My take on the Aqvox USB 2 D/A DAC

Sep 7, 2005 at 10:55 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 12

mattigol

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 24, 2003
Posts
924
Likes
10
Hi all,

though very busy at work I have - over the last couple of weeks - put enough hours on the Aqvox to add some impressions.

Note that I am coming from a rather warm source, the Rega Planet Mk1. Also, while I think my downstream equipment is very decent and well balanced, it is not a reference system. So YMMV.

I bought the Aqvox straight from the manufacturer over the web: www.aqvox.de It was a very pleasant experience. Communication both with Susanne Candeias the owner, and Norman Luebke a sales rep, has been outstanding. They take much pride in their products and go the extra mile to make sure the customers are really happy with their purchases. The current line-up also includes a reference-quality phono amp and a microphone amp and A/D converter. Their list of stores that carry their products grows by the week (in the 2 months that I have been watching it)and includes some of the best stores in Germany by now - which for a small startup is quite an accomplishment.

As I stated elsewhere I burned-in with mp3s from my ibook for about 60 hours before doing any critical listening. And stopped that right away, as the sound was still much too polite with some grainyness that I didn't care for either. However a positive trait showed as well - the DACs capacity to throw an immense soundstage. So I continued burn-in to 120 hrs and eventually ended up at 150 hrs before sitting down with it again.

I went through some of my reference discs (Diana Krall - Live in Paris, Chesky 10 year anniversary compilation, Paco de Lucia - Scirocco, and many more) and found so much detail and spacial information on them it was a real eye-opener. Extension at both ends seemed endless, with good bass control (better than Planet) and sweet, never-shrill treble. Mids were less pronounced than the Planet, but not in a bad way. Unlike during my first audition, there was much more texture, liquidity, sense of reality after extended burn-in. Like on a big panorama painting, I was able to listen-in on the main instrument or voice, or divert my attention to other instruments or simply sit back and listen to the echos and atmosphere of the venue. Quite a ride!

On the minus-side it doesn't quite have the boogie-factor of the Planet - which is kinda important to me listening exclusively to the Rega for so many years. Enters the Berendsen CDP1, which by the luck of the draw, I was able to aquire just two days ago from someone nearby my hometown through ebay Germany. Given the fact these units pop up on ebay only a couple of times a year, I went for it to have a true reference machine for this shootout. Within my financial constraints of course. Granted it's not the newest model at about 5 years of age but I still think it serves its intended purpose well.

So where do I place the Berendsen sonically? There is a clear difference between all three sources. The Berendsen sounds not dissimilar to the Rega, extends more at top and bottom ends and has clearly a higher soundstage. It yields an effortless, liquid sound that is very natural on occasional listen. PRaT isn't quite as good as Rega or Aqvox. It sounds a tad warmer than the Aqvox hence puts vocalist more upfront, while the Aqvox gives more instrument separation and offers a wider and most of all deeper stage than both CDPs.

Take home messages:

1) The Rega Planet is the mother of analog-sounding digital which so many companies are shooting for these days. Sure it lacks a bit of detail, but it definitely has soul. At current used prices, top notch build quality and Rega worldwide support a no brainer for the budget minded. For even more refinement go the Rega Planet 2000 Mk1/Mk2 route.

2) A big step up in many ways the Aqvox DAC, with USB connectivity also catering to the computer-as-source people. I thought I was listening to some new high res format instead of redbook at times. So much more spacial information and detail lurking on these CDs! Not cold sounding. And an enthusiastic company supporting it. Highly recommended! Aqvox, if you are listening - please consider a black version!

3) The Berendsen came from nowhere and was a bargain for me so I will keep it for now unless I get an offer I can't refuse.
wink.gif
It is a step up from the Rega retaining some of the traits that I have grown accustomed to over the years, adding in the detail and soundstage department. A very liquid, organic, real sound - but slightly more tranquil (for the lack of a better word - it's still involving) than the Rega or the Aqvox.

I am quite certain I have auditioned some of the best sources available below 2k, 1k and .5k US$. They all bring certain skills to the table that make them unique - the Aqvox more so than the Rega, more so than the Berendsen I think. However the overall balance may very well be what makes the Berendsen so enjoyable.

I am interested in hearing comments on the Aqvox by other head-fiers as well.

Hope this helped some of your source-hunters out there.

Matthias
 
Sep 8, 2005 at 10:14 AM Post #2 of 12
Many thanks Matthias! I confess that I've been drooling and slavering in anticipation of an extensive review. I don't want you disclosing private information, but are you still using the Aqvox as the principal dac on your main system?
 
Sep 8, 2005 at 10:52 AM Post #3 of 12
Catachresis,

I am sending back the DAC today, but only due to my other expenses of late and because my trial period is about to run out. WAF would also be higher if they made the thing in black.

The Aqvox is a killer product that takes the redbook I knew to new heights. The Berendsen, that some on these boards hold in the highest regard, can't match the Aqvox in terms of resolution or PRaT, while it may have an edge in terms of liquidity and "analogueness". Add to that the Aqvox' tweakability (Digital filtering, Dithering, Phase reversal, variale oversampling) and connectivity and there's little left to be desired. I am pretty sure I'll end up getting one again in the long run, but for a little while I am going to enjoy myself with the Berendsen and sell off the Rega first.

The guys at Aqvox are really helpful and located not half a world away but in the middle of good old Europe. If you are looking for a source that does just about everything right (and some things you never knew existed), look no further than the USB 2 D/A.

I am really hoping some of you guys are trying out the Aqvox as well and will report your impressions for all of us to share and discuss.

M.
 
Sep 8, 2005 at 11:37 AM Post #4 of 12
Ah Mattias, that's a pity that you're sending it back.

I must say, if I had €650 to spare at the moment, that's where the money would be going. Having said that, I'm groaning with the effort of paying the exorbitant Dublin rent and bills at the moment.

I'm also keen to see other members share their impressions in this thread. If I could just get excited enough, I know I'd do something stupid with a credit card. ;] Cheers! -manny
 
Sep 8, 2005 at 12:50 PM Post #5 of 12
Well, mattigol, after your last recomendations is difficult not to jump and buy the aqvox right now
smily_headphones1.gif
. I was still thinking about a new good cd player, but if the aqvox can compete with a Berendsen cdp 1, I think it will be right. Another possibility is the eastsound, but is more expensive and difficult to buy. You can buy it from audiocostruzioni with 2 years of warranty, but it costs 940€, 300€ more than the aqvox dac.
 
Sep 8, 2005 at 2:58 PM Post #6 of 12
Quote:

Originally Posted by mattigol
The Aqvox is a killer product that takes the redbook I knew to new heights. The Berendsen, that some on these boards hold in the highest regard, can't match the Aqvox in terms of resolution or PRaT, while it may have an edge in terms of liquidity and "analogueness". Add to that the Aqvox' tweakability (Digital filtering, Dithering, Phase reversal, variale oversampling) and connectivity and there's little left to be desired.


Thanks for your impressions mattigol
cool.gif

Unless something goes terribly wrong I shall go out and pick one up within the next three weeks, I can hardly wait
biggrin.gif
 
Sep 8, 2005 at 3:18 PM Post #7 of 12
Mattigol: Did you use the balanced or unbalanced connections on the aqvox?

I wish someone would do a comparison with the aqvox and the eastsound
tongue.gif
 
Sep 8, 2005 at 4:36 PM Post #8 of 12
Quote:

Originally Posted by l_simon_l
I wish someone would do a comparison with the aqvox and the eastsound
tongue.gif



Yep. It would be the million dollar comparative. The 'maximize-your-money' championship. Duel of the titans...
 
Sep 8, 2005 at 6:40 PM Post #9 of 12
Mattigol,

I was really eager to hear more about this dac and somehow I feel sorry too about you sending it back. Thank you for sharing your impressions. I can hardly wait to buy a dac myself (I will finally get to hear one of the 3 Dacs on my list, namely the Benchmark, in about two weeks, and buy it then or buy an Apogee or an Aqvox at the end of October - after about 4 months of waiting with the money in my pocket!!). Then I will also write two reviews - of my Stax combo (that I use with a cheap source now, so I couldn't make a definitive opinion on it) and of the Dac I will buy. I feel unconfortable at asking so many questions and sharing so little myself on Head-Fi, but hopefully this will change as I will complete my gear setup.

Now, quickly-quickly, before you send the beast away (or at least before your impressions will lose their freshness), there are 3 more aspects on which I would really like to have your opinion:
1. Jitter resistance. Cosmopragma said it's pretty good, but not as good as Benchmark's. Any experience with different transports (different players, computer via USB) and different digital cables? Or even with original CDs versus CD-R copies?
2. Tonal coherence. I very much care for a smooth, natural transition from bass to midrange, or a coherent sound in that frequency region, if you like. Like there is no gap between bass and mids, or not having the feeling that the two are produced e.g. by two different transducers, that bass is slower than the mids or is noticeably less textured, that bass is "colouring" a bit the mids etc. How does the Aqvox fare in this regard?
3. Do you still feel, like you were during the burn-in period, that the Aqvox is very polite (with little punch, I suppose)? Because your earlier posts mentioned authority and fun among the dac's traits, so I don't quite get it...

Thanks!
 
Sep 8, 2005 at 8:09 PM Post #10 of 12
Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Quichotte
Mattigol,


Now, quickly-quickly, before you send the beast away (or at least before your impressions will lose their freshness), there are 3 more aspects on which I would really like to have your opinion:
1. Jitter resistance. Cosmopragma said it's pretty good, but not as good as Benchmark's. Any experience with different transports (different players, computer via USB) and different digital cables? Or even with original CDs versus CD-R copies?
2. Tonal coherence. I very much care for a smooth, natural transition from bass to midrange, or a coherent sound in that frequency region, if you like. Like there is no gap between bass and mids, or not having the feeling that the two are produced e.g. by two different transducers, that bass is slower than the mids or is noticeably less textured, that bass is "colouring" a bit the mids etc. How does the Aqvox fare in this regard?
3. Do you still feel, like you were during the burn-in period, that the Aqvox is very polite (with little punch, I suppose)? Because your earlier posts mentioned authority and fun among the dac's traits, so I don't quite get it...

Thanks!



1. On jitter resistance, Cosmo is definitely the guy to ask. I didn't do any comparison in this regard and don't have the experience to be of much help.

2. It didn't feel any coherence problems after extended burn-in, even though the Berendsen bests it in this regard. Definitely a different flavor than both the CDPs but not in a bad way at all. Balanced across the board I would say, adding a tad of warmth. As I said I am a Rega man myself and had a bit of a hard time adjusting to a different sound at first, but very much liked the way it improved its center stage presentation over time while retaining its huge soundstage. I mentioned my recent experience with a midrange Arcam, that I couldn't even stand for one song.

What's not to like? I think the Aqvox is warm but not warm enough for me at this time even though cosmopragma mentioning it being better than the DAC-1 in this regard. Maybe my crooked hearing, YMM_verywell_V.

3. No authority problem at all, I may have written a bit confusingly. The politeness I experienced at first related to the somewhat recessed mids (Diana Krall's voice sounding a bit thin), but this turned into a non-issue a couple of days later. The Aqvox shows some impressive authority, enabling so much information to come through. PRaT is very decent, but some of its other qualities mentioned earlier were more apparent to me, I hate to say it again its holographic, palpable sound.

Cheers M
 
Sep 8, 2005 at 10:22 PM Post #11 of 12
Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Quichotte

1. Jitter resistance. Cosmopragma said it's pretty good, but not as good as Benchmark's. Any experience with different transports (different players, computer via USB) and different digital cables?



This is pretty much a non-issue.
I've tested the Aqvox connected to maybe 8 or so CDPs/DVDPs from cheapest crap to very expensive, to a DAP, to expensive studio gear, to relatively inexpensive pro gear (RME soundcard) and to a $30 AV-710 soundcard.
SPDIF toslink and coax, AES/EBU, and even USB.
More cables than I want to count here.I even borrowed 7 cables from two audio dealers and two cables from a studio guy.
Conclusion:
Computer as source is superior as far as price/performance ratio is concerned.
A modest AV-710 is perfect when set up correctly.
I'm utilizing $300 RME soundcards simply because they bypass Kmixer by default and the drivers are rock solid.I don't want to fiddle around with Kernelstreaming and whatnot anymore any time I have to build a computer system from scratch.I have more money than time, but you can get away with the cheap Chaintech or similar bitperfect cards.

My Iriver DAP (kind of tiny specialized computer) is perfect.

Not all traditional players are equal, but this has nothing to to with jitter but with sensitivity to vibrations, error correction and capability to read CD-Rs or scratched CDs properly.Expensive players are nearly as good as a $30 soundcard/$100 Plextor/EAC combo.

Any decent cable in the $40 range is perfect.

The only time there (maybe) occured a jitter resistance difference between the Benchmark and the Aqvox was when I connected a cheap old CDP via a $5 coax cable I had found in my GF's drawer.Well, it's only an assumption that jitter caused the audible artefacts when I listened to the Aqvox, or I dunno and who cares anyway.
 
Sep 11, 2005 at 9:10 AM Post #12 of 12
Thanks for taking the time to jump in and bring more information on the table, Cosmopragma.
I thought you asked Aqvox to send you the USB driver that supposedly bypasses K-Mixer. But I guess that's not for free, so if you already had the RME...
Thanks, Mattigol.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top