[morganc]

I replaced my MHDT Paradisea with the Tranquility and a new USB cable from Eric and voila....great improvements all around...highs are toned down, better musicality for lack of a better word, less fatigue-ability......big upgrade for me for sure.....thanks guys!

[wdmoore451]

Just received a Tranquility DAC SE and Essential Cable from Db Audio labs. I learned about the DAC from reading this thread and decided to try one after speaking to Eric for nearly an hour last week. 

I have only been listening for 24 hours so I expect the sound will continue to improve over the next couple of weeks, but even at this stage I am blown away by the sound coming out of this DAC.  It is easily the best digital front end that I have heard. To be fair, I have not compared it against some of the more highly regarded DAC's in this thread.  My experience has been with a Musical Fidelity XDAC v8, a Wavelength Brick and and HRT Streamer Pro.  Even at this early stage, the Tranquility DAC SE is producing sound far superior to anything I have heard in the past. 

The sound is exactly as I have heard it described on earlier posts.  Huge soundstage, very fine detail within a very relaxed presentation; Instruments are clearly defined in space and extremely musical; low frequency resolution is also excellent. 

My wife immediately noticed the difference as well.  The music just grooves like no other digital source I have heard.

I am running a Mac Mini through Pure Music and have not performed the tweaks suggested in earlier posts. I will be doing those later today so will be interested to see how much further improvement those make.

My initial impressions are very positive and I could not be more pleased with the purchase. 

System -- Mac Mini (2008), BAT VK-55SE Amp, Audio Research LS-26 Preamp, Tranquility DAC SE, Essential USB Cable, Magnepan 1.7's, entry level Shunyata power conditioner and cords, Kimber and Transparent cabling 

[jdbrian]

Hi

  I found that the bass improved from good to amazing over a period of time- perhaps 100hrs or so of listening. I have the regular Tranquility not the SE, but I am running the Essential cable. The sound of Ray Brown's bass on his Don't get Sassy cd is incredibly nuanced and powerful. Enjoy the ride. It only gets better!

Brian

[Marcin_gps]

Hi Guys,

Any PC users here? I would like to know if Tranquility supports Kernel Streaming protocol, which is a must in case of my player of choice (XXHighEnd). Anyone could confirm this? I'd appreciate it.

Best regards,
Marcin

[denjo]

Hi Guys,
Any PC users here?

I would be interested to know as well since getting an Apple might not be a foreseeable option!

[jrebman]

No problem with kernel streaming and the Tranquility dacs.  In order of quality from lowest to highest, here's what I've used with an old Asus Eee Box running XP Home:

asio4all, usb-asio, foobar's internal kernel streaming, and foobar KS in combination with the AQVox asio driver.  Even asio4all is a large improvement over direct sound, but is otherwise pretty far behind the other options when it comes to sound quality.

HTH,

Jim

[chadh]

No problem with kernel streaming and the Tranquility dacs.  In order of quality from lowest to highest, here's what I've used with an old Asus Eee Box running XP Home:

asio4all, usb-asio, foobar's internal kernel streaming, and foobar KS in combination with the AQVox asio driver.  Even asio4all is a large improvement over direct sound, but is otherwise pretty far behind the other options when it comes to sound quality.

HTH,

Jim

Jim,

I still haven't upgraded from ASIO4ALL.  But my next move is likely to be upgrade my operating system so I can employ WASAPI (or whatever it is).  You haven't been tempted to head in this direction?  (I presume the Eee box is a constraint to heading in this direction).

Chad

[jrebman]

Hi Chad,

Well, I don't actually know.  I suppose a stripped down version of win 7 could be installed on the Asus if you were dedicating it to audio, but I haven't tried this myself.  The newer Asus boxes as well as the Acer Revo seem to be coming with win7 basic.  However, I don't actually know if wasapi will be an improvement or not.  Some people I've talked to think that it's not all as simple as switching to wasapi and all your troubles go away and your system sounds like you just dropped another $50k into it.

The 2010 mac mini with Mach2 mods does that .

There are demos of usb-asio and aqvox asio, and it won't hurt to give them a try to see what you think.  Some folks do not like the aqvox driver, but I think it sounds quite good with the Tranquility or SE, but there are so many variables it's hard to predict how it will work for you.  The asus box has not had the full treatment as far as stripping down the OS yet, and then there's still the SSD and linear psu to try.  All it takes is money... and time -- both of which are at a premium right now.

-- Jim

[Rapt]

Hi Chad,

Well, I don't actually know.  I suppose a stripped down version of win 7 could be installed on the Asus if you were dedicating it to audio, but I haven't tried this myself.  The newer Asus boxes as well as the Acer Revo seem to be coming with win7 basic.  However, I don't actually know if wasapi will be an improvement or not.  Some people I've talked to think that it's not all as simple as switching to wasapi and all your troubles go away and your system sounds like you just dropped another $50k into it.

The 2010 mac mini with Mach2 mods does that .

There are demos of usb-asio and aqvox asio, and it won't hurt to give them a try to see what you think.  Some folks do not like the aqvox driver, but I think it sounds quite good with the Tranquility or SE, but there are so many variables it's hard to predict how it will work for you.  The asus box has not had the full treatment as far as stripping down the OS yet, and then there's still the SSD and linear psu to try.  All it takes is money... and time -- both of which are at a premium right now.

-- Jim

  I'd like to share some thoughts on the mini mac vs pc with the tranquility dac (or any other dac for that matter). The Mac Mini seems to trounce the PC and the Mac Book Pro in dac audio performance in all the reviews I've read.  I know there are lots of knowledgable people on this forum and any insight after my post would be appreciated.

   My first point would be is that: How can the MAC OS make a difference as the same OS tweaks can be made on the Mac book pro as the Mac Mini?  This makes me think that it would rule out out any advantage accredited "SOLELY" to the Mac OS.

  So would it be wrong to assume that all the advantages to the mini mac would be in the lack of "noise", whichever kind, generated from the hardware and layout of the Mac Mini into the Dac. Do you think this is where the Mac Mini has the advantage over PC'S and other MAC's?

 

 

[bhobba]

I have tried a PC, a Mac Mini running Windows, and a Mac Mini running the Mac operating system and the Mac Mini running its OS works best for me.  The reason the Mac Mini is better has been discussed elsewhere in this tread, so I won't rehash it except for one point - it is basically a carved out piece of aluminium so RFI issues are reduced - but as I said that is just one point - plenty of others favor the mini as well.  I have tried the Tranquility with a macbook pro and a mini with a number of experienced listeners and all preferred the mini.  It left them scratching their heads but thats the skinny. 

It's not the OS that makes the mac operating system the better choice it is the availability of the better players on the mac OS.  I have compared J River running on the mac under windows to both ITunes and Pure Music.  J River is better than ITunes and Pure Music is better again - however the best I have found is AyreWave.

If you have a look through the history of this thread you will find I was skeptical of the mac's superiority but having done the comparisons to me the choice is clear - get a mac mini and run AyreWave.

Thanks
Bill

[ultrafi]

Bill, et al:

You really owe it to yourself to try Audirvana as may be found in the following link:

http://code.google.com/p/audirvana/

It, like Ayrewave, is free.  Be sure to look under "Audirvana" in the menu at the top margin and under "preferences" as it will not default to an external DAC for playback.  Please also note it requires OS X 10.6, and I prefer it in 64 bit mode.  To my, as well as several others ears, it betters Ayrewave, representing the best sound available for a computer.

All this may change as various playback software packages mature; but, it is genuinely exciting times for computer audio!

Enjoy,
L.D. Moore

[Rapt]

 

It's not the OS that makes the mac operating system the better choice it is the availability of the better players on the mac OS. 

Thanks
Bill

         Thanks Bill, I have read the whole thread and it is more out of curiosity than skeptisism is why I ask. If it was the OS then the Mac Book Pro would have the same gains as the Mini. Now the RFI point you make, makes the most sense. So this RFI interference would be coming from the computers various processes, fans etc to the output of the computer USB into the dac where the interference shows up, correct?

      Bill, I am not doubting the superiority of the Mini due to it being a quieter (interference wise) machine, but I am also wondering why someone cannot come up with a cheaper method of eliminating these interferences that make the difference on all computers, I will probably eventually going with a  Mac Mini, but would rather stay with what I have which is the pc.

       Bill I wonder what difference this would make, I may check this out to see if it makes any difference. it is a very low noise power supply (inserted just before the usb cable enters the dac)  and if you read down the page it explains what kind of "rippling an noise" it eliminates. 

  Edit: oops forgot the link, here    http://www.aqvox.de/usb-power_en.html

[newzooreview]

Bill, et al:

You really owe it to yourself to try Audirvana as may be found in the following link:

http://code.google.com/p/audirvana/

It, like Ayrewave, is free.  Be sure to look under "Audirvana" in the menu at the top margin and under "preferences" as it will not default to an external DAC for playback.  Please also note it requires OS X 10.6, and I prefer it in 64 bit mode.  To my, as well as several others ears, it betters Ayrewave, representing the best sound available for a computer.

All this may change as various playback software packages mature; but, it is genuinely exciting times for computer audio!

Enjoy,
L.D. Moore

I've been comparing AyreWave and Audirvana this morning. They both have excruciatingly bad user interfaces. Audirvana has no library and it erases your playlist after closing so each time you use it you have to go to your hard drive and import songs again. It will not load a folder of songs by selecting the folder--you have to select the songs individually. Once they are loaded you can't search them. The rest of the interface is equally bad. There's a gimmicky picture of a stereo component that serves no purpose. I wastes a lot of space duplicating information about what track is playing, randomly closes the whole program if you click in the wrong spot, and looks ugly.

AyreWave is at least trying to provide a clean, functional interface, but it's badly buggy. It will attempt to load a full folder of music (with sub-folders) into its library, but it loses metadata on most of them and just loads the filename (not the track name or other information). If you close it when a search is active then it deletes everything from the library that wasn't in the search results. And there are no playlists. Playback from memory is not gapless: it introduces a dropout between tracks. But at least AyreWave doesn't try to introduce a digital volume control into the signal path like Audirvana does.

Both AyreWave and Audirvana play songs from memory (although AyreWave does it with dropouts between songs), so the sound from them is inherently (and in observation) better than Play or iTunes, which both stream from the hard drive. (See my profile for system configuration--I use an Oyen Digital external drive connected via FW800 for my music files).

Audirvana, according to the info on Google Code, fully relies on the built-in 32-bit Core Audio on the Mac as does iTunes. With respect to sound quality Audivarna could be thought of as iTunes with playback from memory. Audirvana does provide FLAC playback, auto-resolution switching, and some other features that iTunes currently does not, so if it emerges from alpha with any polish it might be a nice upgrade from iTunes.

AyreWave hands audio off to Stephen Booth's own audio package, SFBAudioEngine. It handles decoding in 64-bits prior to handoff to Core Audio as far as I understand. I recall reference to SFBAudioEngine being based on an open source package, but those references seem to be gone now from the sbooth site and the About section of the software. Stephen Booth intends to sell AyreWave rather than maintain it as freeware, so it's curious that the references to it's open source underpinnings are gone (or maybe I just looked in all the wrong places this morning and couldn't find them).

AyreWave in comparison to Audirvana is more detailed and open. Bass is more tuneful and defined. Highs are cleaner. I listened to various tracks from Tom Waits's Mule Variations, and AyreWave provided better separation among instruments, a much greater sense of openness, and more detail across the board. The vocals were also a bit fuller. Audirvana can smooth things over in a way that is pleasing for casual listening on some songs, but I kept coming back to the more accurate AyreWave presentation. I hope that all of the problems with it are addressed and it isn't overpriced like other audio software.

[bhobba]

Thanks Bill, I have read the whole thread and it is more out of curiosity than skeptisism is why I ask. If it was the OS then the Mac Book Pro would have the same gains as the Mini. Now the RFI point you make, makes the most sense. So this RFI interference would be coming from the computers various processes, fans etc to the output of the computer USB into the dac where the interference shows up, correct? Bill, I am not doubting the superiority of the Mini due to it being a quieter (interference wise) machine, but I am also wondering why someone cannot come up with a cheaper method of eliminating these interferences that make the difference on all computers, I will probably eventually going with a  Mac Mini, but would rather stay with what I have which is the pc.  Bill I wonder what difference this would make, I may check this out to see if it makes any difference. it is a very low noise power supply (inserted just before the usb cable enters the dac)  and if you read down the page it explains what kind of "rippling an noise" it eliminates. 

