I have just connected my sonos zp90 via an optical cable (true colour industries coral) to a recently purchased spitfire DAC. The DAC outputs are connected to an ageing rotel 930 amp via AUX inputs. I must say i am at present underwhelmed to say the least. I am using lossless files via the sonos and it is nowhere near as good as the same tracks being played on my ageing arcam alpha one CDP (£300 when new). In fact there does not seem to be much difference as to when the ZP90 was connected directly to the Rotel amp. Am I expecting too much? Does the DAC need to be run in? Have I connected it correctly.
Spitfire 2 DAC - underwhelmed
- Thread starter Dan.m
- Start date
chebby
Well-known member
My first foray into DACs was with the Firestone Audio Fubar II (USB only).
I was using Apple Lossless at the time (into Arcam Solo-Mini and Rega R3 speakers).
It was certainly better sounding than the same music from CD playing on the Solo-Mini.
Then I upgraded the op-amp and added the Firestone Audio 'Supplier' PSU and a screened TM3 figure-of-eight mains lead (about £20). There were then no doubts at all of the DAC's superiority with Apple Lossless after the upgrades.
I was using Apple Lossless at the time (into Arcam Solo-Mini and Rega R3 speakers).
It was certainly better sounding than the same music from CD playing on the Solo-Mini.
Then I upgraded the op-amp and added the Firestone Audio 'Supplier' PSU and a screened TM3 figure-of-eight mains lead (about £20). There were then no doubts at all of the DAC's superiority with Apple Lossless after the upgrades.
Thanks chebby - I was expecting it to be at least as good as my CDP. Ive just experimented using the DAC followed by ZP90 alone directly into amp - I' m convinced there is no difference. The lights are on (DAC) but its as if the DAC is having no impact on the sound. Is the burr brown DAC in the spitfire being by-passed somehow (i know it sounds daft!) Could it be a faulty DAC. Would a coaxial connection be better than optical. I am a little gutted!
Messiah
Well-known member
The arcam CDP only has a coax digital out. I have a coax on order with father christmas - i wanted to compare one to the optical cable. I may try connecting the DAC to my sky box (SD) and TV (pana 42px80)- however, as i use the TV's own speakers i don't know how much of a detectable difference an external DAC would make.
Messiah
Well-known member
Does the Sky box or TV have analogue outputs?? If so you can do another comparison like you have with the Sonos.
If there is still no difference then something certainly seems amiss...
If there is still no difference then something certainly seems amiss...
From what I gather, DACs significantly change their character with time - leave it playing over Christmas (not joking). Since you're just running in the DAC you can have the amp on a very low volume, or through headphones. If you're going away, just leave it running until you get back.Then have a listen - let us know if you're not pleasantly surprised.
I imagine the power supply will help too but run the DAC in continously first before you buy that, otherwise you won't appreciate the upgrade as much.
I imagine the power supply will help too but run the DAC in continously first before you buy that, otherwise you won't appreciate the upgrade as much.
The sky has an opitcal out which i connect to the DAC - I assume I then connect the DAC outputs (RCA phonos) to the analogue inputs on the TV. Is this correct? Would the TV then use the spitfire DAC rather than its internal DAC/soundcard
Messiah
Well-known member
Yes, I guess, but you would be limited by the TVs speakers.
I would connect the Sky box to the DAC and then the DAC to the Amp.
As far as the comparison is concerned what I meant was compare the set-up I have listed above to just running the Sky Box to the Amp with the analogue connections (taking the DAC out of the equation) and then judge if it makes a difference. Running in may help but personally I am not a great believer in this.
So the comparison is:
Sky Box - optical - DAC - analogue - Amp
Sky Box - analogue - Amp
I would connect the Sky box to the DAC and then the DAC to the Amp.
As far as the comparison is concerned what I meant was compare the set-up I have listed above to just running the Sky Box to the Amp with the analogue connections (taking the DAC out of the equation) and then judge if it makes a difference. Running in may help but personally I am not a great believer in this.
So the comparison is:
Sky Box - optical - DAC - analogue - Amp
Sky Box - analogue - Amp
I see what you mean. I'll try it tomorrow. By the way how do you find the AVI speakers. Do you use the AVI internal DAC and the beresford??
You don't have to be a "believer" (as in, this phenomenon doesn't exist but wouldn't it be nice if it did) - there are many references, in reviews and by manfacturers themselves (e.g. Steve Beresford) that DACs such as Beresford Caiman need several days' use before they're at their best, and then benefit from being permanently switched on. The sound quality of the Spitfire Audio in question has the hallmarks of a fresh out of the box unit. I don't see why it isn't worth a go - especially if away over Christmas, then the comparison on returning can't just be "getting used to the sound" - it's either improved since you've been away or not.
Will be interesting to hear the results of the recommended test through TV speakers all the same.
