Bunch of audio “experts” select their BEST products. Fun! What do you think?

From my experience, a good transport is hard to beat. If I'll ever go computer audio *), I'll invest in it heavily, with a top-range dedicated server rather than just a computer.

This is an incorrect assumption that many are making, that a server is somehow a lot better than any old computer and a DAC with the right interface on it.

There is certainly an argument to be made that when using USB, that the right server can be a big improvement over a computer, particularly one that has not been optimized for the best USB playback. I agree with this, and servers such as Antipodes and Aurender N10 deliver on this.

However, the highest performance interfaces are now Ethernet, so the requirement for an optimized server is no longer required. Any old computer is quite sufficient to deliver even better sound quality than the best USB.

My company have developed 6 generations of USB interfaces and now offers Ethernet. Identical designs using XMOS USB and Ethernet demonstrate the superiority of Ethernet.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
 
And I believe this is generally the way of the world right now . Superstar brands - and the experiences they help provide- is what it's all about. Lebron, steph curry, and Kevin Durant in the NBA. Superhero movie and Star Wars franchises in Hollywood; Hollywood competitors are working to create its own franchises like sex in the city, house of cards, shameless....Crosby, ovechkin, and Kane in hockey....Domingo and Bocelli in the opera world.... lady Gaga and jay z....Magico, Wilson, arc, and macintosh in high end audio.

Quite true, unfortunately. Most people are not savvy enough to understand the brands that get the most air time on TV are there because they are simply not good enough to sell themselves on their own merits. Unlike most people, I buy very few big brand names of anything and I don't care if Lady Gaga likes it or not. Same with the big guys advertising audio equipment. If you have to advertise so much, the product cannot be that great. Really great products are sold by word of mouth. The masses seem to respond to advertising. I am the exception I guess.

I have only advertised my products twice in 15 years, once in Stereophile and once in TAS. The effect was minimal if not insignificant. The money I save on advertising, marketing and the lack of capital loans allows me to charge less for my products. I weathered the recession just fine. I never had any goal of being high-volume anyway. I would end up managing all the time and never have time to do the fun design work. My ulterior motive is to have great sounding stuff in my own audio and video systems without spending a fortune.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
 
Last edited:
This is an incorrect assumption that many are making, that a server is somehow a lot better than any old computer and a DAC with the right interface on it.

There is certainly an argument to be made that when using USB, that the right server can be a big improvement over a computer, particularly one that has not been optimized for the best USB playback. I agree with this, and servers such as Antipodes and Aurender N10 deliver on this.

However, the highest performance interfaces are now Ethernet, so the requirement for an optimized server is no longer required. Any old computer is quite sufficient to deliver even better sound quality than the best USB.

My company have developed 6 generations of USB interfaces and now offers Ethernet. Identical designs using XMOS USB and Ethernet demonstrate the superiority of Ethernet.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

Don't worry, Steve, a USB server was never on my mind. I have a strong antipathy against the very idea of USB and would never consider it. I am thinking more about something like a Baetis server/streamer with AES/EBU interface. Same one as connecting now my transport to my DAC.
 
Don't worry, Steve, a USB server was never on my mind. I have a strong antipathy against the very idea of USB and would never consider it. I am thinking more about something like a Baetis server/streamer with AES/EBU interface. Same one as connecting now my transport to my DAC.

That is the problem I'm talking about. The servers I have used and heard are not great using their own S/PDIF or AES/EBU outputs. The jitter of these outputs is not even as low as using external USB converter or USB DAC.

It's better to get a DAC that has the Ethernet interface in it so it goes directly Ethernet -> I2S -> D/A

If you must use your own DAC, then I believe it would be better to use an external Ethernet to S/PDIF or AES converter.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
 
Don't worry, Steve, a USB server was never on my mind. I have a strong antipathy against the very idea of USB and would never consider it. I am thinking more about something like a Baetis server/streamer with AES/EBU interface. Same one as connecting now my transport to my DAC.

Did you consider the excellent Berkeley Audio USB - AES/EBU converter? I am very pleased with it.
 
