Paradisea DAC

Loftprojection · « **Reply #40 on:** 16 Nov 2006, 02:26 pm »

Quote from: nicksgem10s on 16 Nov 2006, 05:04 am

Tvad and other Paradisea owners...have you tried many different transports feeding this dac? Tvad, I know you mention your reference digital player, have you tried the digital out from your best player to the Paradisea just to see what kind of difference there is in sound? I am just wondering how transport quality will change the playback with the Paradisea. Thanks for all the great information as usual.

I have! I tested it with a Rotel 940ax, Arcam CD23T, Denon 2900, computer/HagUSB and modded RedWineAudio Squeezebox2. All my tests have been done using the same amp and speakers and most of the time the same IC cable.

The RWA SB2, IMO, provides the best sound quality. The Rotel and specially the Arcam CDP are quite close but the modded SB2 is more smooth and silky! The Denon DVD and the computer are not quite in the same league.

Dave G · « **Reply #41 on:** 16 Nov 2006, 03:28 pm »

Quote from: Loftprojection

The RWA SB2, IMO, provides the best sound quality.

Thanks for taking the time to compare all those transports with the Paradisea. How would you compare the sound using the RWA SB2 with and without the Paradisea? I have a RWA SB3 and am thinking of trying a Paradisea. Thanks.

Dave

tdangelo · « **Reply #42 on:** 16 Nov 2006, 04:05 pm »

I completely agree with your line of thought TVAD. I used to have a Tact pre/dac. All I was ever doing is playing with room correction/eq - this and that. The Paradisea has allowed me to just enjoy music. I auditioned Waynes Ultimate II PS and that further increased the enjoyment(he's building me one now). I've made many changes in my system too - I'm now using the Usher 307 Pre w/outboard PS. This preamp is so transparent it's like its not there, hehehe. So... instead of constantly analyzing how this or that sounds I just listen and enjoy. I am getting longer IC's though due to system placement etc and some different tubes for the DAC... Back to analyzing for a little bit

toobluvr · « **Reply #43 on:** 16 Nov 2006, 04:33 pm »

Quote from: nicksgem10s on 16 Nov 2006, 05:04 am

...... I am just wondering how transport quality will change the playback with the Paradisea. Thanks for all the great information as usual.

In my experience with the Paradisea, I would say the transport has a very profound effect on the sound.

I have 2 one box players: Metronome cd2v Signature, and Audio Aero Prima mkII 24/192. I have tried the transport of each into the Paradisea through Nordost Silver Shadow RCA coax cable. For DAC comparisons, I have also connected the player's RCA outputs to my line section inputs. This setup allows for immediate and direct DAC comparisons by simply turning the preamp's selector switch. All things are held constant, except for the DACs....Paradisea vs. internal DAC.

Results are surprising to me. When keeping the transport and all else constant, and just using the preamp to switch between the two DACs, Paradisea and internal, the resulting sound is very similar...virtually indistinguishable...even with the benefit of instantaneous a/b. And this happens with both the Metronome and the Prima.

I was not prepared for this result. It leads me to two possible conclusions: either (1) the Paradisea is a chameleon whose sound is profoundly effected by the transport to the point that DAC differences are basically rendered negligible, or (2) the Paradisea and my internal DACs are extremely similar sonically.

I have no idea about the quality of these two internal transports, but this exercise makes me wonder how much better this little beauty can get with the "right" transport. In any event, it tells me that searching for the "correct" and synergistic transport might be a worthwhile endeavor with the Paradisea.

toobluvr · « **Reply #44 on:** 16 Nov 2006, 04:56 pm »

Quote from: tvad4 on 16 Nov 2006, 04:40 pm

Quote from: toobluvr on 16 Nov 2006, 04:33 pm
Quote from: nicksgem10s on 16 Nov 2006, 05:04 am
...... I am just wondering how transport quality will change the playback with the Paradisea. Thanks for all the great information as usual.

In my experience with the Paradisea, I would say the transport has a very profound effect on the sound.

I absolutely have no doubt that this is true, as it is with any good quality DAC.

Of course, I'm not surprised that differnent transports will give you a different sound.
That is not the point I was making.

What really surprised me, was that both dacs (Paradisea and internal) sounded so similar when using the same transport. Is this because they do indeed sound the same....or because the effect of the transport is soooo strong that it seems to negate, or minimize, dac differences?

Hey...I'm a novice in this field of digital separates....so I'm sure I have a thing or two to learn.

I have only owned single box players.

GHM · « **Reply #45 on:** 16 Nov 2006, 06:42 pm »

Tvad....it seems we are on the same page of sorts. I want to just enjoy the music and get lost in it. The analyzing thing isn't something I like to do. But it must be done sometimes to understand ones preferences in his/her own system and to discover what potential the components have. The Paradisea arrived today.

I'll be hooking her up in a few hours and doing some listening. Can't wait to get this baby cooking.

Good listening

Loftprojection · « **Reply #46 on:** 17 Nov 2006, 07:52 pm »

Quote from: Dave G on 16 Nov 2006, 03:28 pm

Quote from: Loftprojection
The RWA SB2, IMO, provides the best sound quality.

Thanks for taking the time to compare all those transports with the Paradisea. How would you compare the sound using the RWA SB2 with and without the Paradisea? I have a RWA SB3 and am thinking of trying a Paradisea. Thanks.

Dave

Hi Dave, no problem, I had fun swip swapping those various transports in my setup. It was also good for my wallet because I sold the Arcam CDP after this test!!!

There is a pretty significant difference when using the RWA SB2 as transport into the Paradisea versus using the SB2 internal modded DAC. You gain a bit to quite a bit of sound quality in most aspect you can think of. The SB2 alone sounds pretty good but I would not be able to listen to it now that I've got the Paradisea. With the Paradisea you get quite a bit more resolution and details, the imaging and soundstage is more precise and the tonal quality of voices/mids is impressive. Don't forget that this is using a we396a tube in the Paradisea, not with the original tube.

Hope this helps.

NewBuyer · « **Reply #47 on:** 17 Nov 2006, 11:12 pm »

Quote from: GHM on 16 Nov 2006, 06:42 pm

...The Paradisea arrived today. I'll be hooking her up in a few hours and doing some listening. Can't wait to get this baby cooking. ...

Especially interested in hearing your feedback regarding your Audio Sector DAC along with Burson Buffer, versus Paradisea DAC using its internal tube buffer. Should produce some nice anecdotal data between the audible differences (if any) between the solid-state buffer and tube buffer approaches...

GHM · « **Reply #48 on:** 18 Nov 2006, 01:07 am »

Quote from: NewBuyer on 17 Nov 2006, 11:12 pm

Quote from: GHM on 16 Nov 2006, 06:42 pm
...The Paradisea arrived today. I'll be hooking her up in a few hours and doing some listening. Can't wait to get this baby cooking. ...

Especially interested in hearing your feedback regarding your Audio Sector DAC along with Burson Buffer, versus Paradisea DAC using its internal tube buffer. Should produce some nice anecdotal data between the audible differences (if any) between the solid-state buffer and tube buffer approaches...

At this very moment Newbuyer. I've been playing with the Monarchy 48/96 and the Paradisea. I can tell anyone without a doubt! If you're not using the Monarchy or GW Labs or something like this between this DAC and your transport..you're missing some music. The differences were so glaring I had to put the Monarchy back in the chain in a hurry. Better bass, soundstage depth, tonality of instruments and voices are more pronounced or fuller . I'm talking a huge difference in my system! Instruments sound a little anemic without the DIP. This is one tweak..I wouldn't overlook. The fancy cables can wait.

Next will come putting the Burson buffer after the Paradisea for kicks..though I feel at the moment the Paradisea's internal buffer is getting the job done very nicely! So far very impressive..with the DIP. I forgot to add I'm running the DIp at 48 kHz..I don't hear a need to run it at the higher level..the balance is excellent at 48kHz.

denjo · « **Reply #49 on:** 18 Nov 2006, 02:51 am »

GHM
Glad you are enjoying the little overachieving Paradisea. I have a question: are you using RCA or optical from the Monarchy to the DAC? My understanding is that the Monarchy (and I guess similar anti-jitter devices) will make more of a difference with RCA than with optical. I think it has to do with the superb ability of optical vs RCA digital cable in keeping the signals free from jitter. I am asking this question because I am hoping to invest in a SB3 and have been mulling on whether the mods to the SB would make much of a difference if I am using an external DAC and the the optical out. Any views you care to share would be much appreciated!

Keep enjoying the music!

Best Regards
Dennis

tdangelo · « **Reply #50 on:** 18 Nov 2006, 03:40 am »

GHM, sorry if I didn't read the whole thread but are you using a SB with the DIP?

Thanks

Tony

GHM · « **Reply #51 on:** 18 Nov 2006, 04:21 am »

Quote from: denjo on 18 Nov 2006, 02:51 am

GHM
Glad you are enjoying the little overachieving Paradisea. I have a question: are you using RCA or optical from the Monarchy to the DAC? My understanding is that the Monarchy (and I guess similar anti-jitter devices) will make more of a difference with RCA than with optical. I think it has to do with the superb ability of optical vs RCA digital cable in keeping the signals free from jitter. I am asking this question because I am hoping to invest in a SB3 and have been mulling on whether the mods to the SB would make much of a difference if I am using an external DAC and the the optical out. Any views you care to share would be much appreciated!

Keep enjoying the music!

Best Regards
Dennis

Hi Dennis...I'm using the coax output of the Monarchy. The Monarchy does have an optical and coax input for digital. So you would still be converting over to a coax on the output side regardless of the input. Just my thinking...the jitter maybe a factor..I'm thinking it's the strong output of the Monarchy and the upsampling making the most difference in what I'm hearing. After all the Pioneer as with most players except highend transports only outputs .5 volts on the digital out. The Monarchy puts out ten times that..nearly 5 volts. Believe me fellows you can hear it too.

