Just for your information...

[Rob.S.Esquire]

At least one of those DACs is a Texas Instruments one (Burr Brown was bought by TI). Maybe all this means is that Musical Fidelity tends to sound similar to Marantz. Two headphone amps and three sources from 2 manufacturers and all around the same price/quality.

I would be interested to give this a shot myself but I think it is too far a grasp to make broad conclusions about CD players and DAC based on three comparisons. Someone please send the OP a NAIM CD5 XS or similar and then we can try this again.

 

[steve_1979]

Ah right, so you can spot the difference immediately, easily and obviously with a 320kbps rip and a CD or WAV file then?

No.

Using different audio file types won't change the volume level, the dynamic range range or have an effect like a graphic equalizer.

What you were seeing with that ABBA song is probably just two different versions that have been mastered to sound different to each other.

 

[GMK]

In my experience, they certainly don't all sound the same. Switching directly between (same amp/interconnects) my Rotel RCD850 and my (modified) Marantz CD63KI, there's a wealth of difference. The Rotel is cleaner, with more detail and a wider soundstage, but lacks the punch, warmth and attack of the Marantz. Pink Floyd's 3 track "Brick in the wall" sounds flat and uninvolving on the Rotel, but comes alive with the Marantz.

 

[steve_1979]

.

 

[steve_1979]

Is it possible Spotify has a built in EQ? You could always compare the file outputs using something like Audacity (If you could be bothered).

Sounds like a job for steve_1979.

Oh well if you insist. :rofl:

Below are the CD vs Spotify results for for the song 'Dancing Queen' by ABBA.

I recorded the track from Spotify using my PCs sound driver software but I'm not to sure how accurate it is because the volume level was increased on this version for some reason so it's best to take these results with a pinch of salt as they may not be correct. The 'set same volume level for all tracks' setting was switched off in Spotify during the recording BTW.

I volume matched the Spotify and CD versions of the song in Audacity to make it as fair a comparison as possible and as you can see they have some very noticable differences between them.

These wave comparisons show that the Spotify version of the track has a reduced dynamic range compared to the CD version.

Spotify Version

CD version

Below is a frequency analysis which would show if there was any graphic equaliser modification on the Spotify version. The most noticable difference is that the highest frequencies on the CD version are 1kHz higher than the Spotify version but as this is occuring at 21kHz this difference wouldn't be audiable to humans. There are some other very slight variations between them but my guess is that this is due to the differences in dynamic range rather than graphic equaliser modification but it's hard to tell and I'm not an expert.

Spotify version

CD version

 

[steve_1979]

Here's the Spotify vs CD comparison for the song 'Superstition' by Stevie Wonder.

With this song the volume level and dynamic range are a match so this is a good indication that both the Spotify and CD tracks are from the same master version of the song (unlike the ABBA tracks on page 3 which are probably two differently mastered versions).

Again with this one the highest frequencies on the CD version are 1kHz higher than the Spotify version but as before this is occuring at 21kHz so this difference wouldn't be audiable to humans. Apart from that there are some very slight variations between them but they're almost identical to each other.

Based on these results I'd say it's doubtful that Spotify uses a graphic equalizer to modifiy the sound.

Spotify version

CD version

 

[BigH]

In my experience, they certainly don't all sound the same. Switching directly between (same amp/interconnects) my Rotel RCD850 and my (modified) Marantz CD63KI, there's a wealth of difference. The Rotel is cleaner, with more detail and a wider soundstage, but lacks the punch, warmth and attack of the Marantz. Pink Floyd's 3 track "Brick in the wall" sounds flat and uninvolving on the Rotel, but comes alive with the Marantz.

But is that the dac or the transport. I think there are difference when I demo Arcam v Marantz the Marantz was far better.

I tried Spotify and Rdio v MArantz 63SE and I could not tell the difference.

Going forward I will buy a Blu-ray dvd player.

 

[steve_1979]

Ooops.

There was an error with the Spotify recordings that I made last night. They had the high frequencies above 17.5kHz cut off because of a setting that was used in the sound driver recording software. I have now re-recorded them using the correct settings and updated the two posts with the pictures in them which now show the correct results.

Take these frequency analysis results with a pinch of salt though because I'm still unsure of how accurate the PCs sound driver software is at recording (it has to convert the Spotify ogg vorbis file to whatever MS Windows uses and I think it also gets resampled by Windows too. Once this is done the sound driver recording software converts it to a WAV file for analysis in Audacity).

 

[seasiders rock]

Straight to the bottom of the page, you must be mutt and jeff.

I have 2 Audio Analogue CDP in the rack, Rossini VT REV 2, and a Maestro, the first of the big box Maestro.(2001)

The Maestro uses a Philips VAM / VAL1250 loader, laser.

Spares are non existant, Philips stopped producing lasers. Before any one starts, yes you can buy VAM1250 lasers on E Bay, there carp, cheap knock offs and they dont work. You have to use an original VAM 1250

OK. I had to replace the laser in the Maestro and the only way to replace was to find a suitable doner machine.

