funny that Mike...over the years when I decided to upgrade my 2 channel system, I ended up with Meitner + Darts as well (including the Stealh Indra just like Fsarc)...speakers remain the same, which once gain will change as I finally move into a house I have purchased this summer....and

also building a HT system in living room (2 channel will be in my study)....so once again I see you are going thru a similiar journey though perhaps at a much more exalted level.

As I take into considertation room size, WAF etc and do some research, one thing I notice is that the main questions as I see it (given I too want to try multi channel hi rex music), are

1. HT processor: some of the best actually will re-digitize an incoming analogue signal: Goldmund, Meridian. But then SACD?

2. How does the HMDI and upscaling to 1080p work out? Externally? Processor? or Player direct?

3. Room Correction: more needed in case of multi channel?

Just some questions I am really wrestling with. Did notice that Rives Audio has come out with an analogue parametric bass equalizer for mutlti channel which could be of interest...though in a room such as yours may not be needed.

henryhk May 21, 2007 12:11

Mike,
thanks for the explanation... seems that I will have to go for some cable switching or live with 4 front speakers...

Murano amps: interesting! if I am not wrong they are taiwanese. Tell me how you like them, I may buy a few for my HT setup

stereotaipei May 21, 2007 11:23

hi Frank,

i have put the MGE/Topaz on hold for now for a couple of reasons. if i do multi-channel it will change the total peak current needs of the system (the JL Fathom sub takes 2500 peak watts by itself--and i might try 2 eventually).....when i install the MGE/Topaz i would need to have help to remove a built-in cabinet plus the cedar paneling behind it.....then i want to install an Isoclean wall panel when i do the MGE/Topaz since it's such a big job anyway. it's something i want to do but not at the moment.

i've not tried the Indra; i am quite happy with the Valhalla.....of course, there is always the Opus and now the Odin too. i'm always open to trying another cable but in 6 years so far only the Opus has bettered the Valhalla in my system.

mikelavigne May 21, 2007 01:11

Hi Mike- For me, running my CDSA SE single ended into the Dart was nothing short of revelatory. I think the Stealth Indras are contributing, but another CDSA/Dart user got similar results as well using a fairly inexpensive RCA interconnect versus his Jena Labs balanced. He has since ordered an Indra after hearing it in my system. Try one if the opportunity ever presents itelf- I would love to hear your impressions. Make sure it is the latest production version with the titanium RCAs.

Did you ever get the MGE/Topaz installed or have you put it on hold to undergo your multichannel journey?

Keep us posted on the multichannel, I can't wait to read how this develops for you.

Best,
Frank

fsarc May 21, 2007 00:37

OB, thankyou very much for the insight you provided into my planned wiring approach. from what you are saying i will need to unplug whichever channel 1 and 2 outputs i am not using.

what is curious is that a week or so ago i was comparing RCA and XLR inputs into the dart pre (for 2-channel). it had been suggested that the RCA's worked better (into the dart---i had used the XLR outputs on the EMM Labs gear for years). from my test i did prefer the RCA's into the dart but when testing i had both XLR and RCA's hooked up simultaineously from the DAC6e SE into the dart. i noticed no presentation issues during the comparison. maybe i need to re-do the test while unplugging the unused interconnects.

i will closely observe the results when i hook everything up. you would think my situation would work the same as yours.....but who knows?

i guess 'YMMV' is the operative comment. possibly the dart presents a different load compared to the Ref 3. it's beyond my level of understanding.

again, thanks for the info.

mikelavigne May 20, 2007 22:07

Mike

I read with interest your post regarding wirng output from the DAC6E SE by using RCA out to the DART and XLR cables to the Switchman.

I was using a similar wiring pattern last year for dedicated 2 channel listening to my ARC Ref 3 and RCA wires to my 6 channel preamp.