Quote from: tdangelo on 18 Nov 2006, 03:40 am

GHM, sorry if I didn't read the whole thread but are you using a SB with the DIP?

Thanks

Tony

Hi Tony..no I use a modded Pioneer as a transport. I do know of one AC member that was using a GW labs unit with a modded SB3. He told me it did make a difference in his system. He also uses the Altmann Dac and seemed to prefer the Upsampling of the GW Labs over the digital output of the SB3 feeding the Altmann. Whether he's still using this exact setup I'm not sure.

lonewolfny42 · « **Reply #52 on:** 18 Nov 2006, 04:34 pm »

Last Ebay feedback posted for the Paradisea seller :

"Fantastic Dac.I havnt even chaged the tube yet. So smooth.Sold my Citypulse Dac."

Scott F. · « **Reply #53 on:** 18 Nov 2006, 06:08 pm »

Hey GHM,

Thats an interesting combination. Forgive me for asking what may be obvious here but I'm trying to wrap my mind around that you are doing

So you are taking your transport (or the SB in this case), taking that feed to the Monarchy DIP upsampler, then feeding the upsampled feed into the non-oversampling Paradesia?

I think I can understand the reason for doing that but help me understand if you would. I assume this setup is akin to buying, ripping and then listening to a 24bit mastered CD because they tend to sound better than a standard CD because of the enhanced mastering resolution?

GHM · « **Reply #54 on:** 18 Nov 2006, 06:45 pm »

Quote from: Scott F. on 18 Nov 2006, 06:08 pm

Hey GHM,

Thats an interesting combination. Forgive me for asking what may be obvious here but I'm trying to wrap my mind around that you are doing

So you are taking your transport (or the SB in this case), taking that feed to the Monarchy DIP upsampler, then feeding the upsampled feed into the non-oversampling Paradesia?

I think I can understand the reason for doing that but help me understand if you would. I assume this setup is akin to buying, ripping and then listening to a 24bit mastered CD because they tend to sound better than a standard CD because of the enhanced mastering resolution?

Scott I never thought about that..but you may be right. I know it sounds insane when you break it down. I found this by accident myself. I tried the regular Monarchy that doesn't upsample. It made vast improvements. But it also made the music a little edgy... Almost to sharply defined I would say.

I did some reading on the up-samplers 24/ 48 or 96 kHz ..which say they can also help with the resolution of a 16 bit dac. So I took the plunge and sure enough. The edginess of the regular DIP 16 / 44.1 was history. What I got was a more expansive sound. The once glarey strings became silky but without taxing the definition and tone. It was like the signal became easier for the reciever and or Dac chip to decode..I have no idea why.

I've since come across several people doing the same thing. Not only with the AS Dac or the Paradisea. But with Scott Nixon and Altmann Dacs as well.

Scott F. · « **Reply #55 on:** 18 Nov 2006, 07:36 pm »

Thats really interesting........ Upsample then hit an NOS..........I can see how that might work out pretty OK on most CDs.

I'm curious if you've heard any sonic anomalies with any particular music.....maybe any discs that you've got that are the new 20 or 24 bit remasters?

GHM · « **Reply #56 on:** 18 Nov 2006, 08:10 pm »

Quote from: Scott F. on 18 Nov 2006, 07:36 pm

Thats really interesting........ Upsample then hit an NOS..........I can see how that might work out pretty OK on most CDs.

I'm curious if you've heard any sonic anomalies with any particular music.....maybe any discs that you've got that are the new 20 or 24 bit remasters?

No I haven't heard anything strange from the CDs. I have quite a few 20 and 24 bit CDs . They all just sound so much better when their upsampled before going into the NON OS DACs. I know you're a reviewer as well. But if you go to the Monarchy site go to the Upsampler DIPs and find the Soundstage review. This guy describes perfectly what I hear between the 24/48 and 16/44.1. In the Bound for Sound review..the reviewer tries to explain what's going on towards the end of the first page. This is the only thing I can come up with of what's going on..He explains that the retrieval rate of the Dac is increased by upsampling the signal. My ears are telling me this must be true.

Scott F. · « **Reply #57 on:** 18 Nov 2006, 11:25 pm »

Interesting. I'll give the review. Sounds like it might be kinda fun to play with.

Thanks!

JDUBS · « **Reply #58 on:** 19 Nov 2006, 03:28 am »

Hmmm...so both the Altmann and the Paradisea NOS DACs can accept up to a 24 / 96 signal?

-Jim

GHM · « **Reply #59 on:** 19 Nov 2006, 03:31 am »

Quote from: JDUBS on 19 Nov 2006, 03:28 am

Hmmm...so both the Altmann and the Paradisea NOS DACs can accept up to a 24 / 96 signal?

-Jim

Yup..The Constantine can also accept the same signals. The Altmann can accept up to 192 kHz. Most transports output 16 bit / 44.1 or 48kHz..this is oversampled not upsampled like the de-jitters that do 24 bit /48 or 96 kHz.