[halcyon]

Do keep us posted.

The other not so encouraging comments from various forums about it's software and the damned copy protection mechanism turn me off though

 

[MrYman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by halcyon Do keep us posted. The other not so encouraging comments from various forums about it's software and the damned copy protection mechanism turn me off though

Well, as long as sound quality is good I don't mind a bit bad software, and that's surely something they can fix.... Can you tell us more about that "copy protection mechanism"?


UPDATE (Aug.24.2005)

I asked Saffire company which chip they use for headphone amp, this is their reply:
Quote:

Yes, the Headphone output device is a NJM4556AL, indeed a "High Current device" this is capable of driving 70mA into 150 ohms, a very respectable spec indeed, you can find more specs on the saffire here: http://www.focusrite.com/index2.html

A kind guy from Head-Fi.com told me this when I asked about what above means: Quote:

The NJM4556 is a "standard" audio opamp. It's not as good as the ones head-fiers normally us (OPA627, AD8610, AD843 etc.), but it should be allright.

Anyone wants to add something more to that? Or any other questions you have which I could ask this guy from Focusrite company?


From Nuendo.com forum: Quote:

There is a review of the Sapphire in the current edition of Sound On Sound (September) by Paul White. He tested with a G4 iBook and Logic Express 7.1 - not Nuendo or Cubase, and basically loved it. It also ships with Cubase LE, so presumably it has been tested with the range. His comment in the "Cons" section was "Nothing you can complain about given the price". As for it crashing Nuendo with the DSP stuff, according to the review the reverb, EQ, compressor & amp simulators can be run as native or via the sapphire DSP. The plugin versions are presumably the ones to use in Nuendo/Cubase? I would have thought - could be wrong (again) though - that DSP FX on this are for use in recording so you can have latency free EQ/Comps etc whilst recording? Indeed, Paul's review seems to suggest this is in fact the case as he says that "where reverb or one of the other effects is required for mixing, an AU or VST version is available to use with the host software.

 

[halcyon]

The copy protection is only for the VST and AudioUnit plugins:

http://www.focusrite.com/support/ans...cle.php?id=028

regards,
halcyon

 

[chrisfromalbany]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrYman Well, as long as sound quality is good I don't mind a bit bad software, and that's surely something they can fix.... Can you tell us more about that "copy protection mechanism"? UPDATE (Aug.24.2005) I asked Saffire company which chip they use for headphone amp, this is their reply: A kind guy from Head-Fi.com told me this when I asked about what above means: Anyone wants to add something more to that? Or any other questions you have which I could ask this guy from Focusrite company? From Nuendo.com forum:

So MrYman,

Correct me if I am wrong but you are in a similiar situation, in that you are looking for way use your computer as a source to an amp.

Only difference in my case is I have a full size computer. But I wouldn't mind haven't extenal DAC that I could use at work. Now I only need it for playback and NOT recording. But I am looking for something better then the current Sblaster Audigy 2z.

Anyways I see that you have been researching the market, in summary what did you find. In summing up the details you may get more people interested in USB DAC devices and researching them. I am in the early stages so I am only learning things you already know.

I do see that many DACs don't want to run inside the computer box because of ground issues. So correct me if I am wrong the better DAC for a computer run off the UBS from the motherboard rather then in the box. Now the "McCormack Dac-1" looked like a top of the line model for what I wanted to do. Not sure that I wanted to spend that type of money and not sure what if any differences this DAC has then $300 models do. Again I am not going to do recording just want excellent playback.

I lost all my cds 4 years ago in a house fire and I give up the idea of collecting CDs. So I have since collected all on digital form. So I am trying to make good computer as a source system.

 

[MrYman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisfromalbany So MrYman, Correct me if I am wrong but you are in a similiar situation, in that you are looking for way use your computer as a source to an amp.

Right. Audigy2 just doesn't do it for my HD600... EQed Westone UM2 sounds better than HD600 directly from Audigy2...

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisfromalbany Only difference in my case is I have a full size computer. But I wouldn't mind haven't extenal DAC that I could use at work. Now I only need it for playback and NOT recording. But I am looking for something better then the current Sblaster Audigy 2z.

I've got Notebook but also full-size computer, and would need it for both...

The one not so funny thing, funny in its own way, at least to me, is that even if you don't need it for recording their prices are comparable to standalone amps... I've read few people saying, that Edirol UA-25 is almost as good as Corda HA-1 MkII, which costs almost $500, while Ediroal UA-25 costs just $220 -- don't you think buying something like Edirol UA-25 makes quite some sense? Plus even if you don't need to record musical instruments or vocals, you can record other things, like making vynil records digital or whatever one might think of... and even if you don't need recording at all, so what? For $220 you get a great amp...

My guessing is that Saffire is even better than Edirol UA-25 in headphone-amp department, well, we shall see! And still Saffire costs LESS than Corda HA-1 MkII!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisfromalbany Anyways I see that you have been researching the market, in summary what did you find. In summing up the details you may get more people interested in USB DAC devices and researching them. I am in the early stages so I am only learning things you already know.

What I said above I guess pretty much expresses my conclusions... And once I know it from first-hand, be sure I'll post it here, in bad and good

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisfromalbany I do see that many DACs don't want to run inside the computer box because of ground issues. So correct me if I am wrong the better DAC for a computer run off the UBS from the motherboard rather then in the box. Now the "McCormack Dac-1" looked like a top of the line model for what I wanted to do. Not sure that I wanted to spend that type of money and not sure what if any differences this DAC has then $300 models do. Again I am not going to do recording just want excellent playback.

DACs built into Saffire & Edirol UA-25 are prob. quite good... By the way, Saffire uses Firewire connection, which is even better than USB for external audio devices...

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisfromalbany I lost all my cds 4 years ago in a house fire and I give up the idea of collecting CDs. So I have since collected all on digital form. So I am trying to make good computer as a source system.

I think that's good decision.... and it's also practical, if one spends a lot of time behind computer.... and when not at computer I put music on my PocketPC device (or Notebook) and voila....

I'd tho recommend you to buy Edirol UA-25, because it's cheap and especially because people here tried it and love it.... Again it's just $220, and tell me, what kind of amp can you get for that money which would come so close to Corda HA-1 MkII?

I choose Saffire because I'll also use it for recording, and because I think it should be even better than Edirol UA-25, but that's yet to be seen

 

[chrisfromalbany]

Now there are many other components that go into the making of a DAC. But the DAC chip itself has alot to do with the quality of the sound that out of the DAC. I think I read the DAC in my current Audigy 2 is the same one as the Headroom MicroDac. Maybe the extenal ground or the other chips are better in the MicroDAC but basically it comes down the DAC being able to take Digital Signal and Tranlate it into Analog signal. The better the chip is the better it is able to read every little piece of digital information and translate it into Analog. Along with dealing with Jitter.

Anyways do you know the name of the DAC used in the ua25. I had the name of the chip used in the DAC-1. Found it on a Texas Instruments web web. It was one of there top of the line DACs.

 

[chrisfromalbany]

again a topic that I think is a good one on computer as source forum.

 

[Morten]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PFRfan You might consider adding the Mackie Spike to the mix also. It's got a very powerful headphone section. It sounds better than my Indigo IO with my DT770-80s - just enough that I could probably tell the difference blind. Of course it can drive them MUCH louder, so I'd know that way for sure. http://www.mackie.com/products/spike/index.html

I've been using the Spike for some time as well. I agree the headphone output seems decent, but then again I've never used a dedicated headphone amp so my experience is pretty limited.

I've not been able to achieve good results with the 96kHz setting (lots of snap, crackle and pop), which kind of frustrates me.

PFRFan, do you use it for recording as well?

 

[cosmopragma]

MrYman, first of all you should think about what you really need/want.
Your one-size-fits-all-bang-for-the-buck approach is a flawed concept IMO.
In case you really need all the features and your budget is very limited this might be o.k., but soundwise it will be mediocre at best by head-fi terms.
The (semi-)pro gear is probably all decent for recording purposes since that's what paramount for the target group, but Pros on a budget don't care much for the SQ of the DAC and headphone out since they don't need it.All they need on the go is a way to look for obvious recording flaws.The mixing/mastering is done in the studio afterwards utilizing a better DAC and active monitor speakers.

 

[MrYman]

i've got saffire a week ago, i like what i hear, though i still need to hear a standalone headphone amp (hearing both at the same time would be nice, perhaps soon) to make any sensible comments.... will update this when i know/hear more...

cosmopragma, please re-read the section in first post (under the list) where i mention edirol, i think you are "wrong" -- but you know how that is, you can be wrong for me while you can be right for yourself

 

[kytuphicanh]

ESI Quatafire 610 ,I will have this card in days and below is a user review I find on net....

Quote:

I had time to test the card this WE for a few hours: the driver is quite old FEB 2004 a newer is coming for the middle of june according to ESI. First driver pb: I cant change the volume in the control panel its very anoying because my monitor speakers are connected on it so if I don t take care I blast my ears imagine 100 watts in front of your hears! It should be fixed in the next update. I m using a 1,8 ghz pc with win xp sp2 and 512 ram. I have 10 ms latency (I heard people having 4 ms or less on better computer but mine isn t totally optimised and it workd perfectly) better than my old emagic and its 20 ms. first time I tried I had an horrible noise in the low frequencies. I checked its my fault I have blown my old stereo speakers! lol So the sound is clear it doesn t make small noises or anything its clear. I tweaked traktor heavily , EQs filters, loops and scratching in the same time. no drop out at all. Its perfectly stable even with "bad" drivers. the card comes with two midi in responding perfectly. the monitor knob is very loud the only bed thing with it is its loacated just next to the power button! my trick turn it once and change the volume into traktor or with your mixer. this card has got 10 out: 4* RCA mono 2* stereo jack ( I love those big one so I m sure nothing will move) and a stereao digital SPDIF. so despite drivers that will evoluate in the near future the card is perfectly stable, Firewire helps! This card is small a bit less larger than an emagic but higher and in a steel case. the card doens t move. So i m very happy with my purchase. without to say it rocks for audio recording. If you have some question I ll be happy to help.

 

[erozsolt]

Does anybody know anything about Saffire vs. Edirol UA25?
Here, the price difference is more than 2x plus I have to buy a PCMCIA to FireWire converter to my laptop.

I understand, that the headphone amp is better on Saffire, but is there a so big difference even if I use a dedicated amp? I mean, if in one year I will go for an external amp what is the better solution?

Is the unamped sound quality is really better on Saffire and can I tweak it with a better power supply or modding?

 

[AudioNoob]

does anyone have experience with the chinese diy ones

 

[halcyon]

RMAA measurements for the following cards:

- Digidesign Mbox 2
- Echo Gina 3G
- Edirol FA-66
- Edirol UA-101
- E-MU 1616m
- E-MU 1820
- ESI ESP1010
- Focusrite Saffire
- Lynx Studio One
- M-Audio Delta 1010
- M-Audio Firewire 1814
- Presonus Firebox
- RME HDSP 9632
- Steinberg System 4
- Terratec Phase X24 FW

here:

http://arkiv.idg.se/fileArchive/stud...1020154428.zip

Courtesy of Studio magazine (SWE).

They did a round up recently of the cards (issue 9/2005).

 

[Silvermirage]

After 4 months of using the firebox as a DAC/headphone amp, it suits me well...and yes, 150 mW is correct. Boy, they drive my akg k701's. I turn the volume to lower than 1/4th and it's really quite loud. I've had it for a while now and I haven't had any major problems. Sync is always perfect and it sounds great.

However, there is a slight problem while multitasking. It isn't a problem while actually listening to music, but if I'm using Opera browser (Very memory heavy program), downloading files from some unknow source on the interenet, and unraring a file while listening to music, my firebox gets some blips. I wouldn't mind the blips while I'm multitasking, however, the blips keep going on after I've stopped. I have to restart the program (Foobar) or even the computer sometimes before I can get it to not blip. The blips aren't horrible, but an annoyance when trying to relax and listen to music.

I'd rank the firebox 9.5/10, only missing the .5 because of the blips. Cost would be an issue, but I got mine new on ebay for $200...