In theory it should have worked great with no need to remove wires. The problem however was that it dramatically and forthe worst changed my sound stage by lowering the imaging as well as shifting the balance to the left of center. At first I wondered if it were my amps (at that time I had ARC Ref 600 Mk lll). I spoke to the people at ARC who also wondered could it be the Ref 3 or even the DAC6SE or the cabling. They sent one of their technicians to my home who spent the afternoon testing all my cables which proved to be OK as did both the Ref3 and the Ref600 Mk lll's. Then we began to wonder,"could it be the DAC6e. The technician then pulled out all 6 RCA's which I was using for MC sound and instantly the soundstage and the left of center shift resolved. They left that day telling me the problem had to be the DAC 6E SE. As you probably know, Ed Meitner's partner Andreas Koch is a neighbor of mine. I phoned him and told him the problem thinking for sure that this was the DAC6E SE. He told me to bring the DAC over. which of course I did. Andreas put the DAC up on the bench and tested it and showed me that it was working perfectly. I was perplexed. I then told him how I was wiring my system and that is when he told me that was the problem. In essence it seems that the DAC 6E SE is not designed to have both XLR and RCA ouputs wired even though they are both there and one would think otherwise.. Andreas told me that when I listen to dedicated 2 channel and there is no power going to the MC setup there is still a dielectric which potentially could cause my problem. He told me to go home and plug it in for one or the other but not both. When I did there was absolutely no problem. I phoned him and told him the outcome and he told me "that is what the Switchman 3 will resolve"

In summary Mike, you might find that going to MC with a SWM 3 is OK BUT when you use dedicated 2 channel with your Dart preamp you could have the same issue that I did. For me the answer was simple...I still am a 2 channel purist and even though my room is wired for MC with speakers etc, to this day I have given up on MC listening.
Just my $0.02

YMMV

oneobgyn May 20, 2007 19:40

Stereotaipei, what HT processor do you use? most have some provisions for some sort of switching integration. the real issue for you is that you cannot avoid cable switching since you will not want to compromise the signal path purity of the APL unit by having it's signal routed thru some cheap (or even expensive) switcher. this switcher would allow you to switch from the APL as a source to your HT processor as a source and then output to the dart amp for the front 2 channels.

my previous system used the Placette RVC with a custom switchbox which was transparent. it used top-of-line Neutric connectors, a very expensive dual mono Shalco rotary switcher, very good cable and was all deep immersion cryo'd.....it wasn't cheap but it worked great. there are lots of 'pro audio' switchers out there but hard to say how good they are.

mikelavigne May 20, 2007 16:21

Stereotaipei, i forgot to talk about the subwoofer. it will likely be the JL Audio Fathom f113. read about it here.

initially i will just use it for the LFE channel from the Switchman. if i like it as well as i think i might.....i may get a second and try to see if i can add any 'punch' to the MM3's.....i'm quite skeptical about whether i can get subs to perfectly blend. but i do think my room can handle more bass power.

the local JL Audio dealer will be loaning me one to try soon.

mikelavigne May 20, 2007 15:28

Stereotaipei; i already have the separate Home Threatre room with my front projector and 7.1 surround for movies. i am adding multi-channel to my 2 channel room to enjoy SACD surround discs. later i may also add DVD-A and even lossless HD audio from HD-DVD and Blue Ray possibly if i like what it does.

when i designed the room i installed conduit in the floor for rear speaker, subwoofer and center channel interconnects (which all come to a floor box behind my gear rack); and extra dedicated outlets for them in those spots. last week i switched the duplex outlets in those spots to the Oyaide R1 Beryllium in anticipation of the multi-channel. i have long balanced XLR cables being made for the rears and subwoofers.

i have purchased the EMM Labs Switchman III and had the 'phantom center' channel option installed. my cable hookup will be as follows;

1. i will run 6 1m XLR cables from the DAC6e SE into the Switchman.

2.i will also run a set of RCA interconnects from the DAC6e SE into the dart pre for my normal 2-channel digital (the dart sounds better with RCA input). the DAC6e SE powers both XLR and RCA's at the same time.

3. the long interconnects (8m for left rear, 10m for right rear, and 8m for front left sub) will be plugged into the XLR output on the Switchman.

4. i will run a set of RCA's from the Switchman output back into an input on the dart pre. i can designate that input for unity gain by holding down the mute button 7 seconds......which effectively makes it an HT passthru.

this cable arraingement will eliminate the need for plugging and un-plugging any cables. the considerable flexibility of the EMM gear and the dart pre make it easy and elegant.

the Switchman does have 3 other 6 channel inputs for adding other devices in the future. the only issue there would be i would need to have a 'phantom center' circut change for any input i use (or add a center channel--which will never happen).

the rear speaker (and amp) issue has always been what has held me back from doing this.....for a few reasons. first; logistically i love the simplicity and elegance of my room the way it is. i enjoy the easy access to my software on my shelves; many times i am moving around with the lights low and i don't want to worry about some big speaker in the way. then there is the issue of dollars; to match my MM3's is a big outlay. i was skeptical that i could find an affordable, small speaker that could compliment the refinement, tonal balance and speed of the MM3's. then also find a small afordable amp that would also sound correct.

i feel strongly that the MM3's use of the Accuton Ceramic mid-range driver gives it a very 'Kharma-like' sound.....which i love. i did consider the Kharma Ceramique 3.2 as one possible rear channel choice since it is small; but even used it would be over $10k; and it is a floorstander. the Marten Design speakers have always sounded great to me, very Kharma like. they have that 'refinement' that many speakers simply don't have. Marten Design has a small 2-way monitor called the 'Duke' which i have purchased for the rear channels. it's not cheap ($7500 with stands), but it's beautifully made, it's small, and it should be very refined and fast. read about it here. i purchased them in the maple (which will match the cabinetry in my room). i already have them and they do fit the size and look parameters i set.

for an amp i was quite interested in the Rowland 201's and small and reasonably priced. then while researching them i came across a 501 clone (using the 1000 watt ICE module) that i decided to get instead.....the Murano P-1000S Plus. read about it here. these are $899 each retail. i read comments from users that they were essentially identical sounding to the $6k Rowland 501......i figured what the heck.....a rear channel amp which is small, uses little current, and likely would work just fine. it actually fits on the bottom CD shelf perfectly right above the dedicated AC outlet and right next to the conduit outlet for the interconnect.

until the cables arrive i won't be able to listen......that should be by mid-week hopefully.

mikelavigne May 20, 2007 15:11

Mike,
Interesting to hear you want to go for multi-channel. Which speakers and amp will you use for the other channels?
How are you making the switch from stereo to multi-channel? unplugging and plugging cables or using the Dart pre as a switch?
I am asking this as I have a similar problem. I have currently my HT system (Klipsch RF7, RC7, RS7) in my living room. When the MM3 will arrive, I will have the choice to keep both systems separate but in the same room (but will be quite crowded to have both the MM3 and the RF7 on the front of the room...), or I take away the RF7, use them in another room and use also the MM3 as L/R speaker in HT mode. Problem is how do I switch from stereo to HT mode without changing speaker cable? (I will be using the Dart amp directly fed by the APL NWO2.5T CD player, so no pre-amp). Anybody has any idea of a way to do it (w/o deteriorating sound quality)?
thanks

stereotaipei May 20, 2007 07:44

hi Charles, you and Don are most welcome to join Scott and Suresh on Sunday. i will e-mail you the info. i remember your visit a few years back.....it was a fun time. Larry and i have tried to get together a few times but something always comes up.

i would enjoy hearing your impressions of the changes......and just listening. i'm in the midst of adding multi-channel to the 2-channel room; but unfortunately i won't have the required cables until next week.

see ya Sunday.

mikelavigne May 19, 2007 03:34

Hi Mike, I came out a year or two (my memory's fading but my hearing's still good) ago with friends Larry and Don (from Seattle). your system was quite different then. I recently sold my Guarneris to Suresh who said he might be planning a visit this sunday with Scott. i was hoping to get an invite as well (Don and I) to see and hear all your new stuff.if this works for you let me know what time to arrive and brief directions. Thanks. Regards, Charles

carloskatz May 19, 2007 00:40

Mike,
Thank you for the invitation. If I do visit her I surely would contact you.
You truly are a gentleman!
Roger

rwcmacc May 17, 2007 00:26

RWC, when you innocently visit your sister in Seattle in late June, you are welcome to stop by. e-mail me and i'll provide info if you like.

mikelavigne May 16, 2007 13:43

Videoht: If the 10M only outputs a 10MHz signal, then I stand corrected. I've tried to call the company over the last few days to ask questions and possibly order a unit, but no response...

bigamp May 15, 2007 19:43

Very impressive system regardless of how many chairs you have!
Nothing like good music, friends and a nice single malt. I need to visit you,,,,, I mean my sister in Seattle.

rwcmacc May 15, 2007 19:18

Dear Bigamp, Thank for your information on Antelope 10M. Did you notice that Antelope 10M alone can't generate 44.1, 96, or 192 KHz clock signal, instead it just generate 10 MHz reference clock for Antelope OCX or OCX-V. In the end, you need to at least by one Antelope OCX and one Antelope 10M, total cost is USD 1,595 (OCX) plus USD 2,200 (10M) = USD 3,800. But one question, on OCX, the freqency divider circuit board just claims only 1 ppm accuracy Vs 0.1ppm accuracy on Esoteric G-03X which one do you prefer. I think it depends on you to judge whether the investment of USD 2,000 more for 0.1 ppm accuracy is worth or not. That's why I would like to tell you that Rubidium clock is one thing, excellent frequency divider circuit is the other thing. Rubidium clock alone can't give you an accuracy of 0.00005ppm at 44.1 KHz.

Anyway, I recommend you to try and test by yourself to see the difference in sound quality between Antelope and Esoteric. I would like to know the result also. :)

videoht May 15, 2007 19:14

Videoht, tt playback is very dependant on the tt, cartridge and phono stage. i agree that compared to digital it has some degree of color. most cartridges are quite euphonic as are many phono stages that add bloom and warmth. as i mentioned i owned the Io and Io Sig and i own three cartridges that add warmth to varible degree; the vdH Colibri XWG, the Dynavector XV-1s, and the Koetsu Rosewood Singature Platinum. OTOH the phono stage in the dart pre is very neutral and my vdH Colibri XCP is totally neutral.... it has so much top end energy i need to lower the gain on my tweeter 2 db when i play vinyl (3 db for RCA Shaded Dogs).

pro studios do not have vinyl gear like mine. the conclusions they come up with are dependant on their gear. the measurements that make of dynamic range and noise floor do not jive with my experience. good vinyl on my system has a much lower noise floor and greater 'true' dynamic range than any digital. the analog tape based vinyl has waaaay more detail than any digital copy. my vinyl gear is not 'as' neutral as digital but it is quite close. and there is way more music to hear.

i'm doing the 'blind test' to have fun. it is an excuse to get together, listen to music, drink some single malt, meet some new friends, and maybe learn something. it is what this hobby is all about......like modding gear.

not exactly cosmic in significance but worth doing for sure.

mikelavigne May 15, 2007 14:32

Hello Videoht:

Dear Bigamp, I also aware about the available of Cesium Atomic Clock also. They use the attenna to lock up internal oscillator to Cesium Atomic pulse code. That's sell for USD 3,495. But please remind that the Rubidium or Cesium pulse code generate 10 MHz only. You need the other frequency divider circuit to generate 44.1 KHz, 48KHz, 88.2KHz, 96KHz, and other frequency also. And this circuit is very important in generating the precision clock frequency.

If you notice, Cesium atomic clock precision variance is 5x10^-12. Rubidium clock precision variance is 5x10^-11. But when it pass through Esoteric frequency divider circuit, the accuracy drop to only 5x10^-5.

