[Loftprojection]

Hum, I was just reading about these two and please don't laugh because my technical electronic skills are close to null!  However, I'm pretty good at matching buzz words, haha, and these two DAC seem very similar in many ways, except price of course.  In the past I read some good but also some pretty "ordinary" comments about the Scott Nixon versus a few other DACs that are about 1.5 to 2 times more expensive.  Now, did the USB i2s improve the Scott Nixon enough to compete against a DAC like the Brick that is a bit more than 2 times it's price?  What do you think or, even better, if one of you has heard both, how do they compare?

- Both have usb direct i2s

- Both have a very simple circuit

- I think both use the same tube

- Both are non-oversampling, no filter

http://www.stereophile.com/artdudleylistening/905listen/index.html
http://www.scott-nixon.com/dac.htm

[tschanrm]

Loftprojection,

I haven't heard either of these USB dac's, but I can tell you that USB has not been proven to be better than buffered spdif.  Theoretically USB can be better than spdif.  There is proof that a USB implementation can be worse than spdif.  Take a look at Stereophile's review of the Yamaha RP-U100, figure 8:

http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/191/index8.html

Jitter is higher in the USB source than the spdif source.  There's some technical explanation about USB issues, but I don't think you asked that.  Anyway, don't buy a DAC sole for it's USB input feature.  And as a side note, most DAC's use a direct i2s stream once it decodes the spdif signal.  But if I had to choose between the two, I'd say the Scott Nixon, simply because some things written on Wavelength's website are misleading or false.  I feel the brick is overpriced for what you get (plastic, $1000+, ugly black box).  Hope this helps.

[Loftprojection]

Loftprojection,

I haven't heard either of these USB dac's, but I can tell you that USB has not been proven to be better than buffered spdif.  Theoretically USB can be better than spdif.  There is proof that a USB implementation can be worse than spdif.  Take a look at Stereophile's review of the Yamaha RP-U100, figure 8:

http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/191/index8.html

Jitter is higher in the USB source than the spdif source.  There's some technical explanation about USB issues, but  ...

Hey thanks much for this info.  Basically I was tempted by USB because I use a portable computer and it would be convenient to plug it directly with the USB port.  I'm kind of not too interested in having a DAC box, then a sound card box, well unless I can find a good digital out card that could be in a PCMCIA form directly into my portable but again, that's more money...

Anyway, I'm with you on the Wavelength, I find it very expensive for what it looks like and if I decide to go with a USB I'll most probably go with the ScottNixon.  Hantra, a guy here, loves the SN and he says the USB version is even better.  However there are so many different DACs, if I decide to go with a regular digital input then there is this new Attraction that is interesting as well as several others like the Ack, the Monica2, etc...  DAC is a real nightmare!  haha

[tschanrm]

Loftprojection,

If you're planning on using th DAC eith a portable computer, have you considered the Headroom Microdac?  You can power it from the wall, or with batteries for portability.  It features USB, optical, and coaxial input.  I know it's not a tube buffer design, but I think it's a good alternative.

[Loftprojection]

Loftprojection,

If you're planning on using th DAC eith a portable computer, have you considered the Headroom Microdac?  You can power it from the wall, or with batteries for portability.  It features USB, optical, and coaxial input.  I know it's not a tube buffer design, but I think it's a good alternative.

Yes, I know this one also. For some reason, nothing logical, I'm not overly tempted by it!  Headroom stuff is by far the most convenient but even though they always have "very good" comments on their sound, they rarely have "great" comments.  Thanks for your suggestions.

[windwaves]

I have tested the USBTD for a couple of weeks and found it really nice, way superior to my Mac's analog output.  I still miss it.  The only thing I don't miss is the fact that it is so small and light that once you connect the IC it just does not stand still on my desk.

gio

[viggen]

I am really curious to whether there's an audible $1500 difference between the two.  I am thinking of getting a mac mini and ge one of these dacs too.  I already have the older Nixon dac with the external psu. It's good but not good enough.

[Loftprojection]

I am really curious to whether there's an audible $1500 difference between the two.  I am thinking of getting a mac mini and ge one of these dacs too.  I already have the older Nixon dac with the external psu. It's good but not good enough.

If you do, don't sell your Nixon immediately, do a bit of testing for us first!     We will be ever grateful!  I'm quite sure there wont be an audible difference to "logically" justify the difference in price but you know how it is in audio, sometimes us "audiophiles", we can justify to ourself pretty much anything as long as we hear a subtle difference!     Then again, sometimes the difference is not so subtle and we are very happy to have paid more when we find that what we already have is "not good enough"!

[windwaves]

I will through some crazy thoughts here.

I have been testing the USBTD and liked its sound quite a bit.  Now my testing is on with a LavryDA10 and a Benchmark DAC01.  These two I have them together now, the USBTD is gone, but I feel I remember its sound.

Note that this testing is being done at this stage with my headphones set-up (MPX3 amp with various options, HD580).  My source is either my Mac (lossless files mostly) or a Pio Elite 47ai.

Anyhow, after minimal testing, here are my first observations.
The impact of the USBTD when comparing to the anolog out of my Mac was greater that it is wrt to the Lavry (I know, strange);  the difference is to me most evident in the lower frequencies:  the USB had more bass, well controled nonetheless.

When comparing the Lavry to the Pio, I hear no difference !!!!!  I just can't believe it and I can't believe I have lost my hearing either.

I've got to do lots more testing, particularly Benchmark vs Lavry and then redo all testing with my 2 ch (crappy) set-up, where I am sure the differences will be much more evident (but don't ask me why I think so).

ww

[windwaves]

I am really curious to whether there's an audible $1500 difference between the two.  I am thinking of getting a mac mini and ge one of these dacs too.  I already have the older Nixon dac with the external psu. It's good but not good enough.

Just make sure the USB port out of the Mini are good (clean).  My experience is that USB can be FANTASTIC or complete crap.  For instance, the USB ports on my 17" Apple Flat screen are useless for music.  Same for the USB ports on my, old, iBook G3 - useless.

But thankfully the ports on the actual mac (I have a PM G4...) are good !

Anyhow, something to consider.

[Jon L]

I am really curious to whether there's an audible $1500 difference between the two.  I am thinking of getting a mac mini and ge one of these dacs too.  I already have the older Nixon dac with the external psu. It's good but not good enough.

Just make sure the USB port out of the Mini are good (clean).  My experience is that USB can be FANTASTIC or complete crap.  For instance, the USB ports on my 17" Apple Flat screen are useless for music.  Same for the USB ports on my, old, iBoo ...

As we have repeatedly shown and experienced at Head-fi, it's much easier to discern differences with a good speaker setup.  Even on a top-flight headphone setup, it's very difficult to tell differences between DAC's on A-B switching, as we have experienced comparing Lavry, Benchmark, AQVox.

[windwaves]

cool, that was just my uninformed guess.

The fact that you comfirm this, however tells me that the added value of a dac in a heaphone set-up might be very questionable, at least to me !

[Loftprojection]

Well I don't agree totally.  From my experience, what changes most with speaker setup is the soundstage.  When using a good versus no good "transport/DAC" then you see a bigger difference with speakers than you'll see with headphones.  However, for details, tones, musicality,... I think a headphone setup will clearly demonstrate the differences a good versus no good transport/DAC.    But for that you need good headphones and windwaves I think yours, let's say, could be better.  If you want to hear differences clearly between DACs, get yourself the HD650, or many others like AudioTechnica W1000, Beyer DT880, ...  

Also, you have to watch what you test.  If you plug the USBTD via USB and compare that to the Lavry connected to the digital out of your MAC then your test is not too valid because your soundcard can be the culprit.  Same if you connect the Lavry to the MAC versus the Pio.  A more valid test would be the Pio pure versus the Pio digital out to the Lavry, but making sure you have a great digital interconnect cable.  Many people do testing thinking there are no differences but finally it's because they are using cheap cables that screw up everything.

By the way, thanks for those tests/comments up to now, even if it is with your HD580, it's fun to read the results...

Cheers.

[windwaves]

Interesting points Loftprojection.

A couple of comments.  First of all I like to say that what I found is actually more suprising.  I did CLEARLY notice differences between the Mac's output (analog - hence the Mac's internal dac/soundcard) and the USBTD, connected to the Mac via USB.  Undoubtly better with the latter.

As to some of your observation.  When I compared the Dac01 to the Pio, what you suggest is exactly what I was doing.  And I am glad you mention it becuase in some of these tests I was not sure I was doing it right.  But here it was a straightforward thing: Pio analog out ("pure" as you called it) to amp input1 and Pio digital out (optical) to Dac01, to amp input2.  Believe me, no difference.  Now, the optical cable is nothing special (probably pretty crappy, actually pretty sure).

When I tested however the dac01 to the computer anolog out, I used a good digital cable from A/X to Dac01 and also the DA10 (the cable is Van de Hul opto .. something).

