[The Rube]

Hi, I'm pleased to see this AVA forum, especially, since as a recent convert, I am building a system around an OmegaStar amp, OmegaStar SL preamp and OmegaStar DAC.

I am running a new HK DVD-31 via coax and a Sony CX225 via toslink (the only option) to an Audio Alchemy v2.0 DTI, and from there, to the AVA DAC.

I know in a 1995 newsletter, Frank mentioned the AA DTI as a solution to connecting a toslink-only CDP to an AVA DAC.

My question: Would I be better off getting the AVA toslink to coax adapter ($75) and skipping the 10-year-old DTI?

A curious side note. Running without a DAC, straight to the pre-amp, the HK sounded better than the Sony which was running through the AA DTI and DAC in the Box.

Now, with the HK and the Sony both running through the AA DTI and the AVA DAC, the Sony seems to edge the HK in sound, though both sound very good. The older Sony seemed to benefit most from the AVA DAC.

It's certainly not a scientific observation. All I know is the AVA DAC eliminated the fatigue factor.

The system is wildly engaging—an absolute treat to listen to. I realized soon, though, that even as the AVA gear breathed new life into my Paradigm Moniter 7s, I had outgrown them. I grabbed an immaculate pair of used Meadowlark Hot Rod Herons this weekend and can't wait to put them to work.

Thanks for your thoughts.

The Rube

[skrivis]

Hi, I'm pleased to see this AVA forum, especially, since as a recent convert, I am building a system around an OmegaStar amp, OmegaStar SL preamp and OmegaStar DAC.

That's certainly a good start, since it's what I have also.

I know in a 1995 newsletter, Frank mentioned the AA DTI as a solution to connecting a toslink-only CDP to an AVA DAC.

My question: Would I be better off getting the AVA toslink to coax ada ...

I can't really comment about that, but you might give Frank a ring and see what he says.

 I grabbed an immaculate pair of used Meadowlark Hot Rod Herons this weekend and can't wait to put them to work.

Meadowlark seems interesting since they use transmission line enclosures as well as first-order filters, as well as properly time aligning their drivers.

As an aside, in and amongst the mystic tra-la-la, McGinty mentions the step function test. Step function and impulse tests are rather revealing. A simple 9V battery can tell you an awful lot about speakers too. Weems even had an article on constructing an impulse generator in a tuna fish can. Too many speakers go "bong" when they should go "click."

I'm also quite puzzled by JA's lack of comprehension in the speaker tests he does for Stereophile. All these speakers with horrible step functions. The most common flaw seems to be the tweeter leads the woofer, but there are plenty of untamed resonances in most too. Why doesn't JA call a spade a spade? "Never met a speaker he didn't like" or something... At the very least he could point out that tilting the whole speaker backwards will correct the time-alignment so the tweeter doesn't lead so much.

(That's another pet peeve of mine, speakers with stepped baffles, pods, and other things, when there are far more elegant and correct ways of doing it. The Wilson WATT and Fried C/3-L cabinets provide a good example of the elegant way. The Walsh Radiator tried to do a similar thing in some ways.)