|
Post by monkumonku on Nov 8, 2013 9:53:32 GMT -5
A revamped pre-amp that can bring the dynamics of the USP-1 while retaining the transparency and detail that the DC-1 brings directly. But the USP-1, though not as transparent as the DC-1 All this talk about transparency in DAC's drives drove me nuts! There is very little if any transparency that can be contributed to DAC's. The real transparency is in the skulls of the golden ear pedo audiophiles who think they can hear our astronauts on the moon fart. IMO (humble) I think the large majority of the transparency available in audio/HT system for hearing on this planet is from the speakers! That speaker is certainly transparent, but is it also resolving? Does it have a good pace?
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Nov 8, 2013 9:54:38 GMT -5
I think that companies rev their products for many reasons. Sometimes maybe their initial offering missed the mark, or possibly they have to adjust to market trends. Sometimes people (like me) just go for the new shiny things. Sometime sub suppliers obsolete a part that forces a change. Companies like Denon release new models every year! Even the Jolida FX Tube Dac is on version 3. With Emotiva they quickly moved from XDA-1 to XDA-2. In my opinion because of the whole volume control issue and the market demand for asynchronous USB. So in regards to a possible DC-2, there could be many reasons for a product change, not necessarily sonic in nature. Yeah and some folks just need to have the newer model or simply like getting deliveries from Fed Ex to irritate their wives (oh no, what did he buy now). Some get very anxiety/panic driven as soon as the five year warranty passes the one year mark (what if it quits working and I have to pay all that shipping back from LA to Tennasee). Don't be surprised if you see a DC-1 for sale at the emporium soon, shipping from an LA area zip code. I won't mention the membermember namename. You really think anyone is that stupid to be putting their DC-1 up for sale like that??? So... is there really a DC-2 coming out?
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Nov 8, 2013 9:58:09 GMT -5
A revamped pre-amp that can bring the dynamics of the USP-1 while retaining the transparency and detail that the DC-1 brings directly. But the USP-1, though not as transparent as the DC-1 All this talk about transparency in DAC's drives drove me nuts! There is very little if any transparency that can be contributed to DAC's. The real transparency is in the skulls of the golden ear pedo audiophiles who think they can hear our astronauts on the moon fart. IMO (humble) I think the large majority of the transparency available in audio/HT system for hearing on this planet is from the speakers! Thou shalt not add humor to this thread!
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Nov 8, 2013 10:02:07 GMT -5
All this talk about transparency in DAC's drives drove me nuts! There is very little if any transparency that can be contributed to DAC's. The real transparency is in the skulls of the golden ear pedo audiophiles who think they can hear our astronauts on the moon fart. IMO (humble) I think the large majority of the transparency available in audio/HT system for hearing on this planet is from the speakers! That speaker is certainly transparent, but is it also resolving? Does it have a good pace? I found it to have a rather glassy sound. Though it certainly felt like you could see right through it.
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on Nov 8, 2013 11:58:20 GMT -5
That speaker is certainly transparent, but is it also resolving? Does it have a good pace? I found it to have a rather glassy sound. Though it certainly felt like you could see right through it. do I detect some near-field reflections?
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Nov 8, 2013 12:08:25 GMT -5
Ooohhhhh.....
|
|
|
Post by jdskycaster on Nov 8, 2013 12:12:01 GMT -5
Garbulky's post is an interesting one and made me think. Should everyone that posts a review of a product describe their tastes, environment, experience before writing a single word? That would be helpful for anyone looking to purchase a piece of gear and something you never get any insight into with a "professional" review. Sure if you follow a certain reviewer for years you can some base of reference but you never truly know where they are coming from in any given situation and ultimately it comes down to some watered down comparison like "these speakers can hold their own against those costing X dollars more."
How helpful is that really? Will it make a difference in your room and with your ears? Not suggesting everyone has to post a resume but knowing some basics about a reviewer before you actually read the review could help in determining how much value if any you can get out of that review.
Edit: It personally stay away from writing reviews myself because of all these factors. The last piece of gear I added to my HT was the Sherbourn amp in my signature. How did it sound? Just fine. Am I returning it or selling it? Nope.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Ranger on Nov 8, 2013 13:29:02 GMT -5
My XDA-1 doesn't do it for me anymore. I have heard better and I don't want to go back! So what's your excuse for not purchasing Boomzilla's DC-1 in the Emporium? Too late now!
|
|
|
Post by moovtune on Nov 8, 2013 15:00:49 GMT -5
My XDA-1 doesn't do it for me anymore. I have heard better and I don't want to go back! So what's your excuse for not purchasing Boomzilla's DC-1 in the Emporium? Too late now! The one I own uses too much gas. Maybe the new model DC-2 will be more energy saving. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by TheMachinist on Nov 14, 2013 10:46:11 GMT -5
I would look forward for a stripped down version of the DC-1 with a pure DAC only function but with upgraded design and components. Many of us won't need the preamp analog volume control and headphone amp. So all the $$ goes to where it is needed most.
Advances like isolating the incoming power to USB receiver.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,964
|
Post by KeithL on Nov 14, 2013 11:54:46 GMT -5
As to a full-sized version..... then aren't you really talking about an XDA-3 (with the design improvements from the DC-1 added into the XDA-2)? The DC-1 was designed primarily to appeal to the pro market, where being able to mount two DACs side-by-side in a single panel (or a DAC and an ADC) is the standard. Many audiophiles also put their DAC on top of their computer, or tuck it into their current rack someplace where they don't have space for a full-sized component - and both of those work best with the smaller "half-rack" form factor. The DC-1 is a good compromise between the little plastic box (with a wall wart) offered by many other DAC manufacturers - and a full-sized component. In general, we feel that a DAC should be transparent. In strictly technical terms, as a preamp, the output and gain stages in the DC-1 are more perfect than the USP-1 (although the DC-1 doesn't have nearly as many features). Therefore, modifying the preamp circuitry in the DC-1 to sound like the USP-1 would be a step down - so I don't expect that to happen. (There is no actual "design feature" in the USP-1, whose purpose is to "improve dynamics", which we could add in to the DC-1. The output stage of the DC-1 is about as good as we can get it. ) If you really want to add the sound of the USP-1 to a DC-1, then you'll have to get a USP-1. You may see a 1/4" headphone jack in the future, but it's unlikely because the reality is that most modern headphones come with a 1/8" plug. (From the headphone vendor's point of view: their headphones have to work with all the equipment out there. If they put a 1/8" connector on the wire, then provide a nice screw-in 1/4" adapter, their cans can work well with either. If they put a 1/4" connector on the wire, the adapter required to fit it into an 1/8" jack is bulky and prone to damage. This makes the 1/8" plug a better choice for them. Beyond that, some high-end cans now come with one of several types of XLR connectors - which all require a custom wire anyway.) As to the suggestions for a "stripped down" DC-1 sans headphone amp and volume control... usually things like that come down to a matter of production costs. If we were designing a new product instead of the DC-1, eliminating the volume control and the headphone amps would reduce the complexity, and eliminate a few more or less expensive parts, and so it could end up being a lower-cost product. However, since the DC-1 is already in production, producing a second model, minus a few small features but without cutting any important corners, really wouldn't save us much on production costs; in fact, the savings might be overshadowed by the cost of maintaining a separate SKU (that's manufacturer speak for building, packaging, selling, and supporting a separate item number). The reality is that a headphone amp, or a volume control, isn't that expensive to include in a product - and most customers really want one or the other if not both. The reason why the top-of-the-line TV has all the features, and plenty of inputs, while the lower models always seem to have one less input than you need usually ISN'T because those extra inputs cost too much to include. It's called "product differentiation"; it means that many manufacturers feel the need to have a very competitively priced unit (which they don't make much money on); and they MUST do something to make that unit "not quite good enough" for most customers so they buy the more expensive models instead. Rather than spend a lot of money adding cool features to their best model, many of them basically start with "the best model", then deliberately cripple the lower models by removing important features - so you either have to settle for not getting what you really want, or you have to buy that top model. (In fact, in many cases, if you look inside that TV you may find that the circuitry is there for those extra inputs - they just left off the 25 cent connectors on the rear panel. Would you really want a DC-1 minus the headphone amps and volume control for $50 less? ) We don't think that way; rest assured that, in the "big scheme of things", you're not paying that much for that headphone amplifier - and you might actually need (or want) it someday. And your next power amp may not have a volume control.... I'm very happy with the DC-1 as it is. But it also could be offered in a "full size" version, which maybe adds the 1/4" headphone jack and the HT bypass others like. I like the HP jack for listening without firing anything else up. Personally, I think it's best without adding any "slam" or additional stages beyond it's output. Bill Hehe I didn't mean to add slam where it wasn't there like some sort of bass "enhancer" or the "3d awesomeifier" that's coming out in the Geek Pulse DAC. The USP-1 was a conundrum. It had top notch dynamics but wasn't as transparent as either the XDA-1 or the DC-1 direct especially in the treble. But it was able to present "weight" of instruments just beautifully and when there were dynamics it was EXTREMELY quick in bringing them. It was "almost" immediate for lack of a better description. When I listened to both movies and music, I was startled at how quick, weighty and powerful those dynamics were compared to just direct via the XDA-1 to amp. If they could combine the stregnths of the DC-1 with that ability, that would be nice. However, I don't think a DC-1 coupled to a USP-1 integrated into a box would be a good combo. It would need to be a different design.
|
|
novisnick
EmoPhile
CEO Secret Monoblock Society
Posts: 27,230
|
Post by novisnick on Nov 14, 2013 12:07:26 GMT -5
Form factor works for me, I also have full size gear but this really fills the bill.really like the DC-1. peace, Nick
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,964
|
Post by KeithL on Nov 14, 2013 12:08:23 GMT -5
It sounds like a good idea to me - and I try to do so whenever it seems relevant (at least a short statement about your preferences on the type of product being reviewed). Garbulky's post is an interesting one and made me think. Should everyone that posts a review of a product describe their tastes, environment, experience before writing a single word? That would be helpful for anyone looking to purchase a piece of gear and something you never get any insight into with a "professional" review. Sure if you follow a certain reviewer for years you can some base of reference but you never truly know where they are coming from in any given situation and ultimately it comes down to some watered down comparison like "these speakers can hold their own against those costing X dollars more." How helpful is that really? Will it make a difference in your room and with your ears? Not suggesting everyone has to post a resume but knowing some basics about a reviewer before you actually read the review could help in determining how much value if any you can get out of that review. Edit: It personally stay away from writing reviews myself because of all these factors. The last piece of gear I added to my HT was the Sherbourn amp in my signature. How did it sound? Just fine. Am I returning it or selling it? Nope.
