[whanafi]

As a long time user of Slim Devices kit, (original SliMP3, Squeezbox 3, Boom, Duet, Transporter), I am familiar and comfortable with digital source music.  I originally had my CD's in Sony MegaChangers driven by a controller and software from Nirvis.  Now I have ripped everything to FLAC using dbPoweramp, and am happily enjoying the freedom of access that only computers can bring.

I recently paired my Transporter with a Bryston BP26/MM pre-amp, Bryston 4Bsst2 power amp, and KEF Reference 205/2 speakers.  The sound is wonderful and just what I was hoping for.

Lurking on the forums for a while got me thinking about external DAC's and whether adding one to an SB3 would be worth it.  I have an SB3 feeding analogue out to a Linn Classik, and am quite happy with the sound, but it doesn't reach the clarity of the Transporter.

Local dealers in Singapore don't lend equipment, so the trade-off was between price and curiosity.  I settled for the Cambridge Audio DacMagic, which while not cheap, is below my pain threshold.

For the digital interconnect, I used a Daiyo Toslink 1.2 metre cable (DA6211) and fired up the new system.  The sound was terrible!  I played around with the different filter settings, but they all sounded worse than the SB3 by itself. 

Concerned that the TOSLINK cable might be the issue, I changed the connection to a QED One Series 75 ohm coax.  The sound was immediately better, which is annoying because I do believe that bits are bits when it comes to digital.  Either the TOSLINK cable/interface has problems, or it really is an inferior method of transferring digital info.

Although the connection using a coax cable sounded better, it still did not sound as good as the SB3 directly outputting an analogue signal. 

My conclusion when it comes to this combo is save your money and enjoy the music.

[Steidl Guitars]

Although the connection using a coax cable sounded better, it still did not sound as good as the SB3 directly outputting an analogue signal. 

Surprising.  Although the DAC inside the SB3 is fine, I've fed the signal from the SB to a few external DACs and they have all provided a significant improvement. 

I've not tried the Cambridge, which is well regarded, but I'll have a chance to do that next week. 

Thanks for offering up your experience.

[Charles Calkins]

Well you know you get what you paid for. I wonder what the results would have been say using a PS perfect wave or a Bryston or an AVA Dac. Or some other high quality Dac.

                                 

                                                 Cheers
                                                Charlie

[Bill@LakeGeorge]

For the psqat few weeks I have been trying out a few external Dacs with my SB3, the AVA Insight+ and the new EE Dac.  Both make a signifacant improvement over the SB3 alone.  Right now I like the tube output on the EE Dac.  This week I hope to have the Tube Audio Design Tadac.  I have also noticed that different tubes make quite a difference.

[whanafi]

Well you know you get what you paid for. I wonder what the results would have been say using a PS perfect wave or a Bryston or an AVA Dac. Or some other high quality Dac.

                                 

                                                 Cheers
                                                Charlie

I think that's the point.  The Cambridge and cables were almost double the price of the original SB3, and instead of an improvement, the sound was harsh and unpleasant. 

I use a track I have been listening to for years (Santana Samba Pa Ti), which nicely exercises the equipment, and there is an audible difference for the worse with the external DAC. 

It seems Sean Adams and the boys knew what they were doing, and at an excellent price point.

[NewBuyer]

...It seems Sean Adams and the boys knew what they were doing, and at an excellent price point.

I wholeheartedly agree.  You mentioned general clarity; do you notice any other significant differences between the analog out of Transporter vs SB3?

P.S. You have a great system there...

[whanafi]

Thanks, I am enjoying it after too many years with a child-safe set up. 

Everything about the Transporter is just nicer - looks, remote, display, sound. 

The absolute difference between any two components is going to be subjective, and I am not sure my choice of adjectives is going to enlighten you much.  It just sounds better - more detail for things like top hats, a brush on a drum, acoustic guitar, female vocals. 

[Delta Wave]

When you use a TOSlink, or any variation of fiber optics for that matter the signal has to be converted 2 more times to/from light along with dealing with db loss from the "impossible to actually clean without the correct fiber polishing and cleaning tools" let alone the mostly plastic fiber whips on the market. Whereas using a coax you're not converting anything, it's a straight digital signal.

[BobC]

I use a DACMagic with my Duet connected with Straightwire (silverlight or S-Link?) S/PDIF and think it sounds great.  To my ears better than the Duet Receiver by itself and better than my Arcam DV78 (now sold).

As good as something like Bryston or a Transporter, probably not, but hey it was <$400 and sounds darn good to me!   Plus I like being able to play with the filters. 