Did you consider the excellent Berkeley Audio USB - AES/EBU converter? I am very pleased with it.

This is a good converter. I designed a similar one. The problem lies not in the converter, but in the computer, computer software, computer power supply and USB port as well as the playback software and audio stack. Many variables with USB to optimize compared to Ethernet.

I have spent years optimizing my computer, OS, playback software, power supplies and cabling for USB. It is really good now, but even after all of this work, my Ethernet interface via WIFI is better, a lot better. The clocking and output circuit designs on the USB and Ethernet interfaces are identical. The problem with USB is all of these other impediments IME. It's the hoops one must jump through to get stellar sound with USB, or alternately the really expensive servers you must buy.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
 
That is the problem I'm talking about. The servers I have used and heard are not great using their own S/PDIF or AES/EBU outputs. The jitter of these outputs is not even as low as using external USB converter or USB DAC.

It's better to get a DAC that has the Ethernet interface in it so it goes directly Ethernet -> I2S -> D/A

If you must use your own DAC, then I believe it would be better to use an external Ethernet to S/PDIF or AES converter.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

Do you have experience with Baetis servers and measured them? They specialize in running the signal to the DAC through the AES/EBU interface; in fact, if I am not mistaken, this is the only interface these servers offer.

EDIT: just looked it up, and I was wrong:

https://baetisaudio.com/How_we_make_the_best_possible_audio.php

They also offer USB 3.0 outputs (NOT preferred) and ethernet in /ethernet out.

Yet they do say:

a) The SPDIF and AES inputs into a DAC sound the very best, provided that the DAC designers have kept up with the changes in audiophile computers.

b) AES does beat SPDIF, which in turn beats, by a lot, any USB input on a DAC.

And:

e) In some very newest brands and models of DAC, the DAC was designed to sound best by sending the computer file direct to the DAC via an Ethernet port on the DAC.

This seems to imply that they don't think ethernet is the best solution in all cases as connection to the DAC.

However:

But Ethernet is also the best way of downloading hi-def files to the computer (the Baetis); or using JRiver™ or Roon™ software to stream the great slide show of the band members in their private lives, while listening to the music. Therefore, most of our Baetis models have two Ethernet ports, not just one. One Ethernet port takes signals from the internet (streaming), or accesses a computer file from a Network Attached Storage (NAS) device, while the other Ethernet port sends the perfectly bit-streamed audio file to the DAC.
 
Last edited:
Hi Caesar,

A few thoughts on your comments.

1. Audio Research has consistently provided me great sound so I am baffled by your view on the brand. One of the best systems in recent memory was the ARC Ref gear with the flagship Basis table and a Vandersteen "Nine" system at the LA show. Even some jaded industry vets were impressed and Richard opened up the room for a bunch of us. The sound was amazingly lifelike. Even my pal Sunny, a died in the wool Wilson guy, was impressed.

2. Successful brands, in my opinion formed by both being a customer and a McKinsey consultant, rise above others by building a real company that offers great after-sale service and a genuine product that depreciates slowly in value which is difficult to do. As these brands grow, they get more attention (there is a bit of "winner take all" going on here as we say in consulting). With more attention, you get more reviews, larger ad budgets, larger show budgets which lead to more partnerships with the more capable dealers and better quality show demos as a result of both. YG, Wilson Audio and Von Schweikert may be good recent examples. I think I would point to dealer training such as the WASP training that Wilson does.

3. Given 2. I am not sure what your point is about being swayed? Do reviews have influence? Sure, but what is wrong with that. I'm pretty clear reviews should just lead to a short list. But what I have learned is that high end audio is really, truly a word of mouth sales cycle.

4. I cannot agree that the barriers to entry are low for high end audio. On cables? Sure. But not electronic gear and speakers. That does require an investment.

5. Part-Time Audiophile is a regular champion of less well-known brands such as Fern & Roby and Triode Wire Labs among others. We get a boat load of web traffic so my view of the evidence doesn't seem to support that much herding among reviewers.

6. Maybe we can agree that some brands are Ferraris and Porsches like the car magazine world. One may be in the market for a Honda but that Ferrari on the cover catches your eye. Maybe the Wilson Chronosonics and Continuum Obsidians are the Ferraris and Porsche Carreras of the audio world.

7. Consumer choice explosion is a problem in every market. That's just a nice outcome of free markets. And it helps sell Recommended Components and awards issues.

8. You have a very negative view on reviewers. Most of us don't feel that audiophiles are stupid. We are just lucky to listen to more gear and, for that reason alone, maybe have more experience that (if done right) leads to a more informed opinion. Since I started writing, people ask me a lot more for recommendations. If it's an area I have little experience in like NAS drive setup, I refer them elsewhere. If I have experience, my first question is "what budget do you have in mind?" Most audiophiles I have met are very bright and come from white collar professions. There are a few arrogant reviewers but by and large most are nice people. I have seen many reviewers go out of their way to help consumers at the RMAF shows over and over. I had a particularly long discussion with Michael Fremer many years ago that led to my purchase of my VPI table which has been a great investment. John Atkinson has been particularly helpful on a wide variety of topics and I write in some sense for a competitor to Stereophile. At shows, PS Audio brings along Ted Smith who can remarkably for someone probably at genius IQ, explain in plain English what his FPGA circuits do. Honestly, Caesar, the Denver show is more about friendly interactions between manufacturers, dealers, and consumers.

9. There is a financial aspect to going with popular gear. If a piece doesn't work out, it is much easier to sell a popular pieces. While we seek at PTA to promote any brand with a well performing product, we cannot escape the fact that if it doesn't work, resale value of lesser brands can be terrible. In some cases, it may not sell at all.

10. Finally, if the system is working, the brand is popular for a reason. Why are Wilson speakers so popular? Because they are high performance, have good resell value, and have a very professional dealer network. Ditto for Audio Research gear, and although I usually find it overly warm, McIntosh does well. So perhaps this "herd mentality" you speak of is ultimately a combination of strong performance and a real company with a good management. There have been great engineers in audio who started a company but had no business sense in running it. LH Labs makes great affordable gear but struggles to ship product.

This is really tough on people early in their audio journey with limited funds. What phono pre or dac do I buy if I have no money? And if I hate it, what I do? Schiit and Pro-Ject are probably a good answer. Ahhh, but Schiit and Pro-Ject are really, really popular now so maybe the system is actually working. :)

JAJAJAJAJAJA!!! I happen to feel the same way about Audio Research and Focal as you feel about Scaena. A lot of people feel strong dislike about Magico and Wilson. They are very polarizing brands! Interestingly, Harry Pearson thought Scaena and NOLA were 2 of the best speakers in the world, but when "Sterile" Jon Valin usurped power from HP, he called both speakers "as you like it", meaning badly colored speakers.

I have heard ARC amps sound like PURE MALODOROUS DREK every time I have heard them, with only two exceptions. Both times they sounded great - and it was ARC Ref 75 amp. Once was Scaena and once was with Nola. I think both speakers are very easy to drive and both have been designed with ARC.

By the way, I want to make sure you understand I am not laughing at you, Lee. I sincerely appreciate your point of view. Subjectivity is a funny thing.

Here are a couple of posts I wrote about 3 years ago that explain why certain brands dominate, and why most languish and slowly die. Since then, Classe has gone belly up, Raidho's founders have left to peddle cables, Technical Brain seems to be dead also, no one talks about Veloce, and the list of rooms covered 10 years ago at RMAF is nearly unrecognizable. (And interestingly, some dealers who questioned this theory are now selling the blockbuster brands instead of the more obscure ones :) ):


"....interesting thread... let's look at things a bit more holistically from an economic perspective..

There are fairly low entry costs into the high end audio industry. Any guy can assemble the stuff in his garage. capital requirements are fairly low. just build the more complex parts of the gear in someone else’s shop. if you cook up a recipe that others like, you can get “large”. And if you get large, you can open your own machine/ furniture / metal shop. if you so, you can build your own cabinets and drivers, and use it as point of quality/differentiation…

These low entry barriers have caused a proliferation of gear today to suit every taste: from highly musical stuff that conveys human emotions to highly resolving stuff that succeeds at mechanical excellence and detail resolution. There are so many turntables, dacs, speakers, amps, cables, and combinations of the above that it makes your head spin. And all these excessive choices no doubt drives away customers due to sheer confusion because there is no one to trust to help separate the wheat from the chaff. So the primary marketing strategy of successful audio firms is to get a reviewer to like your stuff. If they do, they can mention it every time they write about it...

It’s a shame, but most reviewers are like smegma (there are a few good guys, but they are rare). Most help protect the incumbents and blockbuster brands; most reviewers just follow the herd and most are too gutless to voice independent opinions.

who has the beitzim to give the magico, arc, wilson, pass, macintosh, etc., bad reviews, when in comparison smaller, less talked about companies frequently smoke the blockbuster brands. So the blockbuster brands get stronger, while the smaller companies with better products are starving or scraping by. Of course, it makes sense for a dealer to carry these blockbuster brands, and it makes sense for less demanding audiophiles who are happy to have what others have so they can kibbitz about the products they have on the internet sites with those who own the same products. But not so for the customer that is looking for the ultimate sound of their choice.

Also, the reviewers take on authority mentality. they see the audiophile as some dumb f#%! that they need to give specific instructions to : "this is the best", "I would by this speaker/ dac/ amp”... This is not helpful to consumers and is actually very insulting. despite what our engineering minded friends say, audio products are experience goods. their quality can’t be judged without hearing them and comparing them. Who cares what a famous reviewer likes? the consumer’s taste will not likely match his. Without comparisons, reviewers are just marketing their favorites instead of working for the consumer. But that’s their incentive.


You touch on the bargaining power of consumers, but your comments are incomplete. Some consumers have a taste preference that they follow for years (remember the hunt for the Absolute Sound?). Sure, customers can shop around and play different dealers off against each other in order to drive price down or demand a high quality of service. But if you know what you like, you can’t really substitute. If a customer loves the Vivid Giya, the Wilson or Magico will not do.. If customer thinks ARC is inferior to CAT, he will find a way to get a CAT into your system despite the low number of dealers and paying a premium. So your purchase outlet choices as a consumer are quite limited in this small industry.

Yet, other customers frequently swap gear when they get used to one sound and think there is a sonic signature that they erroneously believe they won’t get sick of. Ever visit a site called the audio shark? They seem like a great group of guys, but swap gear like Wilt Chamberlain swaps girlfriends because of misunderstanding a basic psychological concept of habituation/ economic concept of declining marginal utility. They get all hot about some piece of gear in the beginning of a thread, imagining how that piece of gear will bring them bliss. They get their hands on it and are all euphoric about for a few weeks. Yet only after few months of living with it they are dreaming about the bliss of the new piece of gear. Of course, there is absolutely nothing wrong with approaching the hobby this way. Just another segment and different goals, who may demand a deal or a deep discount.

Sure, the industry growth seems to have slowed down for a variety of reasons. But with a million things completing for our attention, so has pretty much everything else. Baseball world series ratings are at an all time low also. but the high end audio industry has adjusted by raising prices."

And...


"First let me say that I am not talking about any individual’s taste in gear. To me, whatever people do in their personal life, including what kinds of sex, art, sports, or audio they enjoy is irrelevant as long as no one is hurting anyone else. I am sure you and those who own those other blockbuster brands have very fine systems. And I have heard some blockbuster brands sound fabulous in some systems and sound atrocious in others. In the end, achieving happiness is a moral goal, and as long as having great music in your life makes you a better doctor, lawyer, businessman, engineer, or whatever people do, is all that matters.

Yet, on a micro level, doesn't it make you wonder why certain people choose certain brands, and why there is a clump of very popular blockbuster brands mentioned above exists? I don’t have any industry sales stats, but using common sense, it’s probably a safe bet to apply the 80/20 rule and assume that those popular brands get most of the sales.

