[801evan]

@littlej0e Hi-Res will only sound better in two ways:

1. The oversampling process of the DAC is noisy and of lesser performance. A Hi-Res file offloads the taxing process from the DAC.

2. Hi-Res fills the bus frames on the USB protocol faster than 44.1 because of a higher bitrate. The longer a bitstream resides in cache (even on a FIFO buffer on a dac), the more it gets electrically contaminated. Hence the superiority of optical spdif. No caching and galvanized.

 

[chesebert]

Sorry to break it to you, buddy, but when @801evan comes to your defense, you've lost the argument.

And as an FYI, your offhand opinions hardly qualify as "facts".


And this has what exactly to do with Roon... and its supposedly "sh!tty" sound quality?

Do you know if RAAT and DLNA both have parity bits in the encoding or another method of render/endpoint level error correction? I have always thought RAAT is like audiofool tax when DLNA does exactly the same thing but for free.

 

[ThanatosVI]

Ah HA! Now this is a conversation!!!

I would love to hear your thoughts as to why the redbook CDs sound better. I have precious little experience with CDs as I am almost completely digital, but...quick story time with littlej0e:

I purchased an old CD player/DAC combo about a year ago (I only wanted the DAC, but I had to buy them as a package). For grins, I tossed a random CD in the tray, mostly to verify the CD player actually worked before I went to try and sell it. I was immediately struck by the staging and imaging. Everything also seemed to present much larger and overall quite differently compared to the digital tracks I was used to. I assumed there was an unknown variable setting on the CD/DAC rig that was causing this, so I poured through the owners manual - nope. Everything was set perfectly and working as intended.

I A/B'd the CD against my locally stored AIFF digital file and the results were unmistakable: the CD had noticeably more depth and width of stage, slightly better sound isolation and overall dramatically different presentation. I then proceeded to raid my mother-in-law's entire pre-y2k CD collection, playing one after another, comparing them with their digital counterparts (yes, yes, I realize both are digital files. Don't be pedantic...you know who you are!) with almost universally the same result. I needed an answer.

Turns out my old CD/DAC combo has a fancy custom fiber optic (old school, legit glass fiber) interlink with custom clocking. I did a bit more research and discovered this combo was among the best CD players you could buy between 1995 and 1999. Consequently, I assumed what I heard could be attributed to the fact this is the only halfway decent CD player I've ever heard in my life and left it at that.

So my question to you, and to anyone else, is this: if what I heard isn't a fluke, then what in the actual f#(k is going on with CDs compared to modern digital media? Are CDs really that noticeably better with a higher-end CD player? If so, can anyone explain the technical reasons behind the obvious differences in performance? God help me if I ever get ahold of a decent vinyl setup lol.

Incidentally, I'm also discovering that high KHz files aren't always what they are cracked up to be. Seems to get the truest performance, you need to match the original sample rate the track was recorded in. Audio is quite the interesting rabbit hole, no?

Also, my Susvaras really sound great with this old DAC.

I'm not sure why, but listening to CD on my T+A MP2000R yields the best sound quality, compared to streaming the same Song via Tidal on the same device.

Maybe the redbook source file is different from the one used in Tidal?
Maybe CD Playback is a smitch louder (something you wouldn't discern by ear, and I have no way to measure it)
Or there is something superior in the Implementation?

Anyway even though it's both Digital one sounds better than the other

 

[Ragnar-BY]

I’ve tried the bought Qobuz album and then the same Qobuz stream and the locally stored flac album sounds better definitely.

Same story here. And even more, I store my media library not in a .flac, but in unpacked .wav

I can’t say that there is a big difference between compressed and uncompressed format, but on some albums it was audible. Perhaps this is the difference in the load on the server during playback. Maybe something else. Disk storage is cheap these days, so I unpack everything just in case.

 

[Roybenz]

So, you streamers. Have any of you tried melco s100 switch or Paul pang quad switch? According to YouTube video it makes a big difference!

 

[Bonesy Jonesy]

the source is more important than the susvara IMHO...I love my susvara but if you asked me if I would prefer the susvara with a compromised source or a lessor HP with a higher end source I go for the higher end source every time..I know many disagree but that has been my experience

A++ ..... From my life long experience of hifi systems......100% agree 'jibrach'

 

[Bonesy Jonesy]

What I've noticed having a good amp and an even better amp with Susvara, is what might obviously explain why some shrug Susvara off as while excellent, just not the best for their taste.
*Of course it won't be to everyone's, that's obvious as well

While they scale up, they also obviously scale down.

I notice this alot when I take them from MY optimized "totl" setup #1, to my bedroom system that I haven't optimized as much.

On the Thr1 Susvara are very good, nice stage,very nice tone, great imaging and plenty of power.

But when on my optimized system Volot it is a completely different headphone.

On Volot it is huge, in every direction as well, w/ plenty of powerful bass but the music becomes much more intricate and deep. I can hear layers, similar to an exploded diagram, but very dynamic and musical

Just really shows why it's worth it's claim, as one of the best.

Headphones should be treated just like speakers in a complete hifi system especially a TOTL complete hifi system !

