This does not surprise me at all. One can refer to the incredible improvement that Steve Williams is reporting with the addition of his Critical Mass rack system. I remember when a buddy came over with his DAC and laptop to play some music on my system. I had no additional rack space so I simply put his DAC on one of my spare Townshend Seismic Sinks on the floor and the sound improved immediately. This same guy noticed improvements with two of these Sinks under his SS amps. I'm sure there are better isolation alternatives.
DCS Vivaldi
- Thread starter MylesBAstor
- Start date
This does not surprise me at all. One can refer to the incredible improvement that Steve Williams is reporting with the addition of his Critical Mass rack system. I remember when a buddy came over with his DAC and laptop to play some music on my system. I had no additional rack space so I simply put his DAC on one of my spare Townshend Seismic Sinks on the floor and the sound improved immediately. This same guy noticed improvements with two of these Sinks under his SS amps. I'm sure there are better isolation alternatives.
Also agree from my more limited experience...I have heard the Scarlatti full stack on top of a Halcyonics which did make a difference. Although my own digital is tubed (with Tubed PSU) which would theoretically be more susceptible to vibration, i do have a fair amount of experience with what isolation did for the Zanden, it was a huge difference, and i certainly would recommend unequivocally that anyone considering it MUST use isolation across all 4 boxes (surprisingly, the transport being the MOST resilient to vibration of all 4 and benefiting LEAST from it...perhaps due to the design of it being so focused on minimizing vibration).
Oooh, your comment on power cables has me curious since I'm using a Sigma Digital on the Vivaldi. What other cables did you prefer, John?
Well, I am feeling guilty - my Vivaldi stack is still on a solid wheeled platform, the units stacked on each other, just as DCS advises us not to use it ... But it is sounding so good that I did not feel any urgency in putting it on the rack, and considering that Vivaldi owners must optimize ten digital cables and four power cables, not counting the RJ45 Ethernet cable and output analog cables, the convenience of an wheeled platform is currently mandatory. My back would suffer if I had to change all of them with the units in place!
I know what you mean about cables with all my Entreq boxes and cables.
If you do get round to auditioning Entreq even the Silver Tellus is quite a handful but you might find it wise to get somebody to install an Olympus Tellus if you do get round to trying it. It is heavy and bulky!
If you do get round to auditioning Entreq even the Silver Tellus is quite a handful but you might find it wise to get somebody to install an Olympus Tellus if you do get round to trying it. It is heavy and bulky!
Well...look at this way...you have something to look forward to you when you are satisfied with the setup of your Vivaldi!
Surely - it is DCS recommendation. It switches off mainly the display - the measured power consumption decrease is minimal, less than 10%.
I'm thrilled with the new Transparent Opus Source Power cord. If you're using Kubala Sosna signal cabling, you might consider those too
Occasionally, if I'm going out of town for a few days. If I'm home, I generally listen to it everyday...so I just leave it on (display and all). I never full power down...unless a thunderstorm.
My Vivaldi stack is sitting on an HRS SRX rack with 3 Stillpoint Ultra 6's under each component. I couldn't really A:B the rack and my listening room floor is on solid concrete, so I couldn't tell that the rack made a big difference. But I did listen to each of the Vivaldi components one at a time with and without the Stillpoints and the difference is audible, although more subtle on some than the others. Biggest improvement was the Upsampler, then the transport (Esoteric), the DAC, and finally the Clock.
As I am interested in the DCS upsampler subject I will return to your previous post. Some time ago I considered getting a Hi-Rez version of Rebecca Pidgeon Spanish Harlem and suspended my decision when I found that there was a lot of debate concerning the origins of the several avaliable resolutions, including the SACD. IMHO using such recording to analyze the performance of the upsampler can lead to unreliable conclusions. Kind of Blue seems to suffer even more from this problem.
Anyway I would be happy to get a reasoned opinion on which is the best version to get of these recordings.
sources for all the Chesky original (Rebecca Pidgeon) recordings is hi-rez PCM, 88/24 or 96/24. later Chesky did some dsd sourced recordings....but not many. I had used a CD of the Raven and Spanish Harlem for years as a reference. I recall when I first heard the hirez PCM (on the Trinity) it was a revelation.
KOB could be any damn thing. personally I have 2 different 15ips 1/4" versions as well as innumerable pressings, even multiple 45rpm, early original stereo pressings and early mono pressings. add on to all that the speed issue.....
can't think of a worse choice for a reference.
Thanks. So we can admit that the 176/24 HiRez track of RP Spanish Harlem is just an upsampled 88/24? And the SACD is also a transcoded version? Some people state that the AD referred in the technical details "Recorded using the 128x oversampling A to D Mark III converter with ultra-analog modules and vacuum tube equipment built by George Kaye." used in 1993 or 1994 was an 44.1/16 unit. The LP edition was all analog, can we consider that the HiRez versions could come from the analog tapes?
And yes, it is a classical demo for a quality vocal/instrumental recording. Fortunately it is also great music!
Interesting Mike...bolshy words...as to me KOB is a touchstone for placement and imaging....clearly you think differently...perhaps I've something to learn with respect to references.....
Back to the notes...also used Zoe Keating's Escape Artist....ripped CD (AIFF and FLAC uncompressed)
"Timbers/placement/immersion/musicality on the multiple cellos were not better (again understatement) with the upsampler in the loop...what am I missing???."
YMMV...
sorry, my meaning got lost in my bluster. I love the music in every way and could not agree with you more. only that there are so many 'versions' that it's problematic as a reference. if you are using just one and only that then sure, it does all those things you mention. but it can be a moving target from one media example to another much more than most. I might personally have at least 15 versions of KOB.....and they are all a bit different.
heck it's the most sold piece of jazz music of all time.......and most deservedly so.
Last edited:
We must see you are using a reference to establish and justify a preference, and here perhaps we have very different opinions. In order to have a reference we should have a recording that people can know a priori how it should sound, something that IMHO does not happen with the ones you suggested. Your last example - an extremely processed recording as far as I could read - is not the type of recording that I would ever consider for evaluation.
No way I am suggesting my opinion is better than yours, just that I would not consider your appreciation of the DCS upsampler (our main argument) as meaningful opinion for me. Perhaps others will think differently, it is part of the game.
Just to clarify I should say that I am closer to the line of thought of Harry Pearson than that of Floyd Toole concerning references for the evaluation of high-end.
@microstrip complements on the logic. Refreshing on a forum to get to substance/signal in channel as opposed to noise.
Still I would not have thought ripping Zoe's Escape Artist to uncompressed FLAC or AIFF as "significant processing"...and given this feed was common to both Upsampler and DAC ....struggle to see that it would be a source of variance in a comparison..
{@Mike L - thank you for clarifying....understand from whence you are coming. }
Similar threads
- Locked
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |