Portable or Desktop Amp for Hifi Stereo Setup

[Doomster69]

Hi members,

Ive been curious to understand other peoples experiences using dacs in the stereo chain.

I have a fairly treated room with key reflection and diffusion pts/surfaces covered with acoustic panels, bass traps, heavy carpets, etc. Speaker placement done manually for accurate imaging ( cross checked and tweaked factoring YPOA measurements as well). The stereo setup currently gives me pretty good imaging and soundstage. I have been using portable dac amps (Topping NX4 Fiio Q1MK2) as dedicated dacs feeding my stereo setup. Both have a 'line out' feature with 2.2 volts output. That allows me to connect the macbook laptop via usb to dac and then 3.5mm to dual RCA interconnects between the dac going into a tube buffer preamp (FX audio Tube03 MK2) which then connects to power amp via RCA. Both portable dac amps are D-S dacs - the topping NX4 with ess sabre dac sounds clinical and airier, whereas the Fiio with AKM is quite laid back and warm - so i get different sound signatures suited for different genres. The tube buffer adds a bit of tubey goodness making the sound slightly airier, holographic and gives more body overall.

I recently purchase the modi multibit to try the multibit sound after reading what i hear/read about typical r2r presentation, i.e. better body, smoother highs and holographic imaging. Will receive the unit in May this yr. and will tinker around to hear sonic differences.

I had a few questions - appreciate if anyone can throw some light on these:

1. Is a dedicated desktop dac's performance better than using a portable dac (as the main dac in the chain)? if so how?

2. What sonic benefits does a dedicated non-portable dac offer over the portable dac? Both the portable dacs have 2.2 volts line out.

3. How much of the soundstage and imaging is really impacted by the DAC vs other components in the chain?

Hoping to learn some from others experiences!

Thanks!

 

[fLUX]

Hi members,

Ive been curious to understand other peoples experiences using dacs in the stereo chain.

I have a fairly treated room with key reflection and diffusion pts/surfaces covered with acoustic panels, bass traps, heavy carpets, etc. Speaker placement done manually for accurate imaging ( cross checked and tweaked factoring YPOA measurements as well). The stereo setup currently gives me pretty good imaging and soundstage. I have been using portable dac amps (Topping NX4 Fiio Q1MK2) as dedicated dacs feeding my stereo setup. Both have a 'line out' feature with 2.2 volts output. That allows me to connect the macbook laptop via usb to dac and then 3.5mm to dual RCA interconnects between the dac going into a tube buffer preamp (FX audio Tube03 MK2) which then connects to power amp via RCA. Both portable dac amps are D-S dacs - the topping NX4 with ess sabre dac sounds clinical and airier, whereas the Fiio with AKM is quite laid back and warm - so i get different sound signatures suited for different genres. The tube buffer adds a bit of tubey goodness making the sound slightly airier, holographic and gives more body overall.

I recently purchase the modi multibit to try the multibit sound after reading what i hear/read about typical r2r presentation, i.e. better body, smoother highs and holographic imaging. Will receive the unit in May this yr. and will tinker around to hear sonic differences.

I had a few questions - appreciate if anyone can throw some light on these:

1. Is a dedicated desktop dac's performance better than using a portable dac (as the main dac in the chain)? if so how?

2. What sonic benefits does a dedicated non-portable dac offer over the portable dac? Both the portable dacs have 2.2 volts line out.

3. How much of the soundstage and imaging is really impacted by the DAC vs other components in the chain?

Hoping to learn some from others experiences!

Thanks!

1. I have found that desktop DAC's offer better soundstage, airiness , imaging and instrument separation resulting in better overall signature. While I might be wrong, due to no space constraints desktop DAC's tend to be cleaner and have better implementation as they don't have to try to cram up everything in a small portable chassis.

2. Sonic benefits are different in each DAC like how you have elaborated on AKM VS ESS. However each manufacturer further try to optimize the signature to what they feel will be suitable , so will vary per the implementation. 2.2 line outs will ensure line level output , ensuring sufficient signal level is sent further down the line.

3. The highest impact would be via the DAC as its the very start of the chain, if you have a bad DAC/source then regardless how good your rest of the chain is the end result will be still poor. However you can always alter the signature earlier/further down the line with
- Source ( A good source like a network streamer - Bluesound Node 2i/ Paradigm PW Link/ Allo Digione Signature will certainly add benefits to the chain vs using a PC/Mobile Device for playback)
- Preamps (Tube/Class A preamps do exactly what your tube buffer did but probably in a more refined and a larger difference vs only using a buffer, i never tried a buffer but this is my guess)
- Amplifiers ( Preferably you do not want your amplifier to do any changes to the signature , the more neutral it is the better)
- Highly debated , subjective topic - RCA Cables & Speaker Cables -
RCA Cables- I have noticed significant changes while moving from Amazon Basic to Murthys RCA cables & then some minor changes in the upper frequency while using the belden RCA cables. Changes while moving from Amazon Basics to Murthys cable were very significant whereas not so much with the other alternatives I tried
Speaker Cables - Again here while moving from Amazon Basic cables to Belden cables i found a good amount of difference in the lows and highs. Things changed for the better. Then I got a Mogami 2804 on trial basis , the lows which seemed missing from my speakers were even more prominent and music feels much more involving now. Snake oil or not, I like to experiment with cables as I have noticed differences in signature with the cables I have tried till date.

 

[DB1989]

RCA Cables- I have noticed significant changes while moving from Amazon Basic to Murthys RCA cables & then some minor changes in the upper frequency while using the belden RCA cables. Changes while moving from Amazon Basics to Murthys cable were very significant whereas not so much with the other alternatives I tried
Speaker Cables - Again here while moving from Amazon Basic cables to Belden cables i found a good amount of difference in the lows and highs. Things changed for the better. Then I got a Mogami 2804 on trial basis , the lows which seemed missing from my speakers were even more prominent and music feels much more involving now. Snake oil or not, I like to experiment with cables as I have noticed differences in signature with the cables I have tried till date.

Unfortunately (or fortunately for me), i've never found a difference in cables beyond the performance achieved from Amazon Basics ones. My current rig deploys the following - (1) Audioquest Golden Gate (2) Audioquest Pearl (3) Audioquest Tower, (3) QED QX16/2, (4) Mogami 2972, (5) Mogami Gold (6) DAC Silver Streak (7) DAC 10 AWG (8) DAC ARX01A in addition to corresponding amazonbasics ones.

Forn reference, my current chain is Ipad Pro>Audioquest Jitterbug>Audioquest Pearl>Chord Mojo>Audiquest Golden Gate>Cambridge Audio CXA 81>Mogami 2972>Quad S5/Wharfedale Evo 4.2/KEF Q350.

While both amazonbasics speaker wire as well as RCA cables were a step up from generic ones used earlier and the difference was clearly audible, once I upgraded from the amazonbasics ones, I couldn't hear any difference.

One explanation could be that the resolution achievable in my room does not allow for the distinction between cables to be perceivable (except for that from the DAC Silverstreak which makes the treble sparkle).

Which leads to the second question of whether upgrading cables is necessary if the room does not allow for such incremental improvements to be heard. The argument on the flipside would be that one can't really know the maximum resolution achievable in their room unless they have tried the wires out and come to the conclusion that nothing more can be extracted from that room.

 

[Doomster69]

1. I have found that desktop DAC's offer better soundstage, airiness , imaging and instrument separation resulting in better overall signature. While I might be wrong, due to no space constraints desktop DAC's tend to be cleaner and have better implementation as they don't have to try to cram up everything in a small portable chassis.

2. Sonic benefits are different in each DAC like how you have elaborated on AKM VS ESS. However each manufacturer further try to optimize the signature to what they feel will be suitable , so will vary per the implementation. 2.2 line outs will ensure line level output , ensuring sufficient signal level is sent further down the line.

3. The highest impact would be via the DAC as its the very start of the chain, if you have a bad DAC/source then regardless how good your rest of the chain is the end result will be still poor. However you can always alter the signature earlier/further down the line with
- Source ( A good source like a network streamer - Bluesound Node 2i/ Paradigm PW Link/ Allo Digione Signature will certainly add benefits to the chain vs using a PC/Mobile Device for playback)
- Preamps (Tube/Class A preamps do exactly what your tube buffer did but probably in a more refined and a larger difference vs only using a buffer, i never tried a buffer but this is my guess)
- Amplifiers ( Preferably you do not want your amplifier to do any changes to the signature , the more neutral it is the better)
- Highly debated , subjective topic - RCA Cables & Speaker Cables -
RCA Cables- I have noticed significant changes while moving from Amazon Basic to Murthys RCA cables & then some minor changes in the upper frequency while using the belden RCA cables. Changes while moving from Amazon Basics to Murthys cable were very significant whereas not so much with the other alternatives I tried
Speaker Cables - Again here while moving from Amazon Basic cables to Belden cables i found a good amount of difference in the lows and highs. Things changed for the better. Then I got a Mogami 2804 on trial basis , the lows which seemed missing from my speakers were even more prominent and music feels much more involving now. Snake oil or not, I like to experiment with cables as I have noticed differences in signature with the cables I have tried till date.

Thanks for the revert @fLUX

I had the same opinion as you mentioned in pt.1. Think the desktop dacs have better analog output stages (and parts) than the portable ones which make a difference.

I use the amplifiers - marantz pm5005 and Yamaha RX1040 - in 'pure direct modes' which ensures more closer to source output. In my system with the PSB speakers, there is a night and day jump up when using pure direct vs non pure direct/processing modes. I dont use EQs in the entire chain, hence some degree of neutrality is achieved.

As for speaker cables, using DAC SPK14 AWG OFC Dual Speaker Cable for 5 ft runs (read overkill) in smaller stereo setup and Supra directional cables in the larger setup. The RCAs are also DAC cables purchased from Hifimart. - these seem to be well regarded so im assuming im sorted on cables front (for now). Will surely take your advice and experiment with cables when i look to upgrade.

I saw your signature mentions you are using the modi multibit. How has your experience been with that dac in general compared to other DS dacs? What kind of sonic improvements do you think the denafrips brings over and above the modil multibit (asking bcz i might upgrade in future)

Im using the USB from macbook air (2015) as digital source for now playing off Tidal Hifi and Spotify Premium. Im contemplating adding a digione/digione signature as streamer (bluenode out of budget for now). So what sonic benefits can be expected from the switch to the allo? I did a trial of the audirvana app and it did clear up the sound a bit (sharper accurate treble, quiter passages, tighter base). ive read that Macs have reasonably good usb implementations. So a follow on question then is which works better - the streamer app (audirvana) or the streamer hardware (digione)?

Whats your take on the above?

Tx

 

[Doomster69]

Unfortunately (or fortunately for me), i've never found a difference in cables beyond the performance achieved from Amazon Basics ones. My current rig deploys the following - (1) Audioquest Golden Gate (2) Audioquest Pearl (3) Audioquest Tower, (3) QED QX16/2, (4) Mogami 2972, (5) Mogami Gold (6) DAC Silver Streak (7) DAC 10 AWG (8) DAC ARX01A in addition to corresponding amazonbasics ones.

Forn reference, my current chain is Ipad Pro>Audioquest Jitterbug>Audioquest Pearl>Chord Mojo>Audiquest Golden Gate>Cambridge Audio CXA 81>Mogami 2972>Quad S5/Wharfedale Evo 4.2/KEF Q350.

While both amazonbasics speaker wire as well as RCA cables were a step up from generic ones used earlier and the difference was clearly audible, once I upgraded from the amazonbasics ones, I couldn't hear any difference.

One explanation could be that the resolution achievable in my room does not allow for the distinction between cables to be perceivable (except for that from the DAC Silverstreak which makes the treble sparkle).

Which leads to the second question of whether upgrading cables is necessary if the room does not allow for such incremental improvements to be heard. The argument on the flipside would be that one can't really know the maximum resolution achievable in their room unless they have tried the wires out and come to the conclusion that nothing more can be extracted from that room.

Agree with you on that @DB1989. Cables do make a difference, but only to the extent the system (and room) can reveal these small differences.

For the modi multibit dac, ive read that a cleaner usb signal can bring in some improvements (compared with Unison USB implementation). For now, im planning to use the PYST USB cable and hoping the mac air usb is good enough to reduce USB jitter, noise issues.

However, I see you are using Audioquest Jitterbug and Audioquest Pearl. In your experience, what perceptible differences did these 2 make?

Tx

 

[Doomster69]

@DB1989 i see you are using the Chord Mojo and FX Audio Tube 03 (GE tubes). This was my initial choice too, but went with the mimby bcz i wanted a dedicated desktop dac (and had 2 portable amp/dacs already )

I had posted a question reg. the FX Audio Tube 03 on another post (https://www.hifivision.com/threads/tube-pre-amp-op-amp-change.83904/). Appreciate if you can share your knowledge on the same

 

[DB1989]

Agree with you on that @DB1989. Cables do make a difference, but only to the extent the system (and room) can reveal these small differences.

For the modi multibit dac, ive read that a cleaner usb signal can bring in some improvements (compared with Unison USB implementation). For now, im planning to use the PYST USB cable and hoping the mac air usb is good enough to reduce USB jitter, noise issues.

However, I see you are using Audioquest Jitterbug and Audioquest Pearl. In your experience, what perceptible differences did these 2 make?

Tx

Absolutely zilch

 

[Doomster69]

@DB1989 - have you tried opamp change on the FX Audio Tube03 MK2? M thinking of swapping out the current op amp with Muses02.. wondering where the impact would be most felt?

 

[fLUX]

Unfortunately (or fortunately for me), i've never found a difference in cables beyond the performance achieved from Amazon Basics ones. My current rig deploys the following - (1) Audioquest Golden Gate (2) Audioquest Pearl (3) Audioquest Tower, (3) QED QX16/2, (4) Mogami 2972, (5) Mogami Gold (6) DAC Silver Streak (7) DAC 10 AWG (8) DAC ARX01A in addition to corresponding amazonbasics ones.

Forn reference, my current chain is Ipad Pro>Audioquest Jitterbug>Audioquest Pearl>Chord Mojo>Audiquest Golden Gate>Cambridge Audio CXA 81>Mogami 2972>Quad S5/Wharfedale Evo 4.2/KEF Q350.

While both amazonbasics speaker wire as well as RCA cables were a step up from generic ones used earlier and the difference was clearly audible, once I upgraded from the amazonbasics ones, I couldn't hear any difference.

One explanation could be that the resolution achievable in my room does not allow for the distinction between cables to be perceivable (except for that from the DAC Silverstreak which makes the treble sparkle).

Which leads to the second question of whether upgrading cables is necessary if the room does not allow for such incremental improvements to be heard. The argument on the flipside would be that one can't really know the maximum resolution achievable in their room unless they have tried the wires out and come to the conclusion that nothing more can be extracted from that room.

Yup, the biggest difference I could make out was when I moved away from Amazon basics to Murthy cable. Then I moved from Murthy's cable to Belden (which is tinned copper) , this certainly brought about a change in the highs over Murthy's cables. Similarly in speaker cables i moved from amazon basic (ofc cables) to belden (tinned copper) then to Mogami 2804 (which is Coaxial).

I still have not tried moving up the ladder along a wire of similar characteristics like a more expensive tinned copper/ofc wire , so I cannot comment if I heard any changes. However I have changed cables whose core compositions were different and that may be the reason for noticing the change ( I remember a discussion ongoing on silver cables in the past which tend to make the treble hot , so even my experimentation has been moving more horizontally across types of cable vs moving vertically on the cost ladder).

 

[fLUX]

Thanks for the revert @fLUX

I had the same opinion as you mentioned in pt.1. Think the desktop dacs have better analog output stages (and parts) than the portable ones which make a difference.

I use the amplifiers - marantz pm5005 and Yamaha RX1040 - in 'pure direct modes' which ensures more closer to source output. In my system with the PSB speakers, there is a night and day jump up when using pure direct vs non pure direct/processing modes. I dont use EQs in the entire chain, hence some degree of neutrality is achieved.

As for speaker cables, using DAC SPK14 AWG OFC Dual Speaker Cable for 5 ft runs (read overkill) in smaller stereo setup and Supra directional cables in the larger setup. The RCAs are also DAC cables purchased from Hifimart. - these seem to be well regarded so im assuming im sorted on cables front (for now). Will surely take your advice and experiment with cables when i look to upgrade.

I saw your signature mentions you are using the modi multibit. How has your experience been with that dac in general compared to other DS dacs? What kind of sonic improvements do you think the denafrips brings over and above the modil multibit (asking bcz i might upgrade in future)

Im using the USB from macbook air (2015) as digital source for now playing off Tidal Hifi and Spotify Premium. Im contemplating adding a digione/digione signature as streamer (bluenode out of budget for now). So what sonic benefits can be expected from the switch to the allo? I did a trial of the audirvana app and it did clear up the sound a bit (sharper accurate treble, quiter passages, tighter base). ive read that Macs have reasonably good usb implementations. So a follow on question then is which works better - the streamer app (audirvana) or the streamer hardware (digione)?

Whats your take on the above?

Tx

I have acquired the multibit less than a week back (had a SMSL SU-8 before), this is primarily towards my desktop headphone setup use. Not tried it with speakers yet, for the price the tonality is amazing , there is a good bass slam and quantity. On the treble side these seem to fall a little short in comparison to ESS/AKM/Ares II I have tried before.

I am yet to A/B it against the Ares II which is employed in my stereo setup.

 

[Doomster69]

I have acquired the multibit less than a week back (had a SMSL SU-8 before), this is primarily towards my desktop headphone setup use. Not tried it with speakers yet, for the price the tonality is amazing , there is a good bass slam and quantity. On the treble side these seem to fall a little short in comparison to ESS/AKM/Ares II I have tried before.

I am yet to A/B it against the Ares II which is employed in my stereo setup.

cool.. look forward to hearing from you on the test impressions!
Tx again!

 

[DB1989]

@DB1989 i see you are using the Chord Mojo and FX Audio Tube 03 (GE tubes). This was my initial choice too, but went with the mimby bcz i wanted a dedicated desktop dac (and had 2 portable amp/dacs already )

I had posted a question reg. the FX Audio Tube 03 on another post (https://www.hifivision.com/threads/tube-pre-amp-op-amp-change.83904/). Appreciate if you can share your knowledge on the same

@DB1989 - have you tried opamp change on the FX Audio Tube03 MK2? M thinking of swapping out the current op amp with Muses02.. wondering where the impact would be most felt?

My apologies but I have absolutely no knowledge to share on the issue. Haven't gone down the DIY rabbit hole yet though your query has given me ideas now

 

[Doomster69]

My apologies but I have absolutely no knowledge to share on the issue. Haven't gone down that path yet though your query has given me ideas now

Welcome to my conundrums

 

[Doomster69]

I am yet to A/B it against the Ares II which is employed in my stereo setup.

Hi @fLUX

Did you get a chance to A/B the set up? Waiting to hear from you on the impressions on this..im sure the Denafrips will be a step up..keen to know how big a step up it is!

Tx

 

[fLUX]

I have acquired the multibit less than a week back (had a SMSL SU-8 before), this is primarily towards my desktop headphone setup use. Not tried it with speakers yet, for the price the tonality is amazing , there is a good bass slam and quantity. On the treble side these seem to fall a little short in comparison to ESS/AKM/Ares II I have tried before.

I am yet to A/B it against the Ares II which is employed in my stereo setup.

I have not done an A/B comparison directly, but have employed both of the DACs during various times across my stereo/hp setup.

As of today the Ares II is in my headfi chain and modi multibit with the stereo chain. One thing which I notice with Mimby is the bass quantity is a lot more at the cost of little tightness which the Ares II seems to do much better, Ares II has a much more 3d soundstage & is wider/deeper than Mimby and does instrument layering much better. Vocals Ares II are ever so slightly better, but are pretty much a tie and tonality is quiet good in both these dacs , the Mimby has a slightly rolled top end in comparison to Ares II and might miss out on few details (this is very clear on the HP chain vs the stereo chain).

Mimby is around 1/3rd the price of Ares II, if I compare based on value addition Mimby does really well for its price and recently I have seen lot of praise being poured for Soncoz LA-QXD1 and with few opamp upgrades is being said to rival DACs many times its price.

 

[Doomster69]

Wow.. Now I'm so tempted to get a Denafrips..

 

[Doomster69]

@fLUX am you please confirm how much it cost you to get the product (all inclusive) and did you get it from Sugukumar or FM?

 

[fLUX]

@fLUX am you please confirm how much it cost you to get the product (all inclusive) and did you get it from Sugukumar or FM?

Sugumar quoted me 75k with a waiting period of 6-8 weeks. I purchased an used unit from this forum

 

[Doomster69]

Sugumar quoted me 75k with a waiting period of 6-8 weeks. I purchased an used unit from this forum

Thanks for prompt revert.. Can u pm the price u got it at?

 

[fLUX]

Thanks for prompt revert.. Can u pm the price u got it at?

I got it for 65k.