Stellabagpuss
100+ Head-Fier
l believe you can also purchase a outside antenna for this,their are plenty of options on Amazon,chances are this will make a difference,signal wise.
GUSTARD DAC-R26 Balanced Decoder R2R+1Bit Dual Native Decoding Music Bridge
- Thread starter m-i-c-k-e-y
- Start date
duffer5
100+ Head-Fier
A bit of an update. Added a Active Tube Stage from Hattor Audio after my passive preamp. Adds a bit of tube spice to the signal path. Loving it so far.
Source: Hifi Rose 150B (Roon) ➔ Fiber Media Converter ➔LAN | Gustard U18 | ➔ Gustard R26 | Fiio M17 DAP | Hiby R6 2020 DAP
AMP: Ferrum OOR / Hypsos | Oppo HA-1 | Khozmo Passive Preamp | Hattor Audio Active Tube Line Stage
Headphone: Hifiman Susvara | Focal Clear OG | Oppo Pm-1 | UM Mest MKII | Shure se846 | 7Hz Timeless
Speakers: Output, by Barefoot "Frontier" Studio Media Monitors
Source: Hifi Rose 150B (Roon) ➔ Fiber Media Converter ➔LAN | Gustard U18 | ➔ Gustard R26 | Fiio M17 DAP | Hiby R6 2020 DAP
AMP: Ferrum OOR / Hypsos | Oppo HA-1 | Khozmo Passive Preamp | Hattor Audio Active Tube Line Stage
Headphone: Hifiman Susvara | Focal Clear OG | Oppo Pm-1 | UM Mest MKII | Shure se846 | 7Hz Timeless
Speakers: Output, by Barefoot "Frontier" Studio Media Monitors
LarsHP
Headphoneus Supremus
What (and how much) difference do you hear with / without the Gustard U18 between the LAN cable and R26?A bit of an update. Added a Active Tube Stage from Hattor Audio after my passive preamp. Adds a bit of tube spice to the signal path. Loving it so far.
Source: Hifi Rose 150B (Roon) ➔ Fiber Media Converter ➔LAN | Gustard U18 | ➔ Gustard R26 | Fiio M17 DAP | Hiby R6 2020 DAP
AMP: Ferrum OOR / Hypsos | Oppo HA-1 | Khozmo Passive Preamp | Hattor Audio Active Tube Line Stage
Headphone: Hifiman Susvara | Focal Clear OG | Oppo Pm-1 | UM Mest MKII | Shure se846 | 7Hz Timeless
Speakers: Output, by Barefoot "Frontier" Studio Media Monitors
duffer5
100+ Head-Fier
They way I have it (since the Hifi Rose can't output the matching i2s to the Gustard R26 directly) Fiber Media Convertor (fiberoptic converted to ethernet) to the 150b to U18 via USB, the U18 then isolates that USB signal fully and outputs to i2s from the U18 to the R26. Via i2s I hear a big difference as the audio and clock info is transmitted untouched.
Last edited:
LarsHP
Headphoneus Supremus
So, you haven't tested the Ethernet input directly to R26 versus via the U18 (using IIS) ?
Most reviewers appear to prefer the LAN input (even though I saw that Currawong says he prefers optical input since it doesn't carry any electrical noise).
duffer5
100+ Head-Fier
I have indeed tested the ethernet directly with the Gustard and, to my ears, the 150b acting as the streamer only sounded better than the streamer in the R26. I also appreciate the additional feature set of the 150b compared to the R26 as it relates to the streamer. Now don't get me wrong the R26 is the total package and offers a ton of value for the money but on the streamer side for me that feature is nice to have but I prefer the 150b from Hifi Rose.
Last edited:
I found a medium sized difference going between USB Input to LAN (with FMCs) into the R26.. It was alright. Adding a dedicated streamer (in my case the Holo Red) was like getting a totally different sound signature - a cleaner signal. I didn't think it was possible? Haha. Just testing as I just got it yesterday but it was like woah that's different - and for the better. One of the main differences was way less fatigue at higher listening volumes. Listening was done @ PCM 768k/Adaptive in HQPlayer/Roon. (Going LAN Into Streamer, I2S into R26) Tubulus Concentus cable coming soon. Sky's definitely the limit.
You do have a superb streamer/DDC there in the Red, glad to hear it is working out for you. The Concentus, though not exactly cheap, is supposed to be superb.
Did you order a custom I2S cable, or will a regular work, with the Red?
LarsHP
Headphoneus Supremus
Summary of listening impressions, incl. using loudspeakers (Martin Logan Electromotion ESL) versus Audio-gd Reference 7.1 DAC
(See my previous post about that, and how I initially compared the two when using HiFiMan HE-6 headphones.)
The differences largely mirrors those I found with HE-6. On highly revealing tracks, Ref 7.1 has a slightly lower degree of details, including a slightly less precise stereo image in the horizontal dimension, while on the other hand, Ref 7.1 sounds more natural than the R26. With classical orchestra works, the Ref 7.1 also appears to convey a deeper image than the R26. Some of that difference may be caused by tonality, though (see below). On many tracks, I hear very little or no difference, actually.
In this direct comparison, I think the R26 sounds like how Sigma-Delta DAC's often are described. It doesn't have that "analog" character, which is associated with R2R DAC's. There is more focus on the upper mids and lower treble, as if there is more output in that frequency range, while the Ref 7.1 has a darker, more rounded off sound, that resembles how real, un-amplified, acoustic music sounds. The R26 sound more like "excellent hi-fi".
If I had had the opportunity to make a listening test before I bought the R26, I certainly wouldn't have bought it, already having the Ref 7.1. Is this bad for the R26? No. It just means that the Ref 7.1 is pretty revealing, particularly considering its age (12 years). For some, the difference in resolution may be worth it, but to me, it would make more sense spending the money on better headphones.
(See my previous post about that, and how I initially compared the two when using HiFiMan HE-6 headphones.)
The differences largely mirrors those I found with HE-6. On highly revealing tracks, Ref 7.1 has a slightly lower degree of details, including a slightly less precise stereo image in the horizontal dimension, while on the other hand, Ref 7.1 sounds more natural than the R26. With classical orchestra works, the Ref 7.1 also appears to convey a deeper image than the R26. Some of that difference may be caused by tonality, though (see below). On many tracks, I hear very little or no difference, actually.
In this direct comparison, I think the R26 sounds like how Sigma-Delta DAC's often are described. It doesn't have that "analog" character, which is associated with R2R DAC's. There is more focus on the upper mids and lower treble, as if there is more output in that frequency range, while the Ref 7.1 has a darker, more rounded off sound, that resembles how real, un-amplified, acoustic music sounds. The R26 sound more like "excellent hi-fi".
If I had had the opportunity to make a listening test before I bought the R26, I certainly wouldn't have bought it, already having the Ref 7.1. Is this bad for the R26? No. It just means that the Ref 7.1 is pretty revealing, particularly considering its age (12 years). For some, the difference in resolution may be worth it, but to me, it would make more sense spending the money on better headphones.
Last edited:
rodthebod
100+ Head-Fier
As far as getting the best from the source signal, are you using any of the wi-fi extender + Cat5/6 + dedicated switch with LPS + FMC + Cat7/8 + Delocker Cat7/8 R26 LAN tweaks as discussed in detail on this thread, I have found these transform the R26 performance to something really special and optimises the onboard LAN streamer?
I have also found using a dedicated media server running Minimserver (that's it's only job) on an SMC (Sparky or Rpi 3 under clocked) + LPS connected to the dedicated switch via cat5/6 is also a prerequisite for better sound. Having a PC directly feed into the LAN of the R26 is something that I would avoid, way too much electrical noise....
Yesterday, I tried swapping LPS's for the FMC module that directly feeds the R26, from the Allo Shanti 5.2v 1A to a 7.5v (Avondale Audio taken from a preamp) LPS, this showed an improvement and showed how sensitive the LAN signal is prior to feeding the R26. It could also be the extra voltage possibly....
LarsHP
Headphoneus Supremus
I have used PC (with Audirvana) -> LAN -> R26 and Sqeezebox Touch -> Optical cable -> R26. The latter connection is what Currawong recommends as the best, since it doesn't carry electrical noise into the R26.
To be honest, I am not sure what some of the things (dedicated switch with LPS + FMC + Cat7/8 + Delocker) you suggest are...
If I somehow end up keeping the R26, I will try a LAN "noise cleaner" like Sellarz LNF-C8G or IFi LAN iSilencer or perhaps a copper to fiber LAN converter set. For the money, I don't see the point in buying something like the Gustard U18. To me, the whole point of buying the R26 was that, apart from being a R2R DAC with discrete analog output stage, it has LAN input and a very high quality clock, which should make digital bridges unnecessary. According to the reviewer at Sound News, the performance of the R26 as it is (via LAN), is close to state of the art DAC's like Chord DAVE.
In fact, I have just asked the reseller whether I am able to return the R26 for a refund. Not because I think the R26 isn't good enough, but because the level of sonic improvement over my Ref 7.1 doesn't match the price. If I am able to return it for a refund, I may buy better headphones instead - or just settle with the hardware I have. What I am missing primarily is a software-based parametric equalizer that works with Audirvana, Logitech Music Server or something else, that will let me control the music via my Android phone.
Last edited:
rodthebod
100+ Head-Fier
The upgrade path for the LAN input on the R26 was some of the very first things discussed on this thread, if you have a good R2R DAC with an inbuilt LAN streamer it makes sense to try to get the very best signal via the network cable. So began the use of an inline passive LAN cleaner such as the Delocker. Then came the use of fibre optic modules (FMC's) to isolate electrical noise in the LAN cable itself, these made a big leap in fidelity. Less noise more music.
But the biggest difference by far was applying the principle of separating the router from the audio side of things so a dirty side and a clean side is created. Using a wifi extender (plug in wall with RJ45 output) achieved this and really made a beneficial difference to the sound. Then using a network switch to connect only the audio components (R26 + media server + wi-fi extender) with a decent linear power supply to keep harmful electrical noise at bay. I then found using the FMC's in-between the switch and R26 LAN to give the most benefit using Cat7/8 which have the connected ground.
Use of a 10Mhz reference clock (even the modestly priced Leo Bodnar @ £160) with the R26 is the final addition which really does set this DAC apart to play music. Music just flows beautifully, it's glorious, no "excellent hi-fi" sound but an excellent music player, incredible depth and 3D sound with great natural detail you can follow.
The best compliment I can give is that it sounds like a really good turntable now, I'm talking about Voyd or RMS Genesis level.
I still have to address additional screening within the R26, just waiting for the materials. Screening things really does help.
Seriously, I wouldn't return the R26 until you've tried some, or better still, all of the above. My R26 cannot be compared to when I first listened to it last September, it's in a different league completely.
Anyone want to back me up on this......
Most definitely back you up, I couldn't agree more! I've made all the upgrades recommended here over the months, the final one this week being to turn off the unused second output from the Leo Bodnar GPS clock. The improvement this apparently minor tweak has made is difficult to understand, but is simply incredible!
rodthebod
100+ Head-Fier
The 'LB turn off the second input in the app' just prevents the BNC connector, off the LB PCB, act more like an antenna. Placing some foil tape of tin foil over the end of the unused BNC helps too, as well as tape around the actual used BNC connector. I'm looking into getting better connectors for the PCB.
Users who are viewing this thread