[whanafi]

The Duet Receiver has a different DAC than the SB3, so it represents another combination of variables.  Glad to hear that you get a benefit from the DacMagic.

[drphoto]

I put up a post about the DacMagic when it first came out, as it looked promising. Wayne at Bolder said he was willing to look under the hood and see what mods could be done. You might want to contact him. A PS upgrade would be the first place to start.

[BobC]

If I had the money I'd buy a Red Wine Black Lightning to power the DAC and Receiver.

[whanafi]

I put up a post about the DacMagic when it first came out, as it looked promising. Wayne at Bolder said he was willing to look under the hood and see what mods could be done. You might want to contact him. A PS upgrade would be the first place to start.

Cambridge specifically warns against changing the power supply in the manual.  Have to admit I am doubtful it would make an audible difference, and I am into this experiment for as much as I can tolerate.  I am happy with the SB3 sound in my secondary system.

[drphoto]

Well they probably didn't have pro modders like Wayne in mind.

But I see your point. You might feel like you're putting lipstick on a pig if you really don't like it.

However good regulated power supplies can make a big difference, even in the SB3 itself. Those wallwart switchers generate a lot of noise, as well as simply not being robust enough. Yeah, they work, and these companies are trying to meet a price point, so that's what they use.

Battery power might be the best solution of all, as suggested by Bob.

[lcrim]

The Logitech SqueezeBox forum's official position is that the stock power supply works just fine.
The very first mod that anyone serious about sound quality w/ a SqueezeBox is to discard the stock ps and replace it with a decent quality linear regulated power supply.

Sorry, no offense, but its difficult to accept that a stock SqueezeBox 3 w/ a stock ps sounds better through its analog outputs than through a decent DAC like the Dacmagic.

[Steidl Guitars]

Last week, I had the chance to audition the Cambridge DAC on a friend's system fed by a squeezebox receiver, so I thought I'd offer my perspective.

She has an Onkyo A-9555 integrated and matching DX-7555 CD player driving a pair of Paradigm Studio 100s.  A relatively modest set-up by audiophile standards, but I thought it sounded quite nice. 

We started by A/Bing a few interconnects on the CD player; differences were noticeable, but not huge so we settled on a pair that seemed to work well.  We then compared the Duet to the CD player using the Duet's analog outputs (streaming FLAC files), which took about 2 seconds; the CD player was much better.  Next, we compared the Duet's analog outputs to the Duet's digital output fed to the Cambridge DAC.  Again, that took about 5 seconds as the Cambridge DAC was much a noticeable improvement than the DAC in the Duet.  Not even close. 

How much better?  Well, I kept my mouth shut and let my friend make the call on everything (she's not nearly as picky as me, and not nearly so gear-motivated).  Well, she thought swapping ICs on the CD players mattered some, but not a lot.  I agreed.  But running the Duet through the Cambridge DAC made a large and obvious improvement to her, pretty much in every dimension  (and I agree).  As I was swapping back and forth, she asked "do we really need to keep comparing these? I'd rather just be done and listen through the separate DAC." 

I do believe that whanafi did not hear much of a difference in his rig, but wanted to let others know that in at least one other system, the Cambridge offered a terrific improvement over using the Duet itself. 

[JoshK]

When you use a TOSlink, or any variation of fiber optics for that matter the signal has to be converted 2 more times to/from light along with dealing with db loss from the "impossible to actually clean without the correct fiber polishing and cleaning tools" let alone the mostly plastic fiber whips on the market. Whereas using a coax you're not converting anything, it's a straight digital signal.

Not exactly true.  There is a SPDIF transceiver/receiver pair (one in each component) that takes the raw digital and creates an SPDIF RF type data signal for transmission.  This is a conversion of the raw I2S or similar data stream. 

**I am not making any claims as to which works better or worse, simply there is a conversion with coax.

[whanafi]

Last week, I had the chance to audition the Cambridge DAC on a friend's system fed by a squeezebox receiver, so I thought I'd offer my perspective.

I do believe that whanafi did not hear much of a difference in his rig, but wanted to let others know that in at least one other system, the Cambridge offered a terrific improvement over using the Duet itself.

Glad to hear that someone could benefit from the Cambridge.  I was comparing my results using an SB3, not a Receiver.  I understand the SB3 has different internal components to the Receiver.  When I listen to the two devices in my setup (both feeding analogue to a pre-amp) the SB3 sounds better.  In fact I stopped using the Receiver and just use the Duet Controller.  Even that is fading away in favour of iPeng on the iPod Touch.