|
|
Post by basicsystem on Dec 2, 2010 15:38:45 GMT -5
OK, you lucky guys. Here are a few listening test requests.
1. Squeezebox duet (SD) -> XDA-1 -> UMC-1 audibly better than SD -> UMC-1 ?
2. SD -> XDA-1 -> USP-1 audibly better than (SD) -> XDA-1 -> UMC-1 ?
3. SD -> XDA-1 audibly better than all the above?
|
|
|
|
Post by jmargaglione on Dec 2, 2010 16:08:24 GMT -5
I have something similar for you. I did
Sonos* -> XDA-1 -> XPA-5 using balanced cables
Sonos *-> XDA-1 -> UMC-1 -> XPA-5 using unbalanced cables
Sonos *-> UMC-1 -> XPA-5 using unbalanced cables
* Also did same tests using Oppo BD-83 instead of UMC-1.
All tests were to a pair of Klipschorns using home-made reference cables. All component cabling is Emotiva.
First thing to note: XDA-1 -> XPA-5 -> Klipschorns is useless. Volume set to 3 gives reference level sound (that's out of 80!). 0 produces no sound, 0.5 is enough for background music, 2.0 is my wife looking at me to turn it down.
So, on to the UMC-1 vs XDA-1 DACs. I decided to try three tests. The first was from CD-quality rips. The second was a standard 256kbps rip like you would get from iTunes/Napster. The last was an old 128kbps of a poorly recorded song that I happen to love.
Let me preface these tests by pointing out that the sound from the UMC-1 is unbelievable to begin with, so I consider any upside at all impressive. I originally went from a Denon AVR-4306 to the UMC-1, and the Denon became unlistenable to me. So my standards are already really high.
So, first test: CD quality recording of Steely Dan's Aja (http://listen.grooveshark.com/#/s/Aja/ulAgo). The differences were subtle at first, but over time I noticed that the music produced by the XDA-1 is tighter, and yet softer. Bass, especially the lows, is tighter and more natural. No muddiness there. It's just easier on the ears. Placement and sound field were not appreciably wider, but remember that khorns live in the corners, and are not known for spectacular imaging.
On to the second test: 256kbps AAC of Cornelius's "Fit Song" (http://listen.grooveshark.com/#/s/Fit+Song/2rbKoa). This piece is great for measuring stereo separation, attack and decay. The difference between the UMC-1 and XDA-1 were much more immediate and obvious here. The drums had immense attack, and better dynamics. Imaging was noticeably better as well, and the sounds seemed to come from all over the room. Excellent.
And now on to the real test. How well does the XDA-1 do with a really sh*tty MP3 ripped back when Windows 95 ruled supreme. Enter GTR's "When the Heart Rules the Mind" (http://listen.grooveshark.com/#/s/When+The+Heart+Rules+The+Mind/23urys). This song is unlistenable at reference levels on almost all stereo equipment. Even the UMC-1 doesn't know what to do with it. It only sounds good over FM radio in an '82 Chevette. I queued it up on Sonos, and braced myself for the UMC-1, which I have already tried. Just horrible. Screeching lyrics and total compression of the guitars and drums. I switched over to the XDA-1, prepared to be dismayed. To my surprise, it was only really bad, not horrible. The sharp edginess reduced somewhat, and a tiny hint of dynamics entered the music. But for the first time in living memory, I sat through the whole song and even sang along. That was worth the price of admission by itself.
Conclusions:
Understanding that the people who read these posts already have a killer system, with great amps, speakers and sources, it really is hard to figure out how the XDA-1 could improve what is already great sound. It does. And for less than the price of fancy cables or a power cord for that matter. And it looks great.
I will give it a much more thorough listening tonight, as the wife and kid won't be home til late. I will probably try out my classical collection and listen for things like resolution and detail in the string sections (always difficult for any DAC).
|
|
|
|
Post by REN on Dec 2, 2010 16:53:31 GMT -5
nice review cant wait to hear more i also have klipsch speakers and a umc-1 how would you compare the volume levels from the XDA to the UMC
|
|
|
|
Post by paintedklown on Dec 2, 2010 16:57:49 GMT -5
yeah, thanks for your initial impressions. You now have my full attention and I am waiting to see what you think of the XDA-1 with classical music, and the string section test you mentioned.   |
|
|
|
Post by moodyman on Dec 2, 2010 17:34:22 GMT -5
And now on to the real test. How well does the XDA-1 do with a really sh*tty MP3 ripped back when Windows 95 ruled supreme. Enter GTR's "When the Heart Rules the Mind" (http://listen.grooveshark.com/#/s/When+The+Heart+Rules+The+Mind/23urys). This song is unlistenable at reference levels on almost all stereo equipment. Even the UMC-1 doesn't know what to do with it. It only sounds good over FM radio in an '82 Chevette. I queued it up on Sonos, and braced myself for the UMC-1, which I have already tried. Just horrible. Screeching lyrics and total compression of the guitars and drums. I switched over to the XDA-1, prepared to be dismayed. To my surprise, it was only really bad, not horrible. The sharp edginess reduced somewhat, and a tiny hint of dynamics entered the music. But for the first time in living memory, I sat through the whole song and even sang along. That was worth the price of admission by itself. I always thought that excellent audio equipment would make bad recordings sound worse (i.e. they reveal more of the shortcomings of the recording)....so I'm a little confused on why the XDA makes the sound of your lousy recording more bearable. Is the XDA not as transparaent as it should be...therefore masking some of the sound.?? For the record I'm seriously considering getting the XDA and feeding it my 16 year old Yamaha CD player... |
|
|
|
Post by jmargaglione on Dec 2, 2010 17:36:00 GMT -5
nice review cant wait to hear more i also have klipsch speakers and a umc-1 how would you compare the volume levels from the XDA to the UMC When I did the A/B comparison for Sonos -> UMC-1 and Sonos -> XDA-1 -> UMC-1 there was no change in SPL. This is with the volume on the XDA-1 set to maximum. |
|
|
|
Post by jmargaglione on Dec 2, 2010 17:41:03 GMT -5
And now on to the real test. How well does the XDA-1 do with a really sh*tty MP3 ripped back when Windows 95 ruled supreme. Enter GTR's "When the Heart Rules the Mind" (http://listen.grooveshark.com/#/s/When+The+Heart+Rules+The+Mind/23urys). This song is unlistenable at reference levels on almost all stereo equipment. Even the UMC-1 doesn't know what to do with it. It only sounds good over FM radio in an '82 Chevette. I queued it up on Sonos, and braced myself for the UMC-1, which I have already tried. Just horrible. Screeching lyrics and total compression of the guitars and drums. I switched over to the XDA-1, prepared to be dismayed. To my surprise, it was only really bad, not horrible. The sharp edginess reduced somewhat, and a tiny hint of dynamics entered the music. But for the first time in living memory, I sat through the whole song and even sang along. That was worth the price of admission by itself. I always thought that excellent audio equipment would make bad recordings sound worse (i.e. they reveal more of the shortcomings of the recording)....so I'm a little confused on why the XDA makes the sound of your lousy recording more bearable. Is the XDA not as transparaent as it should be...therefore masking some of the sound.?? For the record I'm seriously considering getting the XDA and feeding it my 16 year old Yamaha CD player... In general you are absolutely right. But the real test here was how to handle a relatively low bitrate source. This was 128kbps (non-VBR), using an ancient Linux codec (pre-dates LAME). So what I think the XDA-1 did is better interpolate the gaps in the output stream. When you compress music highly, you lose more information. A good DAC should be smart enough to figure out what the original waveforms looked like and create better approximations. That is what the XDA-1 does well. I will add testing of just plain bad recordings, but from CD instead of MP3. That should tell me if there is anything funny going on. I'll have to go through my CDs and find something appropriately bad. I need the audio equivalent of Hunt for Red October... |
|
|
|
Post by jmargaglione on Dec 2, 2010 17:43:00 GMT -5
Just to follow up on that last comment, I do NOT expect the DAC to do better with sources like 2-channel SACD. Those are high enough resolution that the DAC doesn't have to do much work. The waveforms are encoded very precisely already.
I should also try out some Internet radio, now that I think of it...
|
|
|
|
Post by basicsystem on Dec 2, 2010 18:11:30 GMT -5
Excellent info. Thanks! Now I know why on the reserve form they asked for the quantity (?) you wanted. By the sounds of things the first shipment sold out on the first day and the second shipment sold out soon thereafter. I was wayyyyy too casual in ordering about a week or two later. Oh well, something to look forward to for next year. |
|
|
|
Post by khonfused on Dec 3, 2010 3:12:16 GMT -5
I have something similar for you. I did Sonos* -> XDA-1 -> XPA-5 using balanced cables Sonos *-> XDA-1 -> UMC-1 -> XPA-5 using unbalanced cables Sonos *-> UMC-1 -> XPA-5 using unbalanced cables * Also did same tests using Oppo BD-83 instead of UMC-1. All tests were to a pair of Klipschorns using home-made reference cables. All component cabling is Emotiva. First thing to note: XDA-1 -> XPA-5 -> Klipschorns is useless. Volume set to 3 gives reference level sound (that's out of 80!). 0 produces no sound, 0.5 is enough for background music, 2.0 is my wife looking at me to turn it down. Why you think it is useless? If 0 is no sound, 0.5 is background and 2.0 is too loud for your wife then 1.0 or 1.5 should be just right as a "room temperature" listening gain. |
|
|
|
Post by jmargaglione on Dec 3, 2010 11:51:26 GMT -5
I have something similar for you. I did Sonos* -> XDA-1 -> XPA-5 using balanced cables Sonos *-> XDA-1 -> UMC-1 -> XPA-5 using unbalanced cables Sonos *-> UMC-1 -> XPA-5 using unbalanced cables * Also did same tests using Oppo BD-83 instead of UMC-1. All tests were to a pair of Klipschorns using home-made reference cables. All component cabling is Emotiva. First thing to note: XDA-1 -> XPA-5 -> Klipschorns is useless. Volume set to 3 gives reference level sound (that's out of 80!). 0 produces no sound, 0.5 is enough for background music, 2.0 is my wife looking at me to turn it down. Why you think it is useless? If 0 is no sound, 0.5 is background and 2.0 is too loud for your wife then 1.0 or 1.5 should be just right as a "room temperature" listening gain. For the same reason nobody ships a receiver that has buttons labeled VOL OFF, 1, 2, 3 and 4. That's just not enough options. Every recording is mastered at a different level. I have a Staind CD that is too loud at .5 on this thing. Realistically, without bass management and EQ it's not really useful anyway. It was fun to try, but without equalization my system sounds harsh. The room is like an audio MC Escher puzzle |
|
|
|
Post by jmargaglione on Dec 3, 2010 12:00:35 GMT -5
So as a follow-up review, I spent a few quality hours reprogramming my Harmony remote while using the stock remotes to do more A/B testing. This time I focused on classical music.
I was surprised by what I heard and didn't hear. I was expecting the strings to be more lush, but they weren't. I think the UMC-1 does a great job of that already. What I heard that I was not expecting was in the soft passages. I was listening to Theofanidis' Rainbow Body, and about a 1:30 into the piece there is a forte passage with the strings and winds, and then silence. Or at least there used to be silence. This time I heard the decay of the instruments at incredibly low levels with nothing but blackness surrounding it. It was downright creepy. I loved it!
Other things I noticed: the flutes in Charles Ives' The Unanswered Question (Bernstein version) do a triple forte several times in the piece, and it is enough to make my wife cringe. The harshness of the sound is really terrifying. Now it is still startling as all hell, but some of the shrillness and edge was removed, and it sounded more like instruments and less like noise.
I did one other test as well. I dug up the original GTR CD that I ripped to create the awful version of When the Heart Rules the Mind. It turns out the CD is just that bad. The mastering is godawful. I ordered the remastered MLPS version (Japanese) from 2006 off Amazon.com. Supposedly it is MUCH better. Anyway, the XDA-1 could not save that music from its mastering. I will say that it was difficult to tell the difference between the CD playing through the UMC-1 and the 128kbps MP3 through the XDA-1.
The XDA-1 makes my normal CD's sound a bit like my SACDs. I don't have the means to do an A/B on that, but that's what it FEELS like.
|
|
MikeWI
Emo VIPs 
DC-1, ERC-1, USP-1, UPA-2, Sub 10, Emotiva 4S
Posts: 346
|
Post by MikeWI on Dec 3, 2010 14:07:18 GMT -5
Just to follow up on that last comment, I do NOT expect the DAC to do better with sources like 2-channel SACD. Those are high enough resolution that the DAC doesn't have to do much work. The waveforms are encoded very precisely already. I should also try out some Internet radio, now that I think of it... I'd like to hear your thoughts on how it does with Pandora. Mike |
|
|
|
Post by khonfused on Dec 3, 2010 14:09:32 GMT -5
The volume control is indeed a problem when you connect it directly to your amp.
I am currently listening at Level 0.5!!! Under some circumstances this can be too loud already.
A 0.5 db interval on the UMC is hardly audible. Here with the XDA-1 it feels like 10db difference.
|
|
burki
Minor Hero
Posts: 27
|
Post by burki on Dec 3, 2010 14:42:11 GMT -5
Hi,
for me, the "high level output" from the XDA-1 isn't a real problem, because I'm using active speakers and a headphone amp.
Listening with the speakers, I'm able to set the volume on the DAC unto 30 and with headphone it's possible to use the full range (till 80).
So for me the best path is Source --> UMC-1 (for decoding) --> XDA-1 --> Speakers/Headphones.
And yes, there are differences in using the XDA-1 or not, because the XDA-1 seems to have the better analogue part than the UMC-1.
A real test for this can be to use (UMC-1) --> XDA-1 --> UMC-1 (sure in direct modus, but you've to think about the additonal volume control) --> Speakers/Headphones against XDA-1 alone.
By the way: In my living room I'm using a much higher priced DAC from Audio Agile, which has an additional master clock in and different filter options (but also no upsampling) and my feeling is, that there the sound isn't really better (comparing both listing with the same headphones).
|
|
|
|
Post by jmargaglione on Dec 3, 2010 16:32:33 GMT -5
Just to follow up on that last comment, I do NOT expect the DAC to do better with sources like 2-channel SACD. Those are high enough resolution that the DAC doesn't have to do much work. The waveforms are encoded very precisely already. I should also try out some Internet radio, now that I think of it... I'd like to hear your thoughts on how it does with Pandora. Mike I am out until tomorrow night, but I'll take a listen. I can tell you that I streamed a number of songs from Rhapsody and Napster, and they sounded very nice. |
|