 

[Bonesy Jonesy]

Oh boy. I was hoping to avoid this until later, but here goes:

• I'm using Susvaras with a custom (silver) Viking cable. True top-tier quality and sound all around. Viking cables seem quite tough to beat.
• 
  
• I've used the EF1000 with Susvara, DCA Ether C Flow, DCA Stealth, Focal Utopia (nutopia/2022), and Abyss AB-1266 Phi TC.
• 
  
• I found the casework for the EF1000 a bit lacking. I've taken it apart a couple of times for the sake of general curiosity and to roll tubes. All in, I'm guessing the EF1000 cost somewhere between 3k and 4k in parts and labor, so fairly typical for a commercial product at this price point. However, I am (perhaps unfairly) comparing it to the "work of art" that is the WA33 EE JPS. This is highly subjective, of course, but I think Hifiman could've done a bit better considering the price tag.
• 
  
• The sound is outstanding. If you want to squeeze every drop of performance out of Susvara, this is probably your amp. If you are willing to sacrifice 5-10'ish percent performance for 1/2 the cost, go with double AHB2s. If you are willing to sacrifice 10-15'ish percent at 1/5-to-1/2 the cost, get a Bakoon 13R or a CFA3. However, the most important thing I learned from the EF1000 is driving the Susvaras isn't all about raw power. The EF1000 gives you more subtle goodies like better control, more effortlessness and liquidity, as well as slightly better staging and overall coherence. That's where the EF1000 really earns it's money. You also hit the nail on the head with scaling: the EF1000/Susvara combo just keeps going and going. For that reason, combined with the aforementioned subtleties, I do think the EF1000 is the absolute pinnacle for Susvara. The problem is value. You can almost certainly get within 5'ish percent for half the cost, or even less. The law of diminishing returns is in extreme effect here. Such is life at the extreme high-end.
• 
  
• I tried the EF1000/Sus with multiple sources: a customized Mac mini (optimized software, special RAM, plus external power supply mod), Lumin X1, Aurender N20, Innuos Statement, Pink Faun 2.16 Ultra, Taiko Extreme, and a custom bespoke server from Pareto audio (more on streamers later). The Pareto bested the mini, X1 and N20 in stock configuration, but got flat out destroyed by the PF and Taiko. Interestingly, the N20 came extremely close, and in some ways bested the Pareto, when I added external clocking with a Mutec MC-3+ USB/REF10 SE120 combo and used Aurender's critical listening mode. Fancy stuff.
• 
  
• Quick notes on the the Pink Faun, Taiko Extreme, and streamers in general.
  • I would argue the Taiko is ever-so-slightly better than the PF. Fans of the Chord Dave, DCS, and/or extreme detail wh0res should probably go with the Taiko. It will melt your face off.
  • Those looking for a slightly more organic and musically-focused presentation should probably go with the Pink Faun. The PF also seemed to pair especially well with the Susvara/EF1000 in my system, but the Taiko would likely fit equally well with the right components and tweaks.
  • Both servers are essentially two sides of the same summit-fi coin and would likely represent a side-grade from one another.
  • The Aurender N20 + Mutec clocking + critical listening mode was still a good 10-15'ish percent behind the Taiko and PF. Yep.
  • I think the N20 likely has the most raw capability for it's price. But you'll still want to add proper Mutec clocking to get the absolute most out of it. And at that point, you may be better off splurging for a true summit-fi streamer in the first place.
  • Remember the X1, N20 and Statement (I haven't tried the new Pulsar) are commercially manufactured products. They have custom-tailored software, minimal COTs components, and are VASTLY more user friendly to install, operate and manage. Yes, the proof is in the ear wax and bespoke servers do seem to out-perform most commercial servers. But that extra performance comes with significant trade-offs. Be completely honest with yourself and your technical abilities before purchasing a bespoke solution. No matter how much a bespoke vendor promises to support their build, you will almost certainly end up supporting it yourself and/or bent over your audio rack in the long run. The same can obviously be said of commercial vendors (especially those selling polished audio turds with 1 year warranties), which is why a vendor's track record is absolutely vital when considering server purchases. Probably more so than any other audio component as servers are highly dependent on continuous software, firmware, and driver updates (drivers are the biggie). Consequently, I think most people are better off going the commercial server route with a well-established vendor. It's the best way to keep your risk to a minimum when investing in a high-end streamer, especially if you are technically handicapped.
• 
  
• Lastly, and perhaps most controversially, this exercise forced me to face a rather uncomfortable truth: Compared to most custom built software from high-end server manufacturers, Roon's default sound quality is quite poor by comparison. That really sucks because I think it has the best UI out there. Yes, there are plenty of tweaks and optimizations, but SQ still lags noticeably behind nearly every custom software implementation I've heard from high-end server manufactures. Roon's marketing tagline should read, "Roon Ready....to get $h1t shoveled in your ear holes." If your system is hovering in mid-fi/moderate hi-fi territory, you probably shouldn't care. If you are looking for absolute summit-fi performance, ditch Roon and go with the purpose-built software from the server manufacturer. The only exception to this is Taiko Audio's custom dual CPU implementation for Roon (they strip out and offload 99% of the SQ-murdering shark $h1t to the second CPU, resulting in the best Roon performance I've ever heard. By far. Just wow.).

Thank you 'littlej0e' for your reply posting. Much appreciated.

If you ever get the chance to hook up the EF1000 to a TOTL Turntable analogue system, you should do it.

You will hopefully (or maybe not hopefully due to high financial costs of a TOTL Turntable system plus high quality vinyl recordings) find a big difference between digital (especially a streamer source) input and an analogue source input with playing a high quality piece of vinyl.
If you were impressed with the digital sources you used with the EF1000, your jaw will drop to the floor with a TOTL analogue source as it did for me !

 

[Bonesy Jonesy]

Ah HA! Now this is a conversation!!!

I would love to hear your thoughts as to why the redbook CDs sound better. I have precious little experience with CDs as I am almost completely digital, but...quick story time with littlej0e:

I purchased an old CD player/DAC combo about a year ago (I only wanted the DAC, but I had to buy them as a package). For grins, I tossed a random CD in the tray, mostly to verify the CD player actually worked before I went to try and sell it. I was immediately struck by the staging and imaging. Everything also seemed to present much larger and overall quite differently compared to the digital tracks I was used to. I assumed there was an unknown variable setting on the CD/DAC rig that was causing this, so I poured through the owners manual - nope. Everything was set perfectly and working as intended.

I A/B'd the CD against my locally stored AIFF digital file and the results were unmistakable: the CD had noticeably more depth and width of stage, slightly better sound isolation and overall dramatically different presentation. I then proceeded to raid my mother-in-law's entire pre-y2k CD collection, playing one after another, comparing them with their digital counterparts (yes, yes, I realize both are digital files. Don't be pedantic...you know who you are!) with almost universally the same result. I needed an answer.

Turns out my old CD/DAC combo has a fancy custom fiber optic (old school, legit glass fiber) interlink with custom clocking. I did a bit more research and discovered this combo was among the best CD players you could buy between 1995 and 1999. Consequently, I assumed what I heard could be attributed to the fact this is the only halfway decent CD player I've ever heard in my life and left it at that.

So my question to you, and to anyone else, is this: if what I heard isn't a fluke, then what in the actual f#(k is going on with CDs compared to modern digital media? Are CDs really that noticeably better with a higher-end CD player? If so, can anyone explain the technical reasons behind the obvious differences in performance? God help me if I ever get ahold of a decent vinyl setup lol.

Incidentally, I'm also discovering that high KHz files aren't always what they are cracked up to be. Seems to get the truest performance, you need to match the original sample rate the track was recorded in. Audio is quite the interesting rabbit hole, no?

Also, my Susvaras really sound great with this old DAC.

I bet if you try a TOTL SACD Transporter linked to a TOTL DAC (i.e. a CH Precision D1.5 Transporter linked with CH USB cable to the CH Precision C1.2 DAC as an example) and play a high quality SACD disc it will trounce any Streamer currently made today ! It may even beat a TOTL TT analogue system !

 

[801evan]

A++ ..... From my life long experience of hifi systems......100% agree 'jibrach'

No chance ! I have the DAVE with M Scaler and Chord Blu Transporter and the Susvara doesn't sound even half as good and powered enough for the Susvara to sound good to great. Most small powered amps will make a music sound come out of the Susvara's but you won't be hearing the Susvaras sound as Hifiman intended for them to sound !

I see you have had a change of heart somewhere....

 

[WATASHIWA]

Hi, i just ordert my Susvara and would love to know if i can use my amp with it, its a Cambridge Edge A with 100 W QMW an 8 Ohm; 200 W QMW an 4 Ohm, would like to try the bananaplugs, have to order a cable or a adapter, any recommondation in cables are very welcome, have hard time to finde ones, best regrads

 

[Lumithium]

So, you streamers. Have any of you tried melco s100 switch or Paul pang quad switch? According to YouTube video it makes a big difference!

I wouldn't trust a heavily compressed YouTube audio for any of the difference tbh.

 

[Bonesy Jonesy]

I see you have had a change of heart somewhere....

What do you mean '801evan' ?

 

[Articnoise]

@littlej0e Hi-Res will only sound better in two ways:

1. The oversampling process of the DAC is noisy and of lesser performance. A Hi-Res file offloads the taxing process from the DAC.

2. Hi-Res fills the bus frames on the USB protocol faster than 44.1 because of a higher bitrate. The longer a bitstream resides in cache (even on a FIFO buffer on a dac), the more it gets electrically contaminated. Hence the superiority of optical spdif. No caching and galvanized.

You seem to have forgotten that true Hi-Res contains much more data than Redbook CD. It's not exactly like the difference between HDTV and 4KTV. But, you need a 4KTV to appreciate the higher resolution.

 

[801evan]

You seem to have forgotten that true Hi-Res contains much more data than Redbook CD. It's not exactly like the difference between HDTV and 4KTV. But, you need a 4KTV to appreciate the higher resolution.

Wow. Sorry not everyone else can hear over 22khz like you.