I think it depends on the preamp you have. For me with the DSDac at 70 into the BHK pre it makes the sound more fluid, open with a larger soundstage (as well as giving me the advantage of finer increments with the volume control).
I’m not sure if the sound quality is technically better or it results in more colouration that is more pleasing to the ear. For me it just feels like at the DAC at 100% volume I’m missing the sweet spot for the preamp - if such a thing exists.
I suspect @BHK is the guy who would know these things.
It’s definitely system dependent. I’ve been “riding the gain” between sources for a long time, and especially with the DSD which has such a low output. My Decware ZTPRE preamp can put out up to 60 volts and has 20 stepped attenuators at the output as well as remote dual volume controls, I run balanced in and out and into a Decware ZBIT which has adjustable gain via a pair of 20 step attenuators, and I run that output into a Decware ZROCK2 with mods that also adds a bit of gain as well as a choice of two adjustable EQ curves. And my Decware 4 watt mono blocks also have 20 stepped attenuators on them. Lately I’ve been running the DSD between 80 and 90, the preamp at about 65 percent and the ZBIT at about 85 percent, and the amps at 90 percent. For digital. Different volume settings (and P10 settings) for vinyl.
drarifakhtar, I thought i must have covered all the volume combinations balancing the DSD Sr and BHK Pre until you guys revealed what appears to be a sweet spot of 70-75 on the BHK Pre, at least for my ears and room, then surfing with the DSD vol according to track vol and or type of listening session… not married to any combination, yet feels fantastic to dial in a focus. Would also like to BHK to set the record, just in case we’re hearing things… and then again, it’s user experience…
Actually my Pre is in the 30s right now - have the DAC on 70. I am getting used to that. Later I will try lower the DAC volume further so I can get the preamp into higher volumes and see if that improves the sound. It would also give more fine control of volume.
When I had the DAC at full volume I was only only going up to a level of 10 for some tracks and that doesn’t give much scope for adjusting sound level! The improved sound quality (real or perceived) was a nice bonus for me when I lowered the DAC volume.
For background listening, i have the Pre set to 65-70 and the DSD set to 40 on hi gain. fills the house with quality sq… The BHK Pre is still burning in for me but having the Pre set higher than the DSD reveals more defined bass in my speakers
Given that the BHK uses resistors to switch between volume ranges (the audible clicks as one changes volume), and within those ranges adjusts tube gain, it would seem reasonable that the optimum volume setting from a tube operating point / linearity perspective would be in the middle of each range, and then using the DS to adjust around those points. But again, whether the differences between settings in the middle vs. end of volume range will be audible is questionable.
Maybe @Paul or @BHK could comment on whether this makes any sense.
#1 is an interesting way of looking at it - and as with all reading of measurements, it is looking at it, and not listening to it. My guess is that a measured frequency rolloff above a certain pre level may be a component of what some might call “added warmth and tube goodness”. Not that I am advocating running it that high - as I don’t have the BHK specifically. But with respect to other pre’s - there may be other things going on that are not summed up by that particular measurement.
Not picking on you in particular dsd8192, but I have to say this thread has been really interesting from the perspective of how many folks seem to want some sort of theoretical or scientific “answer” to this “issue” in advance of experimentation. Even if BHK gets on here and says, “X is the best setting of the BHK pre from every possible perspective” (which I very much doubt he would say) - that may not be true for your system or tastes.
For an example, I’m going to pick Elk here, since I know he’ll know what I’m talking about and not take it amiss. My guess is that even if we had identical systems, as a classical musician, he might have a stronger preference for running the pre as clean as possible (as with #1 above, staying below 80 on a BHK), just as he might prefer a very linear/clean mic preamp to record through. As someone who appreciates that, but also feels that there is a huge palette of euphonic distortion in circuits and tubes available out there - I might choose to drive the pre further into the “analog tube goodness” range. Indeed, that’s why we choose certain designs and why there’s a tube in a BHK (and why folks roll them).
So in this example, I’m just talking about two different peoples’ tastes on an identical system. Never mind how entirely different systems interact with the DSD and BHK (or other pre). Relax. Twist some knobs. Trust your ears. Don’t Fear the Reaper. You paid for it - take it out for a spin! To me, its a bit like never driving my car over 80 mph, because I’ve read that it purrs along best below that speed. You may find you don’t like Life in the Fast Lane (…y’know what happens there) but at least you’ll know from experience/experiment. All you have to do is twist a knob or press a button to return to your Happy Place, and there’s little risk of injury. Unless you’re inspired by the sound to become a stage diver ; )
But ultimately I believe that there’s a place for both elements: zeroing in on a desirable characteristic through listening, as well as operating these components based on an understanding of their attributes (whether by looking at measurements, or getting info directly from the designers).
For example, it was very helpful of Ted to explain that the DS volume control is lossless (putting aside the analog noise floor issue), rather than the user pool somehow trying to intuit that subjectively and then debating it here.
Ultimately, listening trumps all else, but a purely perceptual (and uncontrolled) approach has its well known pitfalls.
@badbeef - Very well put… I have been doing that for a month and it was good advice to start and just have fun. In the end it is about the music you listen to and the system you own. However, this thread has some great conversation and I appreciate all the input from everyone… also, great input from Ted resolved my SNR question right quickly and I sat back and enjoyed the music… also, it’s cool when someone throws out an assumption and gets people thinking and we track it down, gather data, push alternate theories… just cool listening to so many different views from different disciplines, systems, musical backgrounds… diversity of thought is really expressed here and that is very cool…
My system is my playground. I twist the knobs, fiddle with acoustic treatments, measure occasionally, change cables/components. But most of all I enjoy it. Both the frustration and aural nirvana. It is a quest for the Grail, but we should never refuse to stop along the way to enjoy music with friends or ask why the Knights who say “Ni!” say “Ni!”
I enjoy this forum as well as many good opinions have been espoused and added to my own. Thanks all!
Agreed, all - don’t mean to sound like I’m crapping on the thread. It’s all good. Just recommending against angst. This is supposed to be fun! Though I’ll admit to being short-sighted enough in my comments not to recognize that others may see measurements as fun and integral to the process.
If, when we get Darren’s Stellar phono pre, he tells me, “The sweet spot is 75”, I’m likely to take that into account. After all - for me this journey (for me) started by questioning the fact that I had assumed that the DSJ should only be run at 100, which I did for two years or so (except when running it without a Pre). Then Ted’s comments on the volume control started to sink in. When Darren came over one day to listen to some tunes, I had the DSJ at 75, and he insisted I turn it up to 100.
We listened to vinyl for a while, then switched back to a digital source. “Where did the magic go?” was his immediate question - even though we knew the track and source (DMP) to be first rate. I walked over, turned the DSJ down to 75, and the VTL pre up. I turned around and his mouth was hanging open. (Don’t like to mention that, because it is over-used and abused. He also may have been exaggerating some for effect). Also, was not any sort of careful matching test. But he hears well enough to discern. Point being, he was as surprised as I had been once Ted’s info had truly sunk in. The next day he was showing Paul in MR2.
I guess this is just to say that it is easy to get mired in orthodoxies for one reason or another. I did.
@badbeef - yeah, I guess I get caught up in the numbers and theory because there are so many smart audiophiles with varying views, opinions, systems, backgrounds… it is just cool to throw out an idea like Scumbag (dislike saying that name) and watch the forum digest it and a groundswell starts and then counter arguments, search for the theoretical truth, then hell just don’t over think and then thruth, then in the end we are all better for the exercise… this thread was very cool and I owe all those on it for their inputs and just kicking it around… I also appreciate members are not afraid to present different viewpoints and are not set on fire (most of the time). A forum that does that is one that has a very narrow view and very shallow diversity…
So, thanks Scumbag for the start and all those that risked pointing in different directions with alternate ideas, theories, approaches, realities… got us all thinking and we have Ted to make sure we/I don’t go off the rails in pursuit…
The operating conditions of the input attenuator which controls the large steps of volume in approximatly 7 dB steps and the incremental steps in the gain of the tube do have consequences of the out of band HF responses. The HF bandwidth vs. volume setting vary from maximum to minimun a number of times as the volume comes down from maximum. This is mostly caused by the varying attenuator’s output impedance against the input capacitance of the tube. I had proposed at one point putting some small capacitors criss crossed between plates and opposite grids which is really a positive feedback thing that would help to nullify the change in frequency response by reducing the effective input capacitance.
However, we have not done that at this point. I wonder if the various observations about changes in sound at various points of the volume control are actually related to this.
Thanks very much. Just to make sure I understand correctly: I believe you are saying that the HF bandwidth is maximum at the top of each of the coarse volume ranges - is that correct?
Does the tube distortion stay more or less constant across the gain levels within these coarse 7 dB segments?
I hear more noise at 52 than 53, the last resister step. Presuming HF bandwidth is greatest at the top of each course adjustment, it seems more bandwidth is not a good thing, at least not for signal to noise in the in-band HF.
Great to hear from Bascom - thank you for all the enjoyment you’ve brought to my family. Just a lovely piece of kit. Hope you are well sir.
and then again, it’s user experience…