Auralic Vega DAC

mr_bill · « **Reply #180 on:** 25 May 2015, 03:43 am »

The Msb analog dac is really good.

Tyson · « **Reply #181 on:** 25 May 2015, 03:50 am »

Quote from: mr_bill on 25 May 2015, 03:43 am

The Msb analog dac is really good.

Yes it is!

doctorcilantro · « **Reply #182 on:** 25 May 2015, 04:42 am »

Quote from: Tyson on 23 May 2015, 07:45 pm

Vega is more fluid and analog like, the PS is drier and less pleasant.

Some say the Vega is colored. My notes when I compared to my Zodiac Gold w/ Voltikus....were a resounding "lush". The Vega paints a more interesting aural landscape for me, vocals were more realistic. If this is colored, so be it.

Tyson · « **Reply #183 on:** 25 May 2015, 04:46 am »

If vocals are more realistic, then by definition the gear producing the more realistic vocals is more accurate.

I.Greyhound Fan · « **Reply #184 on:** 25 May 2015, 03:16 pm »

I found a dealer here in the Twin Cities and I am going to audition the Vega today. I am going to bring along my current DAC for comparison.

mr_bill · « **Reply #185 on:** 25 May 2015, 03:57 pm »

Who has the Vega in the twin cities?
I didn't know anyone did?

doctorcilantro · « **Reply #186 on:** 25 May 2015, 04:15 pm »

Quote from: I.Greyhound Fan on 25 May 2015, 03:16 pm

I found a dealer here in the Twin Cities and I am going to audition the Vega today. I am going to bring along my current DAC for comparison.

Would love to hear what you think. If you want to share the name of your DAC later and your impressions of it next the Vega please do so here.

I.Greyhound Fan · « **Reply #187 on:** 25 May 2015, 10:45 pm »

I heard the Vega today in a $60K plus system and compared it to my Van Alstine Ultra II DAC with all the factory mods and upgrades plus after market Sparko Op amps and 1950's Raytheon Black Plate tubes. My DAC had a slightly warmer and heavier sound with more bass punch. The Vega had more air and was smoother and a little better texture. I liked the 4 digital filters in the Vega. You tailor the sound to your liking. The Vega may be too bright in my system and live room.

Unfortunately the AVA DAC does not do usb or hi-rez music as I could live with it.

In 2 weeks I am going to take the Vega home for a week to use in my system.

I wish I could compare the Hugo Chord with the Luxman da-06 DAC. Both have a romantic musical sound. The Hugo does not have the detail that I like though.

doctorcilantro · « **Reply #188 on:** 31 May 2015, 07:05 pm »

Has anyone compared the ORFEO output stage to the SE using adapters with pin 3 floated?

Since the SE and XLR are both 4v (4.4v in newer versions) output, wouldn't the small loss in gain but outweighed by removing the opamps from SE and going ORFEO?

I'm looking at the Decware ZBIT and Empirical Final Drives too, but maybe a DIY transformer setup too. I've been told the SE and XLR sound the same though.

*Scotty* · « **Reply #189 on:** 31 May 2015, 08:54 pm »

I heard a an A/B of the single ended and the balanced outputs in jarcher's system which consists of a Conrad Johnson PV 10 preamp and a Conrad Johnson MV75A1 feeding a pair of Magnepan MG 1.7s. It really wasn't close, with the single ended sounding much better than the ORFEO balanced output stage. As I recall the single ended had better bass control and better imaging as well as a more coherent sounding mid-range.
It really was that easy to hear the difference.
Obviously YMMV.
Scotty

DaveC113 · « **Reply #190 on:** 31 May 2015, 10:22 pm »

Interesting Scotty, Most people have told me the XLR outs sound much better on the Vega. I was only able to try the RCA outs in my own system, I didn't have a XLR>RCA cable or adapter built so I can't comment myself. I wonder if they changed anything along the way to make the RCA outs better?

loving_it · « **Reply #191 on:** 31 May 2015, 11:07 pm »

The XLR on the Vega is better , but if using a XLR to RCA adapter pin 3 must be floated , another better option is to use a transformer like these from totaldac , or K&K Audio can build them also "sorry for the bad pictures"

The balanced outputs take advantage of Auralic's Orfeo output modules. The RCA outputs run through opamps

http://store.acousticsounds.com/d/100119/Cardas-RCA_output_adapters_for_AURALiC_VEGA-Connectors

http://www.kandkaudio.com/

*Scotty* · « **Reply #192 on:** 1 Jun 2015, 12:49 am »

If pin No.3 has the negative half of the signal on it then pin No.3 must be floated, if it is connected to ground then the output stage will be driving a dead short and any resulting damage to the output stage which occurs will not be covered by AURALIC under warranty.

