Acoustic Portrait - Thiyaga DAC

[Thad E Ginathom]

Garbage in, garbage out, yes indeed ... but that's another reason why I wouldn't call the media "source".

Differences? A few evenings ago I was convincing my self that Ubuntu 12.04 did not sound as good as Ubuntu 11.04. Same hardware and other software. I haven't repeated the test yet. Brains are astonishing things, goodness knows what mine will hear next time!

There is no difference in digital data. But yes, I make the assumption that it is all properly delivered. If there was do difference in conversion and the subsequent analogue circuitry everything would sound the same, and we know it doesn't. That circuitry could be affected by its environment.

 

[BLASTO]

I went for audition of Thiyaga DAC yesterday. Though i wanted to gauge the DAC performance, I ended up listening to a complete Thiyaga setup.

Files: FLACs and MP3s
Source: Computer through USB (Looked like a Silverstone boxed HTPC)
Thiyaga DAC > Thiyaga Pre > Thiyaga Monoblocks > Thiyaga Speakers

I listened to songs ranging from Master of Puppets (Metallica), Hate Me (Blue October), Linkin Park, Norah Jones, Best Audiophile Voices, Mehdi Hassan, Ghulam Ali....

What I could note:
1. Wide soundstage with clear vocals for Jazz/Classical. Especially, Norah Jones Nightingale sounded like NJ sitting in the middle of a well crafted band. You could hear the bass at one end while the drums at other (something like that), while the lovely voice sat high in the middle. Actually, this became apparently clear even as I walked in. Some caranatic music was playing on the system through a audio cd and I can say it was very close to any of the live session that I have listened to in chennai temples.
2. When it came to some low bit rate files like Mehdi Hassan mp3 ripped from a LP (not well done), results were not so good.. there were segments where harmonium took over everything and countered its own sound notes, sounding chaos...
3. Rock was laid back and lacked energy. I verified this twice. Heard rock to start off and came back to it after listening to some jazz. It was definitely cleaner. You can make out every word in Hate Me or even Crawling. But I never hit you like rock is meant to.

So, to me it sounded, very good for Jazz/Soft Classical well recorded songs. Rock sounded clinical, but do u want it to sound clinical or energetic?

This left me wondering, if a real system can deliver both rock and jazz with equal finesse?

Are you comparing it to MF M1 and Monitor Audio combo?? I have many times felt that this combo is "Made for Rock".

My setup is more or less equivalent to what to explain but never tried rock.. The vocals and realism sometimes gives goosebumps and are sometimes scary.. I have always prefered 'singer in the room' kind of sound but this is in a different level.. But all in only well recorded originals..

The setup differentiates between flac and original CDs. Even Original mastered CDs and Collector editions. Now it has become a wild goose chase to get hold of 'mastered' originals. Looks like higher you go, the greater is the rejection rate of 'source'.

 

[jls001]

Looks like higher you go, the greater is the rejection rate of 'source'.

The more resolving one's chain gets, the more one realises how many crappy (sonically, I mean) CDs/LPs one has in one's collection.

 

[jls001]

I beg to differ on this. To me, all mechanical transports sound different.

+1 to this.