Although I am reasonably technically literate I am not an engineer so I can't really say why you can't come up with something cheaper than a mini.  But I can guess - in the context of sales the number sold to Hi Fi nuts is minuscule.  No one is going to investigate this stuff because the market is simply not good enough.  I have read of some companies that do some deep mods to the Mini but the price did not look promising.  Your best bet is the mass produced computer that is best for audio - and that is the mini.  If cost constraints rule it out right now - save up for it.  It will still work fine with other machines machine - just not optimally.

Thanks
Bill

[wilsynet]

  So would it be wrong to assume that all the advantages to the mini mac would be in the lack of "noise", whichever kind, generated from the hardware and layout of the Mac Mini into the Dac. Do you think this is where the Mac Mini has the advantage over PC'S and other MAC's? 

But it could also be hardware and software interfaces too.  For example, the Mac Mini hardware is not necessarily the same as the Macbook Pro hardware and that would imply different device drivers.  And different hardware and different device drivers could imply a different performance profile.  And this might mean different jitter characteristics as the data sent out through USB may be clocked out differently.

Quite frankly, I have no idea.  I'm a software developer by trade, but USB and audio jitter is not my area.  RFI is certainly not my area.  Could be RFI, could be other things.  I wouldn't say definitively that it's one thing or another given that no rigorous analysis has yet been done.

[jkelly]

Some help with volume levels appreciated.
I have a new Mac Mini going directly into the DB Labs Dac and then directly into the amp (no preamp).

Itunes - Volume levels work but audio is noisy at low levels
Pure Music - Volume levels work normal low to high
Play - extremely hot can only move volume a little off rest and loud.
AyreWave - Full blast volume no controls.

Something doesn't seem right - any comments?

Jeff

[wilsynet]

PureMusic works perfectly?  It's the only one in the list that's worked on good dithered volume control isn't it?

If so, sounds like nothing is wrong.

[ultrafi]

Correct.  Normal operation.  The only one that is dithered is Play.  iTunes throws away bits once you exceed about 20dB of attenuation.  Ayrewave has no volume control.  Play...been awhile as to levels; but, that seems right too - from memory (mine, not the computer's).

[jkelly]

OK thanks - I was worried I messed something up!

Jeff

[Audio path]

Larry, Bill, et al:
Well all righty... I tried Audirvana (the latest release which is about 4 hours old at this point) on my Mach2 Music server and like it a lot.  It works with the Apple infrared remote and has a real simple interface that allows drag and drop from Finder (I haven't tried it with iTunes yet), it has volume working on the remote (very cool), and it sounds very good.  So, thank you Larry for the heads up.  It seems that new players for OS X are popping up like mushrooms.
Newzooreview and jkelly,
 AyreWave does indeed have a volume control... it is in the "Controls" drop down menu.  It doesn't work with the Apple remote (it only works with the mouse or keyboard shortcuts) and that is something that probably should be fixed, but I understand why it doesn't work.  As for the sound quality, it has been getting better, but about all you can say for it is that it beats Play and iTunes and a few other players out there right now.  If you use it with iTunes, it allows you to select songs individually or in bunches and then click the icon at the top right of the playlist screen and they will pop into the AyreWave playlist.  Don't bother with trying to import you entire library into the playlist, that is not what it is for.  If you use iTunes for your library and highlight the songs, then you can insert them into the playlist with the icon or the File Menu.  Then you can use the Apple remote to change tracks or stop and start the playback.  Also, AyreWave has something called the Inspector.  Click on it and it will show you the metadata and artwork, but only if  iTunes is not open on the screen.
I started hearing about Amarra last year when a friend started talking about it.  He told me that he was going to get Amarra and what the price was.   I thought he was crazy... to spend $695 for a music player, especially when iTunes was free.  Now I have been using Amarra for about three weeks, maybe a month.  Once I got used to it, and that isn't hard, I don't want to use anything else.  It is fun to do the comparisons,  but IMHO the hot setup is Amarra running on a Mach2 Music mini and using the iPad to control it  via Apple Remote.  If you want the best in the west, that's it, look no further.
Like my friend Dave Elledge says, "looking back at a month ago is like peering back into the Dark Ages". 

Has anybody heard about a new Music Server from Apple based on the Mac mini platform?

Best regards,
Kevin Burke
audio path