Hi John,
I've been reading this thread and I am pretty excited by the MDAC which I hope comes out soon! I had a couple of basic questions to ask you, i'm not very good at all this expert lingo so I hope you can excuse my simplicity...
1) I have an audiolab 8000CDE - how is the DAC inside here in your honest opinion?
2) If I add an MDAC to it via the SPDIF, to what extent should I hear positive differences in the sound? I play mostly CD's and I would love to stretch my budget to the new 8200CD but I think the MDAC would be ideal for me. How would this set up compare to that of just having a 8200CD?
My amps are Little Dot MKIVSE + SPL Auditor if that makes any difference to your answer.
Once again sorry for the sheer simplicity of this question! I'm sure you prefer the tougher answers haha
Thanks
I've been reading this thread and I am pretty excited by the MDAC which I hope comes out soon! I had a couple of basic questions to ask you, i'm not very good at all this expert lingo so I hope you can excuse my simplicity...
1) I have an audiolab 8000CDE - how is the DAC inside here in your honest opinion?
2) If I add an MDAC to it via the SPDIF, to what extent should I hear positive differences in the sound? I play mostly CD's and I would love to stretch my budget to the new 8200CD but I think the MDAC would be ideal for me. How would this set up compare to that of just having a 8200CD?
My amps are Little Dot MKIVSE + SPL Auditor if that makes any difference to your answer.
Once again sorry for the sheer simplicity of this question! I'm sure you prefer the tougher answers haha
Thanks
At risk of shooting myself in the foot.. yes.... Mr Westlake's Audiolab 8200CDQ. I recommend you go and listen to one. Don't tell anyone though!
Question to John Westlake
I'm also bought one today! It's too early to tell someting about sound, just want to say that in my 8200CDQ there are two additional digital filters ( 7 totally ): "Optimal Transient XD" and "Optimal Transient DD". They are not mentioned in manual, so I'm wondering what is the benefit?
I'll make comparison between Audiolab 8000CD MKII + Linn AV5103 preamp against Audiolab 8200CDQ later on. I'm also have two headphone amps to compare. Ah! I also have external DAC on Sabre ES9008 ( not 9018 as in the CDQ )
I'm also bought one today! It's too early to tell someting about sound, just want to say that in my 8200CDQ there are two additional digital filters ( 7 totally ): "Optimal Transient XD" and "Optimal Transient DD". They are not mentioned in manual, so I'm wondering what is the benefit?
I'll make comparison between Audiolab 8000CD MKII + Linn AV5103 preamp against Audiolab 8200CDQ later on. I'm also have two headphone amps to compare. Ah! I also have external DAC on Sabre ES9008 ( not 9018 as in the CDQ )
Well, you know what? Don't be fooled by first three-four days from buying new of Audiolab 8200CDQ. Just don't swith it off. This is the brilliant apparatus!!!
My system now: The Audiolab 8200CDQ + Genelec HT208B in cherry ( active ) = amazing!
Last edited:
Hi John,
Quick (and genuine!) questions:
1. Is there going to be an Audiolab MDAC soon or at all?
2. If so, will it provide the following kind of SNR and THD measurements promised in an earlier post, or can we expect specs more in line with the actual production 8200CD and 8200CDQ?
MDAC highlights:-
• Greater then 132dB Awtd Dynamic Range (Balanced outputs, 6V RMS 0.0008%THD 1KHz 100 Ohm load)
• Greater then 128dB Non Awtd (Measurement limited)
• 0.0004% THD @ 1KHz 2Vrms (50 Ohm Load)
• Selectable 117dB DR Class A Fully Balanced Analogue Line Level Pre Amplifier. 0.0015 THD @ 2Vrms (50 Ohm load).
Thank you Sir.
Quick (and genuine!) questions:
1. Is there going to be an Audiolab MDAC soon or at all?
2. If so, will it provide the following kind of SNR and THD measurements promised in an earlier post, or can we expect specs more in line with the actual production 8200CD and 8200CDQ?
MDAC highlights:-
• Greater then 132dB Awtd Dynamic Range (Balanced outputs, 6V RMS 0.0008%THD 1KHz 100 Ohm load)
• Greater then 128dB Non Awtd (Measurement limited)
• 0.0004% THD @ 1KHz 2Vrms (50 Ohm Load)
• Selectable 117dB DR Class A Fully Balanced Analogue Line Level Pre Amplifier. 0.0015 THD @ 2Vrms (50 Ohm load).
Thank you Sir.
I dont know if anyone's here or interest died down sinced launch but, searching around, I found this answer explaining why the dynamic range of the Audiolab 8200 DACs are now just RCA＞98dB A-wtd and XLR＞110dB A-wtd as specified by the manufacturer:
"During the development cycle I originally used bipolar (transistor) based input stages, these resulted in a 134dB Dynamic range (Awtd), but sounded below par (crap) – well in fact it sounded like Audiolab of old, clinical, hard, cold, uninvolving… so I quickly changed to FET inputs pairs (and other tweaks) , reducing the dynamic range..." JohnW
This is certainly a very different story to the one that unfolded on this thread! The DAC was in development for a long time, and was being bigged up and I quote "It's a DaCapo beater" and "ultimate audio performance (lack of Digital glare)". It was "at final prototype stage" on 17th Sep 2009, and the specs of >132dB dynamic range were announced on 19th Nov 2009 - where really was this quick changing during the development cycle...?
Personally, the very poor RCA dynamic range (and especially if this translates into idle SNR which will mean audible hiss at the listening position with average sensitivity speakers and amp gain) now puts me off buying this DAC. So does the discrepancy in the posts on sound quality and development and specs (ironic really given past run-ins with other manufacturers, where JohnW got my upmost respect actually - only now for it to be all lost, sorry).
"During the development cycle I originally used bipolar (transistor) based input stages, these resulted in a 134dB Dynamic range (Awtd), but sounded below par (crap) – well in fact it sounded like Audiolab of old, clinical, hard, cold, uninvolving… so I quickly changed to FET inputs pairs (and other tweaks) , reducing the dynamic range..." JohnW
This is certainly a very different story to the one that unfolded on this thread! The DAC was in development for a long time, and was being bigged up and I quote "It's a DaCapo beater" and "ultimate audio performance (lack of Digital glare)". It was "at final prototype stage" on 17th Sep 2009, and the specs of >132dB dynamic range were announced on 19th Nov 2009 - where really was this quick changing during the development cycle...?
Personally, the very poor RCA dynamic range (and especially if this translates into idle SNR which will mean audible hiss at the listening position with average sensitivity speakers and amp gain) now puts me off buying this DAC. So does the discrepancy in the posts on sound quality and development and specs (ironic really given past run-ins with other manufacturers, where JohnW got my upmost respect actually - only now for it to be all lost, sorry).
fauntleroy,
Your last posting is very strange - I don’t understand the "Axe" you appear to be grinding?
Dynamic Range has little to do with sound quality - the degradation in DR is caused by the "noisy" Fet's - FFT shows a "Flat" White noise.
Very Poor RCA dynamic Range? it's still better then the theoretical dynamic range of CD of around 96dB - have you been put off by the “Noise” from CD? (I’m not talking about sound quality).
RCA's Awtd dynamic range is over 100dB - with XLR about 117dB - but again this says nothing about sound quality - I design for sound quality, not measurements - the reason I compromised the measurement performance for sound quality in the first instance.
Unfortunately, We have been unable to find lower noise FET OPAMP’s which can be used in our circuit topology (we only use the front-end of the Opamp - bypassing its internal output stage).
The MDAC has a FULLY discrete FET based analogue section, which should result in higher dynamic range - but this is not a design target - rather sound quality remains priority.
And yes - I very much consider the CD / CDQ to be a Dacapo beater - with lack of digital glare! I have yet to hear any disagreement with this statement – how you not notice the number of Dacapo systems that have come up on EBay recently…
In fact there has JUST been a recent post of a Dacapo / PIP2 user on PFM who has just bought the CDQ - his comments are "a Massive difference" I've asked him to clarify for better or worst... ! (I hope not worst – or you have every right to laugh at my expense!)
Do you have any idea of the dynamic range of Dacapo - I don’t believe it was even close to 96dB dynamic range of CD!
John
Your last posting is very strange - I don’t understand the "Axe" you appear to be grinding?
Dynamic Range has little to do with sound quality - the degradation in DR is caused by the "noisy" Fet's - FFT shows a "Flat" White noise.
Very Poor RCA dynamic Range? it's still better then the theoretical dynamic range of CD of around 96dB - have you been put off by the “Noise” from CD? (I’m not talking about sound quality).
RCA's Awtd dynamic range is over 100dB - with XLR about 117dB - but again this says nothing about sound quality - I design for sound quality, not measurements - the reason I compromised the measurement performance for sound quality in the first instance.
Unfortunately, We have been unable to find lower noise FET OPAMP’s which can be used in our circuit topology (we only use the front-end of the Opamp - bypassing its internal output stage).
The MDAC has a FULLY discrete FET based analogue section, which should result in higher dynamic range - but this is not a design target - rather sound quality remains priority.
And yes - I very much consider the CD / CDQ to be a Dacapo beater - with lack of digital glare! I have yet to hear any disagreement with this statement – how you not notice the number of Dacapo systems that have come up on EBay recently…
In fact there has JUST been a recent post of a Dacapo / PIP2 user on PFM who has just bought the CDQ - his comments are "a Massive difference" I've asked him to clarify for better or worst... ! (I hope not worst – or you have every right to laugh at my expense!)
Do you have any idea of the dynamic range of Dacapo - I don’t believe it was even close to 96dB dynamic range of CD!
John
Hi John. Nice to see you back. I'm expecting trouble from my DiscMagic again soon. I intend to upgrade to one of your new designs. Which should I buy? Cost is a secondary issue. I don't need another preamp, but if the unit with pre sounds better, I'd go for that.
I'm in no rush (not yet anyway). Will you be releasing a CDP of your own, or are the Audiolabs the only game in town?
I'm in no rush (not yet anyway). Will you be releasing a CDP of your own, or are the Audiolabs the only game in town?
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/70107-da-capo-issue-john-w-67.html#post2183167
We are still waiting for your clock-lock circuit John...so whenever you are ready
We are still waiting for your clock-lock circuit John...so whenever you are ready
Hi, I've just discovered that this site seems to be the last refuge of Da Capo owners and thought I'd join in.
I've just dug out my Da Capo to test it as I was thinking of selling it to help the purchase of a USB dac but after plugging it in I'm not so sure. I've forgotten how good it sounds !
Is there are way I can use it in a computer audio setup ? I've tried connecting it using my focusrite saffire as a bridge but I get nothing. I'm guessing it doesn't like the output of the saffire.
If it is possible then were then any optical inputs produced for the DC ? Would ebay be the best place to find inputs and modules ?
Many THanks
Alan
I've just dug out my Da Capo to test it as I was thinking of selling it to help the purchase of a USB dac but after plugging it in I'm not so sure. I've forgotten how good it sounds !
Is there are way I can use it in a computer audio setup ? I've tried connecting it using my focusrite saffire as a bridge but I get nothing. I'm guessing it doesn't like the output of the saffire.
If it is possible then were then any optical inputs produced for the DC ? Would ebay be the best place to find inputs and modules ?
Many THanks
Alan
Hi John, Thanks for your reply. It's fine, but it doesn't really address my points. Which were:
1. The design which you were working on for many months (even years) and described on this board as a DaCapo beater and ultimate sound quality and lack of digital glare and boasted with many exclamation marks as having >132 DR.... you now (since actual product launch) describe as crap, clinical, cold, hard, uninvolving and in need of quick changing which necessitated a big reduction in DR. I think THAT is very strange, and the two positions don't sit well together, to put it kindly.
2. Idle SNR, which I did not link to "sound quality" when the music is going at a high masking level.... IS very poor on the RCA outputs at 98dB A-wtd re 2V RMS. High SNR should be a design-goal for equipment with digital volume control going straight into a power output - that's my opinion, we can agree to disagree. The reason? It means audible hiss (which is what a flat FFT "sounds" like) at the listening position when you switch on the Audiolab DAC. Some people with sensitive speakers (like my preference at 99dB/2.83V/@1m) it means fairly intrusive hiss. It is unfair to compare to this hiss with noise-shaped dither when a CD is playing (A-weighted this is larger than 98dB SNR by the way), or to the SNR of a DaCapo which is going to go through a decent analogue preamp and thus attenuate the noise to probably that of the preamp (most hifi designs achieve >108dB Awtd re 2V) which means no audible hiss with average gear unless you get your ear within 1m of your speakers...
Thanks. No Axe or Dacs of my own being grinded here. Just was kinda looking forward to buying them based on what I read here, but no longer.
1. The design which you were working on for many months (even years) and described on this board as a DaCapo beater and ultimate sound quality and lack of digital glare and boasted with many exclamation marks as having >132 DR.... you now (since actual product launch) describe as crap, clinical, cold, hard, uninvolving and in need of quick changing which necessitated a big reduction in DR. I think THAT is very strange, and the two positions don't sit well together, to put it kindly.
2. Idle SNR, which I did not link to "sound quality" when the music is going at a high masking level.... IS very poor on the RCA outputs at 98dB A-wtd re 2V RMS. High SNR should be a design-goal for equipment with digital volume control going straight into a power output - that's my opinion, we can agree to disagree. The reason? It means audible hiss (which is what a flat FFT "sounds" like) at the listening position when you switch on the Audiolab DAC. Some people with sensitive speakers (like my preference at 99dB/2.83V/@1m) it means fairly intrusive hiss. It is unfair to compare to this hiss with noise-shaped dither when a CD is playing (A-weighted this is larger than 98dB SNR by the way), or to the SNR of a DaCapo which is going to go through a decent analogue preamp and thus attenuate the noise to probably that of the preamp (most hifi designs achieve >108dB Awtd re 2V) which means no audible hiss with average gear unless you get your ear within 1m of your speakers...
Thanks. No Axe or Dacs of my own being grinded here. Just was kinda looking forward to buying them based on what I read here, but no longer.
audible hiss at idle level
Thanks, fauntleroy @ #715.
You are so right. I just bought a 8200CDQ and I found audible hiss/noise at idle level when switched to the digital preamp mode. I my case the DAC was connected via RCA to a Cyrus X Power Amp and Audio Physics "Tempo VI" speakers (89dB @ 1W/1m)
At the normal listening position the idle noise was far beyond a tolerable level. Switching to analogue preamp mode was no option for me, as it meant loosing part of the soundstage, pronounciation of the filters and almost no audible difference to the analogue inputs.
I'm quite a bit saddened by this finding in a device, that has been reviewed so favourably by many. I'm now trying to return it to the dealer.
Thanks, fauntleroy @ #715.
You are so right. I just bought a 8200CDQ and I found audible hiss/noise at idle level when switched to the digital preamp mode. I my case the DAC was connected via RCA to a Cyrus X Power Amp and Audio Physics "Tempo VI" speakers (89dB @ 1W/1m)
At the normal listening position the idle noise was far beyond a tolerable level. Switching to analogue preamp mode was no option for me, as it meant loosing part of the soundstage, pronounciation of the filters and almost no audible difference to the analogue inputs.
I'm quite a bit saddened by this finding in a device, that has been reviewed so favourably by many. I'm now trying to return it to the dealer.
Last edited:
Strange thing ( for me ). My 8200CDQ connected via XLR to Genelec HT208B two way active speakers ( max peak acoustic output level per pair @ 1m is >= 120 dB SPL on music material ) and there's no ANY hiss/nose at idle no in digital nor in analog preamp mode. I'm even tried to connect them via RCA outputs and just the same thing - no hiss. Audiolab & Genelec connected to the (really) earthed mains supply, maybe this is the issue.
220/240 volts Mains card for da Capo?
Hi
"Hi, I've just discovered that this site seems to be the last refuge of Da Capo owners and thought I'd join in."
Soumds like me too.
My battery pack is not working despite new capacitors and batteries.
Can anyone offer me at Mains card to take the da Capo back to a simpler connectiion to power?
Also does anyone have a circuit diagram or a surplus to requirement spsres/repair battery pack at a nodest price?
Thanks
WA
Hi
"Hi, I've just discovered that this site seems to be the last refuge of Da Capo owners and thought I'd join in."
Soumds like me too.
My battery pack is not working despite new capacitors and batteries.
Can anyone offer me at Mains card to take the da Capo back to a simpler connectiion to power?
Also does anyone have a circuit diagram or a surplus to requirement spsres/repair battery pack at a nodest price?
Thanks
WA