From the measurements section of Stereophile Auralic Vega review,

Quote

"Auralic's Vega offered very low levels of harmonic distortion, even when driving a full-scale signal into the very demanding 600 ohm load. Fig.14 reveals that the highest-level harmonic under those circumstances is the third, but that it lies at –116dB, or just 0.0002%! The Vega's performance with the high-frequency intermodulation test depended on the Filter mode used. With Mode 1 (fig.15), not only were the intermodulation products supremely well down in level, with the difference product at 1kHz lying at –128dB (0.00005%)"

It seems to me that the above quoted distortion measurements appear to have been done using the single ended outputs as they are stated to be equal to THD+N -116 or .0001585%, while the the ORFEO output stage is claimed to THD+N -100 or .001%. While it is not impossible that ORFEO output stage could measure some 16dB better than the -100dB figure, it is somewhat unlikely. The measured THD+N spec is somewhat closer to that of the TI OPA 1612 used in the IV and analogue filter stages. I guess I would find it easier to believe that some 20db of noise crept into the design to degrade the OPA 1612 specs from a distortion attenuation of -136dB or .000015% to-116dB or .0001585% at the single ended outputs, then the ORFEO output being some 16dB better than claimed.
Its far easier to have an increase in noise than it is to find an improvement equal to 16dB.
In the end the user should probably try both output stages and pick the one that sounds the best to them.
Scotty

doctorcilantro · « **Reply #193 on:** 1 Jun 2015, 06:30 am »

Quote from: barrows on 28 Nov 2014, 05:59 pm

Guys, something to consider: If you oversample in jRiver to 352.8/384, you will not hear any differences in choosing different filters in the Vega DAC. The filters you will be hearing are the ones jRiver uses for the first step of 8x oversampling. Going up in sample rate from 352.8 to the MHz range at which the Vega passes along the data stream to the ESS Sabre will not produce any audible artifacts at all, as all artifacts will be way beyond the range of your systems ability to reproduce them.
I would also consider this: Who do you think is using a better digital filter design: jRiver, or the custom filters which Auralic has developed for the Vega? I would suspect that for redbook files, the Vega minimum phase option would sound better than the standard linear phase, filter jRiver uses.
I would strongly suggest not oversampling in jRiver as a first test, and then, exploring the filter options in the Vega. One of the things you paid for with the Vega is the custom oversampling engine, it is quite a sophisticated set of filters. As far as I know, jRiver just uses the standard SoX open source OSF filters, right?

Interesting. I chose to upsample in JRMC to 384kHz based on Filter 4. It looked like the best performance. Filter 4 at 44kHz has -3db rolloff at 20kHz. I figured upsampling in JRMC to 384kHz would be the best of both worlds.

*Scotty* · « **Reply #194 on:** 1 Jun 2015, 07:18 am »

I suspect that it might be advisable to synchronously up sample the data, in other words always up sample to a number that can be divided by the base sample frequency evenly with no remainders. 352.8 can be evenly divided by 44.1, for example.
Scotty

doctorcilantro · « **Reply #195 on:** 1 Jun 2015, 05:00 pm »

Quote from: *Scotty* on 1 Jun 2015, 07:18 am

I suspect that it might be advisable to synchronously up sample the data, in other words always up sample to a number that can be divided by the base sample frequency evenly with no remainders. 352.8 can be evenly divided by 44.1, for example.
Scotty

Sorry, I meant 352.8. I'll toy around with Filters again soon.

doctorcilantro · « **Reply #196 on:** 27 Jun 2015, 06:30 am »

Damn this is strange.

I use an Adnaco USB-over-fibre solution and EXACT mode. I always upsampling in J. River to 352kHz and use type 4 filter.

I never have dropouts.

But someone, upthread, suggested let the Vega do the upsample instead of J. River.

Today I decided to use the native sample rate and I am shocked at the difference in sound. @ 44kHz dropouts here and there, AND the sound is so dull - I swear it is like a different recording.

Is this normal? Maybe I should restart my Vega and try again. I leave it powered on all the time, and rarely put it to sleep, or power it off.

I just can't believe how different the sound is. Type 4 and software upsampling is so much more clean crisp and the vocal jumps out. I was using a FLAC of Percy Sledge "When A Man Loves A Woman" (from The R & B Box: 30 Years of Rhythm & Blues - Volume 6 - The End of the Golden Age 1966-1972). It's actually a really good track to test this as the recording is so-so. Can anyone try this please?

I'm checking my JRiver settings now because it's unreal, like an EQ is on, a HUGE veil coming down over the sound.

thanks,
Jon

doctorcilantro · « **Reply #197 on:** 4 Sep 2015, 11:55 am »

I'm sending mine out shortly for the DSD256

Any J. River users, with upgraded or V2 Vega, please start testing JRMC21 4xDSD over DoP as it was just implemented.

Kudos to Matt and team for adding this right after I solely petitioned for it!

DSD 256

doctorcilantro · « **Reply #198 on:** 28 Mar 2016, 01:10 pm »

I can't DSD256 to work on JRMC with my upgraded Vega.

Anyone?

What about those with new version?

It just errors out, and I'm told FooBar works but I don't see how they are upsampling to DSD256 as the Auralic tech won't explain this to me....

jarcher · « **Reply #199 on:** 28 Mar 2016, 06:07 pm »

Are you using Mac or Windows? Mac won't do DSD256 out of USB - at least not without a driver, of which there is none for Mac for the Vega.