of you know, Mr. Meitner was in the studio digital business before PC audio was a thing. Because of this and me being an early adopter of PC Audio, Ed and his products have always been on my radar and short list. Because I wanted Ethernet connectivity and a DAC with a pre-amp capable of superbly driving my amps, until the DV2, EMM wasn't in competition when I bought the Rossini. Now, I'm so glad I've had a chance to sample and own Ed's and EMM Labs' great work.

By comparison to the Rossini, the DV2 had a better and more immersive soundstage, it was more musical with greater detail retrieval. The latter two are oftentimes in competition -- i.e., you get one, but not so much the other. That wasn't so with the DV2. With DAC's at the dCS and EMM level, a great frequency response is a given. However, what for me separates a good DAC from a really great one, is how good the illusion is of being at the studio or hall -- i.e. the performance! Although it's obviously not possible, I liken the illusion to being in the music, verses simply being a voyer. The closer I feel like I'm in the hall, or the studio -- in the music, the better. After owning a Lampizator Big7 and then a Lampi Golden Gate and of course the Rossini for 3+ years, the DV2/NS1 are providing the best digital I have ever heard in my room!

Along the way, I had superb communications and support from John at AudioShield, EMM Labs' U.S. Distributor and the Director of EMM Lab's sales Shahin, along with communications with AudiophileStyle Forum's founder Chris.

Interestingly however, because you're talking about upgrades, that is what started me down the new DAC path. Before committing the sort of funds necessary to upgrade the Rossini, I thought why not take that money and see what else was out there? The DV2 was my reward in taking what turned out to be a prudent more reasoned approach, before again diving head first into the deep end.

Great stuff. I am eyeing off a NS1 unit to match with my DAC2X V2 DAC might be awhile before I can upgrade to a DV2 & by then who knows Ed may have released something else by then. I haven't had the opportunity to listen to a Rossini anything here in Australia. I have heard a Lampizator (can't recall the model now) against my Playback Designs MPS-5 when I had it and what I did hear between the 2 I preferred my PBD DAC. The DAC2X was the first DAC I heard when compared to my PDD MPS-5 that I preferred over my PBD DAC. I would love to hear a Rossini one day though. Thanks for the post ... oh and welcome to the club. You got here eventually. Now "you know"

 

[2Maybe4]

Great stuff. I am eyeing off a NS1 unit to match with my DAC2X V2 DAC might be awhile before I can upgrade to a DV2 & by then who knows Ed may have released something else by then. I haven't had the opportunity to listen to a Rossini anything here in Australia. I have heard a Lampizator (can't recall the model now) against my Playback Designs MPS-5 when I had it and what I did hear between the 2 I preferred my PBD DAC. The DAC2X was the first DAC I heard when compared to my PDD MPS-5 that I preferred over my PBD DAC. I would love to hear a Rossini one day though. Thanks for the post ... oh and welcome to the club. You got here eventually. Now "you know"

Before signing-up a couple of years ago, I dropped by the forum many times. Although I don't use headphones, I've found some great info here over the years and thought I would add my 2-cents about EMM and tell everyone about my DAC journey that actually began in 2006 with a Wavelength Audio Brick.

 

[IanB52]

I've got an EMM Labs DA2 (like DV2 sans volume control) and NS1, and this is truly great combo. Incredible speed and detail while being super smooth and low-fatigue on the top end. I also found it much preferable to DCS Rossini and clock, and was able to get an unopened DA2 for less than half of the DCS combo (lucky find!).

I knew of EMM Labs because of Ed Meitner's involvement in the DSD converters used for the original SACDs, which sound awesome to this day. Maybe the only thing really better are MSB's upper end DACs, which I will never afford, and R2R is a different flavor from DSD DACs. EMM Labs make great stuff, and I'm sure the Meitner MA3 is excellent too.

 

[chesebert]

I stumbled upon Emm Labs about 10yrs ago by accident in one of those “let’s try everything you have in the store” demo day.

Linn Klimax (or Akurate) is a great compliment to Emm Labs - not quiet as fast or detailed but feels more analog - very much like a top quality vinyl rig.

 

[2Maybe4]

Interesting you mentioned Linn Klimax, the DSM was on my short list. However, it was crossed off the list, because its output wasn't sufficient to drive my monoblocks. But yes, the Linn Klimax DSM is getting rave reviews...

 

[chesebert]

For those interested: https://www.stereophile.com/content/meitner-emm-dv2-dsd-mqa-digital-audio

Some eyebrow raising comments on external clocks from Ed (don't post this stuff in dCS threads):

Q: You don't believe in using an external word clock. Why?

A: Because I think this is the most stupid thing I've ever heard in the audio business. That means you have a precision clock that you have to connect to a wire to connect to a DAC, when the clock should be straight away where it belongs, inside the DAC, beside the DAC chip, if there is such a thing—not through a cable in a different box. This is so idiotic, it's not even funny. It's a money grab.

Q: I believe one of the arguments for an external clock is that it offers better shielding from power supplies, and will thus operate better.

A: Yeah, especially with units [that] have a separate power supply. There's a lot of shielding there. The whole thing is funny.

In our DACs, the reference clock is inside the product and an inherent part of the conversion circuitry. Anything that comes from the outside world, on whatever input we select, is buffered and reclocked, so we don't have to worry about the artifacts of an external clock. Everything is reclocked to our internal reference. That's what we mean by asynchronous clock design.

 

[jrisles]

For those interested: https://www.stereophile.com/content/meitner-emm-dv2-dsd-mqa-digital-audio

Some eyebrow raising comments on external clocks from Ed (don't post this stuff in dCS threads):

Q: You don't believe in using an external word clock. Why?

A: Because I think this is the most stupid thing I've ever heard in the audio business. That means you have a precision clock that you have to connect to a wire to connect to a DAC, when the clock should be straight away where it belongs, inside the DAC, beside the DAC chip, if there is such a thing—not through a cable in a different box. This is so idiotic, it's not even funny. It's a money grab.

Q: I believe one of the arguments for an external clock is that it offers better shielding from power supplies, and will thus operate better.

A: Yeah, especially with units [that] have a separate power supply. There's a lot of shielding there. The whole thing is funny.

In our DACs, the reference clock is inside the product and an inherent part of the conversion circuitry. Anything that comes from the outside world, on whatever input we select, is buffered and reclocked, so we don't have to worry about the artifacts of an external clock. Everything is reclocked to our internal reference. That's what we mean by asynchronous clock design.

Whilst I am not suggesting for a single moment that Ed doesn't know what the heck he is talking about. You can understand why people would think an "external clock" would be better? I mean we have external separates for everything in this hobby. External volume controls both passive and active, preamplifiers separate from main amplifiers, which is the reason the BEST systems I have ever heard have always had a pre-amplifier when the pre-amp is now being excluded in so many digital setups. A lot of my audio friends - who are into digital audio with very nice sounding systems give me a sideward glance when I say to them "I can't wait until I get my dream preamp in my system". (Which incidentally is an Audio Research one). We also separate our transport from our DACS.We separate our power supplies from a lot of the units to minimise cross talk and other noise within the circuitry. So it is not surprising to think that having a separate clock from the DAC would improve the sound. Perhaps it does. But no one has been able to design it so that it actually is (yet) better?

 

[jrisles]

I've got an EMM Labs DA2 (like DV2 sans volume control) and NS1, and this is truly great combo. Incredible speed and detail while being super smooth and low-fatigue on the top end. I also found it much preferable to DCS Rossini and clock, and was able to get an unopened DA2 for less than half of the DCS combo (lucky find!).

I knew of EMM Labs because of Ed Meitner's involvement in the DSD converters used for the original SACDs, which sound awesome to this day. Maybe the only thing really better are MSB's upper end DACs, which I will never afford, and R2R is a different flavor from DSD DACs. EMM Labs make great stuff, and I'm sure the Meitner MA3 is excellent too.

Other than vinyl I still prefer SACD over anything else. I believe SACD transports better any streaming device I have ever heard to date.

 

[IanB52]

Whilst I am not suggesting for a single moment that Ed doesn't know what the heck he is talking about. You can understand why people would think an "external clock" would be better? I mean we have external separates for everything in this hobby. External volume controls both passive and active, preamplifiers separate from main amplifiers, which is the reason the BEST systems I have ever heard have always had a pre-amplifier when the pre-amp is now being excluded in so many digital setups. A lot of my audio friends - who are into digital audio with very nice sounding systems give me a sideward glance when I say to them "I can't wait until I get my dream preamp in my system". (Which incidentally is an Audio Research one). We also separate our transport from our DACS.We separate our power supplies from a lot of the units to minimise cross talk and other noise within the circuitry. So it is not surprising to think that having a separate clock from the DAC would improve the sound. Perhaps it does. But no one has been able to design it so that it actually is (yet) better?

External clocks are extremely controversial in pro audio, where Meitner originally comes from. It may be better to have circuit components electrically separated, but from the point of the clocking itself, jitter, phase noise in the DAC, having the clock on the board is definitely better than trying to sync up the DAC with another clock over a BNC cable. You lose a lot of precision that way, and from the technical point of view, an external clock can only be more accurate than an internal one if the internal one is pretty lackluster.

DCS and others might be improving the sound of their DACs with external clocks, but they are generally doing this by changing the audio and adding flavor through jitter. It's not a sound I prefer over the DA2/DV2. Probably the best design in the world are MSB clocks, which are modules within the DAC chassis, surrounded by solid aluminum.

 

[2Maybe4]

Q: You don't believe in using an external word clock. Why?

A: Because I think this is the most stupid thing I've ever heard in the audio business. That means you have a precision clock that you have to connect to a wire to connect to a DAC, when the clock should be straight away where it belongs, inside the DAC, beside the DAC chip, if there is such a thing—not through a cable in a different box. This is so idiotic, it's not even funny. It's a money grab.

Q: I believe one of the arguments for an external clock is that it offers better shielding from power supplies, and will thus operate better.

A: Yeah, especially with units [that] have a separate power supply. There's a lot of shielding there. The whole thing is funny.

In our DACs, the reference clock is inside the product and an inherent part of the conversion circuitry. Anything that comes from the outside world, on whatever input we select, is buffered and reclocked, so we don't have to worry about the artifacts of an external clock. Everything is reclocked to our internal reference. That's what we mean by asynchronous clock design.

My move out of the dCS ecosphere to EMM Labs' DV2, was prompted by contemplating the addition of dCS's outboard Rossini Clock to my Rossini DAC ($10,200), along with adding the "Apex" upgrade (new analogue board) to my Rossini. What gave me pause was the cost for both, which approached $20,000 ("money grab"?) as add-ons to a DAC that originally cost $24k and even then, in sound (& cost), it was supposedly far from dCS's flagship Vivaldi DAC. The Vivaldi Apex retails for $46,500. For a mere $44,500 more, one can own the entire 3-box stack. When an outboard network streamer/upsampler plus an outboard clock cost essentially the same as the DAC they connect to, I too wonder about the validity of Ed's "money grab" comment? But such is life at the higher-end of the highend in audiophileville.

 

[chesebert]

There is no question dCS knows how to market and is way better at it than Emm Labs.

 

[eskamobob1]

Anyone using a slightly more budget friendly ddc than the ns1? Currious what works well here synergy wise since I can't use network connection (have to use USB out of my main comp and can mess with it from there)