Marantz DR4050, twin deck recorder from about 2003, about £350 when new, the Maestro in 2001 was aprox £1800. :O

Deck one uses a Vam 1250, whats in the Marantz is in the Maestro, same laser, loader, it,s all stock Philips.

Sound the same, right, no they dont, down to DACS, power supply ,components, even the other half can spot the difference, the Maestro is on another planet compared to the Marantz.

 

[Overdose]

Straight to the bottom of the page, you must be mutt and jeff.

I have 2 Audio Analogue CDP in the rack, Rossini VT REV 2, and a Maestro, the first of the big box Maestro.(2001)

The Maestro uses a Philips VAM / VAL1250 loader, laser.

Spares are non existant, Philips stopped producing lasers. Before any one starts, yes you can buy VAM1250 lasers on E Bay, there carp, cheap knock offs and they dont work. You have to use an original VAM 1250

OK. I had to replace the laser in the Maestro and the only way to replace was to find a suitable doner machine.

Marantz DR4050, twin deck recorder from about 2003, about £350 when new, the Maestro in 2001 was aprox £1800. :O

Deck one uses a Vam 1250, whats in the Marantz is in the Maestro, same laser, loader, it,s all stock Philips.

Sound the same, right, no they dont, down to DACS, power supply ,components, even the other half can spot the difference, the Maestro is on another planet compared to the Marantz.

Two such different sounding digital sources are either specifically designed to sound so, or are compromised by design or defect. There really should not be any major audible difference between digital sources.

The clue is in the name of the hobby, 'hi-fi' for high fidelity, at least one of your CD players is most certainly not if it sounds so different from the other.

 

[tounra]

Ok, I am a fool, I'll admit it.

There are differences between the V-DAC MKII and my Marantz CD5000 and CD6000KI. But the funny thing is that this is more audible with (very) simple material. With complex orchestral works from the likes of Mahler or Bartok or busy over-produced pop the only difference I perceive is a tad more texture in the lows, in favour of the CD5000 (which was criticized at the time for the lack of bass in most magazines, which is funny), the CD6000KI and the V-DAC are similar, not to say identical, maybe the CD6000KI has more bass bloom.

But with simple material, like the slow movements of Bach's Brandenburg concertos, where only a violin, recorder and clavecin play the V-DAC has the edge over the CD5000 and CD6000KI in that the sound has more body (weight) and warmth, and is softer overall. Especially the CD5000 sounds more delicate, you could say 'cleaner', or 'empty' in comparison. With very good recordings the CD5000 can have the edge because the bass is more textured, but overall the V-DAC has the better sound, in my opinion.

So there you have it. I may be imagining all this, but who cares?

 

[CnoEvil]

Ok, I am a fool, I'll admit it.

There are differences between the V-DAC MKII and my Marantz CD5000 and CD6000KI. But the funny thing is that this is more audible with (very) simple material. With complex orchestral works from the likes of Mahler or Bartok or busy over-produced pop the only difference I perceive is a tad more texture in the lows, in favour of the CD5000 (which was criticized at the time for the lack of bass in most magazines, which is funny), the CD6000KI and the V-DAC are similar, not to say identical, maybe the CD6000KI has more bass bloom.

But with simple material, like the slow movements of Bach's Brandenburg concertos, where only a violin, recorder and clavecin play the V-DAC has the edge over the CD5000 and CD6000KI in that the sound has more body (weight) and warmth, and is softer overall. Especially the CD5000 sounds more delicate, you could say 'cleaner', or 'empty' in comparison. With very good recordings the CD5000 can have the edge because the bass is more textured, but overall the V-DAC has the better sound, in my opinion.

So there you have it. I may be imagining all this, but who cares?

if you are a fool, you are not on your own.........count me in.

 

[Jame5]

Straight to the bottom of the page, you must be mutt and jeff.

I have 2 Audio Analogue CDP in the rack, Rossini VT REV 2, and a Maestro, the first of the big box Maestro.(2001)

The Maestro uses a Philips VAM / VAL1250 loader, laser.

Spares are non existant, Philips stopped producing lasers. Before any one starts, yes you can buy VAM1250 lasers on E Bay, there carp, cheap knock offs and they dont work. You have to use an original VAM 1250

OK. I had to replace the laser in the Maestro and the only way to replace was to find a suitable doner machine.

Marantz DR4050, twin deck recorder from about 2003, about £350 when new, the Maestro in 2001 was aprox £1800. :O

Deck one uses a Vam 1250, whats in the Marantz is in the Maestro, same laser, loader, it,s all stock Philips.

Sound the same, right, no they dont, down to DACS, power supply ,components, even the other half can spot the difference, the Maestro is on another planet compared to the Marantz.

Two such different sounding digital sources are either specifically designed to sound so, or are compromised by design or defect. There really should not be any major audible difference between digital sources.

The clue is in the name of the hobby, 'hi-fi' for high fidelity, at least one of your CD players is most certainly not if it sounds so different from the other.

Not quite as black and white as that imo. There are degrees of fidelity to the recording (apply the same logic to speakers) and also tonal character is not inconsistent with high degree of fidelity.