Wyred DAC-1 vs Benchmark DAC-1 (NON USB)

heiney9

Face wrote: »

The room is the most important, then speakers, then gear, then tweaks(cables, etc...).

I would agree, but speakers and gear are tied. I have had some really great results with dac's, amp's, and pre-amp's making more than a sublte difference in my rigs. Perhaps I already have the speakers that make this possible, but gear and speakers are equally important as one can't shine w/o the other, IMO.

My SDA's kept on giving as I moved up the gear ladder and added tweaks like cables.

H9

steveinaz

I disagree; sans possibly a phono cartridge upgrade, IMO speakers make the most significant tonal changes to a system. It's been proven to me time & time again in my 38yrs in this hobby. Of course we are assuming respectable associated gear as well. I know I hit on a good set of speakers when I stop phutzing with the other stuff.

I think too many audiophiles are married to their speakers, and end up on an endless journey, trying to "back-into" the speakers' sound with gear/cable changes. Ala "tail-chasing."

We'll have to agree to disagree on this topic.

While I agree the room is extremely important, most of us are pretty limited to what we can do to improve it--unless of course you have money falling from your **** and can design a perfect listening environment from the ground, up.

Erik Tracy

steveinaz wrote: »

I disagree; sans possibly a phono cartridge upgrade, IMO speakers make the most significant tonal changes to a system. It's been proven to me time & time again in my 38yrs in this hobby. Of course we are assuming respectable associated gear as well. I know I hit on a good set of speakers when I stop phutzing with the other stuff.

I think too many audiophiles are married to their speakers, and end up on an endless journey, trying to "back-into" the speakers' sound with gear/cable changes. Ala "tail-chasing."

We'll have to agree to disagree on this topic.

While I agree the room is extremely important, most of us are pretty limited to what we can do to improve it--unless of course you have money falling from your **** and can design a perfect listening environment from the ground, up.

And then there is the WAF if you even attempt room treatments: felt coverings for windows - big blocky acoustic wall hangings, triangle shaped corner bass traps, ceiling tiles.....good luck with that

tonyb

I agree Steve, speakers do make the most improvment, period. That said, I don't think most actually look for that certain speaker to last a long time until their electronics reaches a certain level. Only then do they search for that "right speaker".

But your right, before finding that right speaker, some will tweek the crap out of everything else to get what they have sound better, nothing wrong with that, but the coin spent could have gone into upgrading the speakers themselves giving more of a boost to SQ.

The speakers I have now, I've had the longest of any other speaker in my life time. Going on 6 years, and have no desire in the future to swap them out. They make mediocre electronics sound frickin' awesome.

steveinaz

Erik--
exactly; for most of us, numerous factors come into play that limit what can be done.

audiocr381ve

steveinaz wrote: »

I disagree; sans possibly a phono cartridge upgrade, IMO speakers make the most significant tonal changes to a system. It's been proven to me time & time again in my 38yrs in this hobby. Of course we are assuming respectable associated gear as well. I know I hit on a good set of speakers when I stop phutzing with the other stuff.

I think too many audiophiles are married to their speakers, and end up on an endless journey, trying to "back-into" the speakers' sound with gear/cable changes. Ala "tail-chasing."

We'll have to agree to disagree on this topic.

While I agree the room is extremely important, most of us are pretty limited to what we can do to improve it--unless of course you have money falling from your **** and can design a perfect listening environment from the ground, up.

I agree. Many of us ARE limited and I'm sure the vast majority of us, including myself, have blown through speakers that are far superior to the ones we end up settling on because they sound good in our listening room.

This also brings up a massive issue, why are 90% of us cycling through speakers/gear/cables to get a pleasing sound when 90% (exaggerated estimate to make a point) of what we're hearing is caused by our room?

Don't get me wrong, I'm preaching to myself!

steveinaz

Agree, but I think it takes a pretty hideous room situation to be that much of a factor. I've lived in some pretty cramped quarters in my life, and have always been able to get good sound with a little speaker placement experimentation and tweaking.

heiney9

steveinaz wrote: »

We'll have to agree to disagree on this topic.

Yep, I can do that Steve :biggrin:

Some of you guys that have been stuck with more middle of the road gear need to hear some serious gear. Not saying anyone specifically, but some that have commented in this thread think stuff like receivers and Emo is great gear, it's not.

I didn't think swapping amps, pre-amps, getting into tubes and modding a dac to make it more modern was going to make such a positive improvement but the GEAR did. I am now a believer, but you still have to create/find that synergy, great gear alone with the wrong or mediocre speakers won't get it done.

H9

Face

Sorry, the room is the biggest factor. You can take the best system in the world and put it in the worse possible room and it will sound awful.

heiney9

Yes, but Mike now you are talking extremes. I agree the room is very important, but most of us are able to take a good system and put it in an "avg" room and get pretty good sound. Then add better gear (all other things equal, ie; room and speakers) and it can sound a lot better.

I'm all for treating a room, but if you already know it's a poor room or proper placement can't physically happen then you have no business buying and setting up an expensive rig in the first place in that listening environment.

Perhaps I'm taking for granted most of us know how to set up a rig to some degree so it will sound good and most *should* know poor placement when they see it. Perhaps I assume too much for some on this board.

IMHO

H9

Face

heiney9 wrote: »

I'm all for treating a room, but if you already know it's a poor room or proper placement can't physically happen then you have no business buying and setting up an expensive rig in the first place in that listening environment.

IMHO

H9

Which further proves my point.

reeltrouble1

by definition nothing in a system can be more important than anything else.

everything matters.

your teacher told you many times to stand in the corner, unzip and consider your overall shortcomings.

RT1

Erik Tracy

Face wrote: »

Sorry, the room is the biggest factor. You can take the best system in the world and put it in the worse possible room and it will sound awful.

Life's a ****, eh? And a constant juggling of constraints and compromises.

I envy those that have the luxury of building up a rig around a room of their choice and design.

Most of us live in a world where there is "a room" to use for audio with all of the ugly compromises that go with it.

Eeeking out the best sound then becomes an exercise of what gear is in the room.

I guess I'll just have to live with my crappy compromised sound....

steveinaz

I'm fortunate that our family room is big, has concrete sub flooring, and works out really well for audio--but that was largely luck.

heiney9

Erik Tracy wrote: »

Life's a ****, eh? And a constant juggling of constraints and compromises.

I envy those that have the luxury of building up a rig around a room of their choice and design.

Most of us live in a world where there is "a room" to use for audio with all of the ugly compromises that go with it.

Eeeking out the best sound then becomes an exercise of what gear is in the room.

I guess I'll just have to live with my crappy compromised sound....

Sorry but Mike took it to the extreme, many of us don't have the perfectly built room and still our rigs sound great.

Room/listening envirnment matters, but a lot of rooms, will at the very least, give decent sound, unless as Mike suggests you go to the extreme of setting up a nice rig in a piss poor room. If you don't have that kind of sense, then you need to start over learning about this hobby.

And yes, I would have to agree "everything matters" if I had to succinctly make a short comment whenever people ask about this subject, that would be it.

H9

Face

reeltrouble1 wrote: »

by definition nothing in a system can be more important than anything else.

Who's definition are we talking about?

reeltrouble1 wrote: »

everything matters.

Of course.

reeltrouble1 wrote: »

your teacher told you many times to stand in the corner, unzip and consider your overall shortcomings.

I'm glad I never paid attention in school.

heiney9 wrote: »

Sorry but Mike took it to the extreme, many of us don't have the perfectly built room and still our rigs sound great.

I never said you can't have good sound in a less than perfect room. I wouldn't say either of mine are close to perfect, but they're not awful either. But after hearing a couple of Rives Audio constructed rooms...wow.

tonyb

steveinaz wrote: »

I'm fortunate that our family room is big, has concrete sub flooring, and works out really well for audio--but that was largely luck.

Mine too....thats why someday I'll have 500 lb. monsters down there.

heiney9

In my old place I actually had a better sounding listening space. In the new place my goal this Fall is to get some proper room treatments in there. It sounds good, but I think my old place sounded a little better. I have even found my self rolling in warmer tubes because my current room is a little bright.

My rig sounds very good, but I know it can sound better and I will treat my room using my favorite tubes so I can get the sound I'm looking for. I need to do some work in this area to be 100% satisfied.

H9

SCompRacer

Face wrote: »

Sorry, the room is the biggest factor. You can take the best system in the world and put it in the worse possible room and it will sound awful.

I'm siding with Mike on this one. And I own speakers that reduce negative room effects by direct beaming the signal to your head. However, room treatments took them to another level.

Only way to find out if you are missing anything is, oh, here is that word, 'measure' the frequency response of your speakers in your room. And not with sustained, long duration frequency tones. I learned that long duration tones tend to load up and the SPL level changes. Burst tones worked best. It can be as simple as noting readings on a frequency chart, or using software (free or pay) on a computer.

I used to think a large room with high ceilings meant I didn't need treatments. I was wrong.

heiney9

So what you "room is the most important" guys are saying is you can take a higher end rig and lower end rig (not using extremes) and just by manipulating the room you can make them sound the same?

Really, if it's the most important then the gear and speakers take a back seat and even a mediocre speaker can sound just as good as a really nice speaker or let's say you take an Emo amp and then a nice Parasound. By treating the room you can make the Emo sound like the Parasound?

I'm sure that's not what you guys mean, but it's coming off that way too me. I was there and helped my brother treat his room and the transformation was excellent, but then he had a really poor room to start with. Square, open in the rear and on one side, windows, hardwood floors. His was an extreme example, IMO, that needed treatment before ANY gear could even remotely be tolerated.

Anyway, I've said what I've had to say and I still thing "everything matters" to pretty much the same degree. You don't turn a competent street car into a rally winner by just adding expensive tires, the entire package has to be given equal attention unless the car is already a rally car and the expensive tires give it a little better edge.

H9

Face

heiney9 wrote: »

Anyway, I've said what I've had to say and I still thing "everything matters" to pretty much the same degree. You don't turn a competent street car into a rally winner by just adding expensive tires, the entire package has to be given equal attention unless the car is already a rally car and the expensive tires give it a little better edge.

H9

Think of the room as the platform. No matter how much money you dump into an 1968 Cadillac Eldorado, a stock GTi would still woop it's **** in a rally race.

heiney9

I suspect we are all on the same page, just differing a few degrees about which is ultimately THE single most important.

I don't strongly disagree with any of the concepts presented here. How I would rank them is where the small disagreement is, and it would be based on each individual situation. For my brother, room had to be addressed first, period! For me, I need room treatments, but my system sounds pretty damn good as is, so in my case I can take my time, enjoy my system and eventually when time permits treat the room for even better performance.

H9

SCompRacer

My point is if we ignore the room, how do you expect to get the most out of your speakers and gear? If you choose to ignore the room, then yes, speakers are the most important but it becomes a matter of chance. Yes, lesser quality gear may sound better.

Brock, you have seen me cruise a room. Listening at different places. Is the bass the same, better or worse here compared to the listening position? How about the mids and highs? I've been in untreated rooms where you would have to sit in three places to get the best sound the speakers were capable of.

You think any of us " ___________(fill in the blank) rules" are rabid audiophiles? Talk to a serious room person. Some of them believe you need to sweep the room every time a different speaker is added. Why? A speaker with better bass, mids or highs may require more treatment for a fair comparison.

The Martin Logan/Sanders 10b's (like my InnerSound MK III's) speaker shootout I attended stands out in my mind. A small room covered with Ownens Corning 702 on all four walls, The Summits sounded great. The Sanders speakers? Where is the deep, hard hitting, articulate bass I enjoy? Oh, here it is out in the hallway outside the room.

SCompRacer

falcon, sorry for going off task in your thread.

FTGV

Your bang on Rich,the room and how the speaker interacts with it IMO has by far the most influence on sound quality.

audiocr381ve

Coming from a former career as a recording session musician, room is everything. You can take extremely mediocre gear and make an unbelievable recording in a great room. However, you CANNOT take top of the line gear and make a half decent recording in a mediocre room.

I just can't treat my room as a holy audio sanctuary and from what I've researched, it would take A LOT to make MY room sound half decent. So what do guys in my situation do? I think we become tinkerers I get hated on constantly around here for it, but I dig it!

falconcry72

SCompRacer wrote: »

falcon, sorry for going off task in your thread.

'tis not my thread; 'tis the thread of the people!

falconcry72

falconcry72 wrote: »

I'll listen more this weekend and come back with a review of the USB to spdif converters as well as the dacs. Btw, I'm getting a great deal on a pair of 1.7's on Friday. Hopefully they'll sound better than my 1.6's.:cool:

Well, I've had plenty of time to play with everything, and here's the conclusion:

1) The USB to SPDIF converters sound the same.

2) The DAC's all sound different; however, they are so similar in quality, I've been instilled with the sentiment that as long as you have a decent stand-alone DAC, you're good to go and probably better off spending your time/money on other components... unless your DAC is blatantly weaker than everything else in your chain.

3) The 1.7's sound better than the 1.6's in every single perceivable way, but none of the improvements are a "slap you in the face, stop you in your tracks" change, so I think I'll save up for some 3.6's.

THE END

Blued

Hi all,

Sorry to dig up this old thread, but I can't send PM's yet.

falconry72,

I see that you kept both audiogd components in your system, according to your sig. I'm looking for DAC to replace my Emotiva XDA-1 and wonder how you would describe the sound characteristics of the Audiogd. I need something a bit more laid back, I think. The XDA-1 has gobs of detail, but also slight sibilance and upper midrange / lower treble glare in my system. Bass is also a little bloomy and mids are forward. My speakers are also a bit forward in presentation, but I've heard them on other gear and I think it's mostly the DAC. I've heard my pre and amps through other speakers (Magnepan MMG mosly) and they're not so forwardthen, just right in fact.

The Audiogd units are on my radar, along with a few others. I use Musiland Monitor 02 as USB > S/PDIF converter playing FLAC files (and some 24/96 stuff) from a PC using J. River.

Which brings me to my next question:

Did you ever do a comparison of your V-Link and your dad's Musiland? Curious about the outcome if you did. I need another converter and the V-Link can be had cheap right now.

Thanks for any help you can offer, and the same goes for the rest here on the boards.

System: FLAC > Musiland Monitor 02 > Emotiva XDA-1 > Emotiva USP-1 pre > Emotiva UPA-1 monoblocks > LSA-1 Signature monitors and Salk Songsub.

falconcry72

Blued wrote: »

...how you would describe the sound characteristics of the Audiogd.

It's awesome. Very warm, analog-sounding, and dynamic. It bested the Benchmark DAC-1, Musical Fidelity M1, and Parasound DAC-2000 Ultra in my system. It's as detailed as the Benchmark with the warmth and dynamics of the Parasound. Best of both worlds. I don't know if Audio GD makes this particular unit anymore, though.

Did you ever do a comparison of your V-Link and your dad's Musiland? Curious about the outcome if you did. I need another converter and the V-Link can be had cheap right now.

The V-Link and the Musiland were comparable, but I preferred the V-Link by slight margin. The Digital Interface was the best, especially with its accompanying external power supply. The only downfall of the DI is that it can't do 88.2/96, but it sounds so good I don't care. It sounds 99%, if not 100%, as good as my newly acquired ARC CD-1.

You're right though, the V-Link can be had rediculously cheap right now due to the V-Link mkII being out. I think it's $99 shipped from Amazon. My dad just got one to replace his Musiland.

System: FLAC > Musiland Monitor 02 > Emotiva XDA-1 > Emotiva USP-1 pre > Emotiva UPA-1 monoblocks > LSA-1 Signature monitors and Salk Songsub.

How do you have J River configured? Are you using ASIO or WASAPI?