What Music Server and Dac Will Out Perform My Turntable and Phono Preamp

[13th Note HiFi Reviews]

Sorry to everyone else but I didn’t have time to read all the responses. The BDA-3 is a good DAC but from my understanding achieves its forte in the analogue output with modest DACs, but move onto FPGA designs like the chord DAVE or dCS Bartok which are ‘resolvers’ par exception, and it takes resolution up to another level.

Or if you want the rounded sound you may consider spending less to get what you like more - if you are comparing the analogue sound you get versus more analytica approach of digital. The ps audio directstream is a vinyl like dac. All these DACs I’ve reviewed.

my problem, and it’s just me, is that you can get away with a lesser source on these types of DACs and need only a steamer or server like an innuos into a Dave to outcompete what vinyl can - simply on economics of having to buy cables, phono stage, and cartridges, then the TT. It’s the original reason cd and digital came along - that you can do more for less. So all power for loving your tt set up, explore with what digital has to offer nowadays and I definitely think you get more for money.

ive sat their listening to pricey transports into DACs and sometimes less is more, but the dac is definetely not something to skimp on.not that you have with your Bryston, but if you were thinking of taking your digital up a notch. Hope my honesty helps.

 

[Alrainbow]

Sorry to everyone else but I didn’t have time to read all the responses. The BDA-3 is a good DAC but from my understanding achieves its forte in the analogue output with modest DACs, but move onto FPGA designs like the chord DAVE or dCS Bartok which are ‘resolvers’ par exception, and it takes resolution up to another level.

Or if you want the rounded sound you may consider spending less to get what you like more - if you are comparing the analogue sound you get versus more analytica approach of digital. The ps audio directstream is a vinyl like dac. All these DACs I’ve reviewed.

my problem, and it’s just me, is that you can get away with a lesser source on these types of DACs and need only a steamer or server like an innuos into a Dave to outcompete what vinyl can - simply on economics of having to buy cables, phono stage, and cartridges, then the TT. It’s the original reason cd and digital came along - that you can do more for less. So all power for loving your tt set up, explore with what digital has to offer nowadays and I definitely think you get more for money.

ive sat their listening to pricey transports into DACs and sometimes less is more, but the dac is definetely not something to skimp on.not that you have with your Bryston, but if you were thinking of taking your digital up a notch. Hope my honesty helps.

May I ask what analog setup you have and what you have used for these reviews.
thanks in advance.

 

[a.wayne]

Sorry to everyone else but I didn’t have time to read all the responses. The BDA-3 is a good DAC but from my understanding achieves its forte in the analogue output with modest DACs, but move onto FPGA designs like the chord DAVE or dCS Bartok which are ‘resolvers’ par exception, and it takes resolution up to another level.

Or if you want the rounded sound you may consider spending less to get what you like more - if you are comparing the analogue sound you get versus more analytica approach of digital. The ps audio directstream is a vinyl like dac. All these DACs I’ve reviewed.

my problem, and it’s just me, is that you can get away with a lesser source on these types of DACs and need only a steamer or server like an innuos into a Dave to outcompete what vinyl can - simply on economics of having to buy cables, phono stage, and cartridges, then the TT. It’s the original reason cd and digital came along - that you can do more for less. So all power for loving your tt set up, explore with what digital has to offer nowadays and I definitely think you get more for money.

ive sat their listening to pricey transports into DACs and sometimes less is more, but the dac is definetely not something to skimp on.not that you have with your Bryston, but if you were thinking of taking your digital up a notch. Hope my honesty helps.

Can you quantify your selection , What digital budget are we talking about to outperform analog TT ...

Regards

 

[13th Note HiFi Reviews]

May I ask what analog setup you have and what you have used for these reviews.
thanks in advance.

i use pmc speakers, Cyrus amp gear and DACs from Chord and others. But gear changes all the time. At the moment I have some atc scm40 actives, Jade 2 headphones from HIFiMan and a rme dac

 

[13th Note HiFi Reviews]

Can you quantify your selection , What digital budget are we talking about to outperform analog TT ...

Regards

too difficult a question for anyone to answer I’d say. But generally I think a digital system will outperform a tt system at same price as it’s easier to make, economies of scale etc.

obviously people who have analogue won’t agree because it’s their preferred choice of audio.

 

[Kuoppis]

too difficult a question for anyone to answer I’d say. But generally I think a digital system will outperform a tt system at same price as it’s easier to make, economies of scale etc.

obviously people who have analogue won’t agree because it’s their preferred choice of audio.

I don’t think you have to have an analogue system to disagree with both, the question and the answer. Too simplistic question and an answer without a logical base.

Why the question is flawed: You simply cannot set a price level to the point where a personal preference for one thing is superior to the personal preference for another thing.

Why the answer is flawed: same as above.

What’s the proof? Even in case of two digital systems you could not say how much more you would have to pay for one system to be better than another. This is, as price is not an objective, but a rather arbitrary measure. There are 5K DACs, which are better than 10K DACs, and vice versa. Also, whether that actually is the case or not, varies based on personal preferences.

Therefore, some might prefer the cheaper, others the more expensive DAC. You cannot argue about taste (you can, but it is not meaningful, as it leads nowhere). Similarly, for some a 5K turntable can be better than a 10 DAC, and vice versa. For some analog is the real deal, while others prefer digital. And yet again others simply think that is not a relevant question, as they enjoy both for different reasons.

You can apply the same logic to many audiophile questions, tubes vs solid state, copper vs silver cables, sigma-delta vs ladder DACs, device footers vs no device footers etc.

Most of what we are dealing with in audiophile topics is not scientific. It’s based on preferences or beliefs, rather than facts. Is the price of an audio toy justified or not? The truth is in the ears of the beholder, and the depth of their wallet.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Alrainbow]

I don’t think one is better over the other but cheap analog beats much more exp digital at many times. I asked you for the simple reason we all need a reference to guide us.
I have tape and vinyl and a few dacs. My server is Cust made.
for me there are in a simplistic way 3 levels of dacs.
1 being bottom 3 top tier
all need a great source but level 1 while it may get better is marginal in being improved. This alone is directly against your view.
level 2 is where a diamond in the Rough resides some when given a great source like the sound galleries shows an approach to level 3.
Level 3 like dcs or msb and others require less exp sources but even these benefit from a great source like sound galleries. The reasons it’s Less so simple they spend plenty of technics in re creating the data stream inside the dac. For me it’s tricky of I try this externally in level 2 Dacs. I use idion master re clocker to get me close after my own cust server.
my over all point is some stuff is on the bottom and stays there but of you keep changing out devices how do you ever get a clear picture of how new stuff sounds.

 

[a.wayne]

too difficult a question for anyone to answer I’d say. But generally I think a digital system will outperform a tt system at same price as it’s easier to make, economies of scale etc.

obviously people who have analogue won’t agree because it’s their preferred choice of audio.

So you are saying a 5K digital will beat a 5K analog and continues the same as we scale up , 10k,20k,30K ,40k etc .. ??

I would have to strongly disagree , which one sounds the best will of course be subjective but when done correctly analog will match and beat digital at most price points IMO, its mostly systems dependent thou , the higher the resolution , dynamics and full range capability of the system the better analog TT will sound vs digital ..

This has been my experiences over time .....

Regards

 

[Kuoppis]

I don’t think one is better over the other but cheap analog beats much more exp digital at many times.

Case in point: there probably are as many people on the forum who agree with this statement, as there are Sharks who disagree.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Kingrex]

I have the Mojo Audo Deja Vu server and Mystique V3 DAC. Package is about $11k.
I have the STST Motus II TT and Allnic H1201 pre with a sound smith modded Denon cartridge. $11k. New Hana next week.

I am consistently drawn to my digital. With the new root ram software package on the server, the realism is through the roof. But then I have a few records that are damb nice and really suck you in too.

My dac is the entry level dac. The new un-advertised Mojo Audio EVO DAC for $6k to $15k depending on configuration is suppose to stomp on mine. The $9k is suppose to be hitting the sweet spot, so $15k would get you a stunning digital package. You will prefer many album on digital to what you find on vinyl. Then again, you will also have jems in vinyl that are magic. Can't be beat.

Mojo Audio is PCM only. 24/192. No bologna filters and upsampling tricks. Just a specific focus on PCM as best as can be.

 

[a.wayne]

Thats a lot of Mojo .....

 

[13th Note HiFi Reviews]

I don’t think you have to have an analogue system to disagree with both, the question and the answer. Too simplistic question and an answer without a logical base.

Why the question is flawed: You simply cannot set a price level to the point where a personal preference for one thing is superior to the personal preference for another thing.

Why the answer is flawed: same as above.

What’s the proof? Even in case of two digital systems you could not say how much more you would have to pay for one system to be better than another. This is, as price is not an objective, but a rather arbitrary measure. There are 5K DACs, which are better than 10K DACs, and vice versa. Also, whether that actually is the case or not, varies based on personal preferences.

Therefore, some might prefer the cheaper, others the more expensive DAC. You cannot argue about taste (you can, but it is not meaningful, as it leads nowhere). Similarly, for some a 5K turntable can be better than a 10 DAC, and vice versa. For some analog is the real deal, while others prefer digital. And yet again others simply think that is not a relevant question, as they enjoy both for different reasons.

You can apply the same logic to many audiophile questions, tubes vs solid state, copper vs silver cables, sigma-delta vs ladder DACs, device footers vs no device footers etc.

Most of what we are dealing with in audiophile topics is not scientific. It’s based on preferences or beliefs, rather than facts. Is the price of an audio toy justified or not? The truth is in the ears of the beholder, and the depth of their wallet.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

i think you can set a personal preference level with price. Checking out all these many components you find out the better ones perform better with price at the preference you buy them for. So Chord for one thing, another dac for another preference. If you go around dCS’ premises like I did and see all the ring dac boards lined up from one gen to the next, see the components that go into a non compromising dac, not some dac where they bolt in an output and fiddle with it with some off the shelf dac, you see how the thing is so damn good when you listen to it. It’s not as if anyone can disagree as it’s at a totally different level of resolution to anything else much cheaper , like the chord Dave too with an m scaler.

There are very few DACs built at half the price that will outcompete double the price DACs fitting them into brackets of preference or their USP on sound they produce. In fact I’ve yet to hear one.

I know people like not to accept you get what you pay for in audio but it is one of the immutable truths in audio a lot of the time. Although I agree some DACs perform as good cheaper. I’m finding that with an RME DAC against a chord Qutest (which I own) but there is hundreds difference not thousands.

 

[13th Note HiFi Reviews]

So you are saying a 5K digital will beat a 5K analog and continues the same as we scale up , 10k,20k,30K ,40k etc .. ??

I would have to strongly disagree , which one sounds the best will of course be subjective but when done correctly analog will match and beat digital at most price points IMO, its mostly systems dependent thou , the higher the resolution , dynamics and full range capability of the system the better analog TT will sound vs digital ..

This has been my experiences over time .....

Regards

yes I think so as digital is so good for the money. You can get modest DACs like the schiit multibit ones being as resolving and dynamic as a tt system because you only need a modest source. With tt you need cables, tt, phono stage. A complex cartridge. 3 box with more interconnects rather than two. With digital you just need one box streamer/dac or two box dac and streamer so economies of scale, cost to make.

ok you might not get same smooth sound with some cheaper DACs but if you spend more you do, and even cheaper DACs are good enough to resolve the system to a good level that makes it as good as what vinyl can achieve aside preference.

also most DACs, even basic ones, are able to resolve more than the cheaper turntables. This was true when cd came on the scene as a digital dac and source and it’s even more the case nowadays with fpga, ladder DACs, multibit, ess sabre etc, and proliferation of digital tech.

 

[Kuoppis]

A plain-Jane price comparison does not tell the entire truth. It really depends on what is up- and downstream. While it’s different things that affect the quality of digital and analog, there are also common factors.

Component - both, but analog has more moving parts

Media quality - both, maybe analog even more so

Power supply - both, maybe digital even more, as it also applies to signal transport (although I also have a 4K power supply unit for my turntable, which makes a huge difference)

Grounding - both, equally for power, signal and components

Signal conversion - both, complex in either case, D/A conversion, signal processing, filters, upsampling, bit rates and formats vs intricacies of groove tracking, azimuth, vertical angle, cart load, alignment, and mV level amplification

Cables - both, different types of cables going into a DAC and different types of cables in the TT setup

Isolation - both, but analog is more sensitive to vibrations, as this needs to be addressed relative to component, placement, tracking, motor, power supply, and even media

System matching - both, if components do not harmonize the system will never yield a top performance

Acoustics - both, usually the most neglected factor, a little of room acoustic treatment is often equivalent to doubling your system investment

Ergo: A 10K vinyl system can easily beat a 20K digital system, when basics are not taken care of properly on the digital side. And exactly the same applies vice versa. Simple component investment does not get you very far in any case.

The trouble is, the weakest link principle applies: everything can be top notch, but if only one key element is suboptimal the entire setup suffers.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Kingrex]

I sat with Ultrafast and Joe P at ultrafast house. We went back and forth with a record and digital. Ultra was switching between vinyl and streaming the same album.. Non of us could tell the difference. Non of us could select whether we were listening to vinyl or digital. It's all about the media. Not the type of gear its played on. Of course you have to implement it properly.

There is no way I have seen to make a crappy source on one format sound better than a great source on another format. I have personally seen on 2 systems, with a very identical source, where its pretty much impossible to tell the difference between digital and vinyl. Your amp, preamp and speakers as well as cabling and power provide enough distortion and masking to make the differentiation even harder to discern.

You CAN build a digital setup that will outperform your vinyl on many album. Not all. And vice versa. Many vinyl album will outperform your digital.

 

[Kingrex]

For instance,
This Paul Simon is horrible on vinyl. It is thin and fatiguing. The digital 24/44.1 is much more harmonically rich and pleasant to enjoy.
The Duke/Coleman is way better on vinyl. Body is just as thick and the horns are spectacular on vinyl. Much more alive, quick and real.

 

[a.wayne]

I sat with Ultrafast and Joe P at ultrafast house. We went back and forth with a record and digital. Ultra was switching between vinyl and streaming the same album.. Non of us could tell the difference. Non of us could select whether we were listening to vinyl or digital. It's all about the media. Not the type of gear its played on. Of course you have to implement it properly.

There is no way I have seen to make a crappy source on one format sound better than a great source on another format. I have personally seen on 2 systems, with a very identical source, where its pretty much impossible to tell the difference between digital and vinyl. Your amp, preamp and speakers as well as cabling and power provide enough distortion and masking to make the differentiation even harder to discern.

You CAN build a digital setup that will outperform your vinyl on many album. Not all. And vice versa. Many vinyl album will outperform your digital.

If they both sounded the same there is some system masking taking place, a sonic signature so to speak ...


Regards

 

[a.wayne]

yes I think so as digital is so good for the money. You can get modest DACs like the schiit multibit ones being as resolving and dynamic as a tt system because you only need a modest source. With tt you need cables, tt, phono stage. A complex cartridge. 3 box with more interconnects rather than two. With digital you just need one box streamer/dac or two box dac and streamer so economies of scale, cost to make.

ok you might not get same smooth sound with some cheaper DACs but if you spend more you do, and even cheaper DACs are good enough to resolve the system to a good level that makes it as good as what vinyl can achieve aside preference.

also most DACs, even basic ones, are able to resolve more than the cheaper turntables. This was true when cd came on the scene as a digital dac and source and it’s even more the case nowadays with fpga, ladder DACs, multibit, ess sabre etc, and proliferation of digital tech.

This has not been my experience , a decent analog rig is only complex in setup , as very few understands or make the effort to set them up correctly, Vinyl is not as plug and play as digital for sure but no simple inexpensive digital will match a decent vinyl rig..

My 2c

 

[a.wayne]

@KingRex ..

Rex could you post a pic of your Turntable with the vertere arm would love to see it .! Also are you running the 103 direct or using an SUT ...?


Regards

 

[13th Note HiFi Reviews]

I agree with your comments - any source can pretty much beat the other unless if it’s vhs. but just to qualify my comments as being digital at x price can outstrip vinyl at same price. Above anything it’s simple economics I feel.