[project86]

Quote:

Does changing the opamp in the I/V stage affect the DAC or just the headphone out only?
 

Swapping the OPA2134 in the I/V stage affects the DAC. Swapping the LM833 would change the amp.
 

 

[MalVeauX]

Heya,

I'm starting to get more into vinyls.

Anyone ever put a turntable input into the Matrix CUBE DAC?

Very best,

 

[rictee]

Quote:

Swapping the OPA2134 in the I/V stage affects the DAC. Swapping the LM833 would change the amp.
 

I too found that my Cube has socketed opamps - it's a REV 1.6F.  What would be a good replacement for the OPA2134/LM833?  Is there any such thing as a combo or could I just swap either one?
 
BTW I must thank you for writing this review!  It helped me decide on getting the Cube.

 

[project86]

Quote:

Heya,
I'm starting to get more into vinyls.
Anyone ever put a turntable input into the Matrix CUBE DAC?
Very best,

You would need a phono stage in between the turntable and the Cube. From there, the Cube would act as headphone amp and allow you to monitor the music from your albums. 

 
Quote:

I too found that my Cube has socketed opamps - it's a REV 1.6F.  What would be a good replacement for the OPA2134/LM833?  Is there any such thing as a combo or could I just swap either one?
 
BTW I must thank you for writing this review!  It helped me decide on getting the Cube.

I'd do a search online and see what others are reporting as good upgrades for those opamps. Obviously each device is different, but it might give you a good starting point. 
 

 

[clams]

I replaced the I/V stage opamp (OPA2134), with the OPA2604. I noticed an even wider soundstage with better instrument separation. The instrument separation was the most noticeable part I'd say. The bass does not "last" as long though, so the CUBE loses a little warmth but still remains punchy. I'll have to listen more so I'll have some more impressions on the way. I also have an AD8066ARZ sample coming but it'll be a while until that arrives.

 

[EraserXIV]

Interested in how this compares with the gamma2. Anyone have any experience with both?

 

[rictee]

Quote:

I replaced the I/V stage opamp (OPA2134), with the OPA2604. I noticed an even wider soundstage with better instrument separation. The instrument separation was the most noticeable part I'd say. The bass does not "last" as long though, so the CUBE loses a little warmth but still remains punchy. I'll have to listen more so I'll have some more impressions on the way. I also have an AD8066ARZ sample coming but it'll be a while until that arrives.

I have also just tried it with OPA2604 and have to agree with your comments.  It sounds clearer, more detailed, but less low end - I think I still prefer OPA2134 for easy listening.  
Still waiting on LM4562 and OPA627 to arrive.  Have you tried any other opamps?  

 

[leeperry]

nice to see that the opamps can be rolled in the newest revision
 
what chip does it use on the coax input? the volume control isn't digital I guess? Can you disable it completely? or at least on the RCA output?
 
Thanks!

 

[clams]

 
Quote:

nice to see that the opamps can be rolled in the newest revision
 
what chip does it use on the coax input? the volume control isn't digital I guess? Can you disable it completely? or at least on the RCA output?
 
Thanks!

 
It uses the same DAC chip (WM8740) for the coaxial input although I think it is sent through the ASRC resampling chip first (like all the other inputs). The volume control is not digital and only affects the headphone out, not the RCA outputs (in other words, it cannot be used as a pre-amp)

 

[leeperry]

Apparently, the ASRC can be disabled? From what I can see, WM8740 cannot work as a S/PDIF receiver? The Cube claims supporting up to 24/192 on its coax input, so I guess it's either using CS8416 in legacy mode or WM8804?

 

[project86]

It actually uses the TI SRC4382 as a digital audio input receiver and sample rate converter. Most of the TI ASRC chips double as DIRs, so no extra chip required.
 
The unit does handle up to 24/192 and does not function as a pre-amp. And yes the ASRC can be disabled, although I generally find that doing so is not desirable. 

 

[enigmatik]

Would this be a good solution as my first headphone amp/dac for my akg 271 studios? (my first pair of audiophile headphones) I still don't know many of the technical terms so im very confused on what i should do. Unfortunately, i have an hp dv7 2277cl. So i don't think i have a good input for headphones. Would a usb to s/pdif do well if i were to get this and use it through that? Someone help please!

 

[project86]

Quote:

Would this be a good solution as my first headphone amp/dac for my akg 271 studios? (my first pair of audiophile headphones) I still don't know many of the technical terms so im very confused on what i should do. Unfortunately, i have an hp dv7 2277cl. So i don't think i have a good input for headphones. Would a usb to s/pdif do well if i were to get this and use it through that? Someone help please!

This is a great started all in one unit. It should do well with your AKGs. The built in USB connection would be fine to use, unless you plan on listening to hi-resolution music. You'll know you have hi-res music because it would have come from places like HDtracks.com instead of iTunes, and it will say something like "24/96" in the description. You would need a USB to SPDIF converter if you wanted to play those through the Cube. But regular iTunes purchases or stuff that you have ripped from your own CDs will work with the built in USB section. 
 
Hope that helps.

 

[manveru]

Hey project86, first of all thanks for all the great reviews. They've been very helpful in my research for a ~$200-300 dac/amp which I think I will request for Christmas. I am currently considering the Cube, U100, and D100. Starting to lean away from the D100 because of all the issues many people seem to have had, but mostly because I think I should probably save my money as I still have to buy a couple small things my band needs to finish the album we're currently working on (the D100 is a little too expensive to ask for so I would have to pay for part of it). Anyways, I was hoping you could clear something up for me. In your U100 review you said:
 
Quote:

If we turn off the upsampling feature on the Cube the two units end up sounding very similar when used solely as a DAC. The Cube has a more lively presentation up top but the effect is minimal.

 
and in this thread you mentioned:
 
 
Quote:

As strictly a DAC I'd say they are pretty close. The Cube is a little warmer or focused on the bottom end, and the U100 a little more sparkly or upper mid/highs oriented.

 
These two statements seem like they might be a little conflicting. Could you clarify? Which would you say is more transparent/neutral? Or is the difference subtle enough to be negligible, because I like the look and i/o options of the Cube better. I'm only concerned about DAC performance as I plan to get a separate amp down the road.


 

 

[project86]

Thanks for the comments, I'm glad I could be helpful in your search.
 
I see how my two statements seem contradictory. Maybe I can clarify:
 
The first part, where I say the Cube is slightly more lively up top, I'm talking about overall extension. Both do highs pretty well for such low priced units. The Cube has a touch more energy up there but as I said, not a huge difference overall.
 
The next part, where I say the Cube is warmer overall and the U100 more focused on upper mids/highs, I'm talking more about the big picture. Even though the Cube has very slightly more sparkle, it also comes across as thicker/warmer/more musical, or however that is worded. The Cube comes across as more light/fast/sparkly/detailed. Does that make sense? You could say that the Cube is too thick on the bottom end, or has a slight U shaped curve, or you could look at it as the U100 being too thin down there. It's a matter of perspective. Again these differences are not huge.
 
Neither unit is 100% neutral. The U100 probably comes closer but it is a very small difference. 
 
Hope this helps!