Trinity DAC

[redsquare]

Wisnon, I was referring to generally perceived bad sounding cd's from the 80's that sound harsh or glaring with most dacs. But with the Trinity the recordings really shown through albeit with no glare. Just music....

 

[Alrainbow]

Yes tubes change the sound , but that is not the point here it's about interpertation of the bits.
As I said I have about 6 DACS of various prices of 2 k and up to the MSB. they all sound different but when I get o the MSB
Platinum it all changes. The interpitation is very different and yes it make many red book much better than before. I am not clIming that a good hirez is beat by a good red book . It's not but it does greatly improve the red books that were not that good. It separates better and just handles the harsh tones and finds info there not heard before. Now if the trinity is doing this , it is entirely possible and it may be done even better.

Al

 

[spiritofmusic]

Yes, my point. I chose my Emm labs CDSA SE cdp 6 years ago for this very reason; it was marginally beaten by the Wadia on bass slam, the Reimyo on warmth, and the AMR on transparency, but it WELL outstripped all these players, and all the others that I auditioned, on it's uncanny ability to make the unpalatable cds out there surprisingly listenable. And I haven't heard anything since beat it.
Now with the takeover of standalone cdps by streaming/hi rez, there are even fewer alternatives (I'm actually looking at the Eera Tentation, which supporters like JackD201 state give the greatest analog-like organic flow to rbcd). Maybe the Trinity combo is the new standard for "deciphering" poor digital. That's a good thing since so many more cds than lps sound just plain bad.

 

[esldude]

Check out the Stereophile measurements for the Zanden 5000? Dac, that is whar I would refer to as a true NOS design, there is a definite HF droop playing 44.1 files.
Keth.

Looked at that review and measurements. The first sample was just not a good piece of equipment, and for only $40k plus. Yet more than those results it represents a great example of how subjective sound evaluation is a broken idea. Mr. Fremer thought highly of the first, and possibly malfunctioning example. And the second example didn't measure great either. One wonders if the second or first sample is really representative of production. And why should such a mediocre DAC cost this much and get praise for sound?

 

[Audiocrack]

Looked at that review and measurements. The first sample was just not a good piece of equipment, and for only $40k plus. Yet more than those results it represents a great example of how subjective sound evaluation is a broken idea. Mr. Fremer thought highly of the first, and possibly malfunctioning example. And the second example didn't measure great either. One wonders if the second or first sample is really representative of production. And why should such a mediocre DAC cost this much and get praise for sound?

Because the Zanden is a very good sounding dac. I believe that our current measurement tools are not as sophisticated as our ears. Listen to the Zanden combo first under good conditions and only than judge for yourself I would say.

 

[esldude]

Because the Zanden is a very good sounding dac. I believe that our current measurement tools are not as sophisticated as our ears. Listen to the Zanden combo first under good conditions and only than judge for yourself I would say.

So is there some reason rolled treble and bass going only to 50 hz sound better than wideband response, and our measurement tools don't show it? Seems more likely those colorations are mistaken for an inviting musical quality when they are lack of fidelity and performance. Oh, and of course, how could a $40k DAC underperform?

 

[Julf]

I believe that our current measurement tools are not as sophisticated as our ears.

Or maybe our measurement tools are sophisticated enough, but we use them with the misgiuded assumption that the more transparent solution is also the more pleasant. Measurements tend to measure the technical transparency, and not the psychoacoustic experience.

 

[jsn]

So is there some reason rolled treble and bass going only to 50 hz sound better than wideband response, and our measurement tools don't show it? Seems more likely those colorations are mistaken for an inviting musical quality when they are lack of fidelity and performance. Oh, and of course, how could a $40k DAC underperform?

Hi esldude,
You referred to the 1st defect sample.
The 2nd sample measurement is more reasonable:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/...emium-cd-transport-second-sample-measurements
.
cheers

 

[Audiocrack]

So is there some reason rolled treble and bass going only to 50 hz sound better than wideband response, and our measurement tools don't show it? Seems more likely those colorations are mistaken for an inviting musical quality when they are lack of fidelity and performance. Oh, and of course, how could a $40k DAC underperform?

Have you ever listened seriously to the Zanden transport/dac combo? If not, I will rest my case.

 

[LL21]

Because the Zanden is a very good sounding dac. I believe that our current measurement tools are not as sophisticated as our ears. Listen to the Zanden combo first under good conditions and only than judge for yourself I would say.

+1. The Stereophile measurements are an age-old debate on the Zanden. And yet, every other review I have read (and I have every single one I could find) is superlative. I am no techie, but I understand from those who have dissected the Zanden themselves that the level of build and design is exceptional and in some cases has been adopted or paralleled by other manufacturers later. Whether it is the use of the TDA 1541 chips for redbook, the focus on crystal oscillators when many were using rubidium 7 years ago, elimination of digital filters, the multi-layer build approach on the transport with alternating layers of aluminium, then acrylic, the i2s linkage, the 6 separate PSUs for the transport, the emphasis on phase noise over other elements relating to jitter.

Again, I am no techie, and I acknowledge that Stereophile was quite unhappy with the measurements even thought they were better when the 2nd, functioning unit arrived. There have also been several updated iterations of the unit since then. I happen to own the latest iteration. I heard 1 iteration earlier but not a full set.

What I can say, is that as recently as last year, Michael fremer and Roy Gregory both felt the Zanden remains their favourite rbcd digital of all time, and after listening to a few digital setups, it is mine as well. There is no perfection, but the elements that the Zanden does well are exceptional.
I also can confirm that if you isolate each of the 4 boxes, it makes a big difference in the linearity, delivery of the sound. I have not measured...frankly would not know how.

It is a preference of mine, plain and simple. But there is no digital I have heard that allows me to keep playing whole albums, no channel flipping for 15 hours straights. Having compared the Zanden to Esoteric X01SE, Metronome Kalista Ref/C2a, Audio Aero La Source, Wadia s71, DCS Scarlatti 4-stack, Meridian 808i.2, Emm CDSA, I am still unable to find digital I prefer. And I also know a few audiophiles who own several digital units (Trinity, Wadia 9-series, Goldmunds SOTA digital system, who have had similar comments about the Zanden.) As for bass, if you stick in NOS Mullards into the PSU, the bass is more propulsive and yet organic than even the Esoteric for example).

I wish I could dissect the technical...I cannot and will not try. I simply share my observations.

 

[Al M.]

So are you saying that NOS designs, like tubes, are not transparent, but change the sound even though it is usually seen as sounding better? BTW, that is my opinion of what tube gear does.

Depends on which tube gear. My amps sound very similar to the Spectral 260 which I had at home for audition, and the Spectral is usually seen as a SS reference (it is an excellent amp indeed). But then, people have commented that my amps really "don't sound like tube amps".

I didn't buy my amps for the "sound", I bought them for their dynamics, both macro- and micro-dynamics. The latter, so critical to liveliness of music, are a domain where some tube amp designs excel. The Spectral 260 is the very first SS amp that I've heard that gets micro-dynamics right as well -- impressive.

 

[Al M.]

I believe that our current measurement tools are not as sophisticated as our ears.

Or we don't or can't always perform all the measurements that are relevant to music reproduction. Frequency and distortion responses measured on sine waves, for example, may not be an entirely relevant read-out of the behaviour of gear on music with its complex signals and transients.

As a scientist (a biochemist) I am critically aware of the measurement problem -- that we sometimes don't measure, or don't know how to measure, the stuff that's really important. In a biological context, for example, it is much easier to measure single components, e.g., enzymes, of a system, than it is to measure their behaviour in a complex system as a whole. Yet a kinetic read-out of an enzyme may not tell you the real story about its behaviour, when other cumulative factors like location, diffusion, modulation by modification, and interaction with other proteins decide on its ultimate behaviour in the cell.

Spectral, whose gear measures great by any conventional standard and who are considered a reference for solid-state amps, have for example pointed out that it is important that nothing in the signal pathway retains 'heat memory', which would distort the behaviour of the transistors on quiet passages after loud and complex transients. That they have successfully tackled the problem to a large extent appears to be an important reason that their amps sound so clean and "fast". Yet this kind of thing is not one typically measured by audio engineers.

 

[Al M.]

I wish I could dissect the technical...I cannot and will not try. I simply share my observations.

Yes, measurements are important, but like you, I usually rely on what my ears tell me (while critically double-checking on my observations all the time). And there may be a good reason for doing so, as I pointed out in my previous post.

 

[Audiocrack]

+1. The Stereophile measurements are an age-old debate on the Zanden. And yet, every other review I have read (and I have every single one I could find) is superlative. I am no techie, but I understand from those who have dissected the Zanden themselves that the level of build and design is exceptional and in some cases has been adopted or paralleled by other manufacturers later. Whether it is the use of the TDA 1541 chips for redbook, the focus on crystal oscillators when many were using rubidium 7 years ago, elimination of digital filters, the multi-layer build approach on the transport with alternating layers of aluminium, then acrylic, the i2s linkage, the 6 separate PSUs for the transport, the emphasis on phase noise over other elements relating to jitter.

Again, I am no techie, and I acknowledge that Stereophile was quite unhappy with the measurements even thought they were better when the 2nd, functioning unit arrived. There have also been several updated iterations of the unit since then. I happen to own the latest iteration. I heard 1 iteration earlier but not a full set.

What I can say, is that as recently as last year, Michael fremer and Roy Gregory both felt the Zanden remains their favourite rbcd digital of all time, and after listening to a few digital setups, it is mine as well. There is no perfection, but the elements that the Zanden does well are exceptional.
I also can confirm that if you isolate each of the 4 boxes, it makes a big difference in the linearity, delivery of the sound. I have not measured...frankly would not know how.

It is a preference of mine, plain and simple. But there is no digital I have heard that allows me to keep playing whole albums, no channel flipping for 15 hours straights. Having compared the Zanden to Esoteric X01SE, Metronome Kalista Ref/C2a, Audio Aero La Source, Wadia s71, DCS Scarlatti 4-stack, Meridian 808i.2, Emm CDSA, I am still unable to find digital I prefer. And I also know a few audiophiles who own several digital units (Trinity, Wadia 9-series, Goldmunds SOTA digital system, who have had similar comments about the Zanden.) As for bass, if you stick in NOS Mullards into the PSU, the bass is more propulsive and yet organic than even the Esoteric for example).

I wish I could dissect the technical...I cannot and will not try. I simply share my observations.

In addition to the reviewer names already mentioned: also Marc Mickelson of the Audio Beat holds the Zanden combo in high esteem. But maybe it is time to go back to topic of this thread: the Trinity dac/combo.

 

[microstrip]

Have you ever listened seriously to the Zanden transport/dac combo? If not, I will rest my case.

It is an important point - what we consider listening seriously.

 

[Audiocrack]

It is an important point - what we consider listening seriously.

Anyway in an environment you are (somewhat) familiar with, that is not only the equipment being used but also the acoustic environment, in particular the acoustics of the listening room (I realize that clean power and effective grounding through eg a Tripoint Troy can make a huge difference as well). And of course using recordings you are familiar with. The Set up is extremely important as it can make and break the performance of a high end system (and I am not only referring to the placement of the loudspeakers).

 

[Audiocrack]

Maybe I should add the following: in this forum quite a number of people have pretty strong opinions on the performance of all kind of audio equipment and a lot of times I am wondering: did you actually listen carefully to these components? I am always cautious because I have experienced systems being transformed for the better (including systems I am quite familiar with such as those of my own) with apparently small changes as eg the vta or a little movement of the speakers.

 

[microstrip]

Anyway in an environment you are (somewhat) familiar with, that is not only the equipment being used but also the acoustic environment, in particular the acoustics of the listening room (I realize that clean power and effective grounding through eg a Tripoint Troy can make a huge difference as well). And of course using recordings you are familiar with. The Set up is extremely important as it can make and break the performance of a high end system (and I am not only referring to the placement of the loudspeakers).

I fully agree with your points. IMHO the main risk of reduced time comparative listening opinions is that you are mainly reporting on synergies of the system, including the recording. High-end digital equipment is particular sensitive to this aspect.

 

[AudioExplorations]

I'm absolutely loving the fact that this 1" thick DAC seems to be de-throning all other sota dac's out there including the completely over the top and exorbitant 3 box Vivaldi!

 

[Audiocrack]

I'm absolutely loving the fact that this 1" thick DAC seems to be de-throning all other sota dac's out there including the completely over the top and exorbitant 3 box Vivaldi!

Even more amazing if you take into account that Trinity is a one man business, meaning that Dietmar worked out the architecture of the dac all by himself.