[kayaker3057]

So I already own the udac, and the other day I just got a new desktop with the Soundblaster X-Fi Xtreme Audio card in it. I figured I would try out the audio card, just for grins. Well, to me, it sounds better than my udac. MY headphones are a pair of shure 840's with about 500 hours on them, all via the udac. I am not sure how that is, but I notice even more details with the x-fi, and the soundstage is wider. Is it due to 16 bit vs 24 bit? Does the x-fi have a better amp section in it? The thought of trading my udac for a ld 1+ has been crossing my mind a lot. Thoughts?

 

[userlander]

Not really surprised. All the hype here notwithstanding, the uDAC isn't really that great of a DAC. I've never heard that audio card, but based on what you say, I bet if you focus in and listen to the highs to compare, you'll notice the flaws in that range in the uDAC. They seem "fizzy" and kind of ragged. I'll bet if you listen closely you will notice some recessed mids, too. Not to mention the overall "compressed" kind of sound you hint at with the soundstage comment.

I doubt it has anything to do with 16 vs. 24 bit, unless you mean the card is 24bit and you're feeding it a 24bit source.

 

[kayaker3057]

the udac is 16 bit, the x-fi is 24 bit. music is all lossless via itunes or foobar with wasapi output. not sure if the music is 16 or 24 bit.

 

[userlander]

most likely 16bit then, so not a factor.

 

[leeperry]

the udac doesn't use any opamp and prolly has a 32Ω built-in HP amp within its DAC chip, so beefy cans could starve and the bass response would suffer...that's a possible explanation but I haven't heard neither of these two, and you need to sign NDA's to get the datasheet for this DAC

you should use ASIO, as it's the only audio renderer that's automatically bit-matched on the X-Fi...16/24 is irrelevant, expect if you listen at +96dB and use 24bit audio files.

 

[SillyHoney]

I had that X-Fi before. The improvement over headphone output on my Alienware M17x is very subtle. Less distortion and the sound is a lil bit tighter. I sold it.

I dont have a uDac but guess I wont buy one since it's even worse than that cheap X-Fi.

 

[kayaker3057]

So would it be wise to try and trade my udac for a LD 1+?

 

[bcwang]

I don't know if the card sounds different, but I have an X-FI XtremeGamer Fatal1ty Pro Series. The uDac sounds significantly better than it when I'm driving the k701.

You'll want to make sure you are getting bitperfect data to the dac.

 

[audiofil]

uDAC usues a 24 bit DAC chip. It's the USB receiver chip (PCM270x) that limits input to 16/48 only.
But all this matters very little. Jitter control and bit accuracy are far more important.

As far as I know the uDAC's output stage is discrete (a simplified SMD transistor based circuit, perhaps).

Haven't made many comparisons, but against my Audiotrack HD2 and an Asus Xonar Essence I've listened to recently, uDAC is a better performer on most accounts.
Detail and high frequency extension are the only two aspects where I felt the soundcards were equal or slightly better.

Back on topic:
If you feel that uDAC has to go, there are plenty of fish in the sea. I'd only suggest to listen before you buy, and aim for a synergetic sound with your headphones and ears. The better DAC isn't always the highest performing one, but the best matched to your system and taste.

 

[userlander]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kayaker3057 /img/forum/go_quote.gif So would it be wise to try and trade my udac for a LD 1+?

If you feel that what you have is at least comparable, if not better than the uDAC, what reason is there not to trade for an amp? Unless you need a portable dac, then it makes sense to keep it. When you're ready to upgrade from your card, you'll most likely end up with something higher in SQ than both dacs.