XDA-2 and XPA-200

[lordfairfax]

Yesterday, I got delivery of the XDA-2 and was able to set it up. So this is my new chain:

MacBook (iTunes+BitPerfect+TosLink) > XDA-2 > XPA-200 > B&W 683

I honestly didn't expect the amount of improvement the XDA-2 has given my system. Now remember, I only listen at low to mid volume.

First of all, the bass is more solid and authoritative. I can clearly discern the individual bass notes. My favorite instrument is now the fretless bass played by someone like Stanley Clarke or Victor Wooten. That's bass that sing and not just thump. Even the harmonics are ringing so true just like in a live performance.

The highs are equally improved. I can almost tell which part of the cymbal was hit, and at what velocity. You know when the drummer is riding the cymbal, I can now discern that each strike is different from the previous. Same thing with the maracas, each shake is audibly different.

Lastly, the vocals are so realistic and sweet. The famed B&W FST mid-woofers are finally given justice. Diana Krall is as intimate as a house guest. James Taylor in Steamroller had his faux anger very well rendered that you can hear him smiling inside.

And now the bad news. My old MP3s at 256k sound horrible - compressed, strident, and grainy. I'm spoiled and ruined. I even did a non-scientific A/B between CD and 320k MP3 (Dire Straits) and sadly, where I used to not hear any difference , now I can.

Oh boy, off to HDTracks I go, I suppose.

P.S. That devil named garbulky planted the XDA-2 seed in my other post. But you sir, is now my sonic angel. Cheers, mate.

[ultramic]

I've had my XDA-2 for approx 1 month now and share a similar experience to you.

Not only can you tell the difference between playing a CD/FLAC file vs an MP3 file, but you will also be able to detect the quality of the CD recording.

For example, I was listening to the Michael Buble Christmas CD (converted to FLAC) which was absolutely stunning. I then put on erm.....One Direction (at the request of my kids) and the quality of the recording was rubbish - lasted about one minute before I had to turn it off and tell my kids to go back to listening on their mp3.

[lordfairfax]

ultramic

Very true indeed. But your post reminded me to be more honest and precise. I did in fact compare ALAC vs MP3, not CD vs MP3. For me CD and ALAC are virtually the same for this purpose but I know others may differ.

You are also spot on with poorly recorded CDs. Listening to Astrud Gilberto's "Triste" made me even more sadder because the recording is now sounding as flat as AM radio. Thus, I refuse to listen to my angel until I get hold of a better CD of hers. Suggestions anyone?

In closing, an xda-2 observation. I hooked my Sony BD-370 using both coax and optical. To me, optical sounds just a tad bit louder. But when volume matched, I couldn't tell them apart.

[KeithL]

ALAC is lossless, as is FLAC, so there should not be any difference. (You should be able to verify that by encoding a test file with each, then converting each version back to WAV, which is uncompressed - the resulting WAV files should be identical to each other, and to the original WAV ripped from the CD.)

MP3, in direct contrast, is a LOSSY compression format (as is the AAC default format for iTunes). The MP3 format also has a huge amount of flexibility. For one thing, most MP3 encoders let you decide how much compression you want - with smaller files sounding worse but taking up much less space. There are several different choices involved, and the individual encoders are optimized differently, so even making the same choices can produce different results with different encoders. For another thing, MP3 is what is ofter referred to as a "perceptual encoder" - which means that decisions are made based on what will be audible. The end result is that certain music "encodes well" - meaning that the result sounds pretty close to the original, while other music, encoded at the same settings, produces very poor results. Since the optimizations in the various encoders are different, certain encoders even sound better at certain settings with certain types of music.

You can Google and find detailed descriptions of how the encoding process works but, much like reading about how sausage is made, it will NOT make you more inclined to like MP3. For any serious audiophile listening, stick to lossless formats like ALAC or FLAC.

Jan 4, 2013 0:32:35 GMT -5 lordfairfax said:

ultramic

Very true indeed. But your post reminded me to be more honest and precise. I did in fact compare ALAC vs MP3, not CD vs MP3. For me CD and ALAC are virtually the same for this purpose but I know others may differ.

You are also spot on with poorly recorded CDs. Listening to Astrud Gilberto's "Triste" made me even more sadder because the recording is now sounding as flat as AM radio. Thus, I refuse to listen to my angel until I get hold of a better CD of hers. Suggestions anyone?

In closing, an xda-2 observation. I hooked my Sony BD-370 using both coax and optical. To me, optical sounds just a tad bit louder. But when volume matched, I couldn't tell them apart.