Valens7
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2008
- Posts
- 954
- Likes
- 243
Alright, here we go!
I apologize in advance for not taking any pictures.
[size=small]Introduction[/size]
For starters, it's important that I point out that I have no background in music. I'm just a young music fan, and nothing more. Nor do I have any great skill at describing what I hear in audiophile lingo, at least in my view. Honestly, I'm still new to this hobby: I've only been at it since 2008! For these reasons, I'm usually apprehensive about providing in-depth descriptions of gear. That being said, I vowed to myself that, this time, I would provide a detailed review for the benefit of the Head-Fi community. Specifically, I've given my impressions of the Channel Islands Audio VDA-2 DAC, with an emphasis on how it compares to HeadAmp's well-regarded Pico DAC. I'm of the opinion that (other than one's headphones of course
) the source (i.e. the component which provides digital-to-analog conversion within one's audio system) is the most important link in the component chain. In my own experience, changing my source has always yielded more dramatic differences than has changing my amp, or really anything else for that matter. Bearing this in mind, I've always found it strange that there seems to a curious dearth of reviews of source components. Detailed comparisons, such as the one I've tried to provide below, seem to be particularly lacking. My hope is that somebody will find my impressions helpful in informing their own decision-making process in the same way that I've found the reviews of others helpful in informing mine.
[size=small]Form Factor & Features[/size]
Ever since getting into this hobby, I've been a fan of CIA's case design. I think that they've managed to strike an excellent balance between size and substance. Their compact components look attractively utilitarian, and the VDA-2 and the VAC-1 make for a pretty neat little combo, especially when stacked vertically. The Pico's casing is similarly attractive, while at the same being vastly more portable. You can pocket it for heaven's sake! Don't bother putting it in its leather carrying bag before you do that though, as it won't fit if you've attached the included rubber feet. The downside to the Pico's diminutive size is, of course, that it's all-but-impossible keep the darn thing stably planted on whatever surface you may be using it on. While it is fairly easy for most to resolve this issue with homespun methods (e.g. velcro strips), I don't see how I could do it in a way that wouldn't compromise aesthetics. Build quality is outstanding on both DACs.
While I do wish that the VDA-2 had a power on/off switch, I'm alright with it not having one. It doesn't draw a great deal of power from the wall, and its LED is unobtrusive; it doesn't turn on unless it has a signal lock, and it isn't very bright anyway. Since the Pico operates in the same always-on mode, it can't claim any significant advantage in this respect, although it does use less power. Of course, the extra power that the VDA-2 draws may well work in its favor in terms of sound quality.
Both the VDA-2 and the Pico have two analog outputs. The Pico has a standard RCA output, as well as a stereo mini-jack. You cannot select between either output; they both are engaged at all times. The VDA-2 has two standard RCA outputs, which are selectable with a rocker switch. I never had any problem using either output, despite the fact that the VDA-2's outputs are configured in an unorthodox manner so as to allow for balanced operation via a special cable that CIA sells. Since the VDA-2 is capable of outputting a balanced audio signal, this gives it a greater degree of flexibility over the Pico. If one is ever inclined to venture into the realm of ultra high-end, balanced equipment, the VDA-2 will still be able to function as a source.
The Pico DAC will only accept a digital bitstream from a computer through a USB port. Given its highly portable design, I have no problem with this. But the VDA-2, with its toslink and coaxial RCA jacks, can be used with a far wider array of gear.
[size=small]Equipment[/size]
Amplifier
– HeadAmp GS-1
Cables
– Enigma Audio Digital Coaxial RCA Interconnect
– Enigma Audio "Elemental" RCA Interconnects
– Enigma Audio "Elemental" Sennheiser Headphone Cable
– HeadAmp Mini-B USB Cable
– Sys. Concept Optical Cable
Digital Transport
– Apple MacBook Pro
– Rega Apollo CD Player
Headphones
– Sennheiser HD600
– AKG K501
[size=small]Setup[/size]
I've always been hesitant to write a review like this one, and one of the biggest reasons (in addition to the ones outlined above) is because I've never felt that my rig has been good enough to justify me doing so. I only do so now because I have confidence in my equipment, as well as (even more importantly) my experience with it. For this review, I relied primarily upon my HD600, as I have a better sense of its sound than I do the K501's. The synergy between my RCA interconnects and my upgraded headphone cable on the HD600 (they are made from the same UPOCC copper wire) also helped convince me to do most of my critical listening with the HD600. My K501 is limited to its stock cable, and I wanted to make sure that my system was as resolving as possible. Since I only had the one RCA interconnect, I had to do a fair amount of switching between the DACs. I was not able to take full advantage of the GS-1's myriad connectivity options, although the ability to listen to both my K501 and the HD600 at the same time did prove handy occasionally. I stuck to using the stock power cords that came with all of my components. The VDA-2 was connected to my computer via a Mini-Toslink cable from my MacBook Pro. The Pico was, naturally, connected through a USB cable. The VDA-2 was connected to the optional VAC-1 PSU at all times, and I never bothered to see how well it would perform without it. I listened to music (lossless ALAC files) with iTunes, and my computer's digital audio output was configured to 16/44.1 the entire time. There wasn't anything special about my testing methodology: I just repeatedly listened to material that I was very familiar with.
[size=small]Sound Quality[/size]
After spending quite a bit of time listening to both components, I've concluded that the Pico and the VDA-2 are both neutral, smooth, and resolving DACs. That does not, however, mean that they sound the same. Quite the contrary, they sound quite distinct from each other. Listening to both through the GS-1, it was quite easy for me to distinguish between the two. I'd credit this to the GS-1's remarkable transparency rather than any particular talent on my part. In effect, it made my job easy.
Compared to the Pico, the VDA-2 has a more pronounced treble. It's airier and, consequently, provides more top-end detail. While I certainly wouldn't say that the Pico has a recessed treble, it just doesn't have the clarity that the VDA-2 does. I miss micro-details with the Pico that I didn't even know existed until I listened to same piece of music through the VDA-2. The VDA-2 doesn't accomplish this by being brighter than the Pico – it does it by offering a more balanced sonic presentation. The VDA-2's treble simply has more to offer than the Pico's.
Both the Pico and the VDA-2 have a somewhat forward midrange that makes listening to music very involving. Neither DAC is deficient in this respect. However, the VDA-2's midrange is more refined (i.e. balanced) than the Pico's, which is more forward. This helps give the Pico a pleasant sound that is somewhat more energetic with certain kinds of music than the VDA-2 is. It is, unfortunately, less resolving and more fatiguing in the long-run. The VDA-2's midrange ultimately conveys more expressive detail, and does so with greater fidelity over a wider range of material.
The bass response of the VDA-2 is rather interesting. Extension certainly isn't a problem for either DAC; both go powerfully deep. But there is something of a difference in quantity between the two. Through the Pico, the bass seems to "fill in the cracks" in the music to a certain degree. It's heavier and more weighty; it suffuses the frequency spectrum. Crucially though, I've never found that it does so in a way that compromises the overall presentation of the music. Rather, it gives the Pico the signature sound that I've always attributed to it – slightly warm of neutral. The VDA-2's bass, in contrast, is more polite and articulate. In effect, it keeps to itself. This permits for a greater subtlety of expression, although at the expense of some of the Pico's slam. In this area, things are basically a wash. I really enjoy both approaches equally.
The VDA-2 has better dynamics than the Pico. Swings in the music were easier to detect, and I must say I was happy that I was finally able get a clear sense of just how intensely meaningful these subtle shifts in volume can be. Such details really makes you appreciate the value of high-quality production.