Anyhow, the digital signal from my Mac should not depend on the soundcard, should it  ?  certainly the anolog out depends entirely from it !

As to my 580, yes, I agree, I want to change them, but I strongly doubt that the 650 would be a significant step-up, I tried them a lot and found the exact same problems with them that I have with the 580.  Now on the other hand I'd love to try the 880...but I wonder whether I should just get the gs1..whatever ... this is a whole other discussion

I am glad (and amused) that someone finds my comments interesting, i sometimes wonder if you guys think I am crazy.  You'll hear more soon as I have brought both dacs with me to my w/e house to try them with my 2 channels system (it is just a temporary set-up but good enough for now).

[Loftprojection]

A couple of comments. First of all I like to say that what I found is actually more suprising. I did CLEARLY notice differences between the Mac's output (analog - hence the Mac's internal dac/soundcard) and the USBTD, connected to the Mac via USB. Undoubtly better with the latter.

Yes, that makes sense and it woud be a real shame if you didn't...

As to some of your observation. When I compared the Dac01 to the Pio, what you suggest is exactly what I was doing. And I am glad you mention it becuase in some of these tests I was not sure I was doing it right. But here it was a straightforward thing: Pio analog out ("pure" as you called it) to amp input1 and Pio digital out (optical) to Dac01, to amp input2. Believe me, no difference. Now, the optical cable is nothing special (probably pretty crappy, actually pretty sure).

Well, a better cable might have helped the dac01 but then if you saw no difference at all then the cable would not have made a night and day difference.  So it probably means you Pio's DAC is not bad at all and it can also point out the fact that your headphones, amp and cable are the weak link so whatever source you put in, they are at their limit!

When I tested however the dac01 to the computer anolog out, I used a good digital cable from A/X to Dac01 and also the DA10 (the cable is Van de Hul opto .. something).

Anyhow, the digital signal from my Mac should not depend on the soundcard, should it ? certainly the anolog out depends entirely from it !

Well yes, if the soundcard is crap, the digital out can be full of "shiiiite", haha, so when you use it to feed the dac01 versus using the usb to feed the usbtd might well have put the dac01 at a big disadvantage.

As to my 580, yes, I agree, I want to change them, but I strongly doubt that the 650 would be a significant step-up, I tried them a lot and found the exact same problems with them that I have with the 580. Now on the other hand I'd love to try the 880...but I wonder whether I should just get the gs1..whatever ... this is a whole other discussion icon_smile.gif

I don't know what kind of music you like but if you like jazz and classical, try to listen a pair of AudioTechnica like W1000 or W5000.  You might be positively surprised!

I am glad (and amused) that someone finds my comments interesting, i sometimes wonder if you guys think I am crazy. You'll hear more soon as I have brought both dacs with me to my w/e house to try them with my 2 channels system (it is just a temporary set-up but good enough for now).

Hey hey, can't wait to read you other findings.  Its a fun discussion and don't think I'm an expert, I'm basically just an idiot like you who likes to listen to music!    

[audioengr]

Loftprojection,

I haven't heard either of these USB dac's, but I can tell you that USB has not been proven to be better than buffered spdif.  Theoretically USB can be better than spdif.  There is proof that a USB implementation can be worse than spdif.  Take a look at Stereophile's review of the Yamaha RP-U100, figure 8:

http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/191/index8.html

Jitter is higher in the USB source than the spdif source.  There's some technical explanation about USB issues, but  ...

It is possible to design poor USB interfaces as well as poor S/PDIF interfaces.  Many USB interfaces also use S/PDIF, so they are just as bad or worse.  However, if USB is designed correctly, both S/PDIF and I2S interfaces can be superior to anything a Transport can deliver.  See this white-paper for more explanation:
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue22/nugent.htm

[audioengr]

As we have repeatedly shown and experienced at Head-fi, it's much easier to discern differences with a good speaker setup.  Even on a top-flight headphone setup, it's very difficult to tell differences between DAC's on A-B switching, as we have experienced comparing Lavry, Benchmark, AQVox.

Jon's point is well-taken.  Much of the top bit of performance is in the imaging and layering, which just does not show-up on headphones.

[slwiser]

There is the possibility that the A/B switch is a great equalizer.

As we have repeatedly shown and experienced at Head-fi, it's much easier to discern differences with a good speaker setup.  Even on a top-flight headphone setup, it's very difficult to tell differences between DAC's on A-B switching, as we have experienced comparing Lavry, Benchmark, AQVox.