[volume]

Quote:

 
In my opinion, NFB1 (especially at its introduction price) has the highest price/performance ratio out of all Audio-gd DAC.
 
 
 

I feel,the statement makes sense only if you need a balanced DAC,for single ended DAC19 DSP would be a fine choice.

 

[dmac03]

^That statement is fairly bold considering the NFB-1's entire circuitry is utilized in SE mode, which is quite the leap (on paper) vs the dac-19

 

[borrego]

Quote:

 
 
 
 
What do you mean by point 2? "clear advantage" as in it is technically superior or as in sounds more clear?

 
Both technically and sound wise
 
And I think I should state it again the statement I made was for my very own purchase consideration and requirement.
 
For me, I need USB input and balance output. NFB1 is the lowest priced balance output Audio-gd DAC and the ES9018 implementation is almost least affected by jitter induced by the USB input (though I also ordered the DI)
 
Without the DSP1 or the built-in jitter isolation circuit of the ES9018, The "DF" implementation of the Audio-gd PCM1704 is much more prone to jitter.

 

[borrego]

Quote:

I feel,the statement makes sense only if you need a balanced DAC,for single ended DAC19 DSP would be a fine choice.

The single ended Audio-gd DAC with the best price/performance ratio, according to Kingwa's opinion (through his email reply), is the DAC3-SE. Actually Kingwa recommended me the DAC3-SE over the RE-5, if it is to be used single ended only. The DAC19 DSP is still very good though.
 
If one read the Audio-gd Chinese forum, Kingwa always stresses his preference for DAC with minimum input (i.e. Ref-7S and DAC3-SE)

 

[borrego]

Quote:

The single ended Audio-gd DAC with the best price/performance ratio, according to Kingwa's opinion (through his email reply), is the DAC3-SE. Actually Kingwa recommended me the DAC3-SE over the RE-5, if it is to be used single ended only. The DAC19 DSP is very good, but DAC3-SE + DI (version A for jitter reduction coaxle imput) combo is a better value. DAC19 DSP is more convenient though
 
If one read the Audio-gd Chinese forum, Kingwa always stresses his preference for DAC with minimum input (i.e. Ref-7S and DAC3-SE)

 

[SilverCans]

Quote:

 
Both technically and sound wise
 
And I think I should state it again the statement I made was for my very own purchase consideration and requirement.
 
For me, I need USB input and balance output. NFB1 is the lowest priced balance output Audio-gd DAC and the ES9018 implementation is almost least affected by jitter induced by the USB input (though I also ordered the DI)
 
Without the DSP1 or the built-in jitter isolation circuit of the ES9018, The "DF" implementation of the Audio-gd PCM1704 is much more prone to jitter.

 
While technical specs are a good starting point, sound matters most. Now, I can't determine what "clear" in your statement means (please be specific. if you can provide links that support your comments that would be good. Yeah, pain in the @ss but one has to be responsible for his/her own comments). Bottom line, are you implying that Kingwa and others think the NB7 > REF7 from a sound perspective? (USB audio is not of my concern, thats what  DI is for)

 

[SaiSai]

Quote:

The single ended Audio-gd DAC with the best price/performance ratio, according to Kingwa's opinion (through his email reply), is the DAC3-SE. Actually Kingwa recommended me the DAC3-SE over the RE-5, if it is to be used single ended only. The DAC19 DSP is still very good though.
 
If one read the Audio-gd Chinese forum, Kingwa always stresses his preference for DAC with minimum input (i.e. Ref-7S and DAC3-SE)

Does it make a big difference from DAC-19DF upgrade to REF-5 DF or DAC3-SE? (with RCA connections only)

 

[vlach]

Quote:

The single ended Audio-gd DAC with the best price/performance ratio, according to Kingwa's opinion (through his email reply), is the DAC3-SE. Actually Kingwa recommended me the DAC3-SE over the RE-5, if it is to be used single ended only. The DAC19 DSP is still very good though.
 
If one read the Audio-gd Chinese forum, Kingwa always stresses his preference for DAC with minimum input (i.e. Ref-7S and DAC3-SE)

 
Then again the RE-5 is considered neutral and the DAC3-SE is not, therefore not quite a fair comparison.
 

 

[tim3320070]

If you are doing RCA, the 3-SE would be best- Kingwa has stated this and all you have to do is look at the extra power parts compared to the DAC19 and Ref-5. I feel that all his gear is neutral. I'd rather have the wider soundstage and blacker background from the power filtering in the 3-SE than the ACSS and less power filtering in the DAC-19/ Ref5.
Or...just get the Ref-7 and never look back.

 

[vlach]

Quote:

If you are doing RCA, the 3-SE would be best- Kingwa has stated this and all you have to do is look at the extra power parts compared to the DAC19 and Ref-5. I feel that all his gear is neutral. I'd rather have the wider soundstage and blacker background from the power filtering in the 3-SE than the ACSS and less power filtering in the DAC-19/ Ref5.
Or...just get the Ref-7 and never look back.

That's good to know regarding the 3-SE, thank you. As a SE user, i am very curious to know what my best option is to upgrade from a DAC19Mklll (DF1704). The Ref-7 is out of my price range and i'm still confused wether or not only half of the DACs would be used in a SE context. I'm beginning to think the 3-SE might be the "sweet spot" in the Audio-GD range for a SE user like me. My main concern with such an upgrade would be to loss of clarity, detail & neutrality of the DAC19 in exchange for a warm, musical and perhaps "softer" sound signature through the 3-SE.  My integrated amp already possesses a smooth sound signature and i don't want to end up with too mellow of a presentation. I would imagine there are other people in my situation (SE user) wondering about this upgrade path...

 

[Trapper32]

Quote:

If you are doing RCA, the 3-SE would be best- Kingwa has stated this and all you have to do is look at the extra power parts compared to the DAC19 and Ref-5. I feel that all his gear is neutral. I'd rather have the wider soundstage and blacker background from the power filtering in the 3-SE than the ACSS and less power filtering in the DAC-19/ Ref5.
Or...just get the Ref-7 and never look back.

I don't want to take this off topic but how does the power parts in the 3-SE compare to the Ref 9?  I have the 19DSP and love it but thinking of setting up another system and am considering the 3-SE or the ref 5 for their diamond differential circuits.

 

[Audio Bling]

[size=medium][size=10pt]What is the word on A-gd sabre DACs? Have they begun to ship? Anyone got one yet?[/size][/size]

 

[tim3320070]

Quote:

That's good to know regarding the 3-SE, thank you. As a SE user, i am very curious to know what my best option is to upgrade from a DAC19Mklll (DF1704). The Ref-7 is out of my price range and i'm still confused wether or not only half of the DACs would be used in a SE context. I'm beginning to think the 3-SE might be the "sweet spot" in the Audio-GD range for a SE user like me. My main concern with such an upgrade would be to loss of clarity, detail & neutrality of the DAC19 in exchange for a warm, musical and perhaps "softer" sound signature through the 3-SE.  My integrated amp already possesses a smooth sound signature and i don't want to end up with too mellow of a presentation. I would imagine there are other people in my situation (SE user) wondering about this upgrade path...

I owned the Ref-1 and Ref-8. I have posted several times that their sounds are very similar to my ears. The warmth is there with the Diamond output but slight vs the ACSS output. No way the Ref-8 is "soft" or rolled off/ rounded. All the clarity and detail are present in both. Both are excellent as I'm sure the 3-SE would be.

 

[borrego]

 
Quote:

 
While technical specs are a good starting point, sound matters most. Now, I can't determine what "clear" in your statement means (please be specific. if you can provide links that support your comments that would be good. Yeah, pain in the @ss but one has to be responsible for his/her own comments). Bottom line, are you implying that Kingwa and others think the NB7 > REF7 from a sound perspective? (USB audio is not of my concern, thats what  DI is for)

The conclusion I drew was base on multiple emails replies from Kingwa to me and to my fellow vrln and reading the Audio-gd Chinese forum. I don't have a single article to refer to.
 
And when I did the research, NFB7 was not even out. So my comparision on PCM1704/ES9018 was between Ref-5 and NFB1. The "effect" of DSP1 on sound are done on comparing Ref-1/Ref-7, Ref-5 DF and Ref-5 DSP.
 
You should just take my comments as "just" another reference. I think Kingwa did honestly price his DAC accordingly to the performance. May feeling is the NFB7 will be a better value than the Ref-5 DSP. But it "may be" not as refined as the Ref-7 because the DSP1 has already undergone several rounds of development and is already "fine tuned". While with the NFB1/7, you are getting the "stock" ESS tune in terms of digital filter (though Kingwa can still tune them in the analog stage).

 

[beeman458]

macrog wrote:
 
It has only ever been my compromises that I have regretted never the excesses.
 
I hate trueisms like your above.

 
Just got a used Burson HA-160 a few days ago that was purchased from the Buy/Sell forum.  Expensive?  To me?  Yes.  Regrets?  As I listen to Stevie Ray Vaughn........not a one.