The biggest difference, by quite a significant margin, between the VDA-2 and the Pico lies in the soundstage. The VDA-2 mostly trounces the Pico in this area. Where the VDA-2 sounds spacious, the Pico sounds compressed. At times, however, the Pico's small soundstage can provide a sense of intimacy that the VDA-2 occasionally lacks. I've read that many Grado owners have similar feelings about their headphones, and I can see where they're coming from. Even so, I feel that the VDA-2's open soundstage ultimately results in a more compelling listening experience more often than the Pico's closed-off one does. Since the VDA-2 provides more space for the music to work within, each element of the frequency spectrum can express itself more clearly and distinctly. The sound that results is more analytical than the Pico's, without sacrificing any musicality. In particular, instrument separation is superb, and when I closed my eyes it was even spooky. On well-produced material, it really sounded like I had a front-row seat to a live show! Since my goal has always been to approximate the sound of live music with my headphone system, you can probably imagine my delight at this. Indeed, the VDA-2 really endeared itself to me here.
The VDA-2 has better attack and decay on notes than the Pico does. This is especially clear in music with strong percussive elements. Cymbals sound especially nice. The Pico just doesn't have the level of precision that the VDA-2 does.
[size=small]Headphone Synergy[/size]
The VDA-2 has wonderful synergy with the HD600. It produced sound from it that was so balanced, and of such high quality, that I was genuinely surprised. It was a clear improvement over anything that I've heard out of the HD600 before, including the Pico DAC. As I mentioned above, the soundstage of the HD600 expanded dramatically both in width and depth. It just goes to show you that the HD600 really does have the ability to scale well with the rest of your system as you upgrade it. What an outstanding headphone!
The K501 performed admirably with both DACs, and neither one was really able to overcome the other with this headphone. The differences that I could discern were quite subtle. Frankly, cabling may have been an issue here. Having said that, I did end up favoring the Pico DAC with the K501 more often than not. Its slightly warmer sound signature mated nicely with the K501, while the VDA-2 occasionally ended up sounding a bit dry by comparison. Essentially, it benefitted from the added bass quantity.
[size=small]Price Vs. Performance[/size]
At $778, the VDA-2 with the VAC-1 certainly isn't cheap. At more than twice the price of the Pico, which is almost absurdly inexpensive at $349, it's hard to say that the VDA-2 offers an improvement in sound quality that is commiserate with the higher asking price. In terms of features, things are basically a wash; it really falls to the customer to determine which ones they value more highly. Ultimately, I think that the Pico is definitely a better value. Still, for my part, I feel that the superior overall performance of the VDA-2 merits the extra investment.
[size=small]Other Observations[/size]
I said in my original post that I would test my Rega Apollo as a transport to the VDA-2, and I did. It worked great, and I can definitely see the appeal of using a high-quality CD player like the Apollo as one's digital front-end. Simplicity is a virtue I always value highly, and CD players don't get much simpler than the Apollo. The top-loading design is honestly a blast to use. While not drop-dead gorgeous, I think that it's quite a handsome-looking unit.
I have a strong sense that low-level detail retrieval with the coaxial connection from my Apollo is better than it is with the optical connection from my computer. It's entirely possible that I am mistaken; the difference is terribly subtle. If anyone can offer me an explanation as to why this may be the case, I'd be happy to hear it, as I really don't have any idea. At the end of the day it's a mute point, since I'm reliant on the added flexibility that using my laptop affords me.
Regarding my buying experience from Channel Islands Audio and HeadAmp, there are some points to make. I have a lot of admiration for small-business owners like Dusty Vawter and Justin Wilson, both of whom seem to have an intense personal investment in their products. I've spoken to both men over the phone and through e-mail, and they were very forthcoming in their responses to any question I asked. Stories abound of Dusty's fantastic customer service, and my experience thus far encourages me to give credence to those accounts. A lot has been made of Justin being unresponsive to inquiries from his customers, but my dealings with him have been mostly positive. He may not get back to you as quickly as he should, but he's definitely there. Both companies offer generous warranties and return policies. I have no problem recommending buying from either one.
