[tosehee]

I didn't know ayre was doing that ****ty business that 'other' company was caught doing.. That makes to rethink about the purchase myself..

 

[.Sup]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tosehee /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you have that much to spend on dac, I'd seriously consider Ayre. They won the 2009 stereophile award for a reason.

They paid the reviewer?

 

[doctorcilantro]

Isn't the Ayre DAC usb?

I need AES and word clock input.

 

[tosehee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by .Sup /img/forum/go_quote.gif They paid the reviewer?

haha

 

[doctorcilantro]

Thanks Jude,

How did it fare against the Raptor (which I have), or the DA11?

In general, are we to assume this is going to be a world-class headphone amp. It really would be an all-in-one solution for me as it has a aux i/o and pre-out.

DC

Quote:

Originally Posted by jude /img/forum/go_quote.gif At RMAF (2009), there was an Ayre QB9 (of course, hooked up via USB), and a Lavry DA11 (hooked up to the same laptop via optical), and all but one or two people I saw comparing the two preferred the Lavry DA11. Even those who were fully expecting the QB9 to come out on top who heard both preferred the Lavry in that system. (The system was a MacBook Pro-->DAC-->Raptor-->Sennheiser HD800.) Yes, the QB9 is prettier, and it did sound very good. But the Lavry DA11 had more of everything to my ears, and was definitely more articulate. No it's not the prettiest thing on the planet (although the DA11's recent cosmetic upgrade helps in this regard). I actually think I may pick up a second DA11. I have heard the Antelope Audio Zodiac+, and had it in my system for a while (a pre-production unit). I'm not exactly sure when it's going to be released. I expect I'll be hearing a production unit when it's available, and I'll say more about it then. I'll only say now that the pre-production Zodiac+ was excellent, and supported up to 24/192 from my MacBook Pro, my Mac auto-switching between 16/44.1, 24/88, 24/96, 24/176 and 24/192 via Amarra. (The pre-production unit that was here was early enough pre-production that I expect it could be different from what will be released for sale.)

 

[Icenine2]

Does anyone have a notification link from the company? I can't find one.

These look incredible.

Keith

 

[doctorcilantro]

I have talked to a couple dealers and the + was last slated for March 2010 release.

Gold for May 2010.

I have been told the Gold will be quite a step up;more than just a remote and gold relay stepped attenuator. I'll probably go for the + unless I can get a deal......

DC

 

[Icenine2]

Doc,

Who's going to sell these?

 

[Icenine2]

What I'd really like is a NAD H2 headphone version. That would be awesome. I think it might be years before we see that though.

K

 

[doctorcilantro]

Ciamarra

And Sweetwater, and I think Sam Ash.

You can buy the Zodiac now at Sweetwater.

DC

 

[sangel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinnie R. /img/forum/go_quote.gif It would also be nice if more recording engineers took more time and effort into the recording process. You can have the best specs, but if the music was not recorded well, it is all just a waste. On the other hand, there are certainly redbook CDs (16/44.1khz) that are very well recorded that sound fantastic! It all starts with the recording...

....even after 25 yrs in the bussiness......RECORDING
is like garbish in.....garbish out OR the other way around.

Regards

Stelios

 

[autonomous]

Let me first thank the sponsors who have added some solid data to this thread of one of the most interesting of audio topics; the ubiquitous DAC. It is also one big can of worms, but when you’re fishing it doesn’t get any better than this! Being a huge protagonist against snake oil* I still find a few things DL states in his position on high conversion rate DAC curious.

The 60-70 KHz rate as the optimum is metaphorically speaking, music to my ears! My dac ONLY does 24 bit/96Khz, and I would love to think it is all the DAC I will ever need. However, since we are talking about music reproduction, and music at the acoustic source is analog, I have to fall back on the old analog standard for recording. Good old magnetic tape technology; open reel at 7.5 IPS is good, 15 IPS is great, and 30 IPS is awesome. Faster is better.

So while the math reads good DL, how is it going to sound? I would like you (if you haven’t already) to back up your statements head to head against one of these wildebeests, ok Antelopes, allowing Jude to report his findings to the Head-Fi readership. I am curious though, because although you state 60-70 KHz is optimum, most of your DAC line seems to go out to 96Khz. Also the Reference Recordings HRx are 174.4/24 bit files and are pretty highly regarded for sound quality. Am I missing something here (or hear)?

P.S. I do agree with the poster who thinks the beastie Atomic Clocks are awesome, but I am a little afraid of the fallout!

*If it measures good and sounds bad, -- it is bad. If it sounds good and measures bad, -- you've measured the wrong thing.

 

[sxr71]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoupRKnowva /img/forum/go_quote.gif ah...i shoulda checked on that one. Makes more sense now, 192dB seemed a little ridiculous lol that would require 32 real bits Edit: 1000th post!! woot

It's not at all the bits in that situation. It's the analog stage. To keep it quiet enough I suppose you'd need to take it close to absolute zero.

 

[sxr71]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kool bubba ice /img/forum/go_quote.gif Kids, this is why you need to go to college & get a education.. To afford stuff like this.. Sorry foe being morbid, but a relative would have to die before I could afford their 'entry' model.

Actually you need the education to know better than to fall for hype marketing.

 

[doctorcilantro]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sxr71 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Actually you need the education to know better than to fall for hype marketing.

True, but Antelope makes some quality clocks. I think they could have easily charged twice what they are for their DACs.