With so many choices, in the so-called “golden age” of audio, why are there just a select few brands extolled by the media, carried by most dealers, and purchased by customers. First, there is no engineering/ hard sciences answer. There are few “objective” claims to high quality, and audio customers disagree on what is good, so their choices reflect tastes, not verifiable differences in quality. And sure, there is a superficial answer….

But those of us with a background in social psychology and behavioral economics like to scratch beneath the surface and try to understand human behavior... How many guys that bought the Magico or Wilson also seriously auditioned the Vivid Giya? How many Audio Research buyers seriously auditioned CAT? Many of those who have are blown away by how much better CAT is than ARC… And how many folks would be willing to admit they can live with either brand (because to them the differences are minor) but chose the more popular brand so they can start a “my system” thread on audiogon or here, and socially relate to more people. If you start talking about CAT or Vivid, people will not engage with you on the same level as with a more popular brand. Start talking about Wilson or Pass, and people have an opinion, and you are talking about it for years while getting thousands of hits in your thread, vs. taking about a less popular brand and ending your conversation in a week or 2, and having your thread die…
Human nature is very interesting. There is a big social aspect to this hobby. Talking about gear is similar to re-experiencing it. (How many times do people re-tell great vacation stories, even after many years?) Based on the initial chatter and buzz, audiophiles can go to dealers and hear a product. Many will buy it and start yapping about it to their friends and online…And it’s just human nature to yap about a popular product than a more obscure one, which may just absolutely kick the popular product’s ass in every way possible. But sadly, many folks on the forums only talk about the popular products because they get extra enjoyment of discussing shared experiences of products they own or are familiar with. So many ARC fans are ARC fans only because others are ARC fans. The technical term for this phenomenon is “social proof”, but such is human nature. Whether people realize it or on, Popularity happens to be a HUGE signal for quality in our hobby.

Also, interestingly, research shows that consumers of obscure products appreciate those products less than owners of popular products. The more obscure the product, the less likely it is to be appreciated. In effect, what results is a natural monopoly of popular, yet not necessarily “best” products. People’s tastes tend to converge on a select few blockbuster products rather than be dispersed across the assortment of available offerings.

And the internet/ social media, of course, amplifies all of this…

But social proof is just one influence force acting on us. There are others even stronger. With so many overwhelming choices and extremely high prices, it sure hurts a lot if you go with the wrong piece. In fact it hurts a lot more to lose a dollar than to gain a dollar. (It’s just human nature and it affects famous investors, famous athletes, audiophiles, and pretty much everyone else. For example, it has been proven that people sell winning stocks too early but hold on to losers for a long time in fear of experiencing a loss.) So why not buy a product that many others like and is favorably thought of by professional reviewers/ audio intellectuals? Surely, one cannot be too wrong and not experience that painful loss.

People can claim to be not be swayed by influences and making deeply personal choices. But then you look at the most popular brands like Wilson, Magico, Macintosh, etc., and you have to ask: Not Swayed? Right!!! …

By looking at the popular brands, it clearly shows most guys in this hobby are herd thinkers (both audiophiles, dealers, and reviewers). Bring it up and they deny it. They use their ears, they say. But they are operating from a set of biases they are not even aware of. But then why is this clump of Magico, Wilson, ARC, Macintosh, etc., getting most of the sales and reviews while virtually everyone else is starving (or keeping a second job)? How many of those low selling brands sell just a single unit a year, usually to their mother?

It’s no coincidence that people’s tastes converge on select few brands rather than be dispersed across the assortment of available offerings. With so many different flavors of sonic signatures in individual components, one can build so many systems to create a similar sound and excellent sound. Guys who run audio magazines are assured of an audience and ad sales by covering and hoarding around the popular brands. Dealers are assured of customers walking into their shops. Audiophiles hoard around these popular “Lady Gagas” and “Peyton Mannings” and the result is a strong concentration of sales for the blockbuster brands that promise familiar and repeatable experiences in an uncertain market.

Now with the economic and social psychology theory and ideas in place, the more demanding audiophiles check out not just the popular brands, but check every nook and cranny to find the less popular brands that frequently outperform the blockbusters."
 
I generally don't bash other brands but Scaena has been a habitual offender for me. I will explain why in a bit more detail. Around five or so years ago, Sunny Umrao came to our Atlanta audio club and had his Mainframe memory player which of course he said was the best CD player out there. And he began to speak on computer audio and made a statement that Windows machines were far superior than Macs. He went on to say that macs were not suited at all for music. This dismayed at least half of the audience as we were mac users and quite happy with our computer audio sound. I had a Mac Mini running Amarra with extra memory and a Benchmark and LH Labs DAC and the sound quality was quite good. Nonetheless, I decided to be objective although I found it odd that Sunny would insult literally half his audience in a sales situation. Then he could not get the Mainframe player/server to work. Hmm, not a great start...the speakers did not impress either.

Since then I have heard many Scaena demos, at least 16 time by my count. I simply have not heard them sound good. Maybe I have been the victim of several bad demos but the odds suggest something is up. I have heard two really bad Magico demos but many good demos. As with everything proper setup is critical. All this show going I do convinces me that often the mfr doesn't always do it right.

Now we get to PS Audio. Their new good is far better than anything they have done. I loved the Sprout when I reviewed it. It even drove my difficult Magnepan 1.7s. Their new DAC is one of the best and the BHK amps are terrific. They sound good with many speakers in my experience. But the string of 2-3 show events with the Scaenas proved a disaster. I talked about this with a senior level guy who is a friend at PS. They were not happy with the sound. Much older models had been praised by HP but that was many years ago. I don't know why the Scaenas sounded so awful but they did and many reviewers (hey, we get drinks and dinner together often) remarked about the bad sound at Axpona and other shows. Yet they still landed on some "best of" list like the dealer here accurately reports. Maybe the lesson here is to be a bit skeptical of "best of" lists like we are doing in this discussion.

Maybe I have it wrong on Scaena and I may yet find the setup that brings out the magic. However, my opinion on them is definitely informed by experience.

But Caesar, we reviewers ARE doing subjective evaluation here. Objective measurements cannot capture the entirety of the audio experience. I learned this a long time ago while working on Chesky sessions. If you look for objective only measurements, the reality is that you will never have a great sounding system.

Looks like ARC fans are really upset here...to make them feel better, I have heard an excellent Wilson alexia system using some arc preamp (too many reference ones to keep track of in the last 5 years) and big d'agostino monoblocks. And as Al mentioned, the latest several generations of Magico sound sublime with CAT. I have no doubt that no other tube amp can hold a candle to the CAT - Magico combination. But one needs to have the curiosity, self-confidence, and strength to step away from the herd and try that combination. Those that have are richly rewarded.


But, isn't it part and parcel of the audiophile hobby culture to bash each other's favorite brands? Led by elites who set the example for our culture, such as "sterile" Jon valin, where the stuff he imagines as "real" in his mind sounds "real and transparent to source" to him, while the stuff he doesn't like is badly cloured :) (ok, he calls it as-you- like-it)...

and then Sterile Jon meets a guy like "great" peter breuninger , and his own confident feelings about his own imagination of "real", in a dark audio room and they want to beat he shitz out of each other... Would have broken a couple of beer bottles, and handed one to great peter and one to Sterile Jon, and would have gotten my camera rolling . :) juuuust kidding!!!

Kidding aside, the latest generation of audio equipment products, just like other subjective, creative entertainment, and art are not really "products. Instead, they are experiences. And these are the types of experiences that engender extremely strong emotions.


Yet to make sense of these experiences, reviews - both from (ethical) professionals and from experienced amateurs, along with word-of-mouth comments from casual fans play a big part in marketing. But these subjective descriptions reveal incentives and popular subjective tastes, not objectively verifiable differences in quality!

And I believe this is generally the way of the world right now . Superstar brands - and the experiences they help provide- is what it's all about. Lebron, steph curry, and Kevin Durant in the NBA. Superhero movie and Star Wars franchises in Hollywood; Hollywood competitors are working to create its own franchises like sex in the city, house of cards, shameless....Crosby, ovechkin, and Kane in hockey....Domingo and Bocelli in the opera world.... lady Gaga and jay z....Magico, Wilson, arc, and macintosh in high end audio.

Superstars draw the fans and are covered by the media. Regular people have a taste for these "winners" and spend $$$ on them!!! People like to discuss them instead of the obscure brands. Reviewers can make a safe choice covering them while assuring they get the next model in the house...Yet not everyone agrees that superstars are the best .... this is not going away...
 
An “expert” is a drip under pressure!

Their advice is free"......take it for what it is worth.
 
This has become one of my favorite thread's audio subjects recently here @ WBF.
It has some of the best readings from some of the best brain in the industry...I truly think.
 
But Ethernet is also the best way of downloading hi-def files to the computer (the Baetis); or using JRiver™ or Roon™ software to stream the great slide show of the band members in their private lives, while listening to the music. Therefore, most of our Baetis models have two Ethernet ports, not just one. One Ethernet port takes signals from the internet (streaming), or accesses a computer file from a Network Attached Storage (NAS) device, while the other Ethernet port sends the perfectly bit-streamed audio file to the DAC.

The closer the master clock is to the D/A, the better. Any DAC designer will tell you this. Having a master clock in another device, whether it's a server or an external converter with additional interfaces (S/PDIF or AES/EBU) will NEVER be as good as having the master clock in the interface just before the D/A in the same device, the DAC.

Seems like you can have your cake and eat it too. Use the Ethernet output from the Baetis server to go to an Ethernet DAC. The server is just another computer. If you are using Roon or Jriver anyway, might as well use a laptop or a Mac Mini. If you are using the Baetis to do housekeeping, ripping, online streaming etc., then us the Baetis.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
 
Steve,

I wonder if this is always true as I have heard much refinement when 1. an external master clock is added on my live recordings and 2. at friends' houses when an external rubidium clock is added on the DAC side.

The closer the master clock is to the D/A, the better. Any DAC designer will tell you this. Having a master clock in another device, whether it's a server or an external converter with additional interfaces (S/PDIF or AES/EBU) will NEVER be as good as having the master clock in the interface just before the D/A in the same device, the DAC.

Seems like you can have your cake and eat it too. Use the Ethernet output from the Baetis server to go to an Ethernet DAC. The server is just another computer. If you are using Roon or Jriver anyway, might as well use a laptop or a Mac Mini. If you are using the Baetis to do housekeeping, ripping, online streaming etc., then us the Baetis.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
 
Not my experience either Steve.
I use the Master Clock mode for my Scarlatti Transport, Paganini DAC and Scarlatti clock and the addition of the Scarlatti clock to my earlier DCS Puccini also made a significant improvement to the sound.
 
Not my experience either Steve.
I use the Master Clock mode for my Scarlatti Transport, Paganini DAC and Scarlatti clock and the addition of the Scarlatti clock to my earlier DCS Puccini also made a significant improvement to the sound.

This is a different architecture from a device that clocks the data and then sends the data to a DAC that does not clock the data. Having the final master clock in the DAC in close proximity to the D/A logic, no matter where the clock comes from, is the best technical solution. If these external clocks would fit into the DAC chassis, that would be even better IMO.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
 
Not my experience either Steve.
I use the Master Clock mode for my Scarlatti Transport, Paganini DAC and Scarlatti clock and the addition of the Scarlatti clock to my earlier DCS Puccini also made a significant improvement to the sound.

Agreed. I have heard the impact of external clocks on dCS and Esoteric gear. We used a Genex Lucid clock on our recordings when we had the Alessis recording deck.
 
Agreed. I have heard the impact of external clocks on dCS and Esoteric gear. We used a Genex Lucid clock on our recordings when we had the Alessis recording deck.

Again, I'm not talking about external clocks. I'm talking about an external device that master clocks the data and sends the data to a DAC that does not have the master clock.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
 
Again, I'm not talking about external clocks. I'm talking about an external device that master clocks the data and sends the data to a DAC that does not have the master clock.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

Steve, for some reason I got you confused with Steve Norber of Prana Fidelity. I guess we did not see each other in Denver.

As for the DACs, I guess you are talking about an implementation I am not familiar with.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing