I use a Hifiberry Digi2 SPDIF hat on a RP4 music server streamer into the SPDIF digital input and it sounds superb. I used Digi+ hat before which doesn’t have optimized clock and yet sounded superb. Used a Focusrite 2i2 into RCA analogue inputs before and the long, unbalanced cables weren’t quite optimal. Yet the Fusion’s sound was so nice. Adding another DAC is just a weird signal chain, send the music in straight away.
Thank you all for so many comments. Great input, much appreciated. In the meantime I realised that option 3 is probably not even possible. I don't think FA can concurrently act as an amplifier and digital out. Has anyone tested it?
Great tip, will get the amps and test option 2 first.
I know what you are saying but this coloration may actually be closer to what we, sorry "I", hear as natural. I'm not saying numbers lie but they don't tell the full story. After thousands of hours of musical education I mostly expect instruments to sound natural and I know how they should sound. I use stacked electrostats and 4x18" open baffle woofers to ensure transparency. Based on my tests Hypex amps are amongst 2% the most natural and transparent out there, no doubt. But I have not heard a budget DAC that made me think it's bees knees, no matter how many wet dreams the folks at ASR had after seeing some spectacular SINAD results. I admire Hypex creators but I'm worried their DAC may just be another SINAD chaser.
Every DAC has some signature in a revealing system. I don't know technical explanation but DACs do sound different. Years ago I was swapping output caps in my DAC and even this had obvious effects. Maybe Hypex found a way for their ADC/DAC process to be extremely transparent and retain the signature of the DAC in the chain, I don't know yet.
I am hoping for FAs to well surpass miniDSP's performance, especially in analog domain which I have tested and was disappointed. FAs also have 1000W per channel which is my main reason for a change. I like your suggestion about cleaning digital signal. Any recommendations that work well with FA?
Are you saying FAs support external clock synch via AES? I thought it was async.
Apologies, I am not sure what you mean. Are you suggesting to use minidsp as the xover before Fusion amp?
Not sure why I can't quote your message, but as to "Every DAC has some signature in a revealing system. I don't know technical explanation but DACs do sound different." I can only say that I understand that that is your perception. Do you have any objective, verifiable support for your view?
I am an engineer, I believe in objective, verifiable facts.
I am an engineer, I believe in objective, verifiable facts.
No, I don't have any objective evidence and I do accept that what I perceive "more natural" may show certain unwanted characteristics on your tests. However, as an engineer you must accept that the testing of equipment, DACs included, is performed in a limited scope. What makes you believe that your tests will capture everything that affects our perception of tone, timbre, space, imaging etc. Will your tests capture total symbiosis between individual elements of an audio system? Finally, for ASR warriors, will Yo Yo Ma's cello through any speakers in an anechoic chamber sound more natural or transparent than him playing cello in your untreated room with 30-40dB noise floor?
Apologies, I am not sure what you mean. Are you suggesting to use minidsp as the xover before Fusion amp?
--
No, I use minidsp in another set with 4-way active diy-speakers with ICEpower amps.
Actually I have also made third pair of active speakers with FA253 for my son, I forgot to mention. Others use FA153. All get analog signal!
Obviously I and my family are just lucky to have bad hearing...
What I measure and test (also with proper, controlled double blind tests) is "is the output signal an accurate copy of the input signal, so yes, it does capture the interaction of the components (I assume that is what you mean by "total symbiosis between individual elements of an audio system").
To me this is the synergy between audio gear that makes some elements work better together than some others. There is probably a set of tests that could capture it almost perfectly but it surely isn't the test of bits in vs. bits out. The blind test you mentioned is great, but it cannot be called objective from engineering point of view. If you think otherwise, then I'm not sure why are you challenging my statement that DACs sound differently.
Why do you think "bits (or analog signal) out vs bits (or analog signal) in" wouldn't capture the mythical "synergy"?
A blind test to test preference is not objective, a proper, controlled double blind test to determine if a person can hear a difference or not is considered objective evidence, especially when enough tests are done so that results have statistical significance.
I am challenging your statement that DACs sound different because properly conducted double blind listening tests not only show that properly designed DACs that are designed to be accurate and transparent (as opposed to having an intentional coloration as "house sound") do sound the same, but that listeners can't tell a combination of ADC and DAC from a straight wire.
A blind test to test preference is not objective, a proper, controlled double blind test to determine if a person can hear a difference or not is considered objective evidence, especially when enough tests are done so that results have statistical significance.
I am challenging your statement that DACs sound different because properly conducted double blind listening tests not only show that properly designed DACs that are designed to be accurate and transparent (as opposed to having an intentional coloration as "house sound") do sound the same, but that listeners can't tell a combination of ADC and DAC from a straight wire.
An ASRC per definition removes all jitter that the incoming stream has. But if the clock that is doing the D/A conversion of that jitter free information is jittery - you are back to square 1.
(Why "per definition"? Because all PCM words are recalculated to a new clock rate - the new PCM word may contain rounding errors - but for sure, it will not contain jitter - as jitter can't be introduced in the digital domain. Let this sink in properly...)
It's always a clock that carry the jitter - never the data. Suck that in as well ;-) Yes, even on s/pdif.
//
Because bits alone are not enough to generate and transform a sound wave that hits my ear drum.
Out of courtesy I will respond but I feel that you are digging a rabbit hole trying to bring statistics to a forum for people who don't simply accept the standards designed for the masses. I believe a blind test with the members of this forum and a revealing system would prove that DACs sound different.
@baMarek not sure what you do so that I can't quote your messages (I can quote everybody else).
Bits alone are enough to generate the electrical signal that goes to the speaker. What happens after that depends on your speaker and your room, but isn't affected by the DAC.
You are of course free to believe whatever you want. I am an engineer, so I don't trust my beliefs, I test and verify them.
Statistics are almost always relevant, and has nothing to do with "designed for masses". You might be a totally unique and special person, but your ears and your brain still works surprisingly like that of most other people.
Bits alone are enough to generate the electrical signal that goes to the speaker. What happens after that depends on your speaker and your room, but isn't affected by the DAC.
You are of course free to believe whatever you want. I am an engineer, so I don't trust my beliefs, I test and verify them.
Statistics are almost always relevant, and has nothing to do with "designed for masses". You might be a totally unique and special person, but your ears and your brain still works surprisingly like that of most other people.
Thanks! Interesting, as older posts have a "Quote" option at the bottom right corner.
Well, theoretically it could be that ASR processing is bypassed in an analogue input scenario... not sure whether this practically makes a difference...
Also, you may lose part of the input range (or much worse, overload the input). Depending on the exact output level of DAC...
Indeed, option 3 is not possible. Agree on audible differences between DACs (and yes, also after level matching).
I understood from others latest generation of MiniDSP (Flex series) is much better than earlier versions. But I did not compare this myself. After this, you only would require amps.
Hard to give a good recommendation, I do not know what all is available in the market.
I currently use the following chain: PC with custom player software -> JCAT Femto USB card -> Supra Excalibur USB cable -> JL sounds USB to I2S (with SPDIF) -> Fusion FA253.
Whatever I do on PC side still makes a huge effect on sound quality. Can really go from harsh & irritating to natural, textured & transparent.
Fusion does not support external clock sync. But input clock / signal quality has a big effect.