At first, I think as you that Esoteric charge too much price for this master clock generator comparing to the one used in laboratory. But I have no choice since you need the best frequency divider circuit to generate the frequency that we can have.

In the market, you can also buy the Esoteric G-03X (USD 3,500), and buy the 10MHz Rubidium clock generator (USD 2,200) and hook it up together to generate a precise clock.

I'm certain they are all great products. And perhaps the Esoteric adds something the others don't. I have never tried any of them in my system. I just offer the suggestion, because Antelope claims a better accuracy than Esoteric.

To clarify, the Antelope 10M is a rubidium clock , like the Esoteric G-0Rb, and also has an input for a cesium clock signal. The Antelope and Esoteric both divide their rubidium clock frequency to 44.1, 96, 192, etc. kHz. Antelope 10M allegedly has an accuracy of +/- 0.03 parts-per-billion. Esoteric G-0Rb outputs same frequencies with an accuracy of +/- 0.05 parts-per-billion.

bigamp May 15, 2007 12:53

Dear Mikel, I think no need to blind test between TT and digital recording from TT. I bet on your side, Mikel. But I don't agree to do the wasting time test like that. Please remind that we play Hi-End audio for fun, and we want to conduct a very good sound from our Hi-Fi system. We are audiophile, not a gambler. There is no win or loss on listening to Hi-End system. I devote myself to develope a better and better sound quality through our Hi-Fi system.

Mikel, as I stated earlier, in final result comparing TT Vs SACD playback sound quality. At the end, no one win, it just depends on the mastering whether it is DSD digital mastering or Analog tape mastering. Very easy to try, just pick the Opus3 test 4 on the same title between TT and SACD, and listen. I bet TT will have a slightly better sound quality because they can do record mastering directly without run through D to A again. Next, pick Eden Atwood, Wave Bossa The Nova Session. I bet on SACD since they do this record on DSD mastering. So to do a master for record, they need to convert from DSD to analog again before doing TT mastering. So, it must run through D to A.

Ther is one funny thing about this behavior as I get it from my friend who was working in Studio recording, there is studio engineer, who want to test which one is better between TT and SACD format, so they just direct convert from Analog Master Tape to DSD mastering and TT record mastering, after they cut the master SACD disc and master TT record, then they play back and compare. They claim the SACD playback is very transparency and make no different from Analog master tape reel. Meanwhile, listen to master TT record, it is slightly different from Analog master tape reel, but he feels very comfortable and enjoy with the color added by Turntable, Cartridge and Tonearm. So, it depends on which one do you prefer Transparency or Color.

I think the reason for Audiophile to prefer TT is that the distortion created by TT playback system is very comfortable to our hearing system. For example, if you can't calibrate the cartridge to the optimum, you will slightly lose detail on Hi-Freq, and a bit blur on the bass, moreover an error on speed control will help color a human voice. Meanwhile, if the CD and SACD playback is not proper calibrated or the Transport design is bad, the distortion come in the form harsh and itchy sound, too much "S..S" on human voice, bass is too strong without harmonic which erritate our hearing system so much.

If you want to hear the distortion of the TT, very easy just pick the test disc for example hi-fi choice and check the running speed to be precise as much as possible and playback 1 KHz test tone, you will hear the sound modulate up and down like "E" "Eor" "E" "Eor" all the time. Anyway, the better the turntable playback system, for example, Rockport Sirius III or Vyger Indian Signature, the less "E" "Eor" you will hear. Some Audiophiles are very prefer this "E" "Eor" so much until they don't like Rockport Sirius III or Vyger Indian Signature. Meanwhile, the cheapest CD Player can reproduce 1 KHz test tone correctly, you will hear only stable "E". But this is not guarantee you will a good sound since this is just a single test tone. In real music playback, there is something else to account for like phase angle, harmonic distortion, impulse response, high amplitude distortion, bandwidth, dynamic headroom and more.

Like mine, I don't care what it will be TT or SACD. But I need it to get to optimum on both TT and SACD. I prefer both TT and SACD playback to get close to live concert, and can recreate the feeling of each recording studio ambience. That's why I recommend you to try this G-0Rb since it help closing the gap between TT and SACD. Now, in my system, Neither TT nor SACD is win, just having a pro and con on each format. With a proper SACD record, it will have a good thing of TT plus good thing offered by SACD.

As an audiophile freind, I wish you will enjoy listen to both format. That is my ultimate goal. :)

videoht May 15, 2007 11:55

Dear Bigamp, I also aware about the available of Cesium Atomic Clock also. They use the attenna to lock up internal oscillator to Cesium Atomic pulse code. That's sell for USD 3,495. But please remind that the Rubidium or Cesium pulse code generate 10 MHz only. You need the other frequency divider circuit to generate 44.1 KHz, 48KHz, 88.2KHz, 96KHz, and other frequency also. And this circuit is very important in generating the precision clock frequency.

If you notice, Cesium atomic clock precision variance is 5x10^-12. Rubidium clock precision variance is 5x10^-11. But when it pass through Esoteric frequency divider circuit, the accuracy drop to only 5x10^-5.

At first, I think as you that Esoteric charge too much price for this master clock generator comparing to the one used in laboratory. But I have no choice since you need the best frequency divider circuit to generate the frequency that we can have.

In the market, you can also buy the Esoteric G-03X (USD 3,500), and buy the 10MHz Rubidium clock generator (USD 2,200) and hook it up together to generate a precise clock. So, altogether still cheaper than G-0Rb alone - USD 5,700 Vs USD 13,500. But do you expect the same result, I don't know the answer for that. But one thing sure is that I have already opened the top cover to check the circuit inside G-03X and G-0Rb, I am willing to pay more for G-0Rb since the circuit design and quality of each component used in G-0Rb is much better than G-03X. Can you imagine the weight of G-0Rb is at 20 Kgs Vs 11 Kgs on G-03X.

My ulimate wish is that I will try to use the 10MHz Cesium Atomic Clock pulse to lock into G-0Rb to see the improvement over internal Rubidium clock generator. By far, I am very satisfy with the result of this G-0Rb. So, that would be my next step when I can't improve the other thing in my system.

One thing I want to make note that I am not recommend this G-0Rb to the standard system or sub-optimum system as it is not worth money investment. You need to use this clock in the ultra hi-end system to make a quantum leap in sound quality. Remember, it doesn't change the tonal balance if you use it correctly. It will only portray a 3D sound stage clearer, more immense in timing and emotion, and more delicacy in inner detail. This would be very little or difficult noticeable in a mid or lower high end system. But for my system which use 6 ways speaker like Quintessence Stealth SV, it is a huge improvement that can't get from doing other thing.

I think Esoteric is quite fair for their price, if you notice that DCS sell Verona 0.1ppm accuracy at USD 6,500 meanwhile Esoteric sell G-03X 0.1ppm accuracy at USD 3,500. Which one do you is more reasonable? Or you can buy much cheaper Apogee Big Ben at USD 2,000 with about 2-3 ppm accuracy.

I hope this will help you clarify your question!

videoht May 15, 2007 06:38

the 'Game' is on.

a year ago i challenged a gentleman over on the Vinyl board on audioasylum. he accepted my challenge. due to issues on my end (my daughter getting married) we delayed it a year.

read about it here

John Ellison stated many times that digital recordings properly made from a tt would be equal (and indistiguishable) from hearing the tt direct. i strongly disagree that any digital (whatever the source short of a digital master) can compete head to head with top vinyl.

i have purchased John's airplane ticket and he will be at my home Friday June 22nd and Saturday June 23rd for this 'test/showdown/exercise'. whatever the result it should be great fun.

John is a very knowledgable guy who knows his technical stuff. he is bringing all sorts of his test gear and recording gear. if you are a Vinyl Asylum regular you already know and respect John.

anyone who wants to show up and watch/listen/kabitz is welcome. i live in the Seattle area.

i am looking forward to learning alot. and i may just need to eat a bit of crow......or not.

stay tuned.

mikelavigne May 15, 2007 01:39

I don't know what the $US price will be on the Esoteric G-0Rb, or its accuracy.

FWIW-Antelope Audio's Isochrone 10M rubidium clock costs $2200 and is more accurate (+/- 0.03 ppb) than the $13K Esoteric G-0s (+/- 0.05 ppb). At this price, it's a no-brainer, or at least worth a test drive to push the envelope.

bigamp May 14, 2007 18:22

Dear Mikel, thank for interesting in Esoteric G-0Rb, here is the connection layout:
From CDSD to DAC6e, just connect ST-Glass Data out and ST-Glass Clock out to DAC6e as usual. And set the DAC6e clock switch to be "Ext" position on front panel. So, you use only 2 ST-Glass cable instead of 3 ST-Glass.

From Esoteric G-0Rb to CDSD, just connect one BNC 75 Ohm RG-11 Digital cable from A1 BNC output to BNC clock input on back of CDSD. And switch the clock input from "Opt" to "BNC", and switch to "75 Ohm" on back of CDSD. By doing this, the internal crystal oscillator of CDSD will synchronize to Esoteric G-0Rb clock signal, and the internal clock of DAC6e will synchonize to internal clock of CDSD which is now run at much more procision 0.00005ppm.

Oh, I forget to tell you that just set the "A" clock output to be 44.1 KHz only.

But if you use DCC2 instead of DAC6e, just connect only one ST-Glass data output from CDSD to DCC2. And connect the BNC clock signal cable from G-0Rb A1 BNC output to CDSD BNC clock input, and G-0Rb A2 BNC output to DCC2 BNC clock input. Don't forget to set the clock switch on front panel to be "BNC", and "EXT".

In theory, connect to DCC2 which clock out direct from G-0Rb to DCC2 should yield a slightly better result, but I haven't test it yet.

I hope you will have a chance to try it soon, but please be noted that it take about one week of continuous run before the Rubidium will extremely stable. So serious comparison should be started after one week. Like in my system, 3rd day is worst sound quality, after that it continue to improve more and more. And also, you can tune a speed, timing, impact, detail by changing the AC power cord, BNC clock cable, isolation base shelf. It has so much effect on sound quality which is very amazing for me because it is just only the clock signal with extremely precision clock inside.

I hope you will enjoy it like I do with Emmlabs equipment.

videoht May 14, 2007 17:13

Dear Stereoteipei,

Esoteric now still sell the VRDS-Neo mechanism as an OEM product, but it is quite expensive and you need to order it in a big volume like 30+ units. Now, DCS use this VRDS-Neo in their new top model transport. As I mention about the APL, actually they can base on Esoteric X-01SE, but they should have a new APL front plate design and their own brandname to differentiate their own product. Since, I believe in what they are doing which 60% is APL own design. That's all.

I agree with you on VRDS-Neo performance, that's why I would like to install the ST-Glass output of Emmlabs in Esoteric P-01 or P-03. And no need to modify the cap or power supply as their design is excellent.

I think it good for them to start their own DAC under APL brand. Frankly, I'm very admire David Heaton of Audio Synthesis as one of genius designer as I check their circuit design of Audio Synthesis DAX Discrete, it is very good design and he designed his own DAC chip which is totally different from Burr Brown or Analog Device. Their DAX Discrete is very good sound quality too. Last time I compare it side by side with Emmlabs CDSD and DAC6e, comparing to DAX Discrete and Esoteric P-0s, no one win, but each have their pros and cons, but one thing sure is that Emmlabs sound better on SACD playback.

Again nice to share some experience with you, Stereoteipei

videoht May 14, 2007 16:39