DacMagic VS same priced cd-player

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the What HiFi community: the world's leading independent guide to buying and owning hi-fi and home entertainment products.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
stringo:
It seems most people who use computer-based music use an Airport Express or Squeezebox, but I'm not convinced my wireless internet is reliable enough for this. Would a laptop connected to a DACmagic via of these (see link below) do the trick? Would such a cheap connection diminish sound quality?

Thanks in advance for advice.

http://www.maplin.co.uk/module.aspx?moduleno=34128

Well the DACMagic has a USB connection anyway so that is superfluous, I'd say.
 
So you just connect your laptop to the DACmagic via USB and then the DACmagic to your stereo amp via phono cables and you're away?
 
stringo:So you just connect your laptop to the DACmagic via USB and then the DACmagic to your stereo amp via phono cables and you're away?

So does the computer "see" the DACmagic is another soundcard? If so does that mean you could use it with cubase etc? Are there ASIO drivers or does it not work like that?
 
mattc76:stringo:So you just connect your laptop to the DACmagic via USB and then the DACmagic to your stereo amp via phono cables and you're away?

So does the computer "see" the DACmagic is another soundcard? If so does that mean you could use it with cubase etc? Are there ASIO drivers or does it not work like that?

Don't know about ASIO as I have a Mac and am not using it with USB anyway, but I think it installs as a soundcard under windows without extra drivers. It has no aduio inputs though so couldn't be used as an input interface for Cubase, if that's what you're thinking?
 
I dont want to be reading this thread after recently buying a roksan cdp! I might have to get my self one of these dacmagic fellas.....just a shame that sony havnt enabled lossloss on the ps3
 
Today i just tried this dacmagic on a yamaha surround receiver in stereo mode.

And i must warn people, don't but this for a surround receiver as the sound will be a bit holdback and not so revealing when i compared it with a straight digital source.

Off coursse if you have a pure analogue stereo amp, then you can't go digital and then you got to have a dac for your music files to be able to play them with good quality.
 
RCduck7:
Today i just tried this dacmagicÿon a yamaha surround receiver in stereo mode.

And i must warn people, don't but this for a surround receiver as the sound will be a bit holdback and not so revealing when i compared it with a straight digital source.

Off coursse if you have a pure analogue stereo amp, then youÿcan't go digital and then you got to haveÿa dac for your music files to be able to play them with good quality.ÿÿ

Not sure I understand this. What source were you using?ÿ
 
Octopo:RCduck7:

Today i just tried this dacmagic on a yamaha surround receiver in stereo mode.

And i must warn people, don't but this for a surround receiver as the sound will be a bit holdback and not so revealing when i compared it with a straight digital source.

Off coursse if you have a pure analogue stereo amp, then you can't go digital and then you got to have a dac for your music files to be able to play them with good quality.

Not sure I understand this. What source were you using?

Different sources, with original CD's on a cd player straight digital versus digital+dacmagic (hard to hear difference) and with a mediaplayer digital versus digital+dacmagic.

With the mediaplayer with MP3's i found straight digital better but of coursse original data from cd (wav) is better then flac (loslees files) or mp3 for sure.

The dacmagic is as good if not better then the dac in the cd player analogue (marantz CD6000OSE).

But as i said neither the dacmagic or cd player through analogue is better through my yamaha 640RDS.
 
RCduck7:Octopo:RCduck7:

Today i just tried this dacmagic on a yamaha surround receiver in stereo mode.

And i must warn people, don't but this for a surround receiver as the sound will be a bit holdback and not so revealing when i compared it with a straight digital source.

Off coursse if you have a pure analogue stereo amp, then you can't go digital and then you got to have a dac for your music files to be able to play them with good quality.

Not sure I understand this. What source were you using?

Different sources, with original CD's on a cd player straight digital versus digital+dacmagic (hard to hear difference) and with a mediaplayer digital versus digital+dacmagic.

With the mediaplayer with MP3's i found straight digital better but of coursse original data from cd (wav) is better then flac (loslees files) or mp3 for sure.

The dacmagic is as good if not better then the dac in the cd player analogue (marantz CD6000OSE).

But as i said neither the dacmagic or cd player through analogue is better through my yamaha 640RDS.

I'm not sure I get what you are saying. First of all wav files from a cd is lossless data. Flac files are lossless data. One is not better than the other. Are you saying you connected your digital source to your Yamaha with digital cables and then the DacMagic to your digital source with digital cables and then to the Yamaha with analogue cables and the first way was better? That surprises me. At the end of the day you will get more out of the DM with a stereo amp than a receiver but that still surprises me.

All I can say is that on my system, the DM is brilliant and not a little bit better than a budget cd player but a lot better (especially when used with my pc).
 
RCduck7:
Different sources, with original CD's on a cd player straight digital versus digital+dacmagic (hard to hear difference)ÿand with a mediaplayer digital versus digital+dacmagic.

With the mediaplayer with MP3's i found straight digital better but of coursse original data from cd (wav) is better then flac (loslees files) or mp3 for sure.

ÿ

As Gerrard said you shouldn't be able to hear a difference between WAV and FLAC.ÿ

RCduck7:ÿ

The dacmagic is as good if not better then the dac in the cd player analogueÿ(marantz CD6000OSE).

But as i said neither the dacmagic or cd player through analogue is better through my yamaha 640RDS.

By straight digital do you mean media player > digital cable > Receiver? Are you saying the DM doesn't add anything compared to the receivers onboard conversion?

ÿ

ÿ
 
hi fi newbie:hi gerrard what cd player were you using before the DAC Magic?

I originally had a Denon DCD-700AE which was decent for the £250 range. I then bought an Arcam FMJ DV27A which, although a dvd player (£2k original rrp), is very highly rated as a cd player and dvd audio player.
 
I really wish I had not been told about the Dac Magic lol, the rca phono lead in total would have to be some 6 metres long or so to around the skirting boards and plus i am not sure if you can get long USB cables either as the DAC magic would be sitting fairly high up compared to the pc.
 
If if you can't use optical or an AE I would buy a long shielded USB cable rather than RCA which are not designed for long runs. SCAN computers probably around your cheapest bet.
 
hi fi newbie:

I really wish I had not been told about the Dac Magic lol, the rca phono lead in total would have to be some 6 metres long or so to around the skirting boards and plus i am not sure if you can get long USB cables either as the DAC magic would be sitting fairly high up compared to the pc.

What amp and speakers are you using? It would be easier to have the DM sitting next to/on top of the amp so you only need a short set of RCA cables. And as Octopo says, you can get an Airport Express for £60 or so which would mean no long usb cable.
 
Thanks I didn't even know what an airport express was until i just searched on yahoo lol. Yeah you are right, it's better to just have the DAC sitting by the amp although I haven't got an issue with long USB cables, having said tht i don't know how if you can get them particularly long.

My amp is a NAD C352 and my speakers are Monitor Audio BR2's
 
Of course its even better if you do like I do and have a squeezebox connected by a Cat5 cable (nice and thin and hideable)...

No dropouts form Wifi and no crazy length RCA or USB leads. It all goes down a cheap as chips Cat5, and comes out the other end like the sound of angels dancing on a bed of rose petals...or something.ÿ
 
I'm clueless on how most people say how the dacmagic makes a difference.

A friend of mine who is really nerdy about these things was testing this dacmagic in any way posssible and can't hear a thing different about the sound on my setup "Mark Levinson Red Rose" by "Dussun" model V8i, or the setups he has.

He has B&W Nautilus 802 speakers which is about the best money can buy, high end NAD and ROTEL equipment a yamaha stereo amp in his kitchen with monitor audio's and even decent hifi in his bathroom with AE speakers.

He tested in every possible way with an older cd player analogue versus digital+dacmagic, digital versus digital+dacmagic and in many other combinations with all the equipment he has and can't hear a difference!

He managed through his laptop with wav files and managed to get 92 khz upsampling out of the unit through USB but this time the sound was a little to sharp, not so good.

He even tried with good headphones and he says it doesn't do a thing.

It's hard to believe for me and the orther guy that anyone is hearing a remarkable difference.

But also the CD player i borrowed " marantz CD6000OSE" which not be the best money can buy but should be decent isn't making a difference between digital versus analogue with a good pair of interconnects.

Very strange, i would say the hifi is to high end for this stuff to make a differnce but since he was trying it on different equipment from different price classes that doesn't hold true.

From our experience we agreed we heared very much improvement in quality with good speakers, pre amps, power amps and a good recording but not that much with kind of source we were using, either digital or dac.
 
Yes, I'm still not clear on how you've tested the various scenarios, but as documented already connecting a DACMagic to a reasonable CD player has not given me any benefits - it's the ability to use error-corrected, lossless music from my PC which has beaten the same player. Of course, this could be done with any DAC, including one in an AV receiver, and I would expect the differences between those DACs to be smaller.

I have long been of the view that incremental upgrades in digital source (ie CD players) give you marginal benefits, and it's only since Cyrus worked out a new way to read CDs that the ante has been upped - it's here that a PC can begin match the best CD transports.
 
So would I hear strong benefits even with the cheaper Beresford or not?
 
Gerrardasnails:"He even tried with good headphones and he says it doesn't do a thing." He should try getting his ears syringed.

How did you test it?? Could you switch between channels emidiately to compare??

If you were using it to compare with old cd player analogue then off coursse you hear difference, but between digital and dacmagic??

Also, i you were listening to music on a HDD or mediaplayer that has analogue outputs (has a mediocre dac), then you will have very bad sound, but you shouldn't compare it that way.
 
RCduck7:
If you were using it to compareÿwith old cd player analogue then off coursse you hear difference, but between digital and dacmagic??

It would be more interesting if you could explain "digital" a little better? Equipment used to get "digital" sound?ÿ
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

V
Advice for а CD player
Replies
40
Views
2K
Hi-Fi
RoA
R
Pier90
Question Tips to complete my Hi-Fi (Yamaha A-S300 Amplifier, Bose E201 Speaker, Pro-ject RPM 1.3 Genie turntable) with a cd player and a bluetooth connector.
Replies
7
Views
871
Hi-Fi
Fandango Andy
Fandango Andy
Azulan
No sound from Preamp
Replies
23
Views
1K
Hi-Fi
Azulan
Azulan
T
Dedicated streamer or
Replies
3
Views
619
Hi-Fi
Revolutions
Revolutions
S
Advice new hifi system
Replies
28
Views
2K
Hi-Fi
landco
landco

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom