dCS Paganini DAC upgrade with master clock or Puccini U-Clock?

[RubenV.]

At the moment I am using the paganini dac as a preamp. Last year I visited a fellow hifi lover and was impressed to hear that adding an ARC REF 5SE to the paganini dac to do the preamp part was actually a step up in quality. Have you ever used your dCS gear without a preamp? And from what " level" did you had the feeling that you gain in quality with a preamp?

In my own set stereo and surround are combined. For the last half year I used the paganini while hooked up to an Arcam AV9 surround processor. Last night I went the amp-direct-route, and was surprised how big the difference was.
Now I am wondering if there are people here that experienced the benefits of adding a preamp to their dCS setup and what kind of models they used. I know stereo listening is supposed not to be done through a surround processor, but I use active fronts (Linkwitz LX521) with only one input. A preamplifier with ht-passthrough would be a nice solution..

 

[RubenV.]

Internal parts of the Paganini Master Clock:

View attachment 20285

Looks like a lot more "real-estate" then the U-clock to me. Not that it necessarily says something about the quality. But to be honest, that is what I expected because they are from the same manufacturer.

 

[asiufy]

Ruben,

It's no surprise your friend found the system with a preamp better than going direct from the Paganini DAC. The volume control on the Paganini is digital, and you're most likely losing bits, the more you attenuate. Also, generally the output sections of DACs don't match well with the input sections of amps, which makes the sound fatiguing, although sometimes more detailed overall.

As for your original question, I wouldn't go for the U-Clock. Or the "old" Paganini clock. Go for a preamp And keep an eye out for a newer version of the Paganini clock, with USB inputs.


alexandre

 

[jfrech]

At the moment I am using the paganini dac as a preamp. Last year I visited a fellow hifi lover and was impressed to hear that adding an ARC REF 5SE to the paganini dac to do the preamp part was actually a step up in quality. Have you ever used your dCS gear without a preamp? And from what " level" did you had the feeling that you gain in quality with a preamp?

In my own set stereo and surround are combined. For the last half year I used the paganini while hooked up to an Arcam AV9 surround processor. Last night I went the amp-direct-route, and was surprised how big the difference was.
Now I am wondering if there are people here that experienced the benefits of adding a preamp to their dCS setup and what kind of models they used. I know stereo listening is supposed not to be done through a surround processor, but I use active fronts (Linkwitz LX521) with only one input. A preamplifier with ht-passthrough would be a nice solution..

I've used my dCS gear with and with out a preamps. This goes for the Puccini, Scarlatti and now Vivaldi. I seem to get the same result every time. Better transparency direct...but more enjoyable via a good preamp. I do suspect it's something with the volume control. Now I'd argue a more higher up dCS DAC is more important than a lesser DAC with a preamp. Especially if digital is your only source...

Preamps I've used over time are a BAT VK51SE, Nagra PLL and Koda K10.

 

[RubenV.]

Ruben,

It's no surprise your friend found the system with a preamp better than going direct from the Paganini DAC. The volume control on the Paganini is digital, and you're most likely losing bits, the more you attenuate. Also, generally the output sections of DACs don't match well with the input sections of amps, which makes the sound fatiguing, although sometimes more detailed overall.

As for your original question, I wouldn't go for the U-Clock. Or the "old" Paganini clock. Go for a preamp And keep an eye out for a newer version of the Paganini clock, with USB inputs.


alexandre

To my ears the there was no loss of detail by adding the ARC REF5SE. Without it the image would be far behind the speakers. With the preamp in place, the image was more in front of the speakers and tended to have more rhythm. The music was simply more enjoyable.

I've used my dCS gear with and with out a preamps. This goes for the Puccini, Scarlatti and now Vivaldi. I seem to get the same result every time. Better transparency direct...but more enjoyable via a good preamp. I do suspect it's something with the volume control. Now I'd argue a more higher up dCS DAC is more important than a lesser DAC with a preamp. Especially if digital is your only source...

Preamps I've used over time are a BAT VK51SE, Nagra PLL and Koda K10.

Yes, digital is my only source. Problem is, the active speakers have only one input. I would love to get a better dCS dac, but without a preamp I still need to change cables everytime betwee the DAC and Processor when I want to watch a movie. A preamp with passthrough would solve this problem. I am trying to figure out what preamp would be a nice addition to the Paganini.

As I now experience, the Arcam is holding back the dCS (just hooked up to the processor again and I just miss a lot dynamics, speed, details and a less tide bass). I know an ARC REF5SE would be a good fit, but it is too expensive for me atm. I would rather build a RTP3D (vacuum state) for that kind of money, but that aside. Was any of the preamps you owned holding back your dCS gear?

 

[jfrech]

To my ears the there was no loss of detail by adding the ARC REF5SE. Without it the image would be far behind the speakers. With the preamp in place, the image was more in front of the speakers and tended to have more rhythm. The music was simply more enjoyable.



Yes, digital is my only source. Problem is, the active speakers have only one input. I would love to get a better dCS dac, but without a preamp I still need to change cables everytime betwee the DAC and Processor when I want to watch a movie. A preamp with passthrough would solve this problem. I am trying to figure out what preamp would be a nice addition to the Paganini.

As I now experience, the Arcam is holding back the dCS (just hooked up to the processor again and I just miss a lot dynamics, speed, details and a less tide bass). I know an ARC REF5SE would be a good fit, but it is too expensive for me atm. I would rather build a RTP3D (vacuum state) for that kind of money, but that aside. Was any of the preamps you owned holding back your dCS gear?

None were holding it back. The Nagra PLL and the newer Nagra Jazz are quite special with the dCS gear.

 

[RubenV.]

None were holding it back. The Nagra PLL and the newer Nagra Jazz are quite special with the dCS gear.

Thanks for clarifying. I think that I should look into getting a decent preamp first instead of a clock for the dac.

 

[jfrech]

dCS announced a new offering today. Rossini. DAC or Player....these replace the Puccini.

http://www.monoandstereo.com/2015/05/dcs-rossini-network-player-and-dac-new.html

 

[JimmyS]

dCS announced a new offering today. Rossini. DAC or Player....these replace the Puccini.

http://www.monoandstereo.com/2015/05/dcs-rossini-network-player-and-dac-new.html

Just got a Debussy, and now won't be spending a lot on the network file playback side knowing this is coming.

 

[RubenV.]

Looks interesting! I wonder how this now player will sound.

@ JimmyS: congrats with your new Debussy!

 

[Barry2013]

dCS announced a new offering today. Rossini. DAC or Player....these replace the Puccini.

http://www.monoandstereo.com/2015/05/dcs-rossini-network-player-and-dac-new.html

Looks very nice but the CD player will be Red Book only because of problems of availability of Esoteric tray etc which is a bit of a disappointment.
Matching clock to be unveiled shortly at around £5k.

 

[RubenV.]

Looks very nice but the CD player will be Red Book only because of problems of availability of Esoteric tray etc which is a bit of a disappointment.
Matching clock to be unveiled shortly at around £5k.

I've read on this forum (unconfirmed however) that Sony stops with making sacd chips and only Esoteric has some stock left. dCS only has a small amount of stock left (again, unconfirmed) and will only equip the Vivaldi line with it. Still rumors, but it would make sense if it is true. A bit of a pitty for all of us that invested in a SACD collection...

 

[Elberoth]

I've read on this forum (unconfirmed however) that Sony stops with making sacd chips and only Esoteric has some stock left. dCS only has a small amount of stock left (again, unconfirmed) and will only equip the Vivaldi line with it. Still rumors, but it would make sense if it is true. A bit of a pitty for all of us that invested in a SACD collection...

I have emailed Martin Rainolds from dCS, and he replied to me: "We would have used the VOSP (this is the model of Esoteric drive that have been used in the Puccini/Paganini range - Elb) for Rossini if we could rely on the supply."

So it seems that the supply of the excellent Esoteric drives had dried up. I was told thay have a big stock of VMK drives that are used in Scarlatti and Vivaldi transports to continue production for couple of years.

 

[Hiro]

I have emailed Martin Rainolds from dCS, and he replied to me: "We would have used the VOSP (this is the model of Esoteric drive that have been used in the Puccini/Paganini range - Elb) for Rossini if we could rely on the supply."

So it seems that the supply of the excellent Esoteric drives had dried up. I was told thay have a big stock of VMK drives that are used in Scarlatti and Vivaldi transports to continue production for couple of years.

But they weren't their top drives, right?

I'm reading in TAS that Esoteric designed the VOSP drives for "lower-priced products"

http://www.theabsolutesound.com/art...ansport-and-d-03-digital-to-analog-converter/

From what I see all their current top SACD/CD players and transports use VRDS NEO drives.

 

[Elberoth]

You may be right here. VOSP is the least expensive model, used in Playback Design MPS-3/5 players for example.

Puccini and Paganini used a bit more expensive, but still affordable (at least by Esoteric's standards) UMK-5 drive.

The Vivaldi and Scarlatti are the only two using the expensive VMK-3 drive. This is still not the most expensive drive made by Esoteric !

Here is an image I had taken in the dCS factory, showing both drives side by side (VMK and UMK):

You can see that the Vivaldi's drive is much more substantial. It is my understanding, that dCS still has a stock of those, that should last for a few years.

It is interesting to see, if Playback Designs, EMM, Soulution, Orpheus, CH Precision etc will continue to manufacture their SACD players and if so - for how long.

 

[Hiro]

You may be right here. VOSP is the least expensive model, used in Playback Design MPS-3/5 players for example.

Puccini and Paganini used a bit more expensive, but still affordable (at least by Esoteric's standards) UMK-5 drive.

The Vivaldi and Scarlatti are the only two using the expensive VMK-3 drive. This is still not the most expensive drive made by Esoteric !

Here is an image I had taken in the dCS factory, showing both drives side by side (VMK and UMK):

You can see that the Vivaldi's drive is much more substantial. It is my understanding, that dCS still has a stock of those, that should last for a few years.

It is interesting to see, if Playback Designs, EMM, Soulution, Orpheus, CH Precision etc will continue to manufacture their SACD players and if so - for how long.

They all continue to produce SACD players, and we can add the latest T+A machine to the list.

 

[Elberoth]

They all continue to produce SACD players, and we can add the latest T+A machine to the list.

Some CD player manufacturers also continued to manufacture players based on a CD-Pro2 mechanism, after it was discontinued. But you can't do that indefinately. Many transports and CD-players based on CD-Pro2 have been already discontinued.

This is exactly why I said that it was interesting to see if said companies would continue to manufacture their SACD players and if so - for how long.

 

[Hiro]

Some CD player manufacturers also continued to manufacture players based on a CD-Pro2 mechanism, after it was discontinued. But you can't do that indefinately. Many transports and CD-players based on CD-Pro2 have been already discontinued.

This is exactly why I said that it was interesting to see if said companies would continue to manufacture their SACD players and if so - for how long.

Well, VOSP isn't the only SACD/CD transport out there, and we already established that it even isn't the best one.

BTW, do you know if the information about TI retiring the PCM1704 DAC is true?

https://www.facebook.com/FikusLampi/posts/1617673151797950

It will be interesting to see if TI continues to manufacture it, and if so, for how long...

 

[Elberoth]

Well, VOSP isn't the only SACD/CD transport out there, and we already established that it even isn't the best one.

So what ? All the better drives than VOSP were all made by Esoteric anyway. They seem to be all gone.

 

[Hiro]

So what ? All the better drives than VOSP were all made by Esoteric anyway. They seem to be all gone.

In its newer SACD/CD players Esoteric is using new versions of VRDS Neo drives. I gather from your post that dCS specifically wanted to use a VOSP drive in their Rossini range (which they couldn't get), but still have the higher VMK drives.