Paul’s recent posts highlighting comparative benefits of the new PMG Signature 512 DAC included a discussion of how the new analog volume control would particularly benefit folks who are driving their amplifiers directly by their DAC. This got me thinking, “how common is this practice?” Hence this poll.
The poll is limited to one choice. Pick the option that best represents what you listen to most.
If you have a multipurpose device like an Ethos or MU2 and are using its embedded DAC/preamp as your amp volume control, pick the first option i.e., ‘where is your volume controlled?’
I voted for Integrated amp as my Decware SEWE300B is an amplifier with a preamp stage, but I do most of my adjusting of volume from the DSD Mk II and adjust gain also from my Decware ZBIT and Decware ZROCK3, and have the amp usually set about 70% volume, adjusting when needed.
Undoubtedly, there are going to be a few edge cases. I tried to strike a balance between over simplicity and trying to account for every possibility. The main thing I’m trying to understand is the size of the population that stand to benefit from the nature of the way volume is controlled in the forthcoming PMG DAC.
For those who use other devices to control volume (and have their DACs set to a fixed level), the new design isn’t likely to be as beneficial since the S/N ratio of the DAC output will be fixed and the details of its volume control design doesn’t matter as much. Those accustomed to adjusting their volume digitally via their DAC, however, should now see the S/N ratio maintained across all DAC volume/output settings.
Because it sounds different at different settings being fed differing gain from the other components, it sounds richer and more to my liking at lower positions. Riding the gain via the source components and amp is how I get my system to shine and be so goshdarned satisfying that I crave no other.
PS: I do not consider the volume control on the SEWE300B (I won’t call it “Sarah”) to be technically “passive.” It definitely attenuates the gain stage. It’s not like the volume control on the Zen amps which are indeed passive attenuators, as there is no gain stage before the amplification stage. Therefore on the SEWE300B it is adjusting the voltage gain, actively.
Nice pole. Thanks.
I chuckle a little when Paul mentions the “a-hah” moment that Chris provided for an analog attenuator in a DAC. This component has been applied by Grimm and other DAC manufacturers for years. It is a central feature and reason I have the MU2.
Not a discovery, but a necessity for any “all-in-one”
DAC that wants to run with the big dogs.
I’m sure the design and implementation and sound of the New DAC is amazing. I’ll never ever be able to afford one–my period of being financially able to upgrade components is gone, never to return. I’m very happy with the system I have. I’m not even sure I should be at this forum any longer as I can’t run with these big dogs and can’t keep up. I’m just interested in tweaking my current system and listening to music as much as I can.
As a former BHK Pre owner, I am on that list.
Others like Al and ADP like a separate preamp with the MU2. Different strokes, priorities, needs, etc., etc.
I have an MU2 and I’m currently using it as a Roon Core/Endpoint/DAC while waiting for my BACCH-SP ADIO to arrive. I’m experiencing the best audio ever from my system but there are other variables offering contributions to my bliss (PZ, Stealth cables, Diablo 333, etc.). As good as it sounds, Al has stated that the DAC in the ADIO is perceptibly better. The silver lining of the ADIO delay is that it has provided me the opportunity to appreciate the MU2. It will still be my go-to for playback of digital files (like DSD) that the ADIO doesn’t support.
As background, my legacy system included a P20, BHK Pre and BHK Monoblocks. They sounded great but the new system is even better!
I am currently driving the M1200 with MU2’s pre too, and I like the SQ better than MK2+BHK pre. However, MK2 goes into the pre section of MU2 sounds incredible (after Bluesky update). So, I think the weak link was the BHK pre, not MK2 anymore.
I know my potential weak link now is M1200. For the 100’s time I like the SQ from it better than my previous Class A amps that cost many times over. However, the latest market surge has recovered a truck load of D333, and I only down like half of a truck load . So, what is the difference of getting one little amp (okay, heavy little amp or two monos)?
My wife quickly shut down the idea by bringing up a VIP European cruise with three Business Class flights.
I ran an MSB Reference DAC thru the BHK Pre onto BHK600s for quite some time and very much enjoyed the results. Then I ventured into a direct connection from the MSB directly to the BHK600s leveraging the MSBs internal pre amp capabilities and was blown away by how much better the direct connection sounded, significantly shifting my pre conceived notion that an external stand alone pre is practically mandatory in the audio signal path from a digital source. The internal MSB Reference serves as my pre for a turntable and sounds fantastic as well allowing for a direct unmolested analogue path to the amps.
I do plan to insert the new PMG Pre into the audio signal path between the MSB Reference and the BHK600s.
I found that pre/ amp synergy will sway your decision direct from dac or pre. I had a pre / then thought direct was better. I changed amps and probably a couple weeks later thought I’d try my pre - and the pre stays w these pass labs amps.
If I didn’t use my system for both HT and 2chan, I would definitely choose whichever sounded better, DAC direct or Pre to amp. When I have some time I think I will try this just for fun. I don’t know why I haven’t prior.
. So, what is the difference of getting one little amp (okay, heavy little amp or two monos)?