(PS. I'm not trying to start a heated debate a la cables here, just pointing out that this is a generally accepted fact, however it occurs).
Will be interesting to hear the results of the recommended test through TV speakers all the same.
(PS. I'm not trying to start a heated debate a la cables here, just pointing out that this is a generally accepted fact, however it occurs).
Messiah
Well-known member
You see I said I was not a great believer
I think certain items (speakers for example) will change over time but I think the greater influence on electronics is getting used to the sound. Maybe once they have warmed up a bit the character will change.
Still that is a debate for another time and for others to discuss.
I think certain items (speakers for example) will change over time but I think the greater influence on electronics is getting used to the sound. Maybe once they have warmed up a bit the character will change.
Still that is a debate for another time and for others to discuss.
Messiah
Well-known member
Dan.m:I see what you mean. I'll try it tomorrow. By the way how do you find the AVI speakers. Do you use the AVI internal DAC and the beresford??
AVI speakers (particularly the 9.1s) are stunning but I will let you do a search to see how discussions over them usually end up!
I use both the Beresford DAC and Internal DAC but obviously not at the same time.
There are various reasons I have the Beresford such as expanding on the inputs, headphone output and better volume control.
My Onkyo dock and PS3 is connected directly to the speakers whilst my TV, DVD player and Laptop are connected to the Beresford and this in turn is connected to the Analogue inputs on the ADMs.
AVI speakers (particularly the 9.1s) are stunning but I will let you do a search to see how discussions over them usually end up!
I use both the Beresford DAC and Internal DAC but obviously not at the same time.
There are various reasons I have the Beresford such as expanding on the inputs, headphone output and better volume control.
My Onkyo dock and PS3 is connected directly to the speakers whilst my TV, DVD player and Laptop are connected to the Beresford and this in turn is connected to the Analogue inputs on the ADMs.
left the DAC running overnight and still not convinced it is 'adding'anything to the ZP90. I have connected my laptop to the DAC via usb cable and there is a little diffrence. However, I am unclear if this difference is down to the USB connection compared to the headphone socket i normally use to connect my laptop to amp (3.5mm - 2 RCA phono) rather than the DAC improving the sound. I will try a coax cable tomorrow otherwise its going back to russ andrews.
The_Lhc
Well-known member
I'd be amazed if you don't hear a difference between using the headphone socket from the laptop and a USB connection, I've always found the headphone socket to be the worst of all connections.
ihc - I agree, there was a difference when i connected the laptop via usb....... but I don't know if the DAC is contributing to the improvement or if it is just an improvement due to the superior usb connection
The_Lhc
Well-known member
Dan.m:
ihc - I agree, there was a difference when i connected the laptop via usb....... but I don't know if the DAC is contributing to the improvement or if it is just an improvement due to the superior usb connection
I don't think you can split the two to be honest, unless your amp can accept a USB connection (I'm guessing not). All the USB connection is doing is shifting the DAC stage from inside the laptop to outside it, so you are comparing the two DAC processes directly. Without a better analogue connection from the laptop you haven't got anything else to go on, the addition of a DAC has changed the sound, that's all you can determine. You just need to decide whether you like the change or not.
ihc - I agree, there was a difference when i connected the laptop via usb....... but I don't know if the DAC is contributing to the improvement or if it is just an improvement due to the superior usb connection
I don't think you can split the two to be honest, unless your amp can accept a USB connection (I'm guessing not). All the USB connection is doing is shifting the DAC stage from inside the laptop to outside it, so you are comparing the two DAC processes directly. Without a better analogue connection from the laptop you haven't got anything else to go on, the addition of a DAC has changed the sound, that's all you can determine. You just need to decide whether you like the change or not.
Yes, the headphone out from any laptop into an amp is always an awful sound - so much so that I gave up ages ago (now able to use USB cable to Cyrus Qx module DAC, much better!). Given you've now run it overnight and nothing has changed (though as I said, they talk about DAYS of constant use for full performance, if you can believe it), maybe sending it back to Julie Andrews is the best option - you must have got it for the intro price anyway, would you consider getting the power supply (makes total cost same as full RRP of Spitfire II)? Or another DAC maybe?
One last thought - Do i have to 'tell' the ZP90 to output via the optical out, i assumed it did this automatically
SteveR750
Well-known member
You would have expected there to be a big difference between the PC sound card and the Spitfire....there certainly is between either of my PCs and the dacmagic...
Still having no joy with the spitfire DAC. I have just completed another comparison using sony 370 blu ray player as a source. I would certainly expect the spitfire to improve or at least change the sound.
sony 370 - rca phonos (chord crimson plus) - rotel amp - B&W601's
sony370 - TCI coral optical - Spitfire DAC - rca (chord crimson plus) - rotel amp - 601's
There is no difference whatsoever between the two. Obviously the signal is passing through the DAC but the burr brown does not appear to have any bearing on the sound. I started to question my ears but I have other people confirm my observations. They all agreed - including agreeing the arcam alpha one CDP was superior to the sonos zp 90 and sony 370 with or without the DAC. Anyone else purchased a spitfire recently - what do you think?
sony 370 - rca phonos (chord crimson plus) - rotel amp - B&W601's
sony370 - TCI coral optical - Spitfire DAC - rca (chord crimson plus) - rotel amp - 601's
There is no difference whatsoever between the two. Obviously the signal is passing through the DAC but the burr brown does not appear to have any bearing on the sound. I started to question my ears but I have other people confirm my observations. They all agreed - including agreeing the arcam alpha one CDP was superior to the sonos zp 90 and sony 370 with or without the DAC. Anyone else purchased a spitfire recently - what do you think?
Dan,
i too took the DAC plunge; attracted by the original spitfire review and the intro offer on the new version.
Sadly, my experience so far mirrors yours
. I have a 20yr old marantz cd player and matching amp. My speakers are 'vintage' tannoy603s. I realise none of this is cutting edge technology, but i like the warm yet clear sound. I recently became a sonos convert
, so now connect a zp90 to marantz.
At first i connected sonos to amp using analogue, as the amp has no digi inputs. I was distinctly unimpressed by the sonos (apple lossless) compared to cd playback. I then invested in better interconnects, and the sonos came very close to the cd sound; at a push i might say the sonos lacked a little excitement but in a blind test i would struggle to seperate them.
That then got me on the road to a 'better sound'
, and intrigued by the DAC craze I assumed that a 21st century dac should beat my aging marantz player and also boost the sonos.
As far as i can make out, the dac makes no audible difference to either my cd player or the ZP90. I appreciate it might need some running in, and as it doesn't impare the system i have left it in place. I will try another back to back trial in a few weeks, but at present it has left me a bit bemused by the current vogue for dacs.
keep us informed of your progress
i too took the DAC plunge; attracted by the original spitfire review and the intro offer on the new version.
Sadly, my experience so far mirrors yours
At first i connected sonos to amp using analogue, as the amp has no digi inputs. I was distinctly unimpressed by the sonos (apple lossless) compared to cd playback. I then invested in better interconnects, and the sonos came very close to the cd sound; at a push i might say the sonos lacked a little excitement but in a blind test i would struggle to seperate them.
That then got me on the road to a 'better sound'
As far as i can make out, the dac makes no audible difference to either my cd player or the ZP90. I appreciate it might need some running in, and as it doesn't impare the system i have left it in place. I will try another back to back trial in a few weeks, but at present it has left me a bit bemused by the current vogue for dacs.
keep us informed of your progress
I struggle to tell much difference between the DACs in various kit. I compared my £99 DVD player on CD playback to that of my £1,100 Musical Fidelity XRay 8 and there was very little difference. It has been suggested that the difference is attributable to the more complex electronics in the DVD player impacting the overall result, i.e. general circuit implementation, sheilding, etc, etc.
My experience has led me to focus more on the speakers and amplification. I know the mantra, source first, but sources (digital, can't speak for analogue) are so good these days that it's hard to go wrong (unless a manufacturer has decided to colour the sound of their kit in a certain way to make it difficult to match up). The huge variations in software (music) production quality makes it even harder to justify losing sleep over the minute differences between DACs too.
Amps and their speaker matching hasn't been 'solved' in quite the same way as the digital source, and my experiences have shown me that a lot is lost if this bit isn't dealt with adequately. When I say 'solved', I'm referring in part to the fact that we have to make decisions about matching speakers and amps that others have designed. All this within real world budgets.
My experience has led me to focus more on the speakers and amplification. I know the mantra, source first, but sources (digital, can't speak for analogue) are so good these days that it's hard to go wrong (unless a manufacturer has decided to colour the sound of their kit in a certain way to make it difficult to match up). The huge variations in software (music) production quality makes it even harder to justify losing sleep over the minute differences between DACs too.
Amps and their speaker matching hasn't been 'solved' in quite the same way as the digital source, and my experiences have shown me that a lot is lost if this bit isn't dealt with adequately. When I say 'solved', I'm referring in part to the fact that we have to make decisions about matching speakers and amps that others have designed. All this within real world budgets.
Interesting comments guys. What gets me is that i would expect the spitfire DAC to change the sound even if its for the worse! - unless of course the sony 370, ZP90 and arcam alpha one has exactly the same burr brown DAC. Otherwise all I conclude is that DAC's do not make a difference (which I do not think is the case!). I am a little stumped by it all. However, I will try the new Rega DAC on home demo as I think the ZP90 is crying out for a DAC. By the way Russ Andrews have been great and are more than happy to refund me - good service
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Ortofon m2 black sibilance cartridge or stylus? or something else
- Started by speedthing
- Replies: 73
-
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram