[hmp406]

Hi there,

I have a pair of SR80s whose sound I appreciated for a little while, but after testing out the 325is at a local store, I have decided to move up the sound chain a little. Reading these forums a little while have helped influence my decision, so here's my question...

Would a macbook pro source >> little dot i+ >> sr325i(s) provide a significant improvement in sound quality over my current paltry mbp >> sr80?

I am slowly saving up the approximately $450 necessary to buy a new setup. (my first of hopefully many future "sorry about your wallet" purchases)

I'm a fan of a lot of rock/indie rock/dance/pop music (also the fallout 3 soundtrack and louie armstrong recordings). Are there comparable setups I should look at?

Thanks,
h

 

[Jaska]

I would seriously consider an Apogee Duet as the heart of your upgrade investment. Give the Grados a whirl with that and see if you don't smile.

 

[hmp406]

The apogee duet sounds like a very nice addition down the line. I am all for a high quality DAC but until I can save another 450-500 it will have to wait for now. Thanks for a great idea

How do the stock tubes on the little dot I+ compare against the WE408 tubes they offer for $50 more?

-h

 

[tintin47]

I would say that is a fine setup, but one thing I would do is read a lot of comparisons between the 225 and 325, because I know that many like th 225 more. That said, if you heard the 325 and you're happy, go for it. The little dot will be a good starting amp for the phones.

 

[hmp406]

Well the little dot is on its way, & i've seen a couple good deals on the sr325is lately, but wanted more info from the seller before i took that plunge. Huzzah for pillaging the checking account!

As far as DACs go, I don't think I'm going to be a big fan of firewire DACs like the apogee, unless they have one hell of an improvement as compared to the USB-based or S/PDIF based DACs. This is because apple is killing off firewire 400 -- new macbooks don't have any firewire and macbook pros only have a firewire 800 port. Versatility would be key for an entry level DAC IMO. (i don't want to be beholden to a single source)

Thanks everyone for your suggestions and don't keep your opinions to yourself

 

[hmp406]

Well the little dot i+ came in the mail today, and so did my sylvania 408a gold series tubes. Initial impressions of the stock 6zi tubes are great out of the box with excellent drum detail. The gold series tubes I think need more burn-in time, being NOS, before I say anything about them. With SR80s I have never heard this much clarity. My SR325is come in tomorrow and that's when the real fun begins, I imagine. Soundstage is better as far as "height and width" goes, but "depth" needs a little work still.

So.. new question: Is a <$150 optical-in DAC going to improve upon a macbook pro >> little dot i+ >> sr325is setup? Or should I wait and save up for something nicer? Brand names/recommendations?

Thanks

 

[fjrabon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hmp406 /img/forum/go_quote.gif So.. new question: Is a <$150 optical-in DAC going to improve upon a macbook pro >> little dot i+ >> sr325is setup? Or should I wait and save up for something nicer? Brand names/recommendations? Thanks

Yeah, it will. If you're willing to go the USB DAC route, I'd recommend:

HOTAUDIO SUPREME PCM2702 BUFFERED USB DAC [PCM2702 BUFFERED ALUMINUM] - $145.00 : Zen Cart!, The Art of E-commerce

 

[boomy3555]

IIRC your limited to Itunes with the mac and I personaly find the Itunes very analytical and bright. Can you run Foobar or Winamp on a mac?

 

[hmp406]

I've used a VM running windows in the past with winamp -- not a bad combination, but i don't have enough lossless audio yet to compare winamp to itunes (~5 albums).

Back to the current issue ... what decent sub-$150 DACs are out there with an optical in? I'm willing to go the USB route but the optical out of the macbook pro just seems too fun to waste.

 

[fjrabon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boomy3555 /img/forum/go_quote.gif IIRC your limited to Itunes with the mac and I personaly find the Itunes very analytical and bright. Can you run Foobar or Winamp on a mac?

