Introducing Lina: A new dCS system, purpose built for headphone listeners

[adrianm]

Our review of the Lina Headphone Amplifier has just been published. There is some mention of the DAC and clock effects, but we will have separate reviews of those also in the coming weeks

https://headfonics.com/dcs-lina-headphone-amplifier-review/

That link to buy it in the review is also very convenient!

 

[marcusd]

That link to buy it in the review is also very convenient!

Where else would you suggest we link the review to since that's the manufacturer's website and they don't actually sell anything there.

 

[adrianm]

Where else would you suggest we link the review to since that's the manufacturer's website and they don't actually sell anything there.

I just saw there's no affiliate link. Fair enough. Fwiw, having heard it recently, I was less than impressed. The Dac+ clock is great though.

 

[marcusd]

I just saw there's no affiliate link. Fair enough. Fwiw, having heard it recently, I was less than impressed. The Dac+ clock is great though.

I found it hard to separate all 3, but in the understanding that some might be interested in the amp only given budgets. A good DAC will give everything a bit of a lift. The clock even more so.

 

[adrianm]

I found it hard to separate all 3, but in the understanding that some might be interested in the amp only given budgets. A good DAC will give everything a bit of a lift. The clock even more so.

We had quite a fun 4-5 days. Tested tons of scenario +- power regenerator and filter. There's no way I'd ever use it over the Oor though.

 

[marcusd]

We had quite a fun 4-5 days. Tested tons of scenario +- power regenerator and filter. There's no way I'd ever use it over the Oor though.

I might try the Wave Fidelity BNC cables I use for the M Scaler for the dCS Clock also shortly. They are substantially better than the stock Chord BNC cables and wondering if it will have a similar effect over the stock dCS ones.

 

[adrianm]

I might try the Wave Fidelity BNC cables I use for the M Scaler for the dCS Clock also shortly. They are substantially better than the stock Chord BNC cables and wondering if it will have a similar effect over the stock dCS ones.

The stock dCS ones are also substantially better than the stock Chord ones. I didn't bother trying my Oyaide cables

 

[Ultrainferno]

Today we look at the LINA headphone amplifier on Headfonia!

https://www.headfonia.com/dcs-lina-amplifier-review/

 

[bevanc]

For anyone that wants to try out the Lina in the Pittsburgh area, we will have one, as well as the Bartok, at our meet on the 22nd of October.

More details below:

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/headphone-meet-in-pittsburgh-pa-october-22nd-2022.964473/

 

[marcusd]

Hi folks, our Lina Network DAC review is now posted. This is one beautifully performing high-end DAC. but... that Lina Clock, it makes a big difference.

https://headfonics.com/dcs-lina-network-dac-review/

 

[563236]

that Lina Clock, it makes a big difference.

Nice review. It gives me a better understanding of how the dCS clock complements the DAC.

I'm not the target market since I'm CIEM-only, but I'm fascinated with the dCS clock option as it parallels my own CIEM rig along with similar parallels in impressions.

So many thanks to dCS for being progressive with clocks and best of luck with these products with the clock option.

I don't know why others feel so threaten by clocks on the Chord threads. It's standard SPDIF implementation. I just know Chord is weak when it comes to sources, so I hope they never attempt to build a stack. Clocks would be the last thing on their mind since they have horse blinders on. If high performance clocks are good enough for dCS, they are more than good enough for my CIEM rig. I guess it's a complement Chord feels threaten with the dCS stack w/ clock option.

I don't know why Chord would even offer a Toslink input since their stance now is to not use external clocks. External clocks are mandatory if you use SPDIF. Just please don't comment on sources Chord, it's embarrassing, look at what dCS is doing and it's right. 2YU, lol, weak clocking. That's all you got Chord?

I too, like dCS, run my clocks in the MHz range (most optimal, best measuring performance) with a realtime low latency system to keep things tight. Standard basic freq 44.1 kHz base and 48 kHz base is just so lame, so massive respect dCS went this route. Without this review, I would of never notice the similarities with my CIEM rig. I did have the most difficult time getting my Chord DAC to lock in @ MHz, but it was well worth the learning curve in the end. Without external clocks, the Chord DAC will never handshake and initiate the resolution light so I don't understand their "No external clocks" stance. Toslink is not just going to magically lock into a freq, clocks are needed on one end.

I could never go back to using a Chord DAC without high performance external clocks via SPDIF much like those whom experience the optional clock with dCS DACs.



This is great to know along with the MHz. It just proves you have to treat the source and DAC separately. Chord feels threaten that external clocks somehow magically reclock their DAC. It's a separate issue. Clocks are about the source only. Nothing to do directly with the DAC. GIGO. It's about timing errors more than jitter in my case.



agree with similarities



agree with similarties



Massive details when listening via CIEM.



Yes, the bass texture and quality are extremely noticeable improvements with external clocks as eliminating timing errors gives the highest probability of replicating the original source. No loss as "The right bit at the wrong time is the wrong bit". So I wonder if bits get loss in translation without external clock quality so will focus on impressions that might exhibit this behavior.

Thanks dCS, this restores my faith in humanity with external clocks. Look forward to the growing sample size of clock / noclock impressions over the years... On the Chord side, it's just a sample size of one using high performance clocks via SPDIF.

Anyways, I have to put my CIEM stack into storage for a few years as I'm on call overseas. Unfortunately, my CIEM stack is too much to manage for travel so I can't even imagine an investment in a headphone rig that I would have to store away and not use for a few years. Glad I'm not into headphones.

High performance clocks running in the MHz range are definitely a SQ pillar. Also agree external clocks > mScaler. Thanks again for having that in the review along with that it's optional. OUT.

 

[RustyGates]

Nice review. It gives me a better understanding of how the dCS clock complements the DAC.

I'm not the target market since I'm CIEM-only, but I'm fascinated with the dCS clock option as it parallels my own CIEM rig along with similar parallels in impressions.

So many thanks to dCS for being progressive with clocks and best of luck with these products with the clock option.

I don't know why others feel so threaten by clocks on the Chord threads. It's standard SPDIF implementation. I just know Chord is weak when it comes to sources, so I hope they never attempt to build a stack. Clocks would be the last thing on their mind since they have horse blinders on. If high performance clocks are good enough for dCS, they are more than good enough for my CIEM rig. I guess it's a complement Chord feels threaten with the dCS stack w/ clock option.

I don't know why Chord would even offer a Toslink input since their stance now is to not use external clocks. External clocks are mandatory if you use SPDIF. Just please don't comment on sources Chord, it's embarrassing, look at what dCS is doing and it's right. 2YU, lol, weak clocking. That's all you got Chord?

I too, like dCS, run my clocks in the MHz range (most optimal, best measuring performance) with a realtime low latency system to keep things tight. Standard basic freq 44.1 kHz base and 48 kHz base is just so lame, so massive respect dCS went this route. Without this review, I would of never notice the similarities with my CIEM rig. I did have the most difficult time getting my Chord DAC to lock in @ MHz, but it was well worth the learning curve in the end. Without external clocks, the Chord DAC will never handshake and initiate the resolution light so I don't understand their "No external clocks" stance. Toslink is not just going to magically lock into a freq, clocks are needed on one end.

I could never go back to using a Chord DAC without high performance external clocks via SPDIF much like those whom experience the optional clock with dCS DACs.



This is great to know along with the MHz. It just proves you have to treat the source and DAC separately. Chord feels threaten that external clocks somehow magically reclock their DAC. It's a separate issue. Clocks are about the source only. Nothing to do directly with the DAC. GIGO. It's about timing errors more than jitter in my case.



agree with similarities



agree with similarties



Massive details when listening via CIEM.



Yes, the bass texture and quality are extremely noticeable improvements with external clocks as eliminating timing errors gives the highest probability of replicating the original source. No loss as "The right bit at the wrong time is the wrong bit". So I wonder if bits get loss in translation without external clock quality so will focus on impressions that might exhibit this behavior.

Thanks dCS, this restores my faith in humanity with external clocks. Look forward to the growing sample size of clock / noclock impressions over the years... On the Chord side, it's just a sample size of one using high performance clocks via SPDIF.

Anyways, I have to put my CIEM stack into storage for a few years as I'm on call overseas. Unfortunately, my CIEM stack is too much to manage for travel so I can't even imagine an investment in a headphone rig that I would have to store away and not use for a few years. Glad I'm not into headphones.

High performance clocks running in the MHz range are definitely a SQ pillar. Also agree external clocks > mScaler. Thanks again for having that in the review along with that it's optional. OUT.

There is no engineering based argument here for an external clock.

When you have extremely high performance DPLL's and supreme quality clocks, which are integrated into most well engineered products (e.g. Mola-Mola Tambaqui), there is absolutely no need for external clocks. These external clocks are simply a money grab as far as I'm concerned.

If the Lina DAC doesn't have a high-grade SC-cut OCXO and high-performance DPLL for the price you're paying, that's a few hard points lost there. If this external clock is "adding" to the SQ, then its something that should've been with the DAC in the first place.

 

[adrianm]

There is no engineering based argument here for an external clock.

When you have extremely high performance DPPL's and supreme quality clocks, which are integrated into most well engineered products (e.g. Mola-Mola Tambaqui), there is absolutely no need for external clocks. These external clocks are simply a money grab as far as I'm concerned.

If the Lina DAC doesn't have a high-grade SC-cut oscillator OXCO and high-performance DPPL for the price you're paying, that's a few hard points lost there. If this external clock is "adding" to the SQ, then its something that should've been with the DAC in the first place.

I completely agree with you. But the end result is that it does sound better. So much so that it makes or breaks the dac for me. I am sure it could have better clocks, which could narrow the sq gap. But it is what it is

 

[RustyGates]

Nice review. It gives me a better understanding of how the dCS clock complements the DAC.

I'm not the target market since I'm CIEM-only, but I'm fascinated with the dCS clock option as it parallels my own CIEM rig along with similar parallels in impressions.

So many thanks to dCS for being progressive with clocks and best of luck with these products with the clock option.

I don't know why others feel so threaten by clocks on the Chord threads. It's standard SPDIF implementation. I just know Chord is weak when it comes to sources, so I hope they never attempt to build a stack. Clocks would be the last thing on their mind since they have horse blinders on. If high performance clocks are good enough for dCS, they are more than good enough for my CIEM rig. I guess it's a complement Chord feels threaten with the dCS stack w/ clock option.

I don't know why Chord would even offer a Toslink input since their stance now is to not use external clocks. External clocks are mandatory if you use SPDIF. Just please don't comment on sources Chord, it's embarrassing, look at what dCS is doing and it's right. 2YU, lol, weak clocking. That's all you got Chord?

I too, like dCS, run my clocks in the MHz range (most optimal, best measuring performance) with a realtime low latency system to keep things tight. Standard basic freq 44.1 kHz base and 48 kHz base is just so lame, so massive respect dCS went this route. Without this review, I would of never notice the similarities with my CIEM rig. I did have the most difficult time getting my Chord DAC to lock in @ MHz, but it was well worth the learning curve in the end. Without external clocks, the Chord DAC will never handshake and initiate the resolution light so I don't understand their "No external clocks" stance. Toslink is not just going to magically lock into a freq, clocks are needed on one end.

I could never go back to using a Chord DAC without high performance external clocks via SPDIF much like those whom experience the optional clock with dCS DACs.



This is great to know along with the MHz. It just proves you have to treat the source and DAC separately. Chord feels threaten that external clocks somehow magically reclock their DAC. It's a separate issue. Clocks are about the source only. Nothing to do directly with the DAC. GIGO. It's about timing errors more than jitter in my case.



agree with similarities



agree with similarties



Massive details when listening via CIEM.



Yes, the bass texture and quality are extremely noticeable improvements with external clocks as eliminating timing errors gives the highest probability of replicating the original source. No loss as "The right bit at the wrong time is the wrong bit". So I wonder if bits get loss in translation without external clock quality so will focus on impressions that might exhibit this behavior.

Thanks dCS, this restores my faith in humanity with external clocks. Look forward to the growing sample size of clock / noclock impressions over the years... On the Chord side, it's just a sample size of one using high performance clocks via SPDIF.

Anyways, I have to put my CIEM stack into storage for a few years as I'm on call overseas. Unfortunately, my CIEM stack is too much to manage for travel so I can't even imagine an investment in a headphone rig that I would have to store away and not use for a few years. Glad I'm not into headphones.

High performance clocks running in the MHz range are definitely a SQ pillar. Also agree external clocks > mScaler. Thanks again for having that in the review along with that it's optional. OUT.

To add to my previous post, a lot of things here are factually incorrect, or just don't make sense.

Firstly, the Lina Master Clock has 44.1kHz and 48kHz OCXO word clocks. Secondly, why would you think arbitrarily "running your clocks in the MHz" range correlates to the internal architecture of a DAC's workings and the rate upon what it actually needs?, Fourthly digital phase / timing errors is what is called Jitter. Fifthly, where did Chord say having an external clock magically re-clocks the DAC? Chord (Rob Watts) says its completely unnecessary and doesn't do anything because the system uses its own clock/DPLL. Sixthly, M-scaler is a Shannon-Whittaker like sinc interpolator / upsampler, so why are you comparing it to a clock?

What difference is the clock making here? Nothing that could've just been done in the DAC in the first place.

 

[Frankie D]

To add to my previous post, a lot of things here are factually incorrect, or just don't make sense.

Firstly, the Lina Master Clock has 44.1kHz and 48kHz OXCO word clocks. Secondly, why would you think arbitrarily "running your clocks in the MHz" range correlates to the internal architecture of a DAC's workings and the rate upon what it actually needs?, Fourthly digital phase / timing errors is what is called Jitter. Fifthly, where did Chord say having an external clock magically re-clocks the DAC? Chord (Rob Watts) says its completely unnecessary and doesn't do anything because the system uses its own clock/DPPL. Sixthly, M-scaler is a Shannon-Whittaker like sinc interpolator / upsampler, so why are you comparing it to a clock?

What difference is the clock making here? Nothing that could've just been done in the DAC in the first place.

I do not understand the Enginerring as you do, but I do agree with you. Berkeley, for example, makes a competing DAC to DCS’s Vivaldi and they do not use an external clock. With DCS, their best performance comes from using the external clock ( except for the Vivaldi One from what I can tell ). So when comparing the competition to DCS, always add in the cost of the clock for the best cost comparison.