I have not tried it Ian but you are correct. I could run the outputs directly into the HRX using the gain on the front panel of the Dac. I will give it a try this weekend and post the percieved results.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Mackenzie
Ken
Printable View
I have not tried it Ian but you are correct. I could run the outputs directly into the HRX using the gain on the front panel of the Dac. I will give it a try this weekend and post the percieved results.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Mackenzie
Ken
That should be interesting...:hmm:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Pachkowsky
From a theoretical standpoint it should be better without the extra electronics, however you seem to be really using your EQs so I guess you'll miss 'em. You might also try just taking the preamp out of the circuit just to see what the tubes are doing.
Widget
Seeing as I will have it all pulled out, I will try that as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Widget
Ken
Ken's going to be a busy man fulfilling all these suggestions. Good luck, bud.
If your EQ is properly set, it is doing it's job - adjusting for cabinet, room and "system" anomalies (nodes and nulls).Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Widget
Widget's on the trail here - leave the EQ in. Otherwise, you are comparing too many variables. Plus, you've already determined you like the EQ to assist the "Westies" reproduction.
With regard to "system" anomalies...
To be pedantic about it, you should re-EQ the system without the preamp. That would be the purest comparison, as you know.
But, if you don't have a second graphic EQ which you can use for a quick A/B, this comparison will not only be subjective, but will be not readily comparable, A to B.
Just being a stickler, here... :o:
-------
ps: I submit this may be particularly important (read: interesting) since you use a tube preamp. :hmm:
Sorry the logic was not clearer...
If Ken cares to set the Eq flat in bypass mode and then compare it in circuit and out he might then have a better understanding of doing a "health" check on the signal path purity.
Since the new Dac1 is the prime source and purpose of this thread I am sure Ken would benefit in knowing the true accuracy of the DAC1 through his Westies! It will either sound better direct or non different.
Yes, but actually, here, Widget's suggestion was to by-pass the pre-amp and see how the DAC-1 sounds direct.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Mackenzie
My point was, if the system sounds crummy/edgy/harsh/muffled/boomy (particularly this, looking at that ~125Hz notch) without the EQ, that might confound his appraisal of the DAC-1 direct. It would be easier on the ears if it sounded good, with, and without, the preamp, since that is what is being "tested" by Widget's suggestion.
The new digs will require a totally different EQ setting (or none at all), that notch will be a moot point by then (at least hopefully for Ken).
Ken,
The suspense is killing me- Hook that baby up direct! I'm looking into an outboard DAC myself. I'd like to hear what your findings are. How many source components do you have?
Sorry buddy, did not get a chance till this weekend. I will post impressions on Sunday night.Quote:
Originally Posted by hapy._.face
PS: I have the Sony CDP-D11 and a Pioneer 578-A DVD player. My sat system is a Direct TV HR10-250 Hi-Def.
Ken
You promised:crying:
Hi All
I have been using a new Benchmark Dac1 now for 2 months and put it through it's paces.
After careful consideration I would say that upgrading your cd player might be a more cost effective use of 900-1000 bucks. The Dac1 improved the performance by a slight margin in many aspects. I would have to say the most dramatic improvement was in the 2-5k range. I can only describe the difference as follows.
When switching from the Dac1 back to the on board Dac from the same source (Sony CDP D11), the Dac1 had a more black background virtually eliminating what I think may be jitter distortion. The operative word being "think". If you could describe jitter distortion as edgy (slightly distorted) sounding mid-range, then that may be it. The Dac1 also widened the sound-stage, but only a little.
I hope someone finds this useful.
Ken