[lh0628]

Any idea on the left channel cutting out Jason? I think another user has reported a similar problem too.

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

Originally Posted by userlander /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hi Larry - you still haven't clarified on your relationship with nuforce. In the original post you said you had a pre-production model, then on 12/1 you said you got a final production uDAC, but that was before they were for sale to the public, wasn't it? Was all that gratis from nuforce? Or did you buy all your uDACS? Just curious on that point as it obviously relates to objectivity, conflict of interest, etc. thanks.

Understandable. Many reviewers must borrow gear to review, or they would not be able to do it. Skylab has reviewed something like 48 portable amps in his "37 amp review", and when people ask him to review another one he makes it clear that the manufacturer must send him one to review as he cannot buy them all. I have had to loan him my own iBasso D2 Boa and D3 Python, along with my review sample Icon Mobile for his big review because he did not have those. mrarroyo recently loaned him a T3 to review.

In this case, after I bought a Nuforce Icon and Nuforce NE-7M on Amazon and wrote my impressions on head-fi, Nuforce contacted me and wanted my opinion on some products that they thought could be improved. I have a review sample of Nuforce NE-8 and Icon Mobile, but I received pre-production and final production review samples UF-30 and uDAC. These were not mine, but consider them to be on long-term loan to use for comparisons with other equipment over time. I would never sell them, as it would be unethical. With Nuforce's permission I would forward them to another reviewer, but then I would not be able to compare them to other gear in my reviews for people to have an idea of where something stands in relation to them. For example, for the longest time I did not have my own Meier 2MOVE for my big 13 USB DAC/amp review. I borrowed Skylab's and returned it after a week or two, and because I could not compare my new amps to the 2MOVE it was being pushed down in the rankings as I bought new DAC/amps to review. I simply could not remember just how good or bad the 2MOVE sounded, until I bought my own B-stock 3MOVE from Meier months later and found that it still belongs near the top with the D10, Predator and Pico.

For my big DAC/amp review, in addition to the 3MOVE I bought my own HR Micro DAC and AMP, Predator, Pico DAC/amp and Pico DAC only, D1, D2 boa and Viper, D3, D4 and D10, Headstage Lyrix, etc. Only my Icon Mobile, XM5 and Vivid V1 are loaner review samples that I may keep for comparisons but not sell or profit from. Each of those review samples also rated near the middle of the pack, with XM5 being better than Nuforce's Icon Mobile and in the top tier, but V1 below the Icon Mobile which is in the second tier. As you can see there was no favoritism pushing any of those 3 review samples anywhere near the top, and I bought 10 of the 13 amps that I reviewed against each other. Of those 13, I have only sold ones I owned like D1, D2 Boa, D2 Viper, D3, Lyrix; and very recently Blutarsky acquired my Pico #11 since I own the Pico DAC with a Pico Slim coming soon.

The review sample NE-8 also did not get a glowing review (see links to reviews in my public profile "about me") and I even liked the cheaper NE-7M that I bought for myself more, partly because of fit and because the NE-8 require an amp to balance the sound. Nor did I give glowing reviews to the Icon desktop amp that I bought myself - where my postings indicate that the DAC was decent but not exceptional, and that other amps like the less expensive Travagans Red has a better headphone output, although the Nuforce was a better speaker amp. More recently in this uDAC review I found the $249 Nuforce Icon's headphone out to be on a similar level to the $169 tube-rolled Qinpu A-3 with my HD600 (normally $239 A-3). If I had to lie about what I thought the Nuforce products sounded like vs other gear, I would never be able to keep up with all the twists and turns in order to fudge them into being a little better than the competition and not making a mistake later.

As for the pre-production models, I was able to make suggestions to Nuforce regarding concerns I had with both the UF-30 and uDAC, which were fixed in the final production versions. So, I was partially responsible (along with other evaluators) for important improvements in their final sound. In my UF-30 review I posted what I felt was wrong with the pre-production UF-30 and how I felt they fixed some of those issues. In reading the review you will see that I did not use favoritism to rank the UF-30 above all the other competition. And, as recently as 1/16/10 I posted which flaws I still heard in the UF-30. http://www.head-fi.org/forums/6321892-post43.html "Agreed, the SR-60 are not vastly different from SR-80, but some of the upper mids peak/etch in the SR-60 is removed with the SR-80 and MS-1. I would give the UF-30 at least 100-150 hours before deciding on whether you like them or not. They do have a slight colored upper mids like SR-60 at times once burned in, but the soundstage will seem more open and deeper, and the ends of the bass and treble will seem a little more tipped up than with the Grados. However, I suspect the UF-30 are also tuned to work well with the Icon Mobile, which they do." (I corrected a typo here but not in the original post, so it still shows that the actual post has not been edited since the 16th).

Like with the UF-30, with the uDAC I also posted what was wrong pre-production sample, namely a loud hiss with Westone IEM, which they fixed in the production version at my urging. In addition to the hiss in the pre-production uDAC I have also posted about it's limited but adequate power for HD600 which is less than that of full size amps or 9v portable amps, it's forward nature making the soundstage less deep than pico but just as wide, treble presence and extension being slightly less than Pico, and that it may not mate well with all amps and phones. Then last night I added my beef about the USB jack.

I think that I have demonstrated that I can be un-biased in my review regardless of how I have obtained the uDAC. My relationship with dononus allows me to jokingly offer him financial aid for return shipping if he doesn't think the uDAC was worth paying taxes for, knowing he would never accept. If you want to imply that I am biased towards Nuforce so that I would pay off dononus, then I am sorry for any misunderstanding. In fact, that would only make Nuforce look worse because I was willing to do what they would not because of the loss of one uDAC already. I did say I would never make that offer for anyone else, but I take that back. I will never make that offer again to anyone.

PS: I hadn't read any posts after userlander's post at 7:44AM my time, which I took a long time to compose a reply, so I am still trying to catch up in this thread for other replys.

 

[hmm...]

Anyone know when the uDAC will be in stock on ebay or amazon?

 

[AmanGeorge]

Also, to Larry's credit, he noticed immediately when he wrote the initial review that he was so impressed with the uDAC that his post might incorrectly strike some folks as shilling. Either Larry was being extremely open, careful, and accurate with his words (as usual), or he's using brilliant reverse psychology.

 

[weibby]

Hey if the product sucked so badly, people would have complained by now and juxtaposed to HPA's review, it would be inverse.

But it isn't so init?

 

[sune]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hmm... /img/forum/go_quote.gif Anyone know when the uDAC will be in stock on ebay or amazon?

Nu Force - Amplifier, Speaker, Headphone & Earphone, Audio Video Processor, CD, DVD, Digital Music players & more

"uDAC will be back in stocks for sale on 1/23."

I will be ordering one as soon as they get back in stock

 

[wheelsx45]

Anyone do any gaming with there udac?

 

[tstarn06]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict /img/forum/go_quote.gif Understandable. Many reviewers must borrow gear to review, or they would not be able to do it. Skylab has reviewed something like 48 portable amps in his "37 amp review", and when people ask him to review another one he makes it clear that the manufacturer must send him one to review as he cannot buy them all. I have had to loan him my own iBasso D2 Boa and D3 Python, along with my review sample Icon Mobile for his big review because he did not have those. mrarroyo recently loaned him a T3 to review. In this case, after I bought a Nuforce Icon and Nuforce NE-7M on Amazon and wrote my impressions on head-fi, Nuforce contacted me and wanted my opinion on some products that they thought could be improved. I have a review sample of Nuforce NE-8 and Icon Mobile, but I received pre-production and final production review samples UF-30 and uDAC. These were not mine, but consider them to be on long-term loan to use for comparisons with other equipment over time. I would never sell them, as it would be unethical. With Nuforce's permission I would forward them to another reviewer, but then I would not be able to compare them to other gear in my reviews for people to have an idea of where something stands in relation to them. For example, for the longest time I did not have my own Meier 2MOVE for my big 13 USB DAC/amp review. I borrowed Skylab's and returned it after a week or two, and because I could not compare my new amps to the 2MOVE it was being pushed down in the rankings as I bought new DAC/amps to review. I simply could not remember just how good or bad the 2MOVE sounded, until I bought my own B-stock 3MOVE from Meier months later and found that it still belongs near the top with the D10, Predator and Pico. For my big DAC/amp review, in addition to the 3MOVE I bought my own HR Micro DAC and AMP, Predator, Pico DAC/amp and Pico DAC only, D1, D2 boa and Viper, D3, D4 and D10, Headstage Lyrix, etc. Only my Icon Mobile, XM5 and Vivid V1 are loaner review samples that I may keep for comparisons but not sell or profit from. Each of those review samples also rated near the middle of the pack, with XM5 being better than Nuforce's Icon Mobile and in the top tier, but V1 below the Icon Mobile which is in the second tier. As you can see there was no favoritism pushing any of those 3 review samples anywhere near the top, and I bought 10 of the 13 amps that I reviewed against each other. Of those 13, I have only sold ones I owned like D1, D2 Boa, D2 Viper, D3, Lyrix; and very recently Blutarsky acquired my Pico #11 since I own the Pico DAC with a Pico Slim coming soon. The review sample NE-8 also did not get a glowing review (see links to reviews in my public profile "about me") and I even liked the cheaper NE-7M that I bought for myself more, partly because of fit and because the NE-8 require an amp to balance the sound. Nor did I give glowing reviews to the Icon desktop amp that I bought myself - where my postings indicate that the DAC was decent but not exceptional, and that other amps like the less expensive Travagans Red has a better headphone output, although the Nuforce was a better speaker amp. More recently in this uDAC review I found the $249 Nuforce Icon's headphone out to be on a similar level to the $169 tube-rolled Qinpu A-3 with my HD600 (normally $239 A-3). If I had to lie about what I thought the Nuforce products sounded like vs other gear, I would never be able to keep up with all the twists and turns in order to fudge them into being a little better than the competition and not making a mistake later. As for the pre-production models, I was able to make suggestions to Nuforce regarding concerns I had with both the UF-30 and uDAC, which were fixed in the final production versions. So, I was partially responsible (along with other evaluators) for important improvements in their final sound. In my UF-30 review I posted what I felt was wrong with the pre-production UF-30 and how I felt they fixed some of those issues. In reading the review you will see that I did not use favoritism to rank the UF-30 above all the other competition. And, as recently as 1/16/10 I posted which flaws I still heard in the UF-30. http://www.head-fi.org/forums/6321892-post43.html "Agreed, the SR-60 are not vastly different from SR-80, but some of the upper mids peak/etch in the SR-60 is removed with the SR-80 and MS-1. I would give the UF-30 at least 100-150 hours before deciding on whether you like them or not. They do have a slight colored upper mids like SR-60 at times once burned in, but the soundstage will seem more open and deeper, and the ends of the bass and treble will seem a little more tipped up than with the Grados. However, I suspect the UF-30 are also tuned to work well with the Icon Mobile, which they do." (I corrected a typo here but not in the original post, so it still shows that the actual post has not been edited since the 16th). Like with the UF-30, with the uDAC I also posted what was wrong pre-production sample, namely a loud hiss with Westone IEM, which they fixed in the production version at my urging. In addition to the hiss in the pre-production uDAC I have also posted about it's limited but adequate power for HD600 which is less than that of full size amps or 9v portable amps, it's forward nature making the soundstage less deep than pico but just as wide, treble presence and extension being slightly less than Pico, and that it may not mate well with all amps and phones. Then last night I added my beef about the USB jack. I think that I have demonstrated that I can be un-biased in my review regardless of how I have obtained the uDAC. My relationship with dononus allows me to jokingly offer him financial aid for return shipping if he doesn't think the uDAC was worth paying taxes for, knowing he would never accept. If you want to imply that I am biased towards Nuforce so that I would pay off dononus, then I am sorry for any misunderstanding. In fact, that would only make Nuforce look worse because I was willing to do what they would not because of the loss of one uDAC already. I did say I would never make that offer for anyone else, but I take that back. I will never make that offer again to anyone. PS: I hadn't read any posts after userlander's post at 7:44AM my time, which I took a long time to compose a reply, so I am still trying to catch up in this thread for other replys.

Like I said, it ain't easy.

Though some manufacturers, according to IJokeI and other HF members who do reviews, do not care if you sell review samples once a review is completed (as long as you don't sell them on HF, according to Jude, who says it's the same rule violation as flipping). So it's not necessarily unethical if the vendor says it's fine with them (in other words, what is unethical if the vendor says it's okay, as long as the review was honest and balanced?).

Anyway, excellent explantion HPA.

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RASeymour /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm getting some clipping too. Especially with the volume on the uDAC up to max. Clipping seems to go away by reducing volume on the uDAC to the 12 - 2 range. Oddly enough, setting the volume on my amp (HeadRoom Micro on low gain) and the uDAC at about the same position seems to work best. I agree with Larry, at least the light isn't some HAL. I wondered too about the big USB. Is there some technical reason to prefer the full size to the mini USB?

Like I said before, all my full size desktop DACs have the larger USB jack like my printers, and I think it's because it's a sturdier jack and wont hurt much if the cable is tugged on. Even my $120 SuperPro DAC707 mini-desktop DAC (kinda like a HR Micro DAC clone with worse PSU) has a large size USB jack and it's only slightly larger than uDAC (not including PSU). I just figure since it's a desktop DAC replacement that maybe they figured it should use the same cable as the others, even though it would be less likely to be damaged by tugging on the cable because the DAC would come along with the cable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by userlander /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks, rawrster. I try to be as honest and objective as possible. Apparently some people had a problem with some of the terminology I used, so after considering all the feedback I received, I tried to modify what I said according to the list of guidelines donunus provided, along with an entire post dedicated to describing the strong positive attributes of the uDAC. I hope now there is no doubt that I am saying this is generally a very good DAC, performs quite well, is a great value, but there is no escaping that it has a slight midrange emphasis and voicing that -- for me at least -- would incline me to steer away from it for classical music and with certain warmer phones, like HD650 that Larry also mentioned. I also have said a number of times that I think it "kicks ass" for rock and that it synergizes with Grados especially well. In reading the very strong trend in favor and praise of the uDAC (and why not, it's a good DAC), I also thought some of that might have been a tad uncritical, and that it might be unfair to some people who were looking for a different sound (e.g., more neutral for classical) and as a result they might have been slightly misled and then ultimately disappointed with it *for those applications.* So I thought I would try to address that aspect more than I felt had been brought up. But then again, someone said they really liked it with classical. So in the end it's all very individualistic and subjective anyway. None of us are perfect, and everyone is coming from having different gear, different audio experience, and so on. So I would hope that everyone takes what *anyone* says with a grain of salt, understands that we're all just doing the best we can to give a fair and balanced view of the product, and make their best decision based on that. I only asked Larry about his connection not because I doubted the objectivity of his review and opinions, but because he seems very upfront about his support of the uDAC and I was merely curious about his relationship with the company. Again, not because I doubt his review, but merely because I think it's better for everyone to have full disclosure. For the record, I'm just an end-user audio enthusiast/consumer. I have no financial or other interests with any audio company at all, no axes to grind, or anything like that. I'm certainly not trying to hurt anyone's business, I'm only interested in people getting as complete a picture as possible so they can decide for themselves. Sometimes in the short run it might help a business to make a sale, but if the person is disappointed b/c what they got wasn't what they expected, it could actually hurt the business more in the future. So managing expectations can be important. So I just thought I would mention that since "pcfranco" questioned me on it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by K_19 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Agreed. I think everyone is pretty much in agreement on how the general sound quality of it is like. It's mainly because of use of terminologies that there's been bit of a disagreement, and it seems like by now we've all come to an understanding of where everybody stands on that issue, anyway.

Agreed, it was mostly a problem with the terminology but not the actual descriptions that lead to the impressions (except for where I thought you were exaggerating the degree of forwardness which you adjusted from very to slightly). I thought it was important for us to all agree on what thick means, or boomy, aggressive vs forward, etc.; and I think we accomplished that here.

userlander, it did look to me like you may have been implying that I might be biased due to an inappropriate relationship with Nuforce, but I was happy to address that issue with you in my big post above, and it looks like Nuforce beat me to it as well. I had an email this morning with the same concerns, asking me to come visit this thread and address your question; so I went straight to that task without even reading all the other posts first. It was pretty obvious that I was getting the uDAC in advance of sales, and I did not hide that fact at all (just like in the UF-30 review).

But, it's also obvious from the examples I gave that I have not been hiding flaws, or raising the ranking on review samples above what they deserve. I would say that if 80% or more of posters seem to agree with my review than I am doing well. I don't think that you found I was misrepresenting the sound of the uDAC, as we both agreed it has strong bass, is warm and slightly forward (even though you called it thick and aggressive and I called it warm rich and vibrant).

In order to minimize confusion I try to compare what I am reviewing to other similar gear, to give people a baseline or point of reference. In this case compared the DAC to the Pico DAC (and D4) as a point of reference that others could understand. In order to accurately represent the headphone amp's power levels with HD600, I even compared it to several 5v and 9v portable amps and desktop amps, to make it more objective and comparative. I obviously can't reasonably try it will all amps and headphones out there, or even all those on hand, or I would never have a real life. But we all agree a piece of gear will sound different depending on the gear that it's being used with, and that what you hear with your gear will be just as real as what I hear with my gear. But it will often lead to somewhat differing opinions, and even huge differences in opinion, based on how dependent the reviewed gear is on the other connected gear. Just look at the HD800 impressions, which range from utter poop to the best ever heard, because it's such a demanding and revealing headphone. Synergy cannot be overlooked.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tstarn06 /img/forum/go_quote.gif X2 on paragraph 1. On the issue of reviewing on HF, speaking from very limited experience and skill (esp compared to HPA), when you get gear gratis from a vendor, it's very, very hard to be brutally frank about a product if you don't care for it. So you try to be as fair as possible, point out the good and the bad. It's a little different when you pay for it out of pocket, or work as a professional reviewer for a money-making site or magazine, no? In those cases, if you really dislike something, it's much easier to be brutally honest (but of course you should still try and be balanced). After all, you put out your hard-earned money for it. When a company is going to start funneling products to a member gratis on a regular basis, in my humble opinion, they really don't expect to be blasted in a review. It's human nature on the vendor's part. And likewise, when you are on the receiving end, again, it's human nature to give the vendor every benefit of the doubt. Otherwise, the free merchandise will certainly come to a grinding halt in short order, and more importantly, your credibility as a reviewer will be kaput. The only way to discern any bias in favor of a vendor who supplies free samples is to match reviews with known "review samples" of gear over time, and see if the reviews/reports are mostly favorable by a large percentage. If that happens over the course of say 50 products, then pro-vendor bias would make the reviewer suspect. Using 1-2 reviews is not a good sample. In my view it is critical, on this forum, that anyone reviewing a product that was given, not loaned, but given by a vendor say so up front. It's just common sense that that be the case, so members can adjust their perception of the review accordingly. No doubt the hardest thing about being an amateur reviewer on HF is getting something free and then really liking it, because no matter how much you might try to deny it/defend yourself, some members are going to say you can't possibly be objective. And they could be right, depending on your relationship with the vendor, etc. So no reason to attack userlander, for sure. His question is valid. And HPA is well aware of the thin line an amateur HF reviewer walks when the benefit from free gear. It ain't easy.

Thanks, I addressed this in my longer reply above. But, yes, it's a very hard line to walk, probably harder than an redneck taking a sobriety test at his brother's wedding.

 

[tstarn06]

And Redneck jokes too!

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

One last thing. Here is something I found in my review on page one, as a 1/14/10 update at the bottom, posted as I added more gear to the review. (I do need to update it with comments from later in the thread, but it's almost getting too long to keep up with now). It's an example where something I said that is critical about the sound could be interpreted either as the fault of the uDAC or the fault of the IEM.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict Plus, I tried my new Triple.fi 10 Pro with the uDAC headphone out and it sounds really good, almost as good as my W3, and sounding better than I recall them sounding last time I owned them 2 years ago. The mids are slightly more forward with uDAC/Triple.fi than I'd like, but I could live with it. I'm not having any issues with sibilance with my sibilance test music from Diana Krall Live or Eva Cassidy Live. Bass is strong down to 16Hz, and test tones sound fairly flat out to 16,000 Hz except a slight bump that I hear at 6 Khz. The UE11Pro are still a bit better on the uDAC in most areas (duh!), especially soundstage which is not too forward on the 11Pro. But, with very low resolution Green Day (Shenanigans) 128K MP3 the Triple.fi were actually a little better combined with the high resolution uDAC than the 11Pro or W3 (which revealed the MP3 flaws more readily and sounding a little thinner in the mids and brighter, sharper and edgier).

People are free to interpret that as saying the uDAC is more forward than I like with Triple.fi 10 pro; and too revealing of 128K MP3 flaws with UE11 Pro which sounded thinner, brighter, sharper and edgier.

Or it could be interpreted as the Triple.fi 10 Pro are too forward to use with the uDAC and they smooth out and hide MP3 artifacts and sibilance, or saying the UE11Pro are too revealing of MP3 artifacts.

Either way, If I wanted to pump up the uDAC artificially I would not have said those things back then. Hope this helps.

