dolby
Minor Hero
Posts: 62 
|
Post by dolby on Dec 13, 2015 23:39:19 GMT -5
I have a XDA-1, UMC-1 and ERC-3 CDP - but sold the XDA-2 Gen 2 DAC I had.
Of interest, theoretically, which has the better DAC?
Should I have kept that XDA-2 and sent UMC-1 and ERC-3 through it?
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Dec 13, 2015 23:45:35 GMT -5
erc3 analog to umc-1
|
|
dolby
Minor Hero
Posts: 62
|
Post by dolby on Dec 13, 2015 23:49:30 GMT -5
Thanks.
AND UMC-1 and XDA-1 ?
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Dec 14, 2015 0:48:51 GMT -5
Thanks. AND UMC-1 and XDA-1 ? Not sure what you're asking there? garbulky is saying the DAC in the ERC-3 is the one you want to use for CD, so straight from there to the UMC-1. No need for the XDA-1 unless you have another digital source. |
|
dolby
Minor Hero
Posts: 62
|
Post by dolby on Dec 14, 2015 1:23:29 GMT -5
I do have another source which I can run through XDA and then analogue to UMC - or direct to UMC and ditch the XDA in the chain.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Dec 14, 2015 1:42:08 GMT -5
The ERC-3 has the better sounding DAC to me, I can't tell much difference between the XDA-2 and the UMC-200.
Cheers
Gary
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Dec 14, 2015 10:24:57 GMT -5
I do have another source which I can run through XDA and then analogue to UMC - or direct to UMC and ditch the XDA in the chain. Then we'd need to know the quality of the DAC in "another source" to recommend using it, or the XDA-1. The XDA-1 is a good DAC, especially when run in front of a preamp, but if your other device has a good DAC then you don't need it. It's all about the DAC. |
|
dolby
Minor Hero
Posts: 62
|
Post by dolby on Dec 28, 2015 5:00:59 GMT -5
I'm running a PC and using Kodi as my media software. I have close on 10,000 FLAC files that I can either run a signal from the PC :
a) Via HDMI to the UMC-1 processor, using its DACS
b) Via USB to the XDA-1, using it as a DAC
Theoretically, which is the better DAC?
|
|
|
|
Post by Axis on Dec 28, 2015 5:53:42 GMT -5
Both the UMC-1 and XDA-1 are preamps with Dacs. My thoughts, not theoretically but just for general purpose would be that you would have a very hard time telling the difference between the Dacs. The UMC-1 HDMI input is normally used for Bitstream surround. I have never used a HDMI input to play FLAC files. I would think the UMC-1 would need to be able to take what I would think is PCM files from your PC's HDMI output. I have no ideal if that is possible but if it is your now either stereo out or all-channel to whatever amp is connected to the UMC-1. If it was me I would go USB from my PC to the XDA-1. Your media software and FLAC files coming from your PC to the XDA-1 will not need to do anything but enjoy themselves.  Go analog out of the XDA-1 strait to you amp and use the XDA-1 as the preamp or go analog into the UMC-1 and use it as the preamp to your amp. |
|
|
|
Post by brubacca on Dec 28, 2015 9:29:16 GMT -5
XDA-1 had a sub par USB implementation. Not even Asynchronous, and if memory serves me right it was 24/48 only. Use the analog out of you ERC-3. Acquire another XDA-2 Gen 2 and use that USB from your computer.
Good luck.
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 18,489
|
Post by DYohn on Dec 28, 2015 10:25:06 GMT -5
I'm running a PC and using Kodi as my media software. I have close on 10,000 FLAC files that I can either run a signal from the PC : a) Via HDMI to the UMC-1 processor, using its DACS b) Via USB to the XDA-1, using it as a DAC Theoretically, which is the better DAC? In theory USB offers better 2-channel audio than HDMI. |
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Dec 28, 2015 10:44:56 GMT -5
To be honest, I don't recall if the USB input on the XDA-1 is asynchronous or not, but it definitely is limited to sample rates of 48k and below (since nobody much uses 48k outside of audio tracks from videos, that means 44k Red Book CD sample rate). On the plus side, it runs UAC1, and so can be connected to any computer without an extra driver. Also, technicalities aside, it actually sounds quite good. (Note that the other inputs do have full support for sample rates up to 24/192k and sound very good.) In other words, as a "basic DAC", the XDA-1 still ain't bad. That said, the XDA-2 is better, and has an asynch USB input that supports up to 24/192k, and an ASRC, and a headphone amplifier, and does sound better than the XDA-1. The XDA-2 is actually quite similar to the DAC in the ERC-3, although some people prefer one or the other by a slight margin. Therefore, if you already have an ERC-3, the only reason you would want an XDA-2 is if you want more digital inputs. Of course, anyone looking for a USB-only DAC should consider our new Ego DACs.. XDA-1 had a sub par USB implementation. Not even Asynchronous, and if memory serves me right it was 24/48 only. Use the analog out of you ERC-3. Acquire another XDA-2 Gen 2 and use that USB from your computer. Good luck. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Dec 28, 2015 21:40:35 GMT -5
Of course, anyone looking for a USB-only DAC should consider our new Ego DACs. +1 I haven't heard an XDA-1, but I have compared side by side an XDA-2 and a BigEgo and I prefer the sound from the Ego. For sure it's not night and day, smack you in the face better, the difference is very subtle, smidgen of extra clarity, a tiny bit "nicer" sounding. If I had an XDA-2 I don't think I'd sell it and buy a BigEgo, unless the form factor was an issue, Ego's really are compact and for desk top use unbeatable value. Happy New Year Gary |
|