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Nov 14, 2013 13:05:31 GMT -5
As to a full-sized version..... then aren't you really talking about an XDA-3 (with the design improvements from the DC-1 added into the XDA-2)? The DC-1 was designed primarily to appeal to the pro market, where being able to mount two DACs side-by-side in a single panel (or a DAC and an ADC) is the standard. Many audiophiles also put their DAC on top of their computer, or tuck it into their current rack someplace where they don't have space for a full-sized component - and both of those work best with the smaller "half-rack" form factor. The DC-1 is a good compromise between the little plastic box (with a wall wart) offered by many other DAC manufacturers - and a full-sized component. In general, we feel that a DAC should be transparent. In strictly technical terms, as a preamp, the output and gain stages in the DC-1 are more perfect than the USP-1 (although the DC-1 doesn't have nearly as many features). Therefore, modifying the preamp circuitry in the DC-1 to sound like the USP-1 would be a step down - so I don't expect that to happen. (There is no actual "design feature" in the USP-1, whose purpose is to "improve dynamics", which we could add in to the DC-1. The output stage of the DC-1 is about as good as we can get it. ) If you really want to add the sound of the USP-1 to a DC-1, then you'll have to get a USP-1. You may see a 1/4" headphone jack in the future, but it's unlikely because the reality is that most modern headphones come with a 1/8" plug. (From the headphone vendor's point of view: their headphones have to work with all the equipment out there. If they put a 1/8" connector on the wire, then provide a nice screw-in 1/4" adapter, their cans can work well with either. If they put a 1/4" connector on the wire, the adapter required to fit it into an 1/8" jack is bulky and prone to damage. This makes the 1/8" plug a better choice for them. Beyond that, some high-end cans now come with one of several types of XLR connectors - which all require a custom wire anyway.) As to the suggestions for a "stripped down" DC-1 sans headphone amp and volume control... usually things like that come down to a matter of production costs. If we were designing a new product instead of the DC-1, eliminating the volume control and the headphone amps would reduce the complexity, and eliminate a few more or less expensive parts, and so it could end up being a lower-cost product. However, since the DC-1 is already in production, producing a second model, minus a few small features but without cutting any important corners, really wouldn't save us much on production costs; in fact, the savings might be overshadowed by the cost of maintaining a separate SKU (that's manufacturer speak for building, packaging, selling, and supporting a separate item number). The reality is that a headphone amp, or a volume control, isn't that expensive to include in a product - and most customers really want one or the other if not both. The reason why the top-of-the-line TV has all the features, and plenty of inputs, while the lower models always seem to have one less input than you need usually ISN'T because those extra inputs cost too much to include. It's called "product differentiation"; it means that many manufacturers feel the need to have a very competitively priced unit (which they don't make much money on); and they MUST do something to make that unit "not quite good enough" for most customers so they buy the more expensive models instead. Rather than spend a lot of money adding cool features to their best model, many of them basically start with "the best model", then deliberately cripple the lower models by removing important features - so you either have to settle for not getting what you really want, or you have to buy that top model. (In fact, in many cases, if you look inside that TV you may find that the circuitry is there for those extra inputs - they just left off the 25 cent connectors on the rear panel. Would you really want a DC-1 minus the headphone amps and volume control for $50 less? ) We don't think that way; rest assured that, in the "big scheme of things", you're not paying that much for that headphone amplifier - and you might actually need (or want) it someday. And your next power amp may not have a volume control.... Hehe I didn't mean to add slam where it wasn't there like some sort of bass "enhancer" or the "3d awesomeifier" that's coming out in the Geek Pulse DAC. The USP-1 was a conundrum. It had top notch dynamics but wasn't as transparent as either the XDA-1 or the DC-1 direct especially in the treble. But it was able to present "weight" of instruments just beautifully and when there were dynamics it was EXTREMELY quick in bringing them. It was "almost" immediate for lack of a better description. When I listened to both movies and music, I was startled at how quick, weighty and powerful those dynamics were compared to just direct via the XDA-1 to amp. If they could combine the stregnths of the DC-1 with that ability, that would be nice. However, I don't think a DC-1 coupled to a USP-1 integrated into a box would be a good combo. It would need to be a different design. I'm not sure if you've read my review of the DC-1, but I consider it a pretty significant step up from the XDA-1. (I really like it). I guess I'm not sure what it is about the DC-1 pre-amp that keeps me from rating it less than perfect. It's good don't get me wrong. But the USP-1 is not a paring I would personally use with the DC-1. The DC-1 is simply more transparent to me. I guess for pre-amp functionality, maybe it's the resistor attenuation that I'm finding strange? I don't know. I have used 6, 12 and 24 db attenuators in other applications and I found it prevented that last bit of dynamics too. I may be completely mixing the two up. So I was thinking of a dc-1 coupled to a pre-amp which doesn't have resistor attenuation (i.e. to use a potentiometer instead). Now since I haven't heard the XSP-1 that does have resistor attenuation and is reportedly top notch...I don't want to go around saying it's got to be resistor attenuation etc as I simply don't know. Anyway, it's all wishful thinking. Just was thinking how something that combines the stregnths of the DC-1 (really nice sound quality) with the strength of the USP-1 (really nice dynamics) would sound. Unfortunately, I don't know what kind of circuitry that would entail.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,964
|
Post by KeithL on Nov 14, 2013 14:55:56 GMT -5
I'll tell you honestly - from an engineering point of view this topic is very.... perplexing.... (from a technical standpoint, I don't know of anything that the USP-1 does "better" than the preamp section of the DC-1) ALL of the devices we're discussing are resistor attenuators: * A potentiometer is a variable resistor with a tap that is moved mechanically. * A stepped attenuator is a series of resistors which are switched with a manual selector switch. * The volume controls we use in the XDA-2 and DC-1 are a series of resistors, switched by electronic switches, all in a nice neat chip package with digital control circuitry. But they are all still just resistors... which are rather simple passive electronic devices and really shouldn't have distinctive sounds, although each type does have limitations: the two resistors in a stereo potentiometer often don't track perfectly; there could be resistance or distortion generated at the switch contacts of a stepped attenuator; and the electronic switches in a digitally controlled switch could introduce distortion (ours are very good in that regard). Likewise, an attenuator is simply a pair of resistors, and also shouldn't have a distinctive sound. Now, of course, nothing in the real world is perfect, so resistors aren't identical - and some varieties do have slightly different electrical characteristics - but they are pretty darned close. Adding an attenuator between two components alters the load impedance seen by the source device, and the source impedance seen by the destination device, which is more likely to be the cause of some slight audible difference than the attenuator itself. This could then affect the performance of one or the other of those circuits, and so alter the sound. The change could also result in an interaction with the electrical characteristics of the interconnect cable - but, again, this should be between slight and nonexistent. (Adding an attenuator does cause the circuits involved to shift to a slightly different part of their operating range - which is, presumably, why you inserted them in the first place - and which could cause some slight change in sound.) As to a full-sized version..... then aren't you really talking about an XDA-3 (with the design improvements from the DC-1 added into the XDA-2)? The DC-1 was designed primarily to appeal to the pro market, where being able to mount two DACs side-by-side in a single panel (or a DAC and an ADC) is the standard. Many audiophiles also put their DAC on top of their computer, or tuck it into their current rack someplace where they don't have space for a full-sized component - and both of those work best with the smaller "half-rack" form factor. The DC-1 is a good compromise between the little plastic box (with a wall wart) offered by many other DAC manufacturers - and a full-sized component. In general, we feel that a DAC should be transparent. In strictly technical terms, as a preamp, the output and gain stages in the DC-1 are more perfect than the USP-1 (although the DC-1 doesn't have nearly as many features). Therefore, modifying the preamp circuitry in the DC-1 to sound like the USP-1 would be a step down - so I don't expect that to happen. (There is no actual "design feature" in the USP-1, whose purpose is to "improve dynamics", which we could add in to the DC-1. The output stage of the DC-1 is about as good as we can get it. ) If you really want to add the sound of the USP-1 to a DC-1, then you'll have to get a USP-1. You may see a 1/4" headphone jack in the future, but it's unlikely because the reality is that most modern headphones come with a 1/8" plug. (From the headphone vendor's point of view: their headphones have to work with all the equipment out there. If they put a 1/8" connector on the wire, then provide a nice screw-in 1/4" adapter, their cans can work well with either. If they put a 1/4" connector on the wire, the adapter required to fit it into an 1/8" jack is bulky and prone to damage. This makes the 1/8" plug a better choice for them. Beyond that, some high-end cans now come with one of several types of XLR connectors - which all require a custom wire anyway.) As to the suggestions for a "stripped down" DC-1 sans headphone amp and volume control... usually things like that come down to a matter of production costs. If we were designing a new product instead of the DC-1, eliminating the volume control and the headphone amps would reduce the complexity, and eliminate a few more or less expensive parts, and so it could end up being a lower-cost product. However, since the DC-1 is already in production, producing a second model, minus a few small features but without cutting any important corners, really wouldn't save us much on production costs; in fact, the savings might be overshadowed by the cost of maintaining a separate SKU (that's manufacturer speak for building, packaging, selling, and supporting a separate item number). The reality is that a headphone amp, or a volume control, isn't that expensive to include in a product - and most customers really want one or the other if not both. The reason why the top-of-the-line TV has all the features, and plenty of inputs, while the lower models always seem to have one less input than you need usually ISN'T because those extra inputs cost too much to include. It's called "product differentiation"; it means that many manufacturers feel the need to have a very competitively priced unit (which they don't make much money on); and they MUST do something to make that unit "not quite good enough" for most customers so they buy the more expensive models instead. Rather than spend a lot of money adding cool features to their best model, many of them basically start with "the best model", then deliberately cripple the lower models by removing important features - so you either have to settle for not getting what you really want, or you have to buy that top model. (In fact, in many cases, if you look inside that TV you may find that the circuitry is there for those extra inputs - they just left off the 25 cent connectors on the rear panel. Would you really want a DC-1 minus the headphone amps and volume control for $50 less? ) We don't think that way; rest assured that, in the "big scheme of things", you're not paying that much for that headphone amplifier - and you might actually need (or want) it someday. And your next power amp may not have a volume control.... I'm not sure if you've read my review of the DC-1, but I consider it a pretty significant step up from the XDA-1. (I really like it). I guess I'm not sure what it is about the DC-1 pre-amp that keeps me from rating it less than perfect. It's good don't get me wrong. But the USP-1 is not a paring I would personally use with the DC-1. The DC-1 is simply more transparent to me. I guess for pre-amp functionality, maybe it's the resistor attenuation that I'm finding strange? I don't know. I have used 6, 12 and 24 db attenuators in other applications and I found it prevented that last bit of dynamics too. I may be completely mixing the two up. So I was thinking of a dc-1 coupled to a pre-amp which doesn't have resistor attenuation (i.e. to use a potentiometer instead). Now since I haven't heard the XSP-1 that does have resistor attenuation and is reportedly top notch...I don't want to go around saying it's got to be resistor attenuation etc as I simply don't know. Anyway, it's all wishful thinking. Just was thinking how something that combines the stregnths of the DC-1 (really nice sound quality) with the strength of the USP-1 (really nice dynamics) would sound. Unfortunately, I don't know what kind of circuitry that would entail.
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Nov 14, 2013 15:27:33 GMT -5
I'll tell you honestly - from an engineering point of view this topic is very.... perplexing.... (from a technical standpoint, I don't know of anything that the USP-1 does "better" than the preamp section of the DC-1) ALL of the devices we're discussing are resistor attenuators: * A potentiometer is a variable resistor with a tap that is moved mechanically. * A stepped attenuator is a series of resistors which are switched with a manual selector switch. * The volume controls we use in the XDA-2 and DC-1 are a series of resistors, switched by electronic switches, all in a nice neat chip package with digital control circuitry. But they are all still just resistors... which are rather simple passive electronic devices and really shouldn't have distinctive sounds, although each type does have limitations: the two resistors in a stereo potentiometer often don't track perfectly; there could be resistance or distortion generated at the switch contacts of a stepped attenuator; and the electronic switches in a digitally controlled switch could introduce distortion (ours are very good in that regard). Likewise, an attenuator is simply a pair of resistors, and also shouldn't have a distinctive sound. Now, of course, nothing in the real world is perfect, so resistors aren't identical - and some varieties do have slightly different electrical characteristics - but they are pretty darned close. Adding an attenuator between two components alters the load impedance seen by the source device, and the source impedance seen by the destination device, which is more likely to be the cause of some slight audible difference than the attenuator itself. This could then affect the performance of one or the other of those circuits, and so alter the sound. The change could also result in an interaction with the electrical characteristics of the interconnect cable - but, again, this should be between slight and nonexistent. (Adding an attenuator does cause the circuits involved to shift to a slightly different part of their operating range - which is, presumably, why you inserted them in the first place - and which could cause some slight change in sound.) I'm not sure if you've read my review of the DC-1, but I consider it a pretty significant step up from the XDA-1. (I really like it). I guess I'm not sure what it is about the DC-1 pre-amp that keeps me from rating it less than perfect. It's good don't get me wrong. But the USP-1 is not a paring I would personally use with the DC-1. The DC-1 is simply more transparent to me. I guess for pre-amp functionality, maybe it's the resistor attenuation that I'm finding strange? I don't know. I have used 6, 12 and 24 db attenuators in other applications and I found it prevented that last bit of dynamics too. I may be completely mixing the two up. So I was thinking of a dc-1 coupled to a pre-amp which doesn't have resistor attenuation (i.e. to use a potentiometer instead). Now since I haven't heard the XSP-1 that does have resistor attenuation and is reportedly top notch...I don't want to go around saying it's got to be resistor attenuation etc as I simply don't know. Anyway, it's all wishful thinking. Just was thinking how something that combines the stregnths of the DC-1 (really nice sound quality) with the strength of the USP-1 (really nice dynamics) would sound. Unfortunately, I don't know what kind of circuitry that would entail. I think I'll take this discussion away from the forum so that I won't derail this thread. But I will send you a PM. Thank you for your thoughtful replies.
|
|
|
Post by TheMachinist on Nov 14, 2013 20:18:35 GMT -5
View AttachmentForm factor works for me, I also have full size gear but this really fills the bill.really like the DC-1. peace, Nick Thats exactly what i intend to do for a compact 1U rack size bedroom setup. Waiting for my 2nd PA 2-50 and DC-1 to arrive to replace the MF M1. Will run 2 PA 2-50 in bi-amped mono modes to the Dali ikon 5s.
|
|
novisnick
EmoPhile
CEO Secret Monoblock Society
Posts: 27,230
|
Post by novisnick on Nov 14, 2013 20:35:01 GMT -5
Hi Machinist, I concur with you choice for the bedroom, should be a nice fit. I saved about $100.00 going with the Sherbourn 2/150, I already had one so I got the match for my HT front and rear hight speakers. I was looking for an inexpensive way to configure them. I did look at the PA 2-50 but Locke I said, already had one. In my rack , on one side is my XSP-1 and the other side is my Belkin with an Oppo 103 on top, so it's a perfect fit. Let me know how your setup sounds please. I'm very curious.
Peace,
Nick
|
|
|
Post by sahmen on Nov 14, 2013 21:51:57 GMT -5
I really, really love the sound of my DC-1, but there is one thing that really, really needs to be fixed about it: i.e. The remote... The remotes of all my other Emo Units are built like tanks, and work flawlessly... So what happened with this otherwise almost perfectly engineered little DAC?... You would think someone was too busy trying to perfect the DAC to think of the remote... Sooo something has got to give here, although I do not think we need to wait for a DC-2 for a remote to be fixed, right? Sorry guys! This sucks... Today, my DC-1's remote stopped working, and I'm cranky! I replaced the batteries with new ones. and it still won't work... And the darn thing is not even 2 weeks old yet...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2013 21:59:13 GMT -5
My DC-1 remote started having issues less than two weeks too. The power on and off would not work, and if you hit the volume up or down it would do nothing. Then on it's own it would go to 0 or 100 depending which button you hit. It would not stop until it reached 0 or 100 even if you attempted to stop it. I had to send mine for repair. I received the e-mail today saying it is being shipped back to me. Hopefully whatever the issue was it has been corrected, and I don't have any more issues with it.
|
|