[size=small]Conclusion[/size]
I've been contemplating buying a new source for some time now. Whatever DAC I decided upon, it would have to fulfill two simple requirements. First, it needed to be under $1000. Second, it had to offer a substantial improvement on the sound quality of the Pico DAC. I feel that the VDA-2 succeeds amply on both counts. I've sold my Pico DAC, and I plan on keeping the VDA-2. At least for the time being anyway... however long that may be!
[size=small]Introduction[/size]
For starters, it's important that I point out that I have no background in music. I'm just a young music fan, and nothing more. Nor do I have any great skill at describing what I hear in audiophile lingo, at least in my view. Honestly, I'm still new to this hobby: I've only been at it since 2008! For these reasons, I'm usually apprehensive about providing in-depth descriptions of gear. That being said, I vowed to myself that, this time, I would provide a detailed review for the benefit of the Head-Fi community. Specifically, I've given my impressions of the Channel Islands Audio VDA-2 DAC, with an emphasis on how it compares to HeadAmp's well-regarded Pico DAC. I'm of the opinion that (other than one's headphones of course
[size=small]Form Factor & Features[/size]
Ever since getting into this hobby, I've been a fan of CIA's case design. I think that they've managed to strike an excellent balance between size and substance. Their compact components look attractively utilitarian, and the VDA-2 and the VAC-1 make for a pretty neat little combo, especially when stacked vertically. The Pico's casing is similarly attractive, while at the same being vastly more portable. You can pocket it for heaven's sake! Don't bother putting it in its leather carrying bag before you do that though, as it won't fit if you've attached the included rubber feet. The downside to the Pico's diminutive size is, of course, that it's all-but-impossible keep the darn thing stably planted on whatever surface you may be using it on. While it is fairly easy for most to resolve this issue with homespun methods (e.g. velcro strips), I don't see how I could do it in a way that wouldn't compromise aesthetics. Build quality is outstanding on both DACs.
While I do wish that the VDA-2 had a power on/off switch, I'm alright with it not having one. It doesn't draw a great deal of power from the wall, and its LED is unobtrusive; it doesn't turn on unless it has a signal lock, and it isn't very bright anyway. Since the Pico operates in the same always-on mode, it can't claim any significant advantage in this respect, although it does use less power. Of course, the extra power that the VDA-2 draws may well work in its favor in terms of sound quality.
Both the VDA-2 and the Pico have two analog outputs. The Pico has a standard RCA output, as well as a stereo mini-jack. You cannot select between either output; they both are engaged at all times. The VDA-2 has two standard RCA outputs, which are selectable with a rocker switch. I never had any problem using either output, despite the fact that the VDA-2's outputs are configured in an unorthodox manner so as to allow for balanced operation via a special cable that CIA sells. Since the VDA-2 is capable of outputting a balanced audio signal, this gives it a greater degree of flexibility over the Pico. If one is ever inclined to venture into the realm of ultra high-end, balanced equipment, the VDA-2 will still be able to function as a source.
The Pico DAC will only accept a digital bitstream from a computer through a USB port. Given its highly portable design, I have no problem with this. But the VDA-2, with its toslink and coaxial RCA jacks, can be used with a far wider array of gear.
[size=small]Equipment[/size]
Amplifier
– HeadAmp GS-1
Cables
– Enigma Audio Digital Coaxial RCA Interconnect
– Enigma Audio "Elemental" RCA Interconnects
– Enigma Audio "Elemental" Sennheiser Headphone Cable
– HeadAmp Mini-B USB Cable
– Sys. Concept Optical Cable
Digital Transport
– Apple MacBook Pro
– Rega Apollo CD Player
Headphones
– Sennheiser HD600
– AKG K501
[size=small]Setup[/size]
I've always been hesitant to write a review like this one, and one of the biggest reasons (in addition to the ones outlined above) is because I've never felt that my rig has been good enough to justify me doing so. I only do so now because I have confidence in my equipment, as well as (even more importantly) my experience with it. For this review, I relied primarily upon my HD600, as I have a better sense of its sound than I do the K501's. The synergy between my RCA interconnects and my upgraded headphone cable on the HD600 (they are made from the same UPOCC copper wire) also helped convince me to do most of my critical listening with the HD600. My K501 is limited to its stock cable, and I wanted to make sure that my system was as resolving as possible. Since I only had the one RCA interconnect, I had to do a fair amount of switching between the DACs. I was not able to take full advantage of the GS-1's myriad connectivity options, although the ability to listen to both my K501 and the HD600 at the same time did prove handy occasionally. I stuck to using the stock power cords that came with all of my components. The VDA-2 was connected to my computer via a Mini-Toslink cable from my MacBook Pro. The Pico was, naturally, connected through a USB cable. The VDA-2 was connected to the optional VAC-1 PSU at all times, and I never bothered to see how well it would perform without it. I listened to music (lossless ALAC files) with iTunes, and my computer's digital audio output was configured to 16/44.1 the entire time. There wasn't anything special about my testing methodology: I just repeatedly listened to material that I was very familiar with.
[size=small]Sound Quality[/size]
After spending quite a bit of time listening to both components, I've concluded that the Pico and the VDA-2 are both neutral, smooth, and resolving DACs. That does not, however, mean that they sound the same. Quite the contrary, they sound quite distinct from each other. Listening to both through the GS-1, it was quite easy for me to distinguish between the two. I'd credit this to the GS-1's remarkable transparency rather than any particular talent on my part. In effect, it made my job easy.
Compared to the Pico, the VDA-2 has a more pronounced treble. It's airier and, consequently, provides more top-end detail. While I certainly wouldn't say that the Pico has a recessed treble, it just doesn't have the clarity that the VDA-2 does. I miss micro-details with the Pico that I didn't even know existed until I listened to same piece of music through the VDA-2. The VDA-2 doesn't accomplish this by being brighter than the Pico – it does it by offering a more balanced sonic presentation. The VDA-2's treble simply has more to offer than the Pico's.
Both the Pico and the VDA-2 have a somewhat forward midrange that makes listening to music very involving. Neither DAC is deficient in this respect. However, the VDA-2's midrange is more refined (i.e. balanced) than the Pico's, which is more forward. This helps give the Pico a pleasant sound that is somewhat more energetic with certain kinds of music than the VDA-2 is. It is, unfortunately, less resolving and more fatiguing in the long-run. The VDA-2's midrange ultimately conveys more expressive detail, and does so with greater fidelity over a wider range of material.
The bass response of the VDA-2 is rather interesting. Extension certainly isn't a problem for either DAC; both go powerfully deep. But there is something of a difference in quantity between the two. Through the Pico, the bass seems to "fill in the cracks" in the music to a certain degree. It's heavier and more weighty; it suffuses the frequency spectrum. Crucially though, I've never found that it does so in a way that compromises the overall presentation of the music. Rather, it gives the Pico the signature sound that I've always attributed to it – slightly warm of neutral. The VDA-2's bass, in contrast, is more polite and articulate. In effect, it keeps to itself. This permits for a greater subtlety of expression, although at the expense of some of the Pico's slam. In this area, things are basically a wash. I really enjoy both approaches equally.
The VDA-2 has better dynamics than the Pico. Swings in the music were easier to detect, and I must say I was happy that I was finally able get a clear sense of just how intensely meaningful these subtle shifts in volume can be. Such details really makes you appreciate the value of high-quality production.
The biggest difference, by quite a significant margin, between the VDA-2 and the Pico lies in the soundstage. The VDA-2 mostly trounces the Pico in this area. Where the VDA-2 sounds spacious, the Pico sounds compressed. At times, however, the Pico's small soundstage can provide a sense of intimacy that the VDA-2 occasionally lacks. I've read that many Grado owners have similar feelings about their headphones, and I can see where they're coming from. Even so, I feel that the VDA-2's open soundstage ultimately results in a more compelling listening experience more often than the Pico's closed-off one does. Since the VDA-2 provides more space for the music to work within, each element of the frequency spectrum can express itself more clearly and distinctly. The sound that results is more analytical than the Pico's, without sacrificing any musicality. In particular, instrument separation is superb, and when I closed my eyes it was even spooky. On well-produced material, it really sounded like I had a front-row seat to a live show! Since my goal has always been to approximate the sound of live music with my headphone system, you can probably imagine my delight at this. Indeed, the VDA-2 really endeared itself to me here.
The VDA-2 has better attack and decay on notes than the Pico does. This is especially clear in music with strong percussive elements. Cymbals sound especially nice. The Pico just doesn't have the level of precision that the VDA-2 does.
[size=small]Headphone Synergy[/size]
The VDA-2 has wonderful synergy with the HD600. It produced sound from it that was so balanced, and of such high quality, that I was genuinely surprised. It was a clear improvement over anything that I've heard out of the HD600 before, including the Pico DAC. As I mentioned above, the soundstage of the HD600 expanded dramatically both in width and depth. It just goes to show you that the HD600 really does have the ability to scale well with the rest of your system as you upgrade it. What an outstanding headphone!
The K501 performed admirably with both DACs, and neither one was really able to overcome the other with this headphone. The differences that I could discern were quite subtle. Frankly, cabling may have been an issue here. Having said that, I did end up favoring the Pico DAC with the K501 more often than not. Its slightly warmer sound signature mated nicely with the K501, while the VDA-2 occasionally ended up sounding a bit dry by comparison. Essentially, it benefitted from the added bass quantity.
[size=small]Price Vs. Performance[/size]
At $778, the VDA-2 with the VAC-1 certainly isn't cheap. At more than twice the price of the Pico, which is almost absurdly inexpensive at $349, it's hard to say that the VDA-2 offers an improvement in sound quality that is commiserate with the higher asking price. In terms of features, things are basically a wash; it really falls to the customer to determine which ones they value more highly. Ultimately, I think that the Pico is definitely a better value. Still, for my part, I feel that the superior overall performance of the VDA-2 merits the extra investment.
[size=small]Other Observations[/size]
I said in my original post that I would test my Rega Apollo as a transport to the VDA-2, and I did. It worked great, and I can definitely see the appeal of using a high-quality CD player like the Apollo as one's digital front-end. Simplicity is a virtue I always value highly, and CD players don't get much simpler than the Apollo. The top-loading design is honestly a blast to use. While not drop-dead gorgeous, I think that it's quite a handsome-looking unit.
I have a strong sense that low-level detail retrieval with the coaxial connection from my Apollo is better than it is with the optical connection from my computer. It's entirely possible that I am mistaken; the difference is terribly subtle. If anyone can offer me an explanation as to why this may be the case, I'd be happy to hear it, as I really don't have any idea. At the end of the day it's a mute point, since I'm reliant on the added flexibility that using my laptop affords me.
Regarding my buying experience from Channel Islands Audio and HeadAmp, there are some points to make. I have a lot of admiration for small-business owners like Dusty Vawter and Justin Wilson, both of whom seem to have an intense personal investment in their products. I've spoken to both men over the phone and through e-mail, and they were very forthcoming in their responses to any question I asked. Stories abound of Dusty's fantastic customer service, and my experience thus far encourages me to give credence to those accounts. A lot has been made of Justin being unresponsive to inquiries from his customers, but my dealings with him have been mostly positive. He may not get back to you as quickly as he should, but he's definitely there. Both companies offer generous warranties and return policies. I have no problem recommending buying from either one.
[size=small]Conclusion[/size]
I've been contemplating buying a new source for some time now. Whatever DAC I decided upon, it would have to fulfill two simple requirements. First, it needed to be under $1000. Second, it had to offer a substantial improvement on the sound quality of the Pico DAC. I feel that the VDA-2 succeeds amply on both counts. I've sold my Pico DAC, and I plan on keeping the VDA-2. At least for the time being anyway... however long that may be!