How exactly does iTunes effect the sound, as long as you have the EQ off? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the jukebox itself doesn't process the sound at all, as long as EQ is off. It just calls up the digital file and then lets the DAC convert that to analog. Again, I may be wrong about this, but Foobar's own website says that no jukebox sounds different from another. If foobar could even theoretically sound better, don't you think foobar itself would make this claim? Instead, in Foobar's FAQ it says that it doesn't sound better than other jukeboxes, and the only reason to pick it over others is features and ease of use.

 

[boomy3555]

That would like saying that ipod and Zune should sound the same. The difference is in the Mac's DAC which sould be similar to the apple Ipod's DAC. I have a PC which I run WMP. (.wma and .wav files) I like the sound better than Itunes (.wav and .aac and .mp3 files )off the same computer. I was saying that the DAC on the Mac is Apple as is the Itunes and I find it bright and analytical.

 

[fjrabon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boomy3555 /img/forum/go_quote.gif That would like saying that ipod and Zune should sound the same. The difference is in the Mac's DAC which sould be similar to the apple Ipod's DAC. I have a PC which I run WMP. (.wma and .wav files) I like the sound better than Itunes (.wav and .aac and .mp3 files )off the same computer. I was saying that the DAC on the Mac is Apple as is the Itunes and I find it bright and analytical.

I was under the impression that the soundcard did the digital to analog conversion, not the jukebox. Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but the jukebox just "points" the digital file at the DAC, which is part of the soundcard and the jukebox itself doesn't do anything to the file.

edit: I'm also aware that there are plugins for win-amp and foobar that get you to bypass windows' digital to analog conversion "program", but I don't consider these a part of the jukebox. They don't even come with either jukebox, you have to download them separately, the jukeboxes just support them. Much like some jukeboxes don't support some external DACs.

 

[RonMiller1]

I'm in the same boat as the OP, I just received my 325i's last week, and just put in my order for the Little Dot I+. I'm having a much harder time finding a sub $150 DAC.

PS, When playing a song through iTunes, Quicktime or even through Songbird the song sounds the same as long as EQ is turned off in iTunes.

 

[nullstring]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hmp406 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well the little dot is on its way, & i've seen a couple good deals on the sr325is lately, but wanted more info from the seller before i took that plunge. Huzzah for pillaging the checking account! As far as DACs go, I don't think I'm going to be a big fan of firewire DACs like the apogee, unless they have one hell of an improvement as compared to the USB-based or S/PDIF based DACs. This is because apple is killing off firewire 400 -- new macbooks don't have any firewire and macbook pros only have a firewire 800 port. Versatility would be key for an entry level DAC IMO. (i don't want to be beholden to a single source) Thanks everyone for your suggestions and don't keep your opinions to yourself

The method in which the digital audio is transferred to the DAC does not effect sound quality what so ever.

Argueably, USB/firewire might be theoretically better because their data is error checking.

also, as far as music player goes:
I did a bit of googling and found this:
mac.org

benchmark seems to think it's a good enough player.
MacAmp for Mac - Setup Guide - Benchmark

 

[sputnik13]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boomy3555 /img/forum/go_quote.gif That would like saying that ipod and Zune should sound the same. The difference is in the Mac's DAC which sould be similar to the apple Ipod's DAC. I have a PC which I run WMP. (.wma and .wav files) I like the sound better than Itunes (.wav and .aac and .mp3 files )off the same computer. I was saying that the DAC on the Mac is Apple as is the Itunes and I find it bright and analytical.

That's an entirely flawed comparison. iPod and Zunes of course sound different because they have different hardware. Your suggestion of using different applications should only make a difference in so far as any processing applied by the application, whether it's EQ or some sound effects, and the decoder used to decompress any files that are encoded. There's also the possibility of an application introducing noise or artifacts into the audio signal by using additional resources in the system. Hard to believe it may be, but many people who have plugged in a sensitive IEM to their laptop port can probably tell when their hard drive is being accessed vs not. So I think a much fairer comparison to draw is between a stock iPod and an iPod running Rockbox.

The fact that Apple makes both iTunes and the Mac should have no correlation in the sonic qualities of the output you get from a PC and a Mac.