I bought a used Directstream DAC and it arrives tomorrow.
It doesn’t have a bridge nor do I need one.
I want to use this with a dedicated pre-amp (Pass Labs XP-22)
My main source is an Auralic Aries 2.1 network player/streamer.
My Digital cable from the Auralic to the Directstream is Audience Frontrow XLR-AES-EBU type.
Can I also use the optical and SPDIF inputs and change them on a fly from the remote?
Which gain setting is recommended for my setup?
Any and all help would be appreciated. I’ve read a lot about the different settings and it can get confusing.
I have the Aries G2 running with the DSD. I was told by someone whose opinion I value on this forum that the AES/EBU is the best option for sound quality on the Aries. I use the USB out to a Matrix Spdif then out I2S so I can take advantage of DSD256. Good luck and enjoy!
For me best SQ has always been HDMI. I use Antipodes CX > EX > (plus Innuos Phoenix USB) > P2 > HDMI. I have always found found the DS more dynamic and less cable dependent with HDMI. Which isn’t to say I don’t see improvements with high-end AQ HDMI cables (compared to the PS Audio AC12 which is itself a lovely cable).
HDMI is also the only DS input that accepts DSD256 – if that’s a format that matters to you. You can get DSD128 through USB. If you use AES you will only get DSD64.
You can connect optical and all the other inputs, and change them on the remote. A unique aspect of Ted’s digital input implementation is that every input is active all the time. You will experience 0 lag between switching inputs, which you can do with the supplied remote.
Given your Pass preamp, with lots of gain available, you can likely use the full gain setting – ultimately this may depend on the gain of your amp and efficiency of your speakers. But I find that the DS sounds better without the (20 db if memory serves?) attenuator on.
FWIW I use an AQ Firebird HDMI for my CX > (etherregen) > EX > USB > Phoenix > P2 > HDMI source and I use the PS Audio AC12 HDMI for my PSA PST. My system is unforgiving though – YMMV.
Absolutely. The Firebird with the PST is extremely revealing, black background, and dynamic, making the AC12 by comparison sound slightly slow and golden. In my system (pro monitors with beryllium tweeters) it is a bit much if the CD in question isn’t perfect. So in a recent effort to “de-tune” my system slightly (i.e. trading off tiny amounts of resolution for better listenability for old digital albums) I am using the more revealing cable on my streaming setup, which is not quite as good as the PST of course, and letting the PST drive through the AC12, which is still a great cable.
Because you’re not using a pre between the DAC and the amp, it may be worth playing around with the attenuator setting. If on, it engages a 6dB attenuator on the output. This can help if the noise floor is too high.
Makes sense. I have a different situation. I just don’t play much of those old badly recorded albums anymore. They sound irritating with their harshness and sibilance no matter what cable I use. I just turn down the volume a bit with those recordings. But with really good recordings, there’s nothing like a really high resolution cable to bring out the best of that recording. Some of those really well recorded is really blowing me away on how good they can sound with a top quality HDMI cable. By the way, I’m using the AQ Dragon HDMI very similar to the Firebird in my system.
Yes, I thought I would try the Firebird before going full crazy banana on the Dragon. I’ve also recently upgraded all my interconnects from Acoustic Zen to Audioquest Earth/Wind… this added a lot of air in the high end but similarly was more revealing of recording faults (and interesting stuff like edit splices, mic preamp distortion, etc.).
I’m assuming your Esoteric back end + those Infinity ribbons leave nowhere for bad recordings to hide.
It’s def off-topic for this thread, but I have had some success upsampling some harsh but much-loved recordings up to DSD128 / 256 using the more intensive HQPlayer filters. Doing it in real time is expensive from a processing perspective but worth it for some material.
I am amazed on what the DSD can do with 256DSD. The sound is competitive with my turntable! The sound has more density and presence than 128 or 64. I bought a bunch of magnificent 256 recordings from NativeDSD and with a couple of the recordings, I also have it in 128 and 64 and have compared them. Without a doubt, 256 is the most enjoyable!
I think this is very dependent if you are using a Pre. If your Pre has a sweet spot, like the BHK Pre does, then there’s going to be some sort of compromise. There’s a discussion about this going on over here:
Just listen to the DAC at fixed 100 for awhile. Then Fix it at 92 and listen. Then adjust it up and down from there and see what is best for your Pass preamp. I find 92 best for my Esoteric preamp. It has the best clarity and lowest noise.
Yes, I’ve dipped more than a toe into 256 content as well – new material from NativeDSD as well as master tape transfers (recordings from the 40s to 70s) from HDTT.
Setting aside the misery of getting DSD256 to play properly outside of Roon > Roon endpoint (which I don’t love the sound of) or SqueezeServer > SqueezePlayer (clunky UI, amazing sound), this is the best digital that I (and a number of friends) have heard, including quite a few SACDs through the PST.
I would agree in theory; however Ted Smith (somewhere in these forums, probably the Sunlight release thread) stated (and I am paraphrasing from memory here…) that the high switching rate / high FPGA usage required for DSD512 resulted in lower sound quality than DSD256 – which is why they didn’t support in the Sunlight release. That is likely limited to this particular implementation / FPGA. Perhaps the DSMkII will address that issue?
It occurs to me that another component relevant to SQ here could be the steps ‘skipped’ in the DS internal upsampling process. In other words, a DSD256 input requires less upsampling to get to the DS final rate (30fs? 50fs?) than a DSD64 input, and much less than a PCM24/48 signal.
Other DACs, the Holo May comes to mind, are reported to pretty much sound better with every increase in sample rate (all things being, of course, equal). But the May is a particularly simple DAC (in NOS mode), and seems to have been designed with (external) upsampling to extremely high rates in mind.
Just purchased a gently used DS over the weekend and experimenting with the settings. I currently have rca running directly to my integrated tube amp via the line in with volume fixed at 100 on the DS. I have seen discussion on volume setting lower than that but not sure in what situation that should be. With volume fixed does that bypass the DS preamp and use the preamp on the amp?
I also have the option to take xlr out from the DS to a Schiit Freya+ then rca out to a pre-in on the amp.
Does your integrated have a direct preamp input, like an input for an external preamp bypassing the built in preamp? If it does, you can use your DAC as a preamp and use the DAC to control the Volume. It might sound the best that way. You have to try and see.