PS: tstarn06, I can do the redneck jokes because I was born and raised in Texas, went to Texas A&M (brother was a T-sip and I'm an Aggie), and I wore cowboy boots and drove a pickup truck towing horses. However, at my wedding my brother wasn't as drunk as the minister. Seriously.

 

[userlander]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict /img/forum/go_quote.gif Understandable. Many reviewers must borrow gear to review, or they would not be able to do it.

<snipped for bandwidth>

Thanks for the detailed response. You and Jason have more than adequately answered any concerns, appreciate it. Like I said, I wasn't doubting the accuracy of your reviews or impressions at all, but I think it's good to have that info up front.

I also think the issue of having a hand in the production and design decisions (which I suspected you did when you were talking about receiving pre- and post-production models, etc.) is an interesting aspect of this, because obviously you are giving feedback to the company which -- if they take it -- is shaping the final product and the sound in some way, most likely in a direction toward your natural listening preferences. So that was one reason I asked. I mean, if someone asked me for my input on how something sounded, and then they implemented my suggestions, I would probably be naturally inclined to like the sound of the product since it would therefore automatically be geared toward my particular preferences. I think you get my point - it's almost like "bias in reverse," if you see what I'm saying.

But yeah, this thread is getting big. I haven't read all the recent replies yet, so on to do that.

 

[pcfranco]

Well, I'm here to publicly apologize for my harsh words to Mr.
Userland.

Maybe I've exceeded by my comments.

Is always welcome opinions, for or against certain issues.

But what caught my attention were the accusations and assumptions regarding
people who contribute much to this forum.

Among them, I refer to the HPA. (Larry). Never been in contact with HPA.

I come from the Hi-Fi stereo and I have great experience in this matter, but I do not know
nothing about headphones and headphones amps, cables, re-cables, mods, so on.

I found valuable information here to help my son (14 years old) in his quest for a good
equipment.

People like the HPA, Jamalto and Skylab, spend your time and perhaps money
to help us in our choices. If the information is 50% certain, it is a excellent base for the acquisition of these products.

When I put my first post, Mr. Userland asked me in a rather aggressive when I praised the review of the HPA.

I believe that this forum is for friendship and exchange of experiences, but I'm pretty
unhappy when I see attacks and insinuations to people who passionately evaluate
equipment and help us with their experience.

However, strengthening my apology to Mr. Userland

 

[userlander]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pcfranco /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, I'm here to publicly apologize for my harsh words to Mr. Userland. Maybe I've exceeded by my comments. Is always welcome opinions, for or against certain issues. But what caught my attention were the accusations and assumptions regarding people who contribute much to this forum. Among them, I refer to the HPA. (Larry). Never been in contact with HPA. I come from the Hi-Fi stereo and I have great experience in this matter, but I do not know nothing about headphones and headphones amps, cables, re-cables, mods, so on. I found valuable information here to help my son (14 years old) in his quest for a good equipment. People like the HPA, Jamalto and Skylab, spend your time and perhaps money to help us in our choices. If the information is 50% certain, it is a excellent base for the acquisition of these products. When I put my first post, Mr. Userland asked me in a rather aggressive when I praised the review of the HPA. I believe that this forum is for friendship and exchange of experiences, but I'm pretty unhappy when I see attacks and insinuations to people who passionately evaluate equipment and help us with their experience. However, strengthening my apology to Mr. Userland

Apology accepted - let's just forget it and move on. Everyone seems to be on the same page now for terminology, etc. and mea culpa for my part in that. I admit to feeling a little attacked over the responses to my critique and might have gotten too defensive when you seemed to chime in out of the blue with that first message and its implications about what I said not being the "truth" or whatever. And I definitely took offense at your comments this morning, as I do not try to attack anyone personally, only to give my views, and I felt your comments were a little harsh and out of line. So as long as we can move past all that, I accept your apology, thanks.

 

[BryanP]

Just received it and listened to some FLAC songs with both my 440 and RE0s. I love this DAC! The first thing I noticed was the micro-detail of the sounds produced. This being my first external DAC, I'm very impressed with the representation of the sounds I'm hearing compared to pretty much anything else I've listened through before. It seems like it's brought both of my headphones to life with the way the songs are presented. The mids and definitely right at your face.

So far, worthwhile the investment

. Great improvement over the HT DACs I was using before.

Can't wait to mate it with the EF2 that is on its way.