Claus wrote:My system is BAT VK-5SE into Musical Fidelity M3 Nu-Vista int. amp. The BAT is just balanced or rca out. It has been upgraded with the "six-pack" from factory.
I read about issues with the mac driver for the young dac from M2Tech. So I don't know if this is what I am hearing as well. I will try out a bit more with
the head phones which I guess should not distort as I am generally running the software volume very low on the flac player (decibel or puremusic).
I find it likely to be the amp as there has been problems with distortion and intermittent breakup on all sources over the last month or so.
OK, Claus first thing - let's put some context on your listening - correct me if I'm wrong - the only BAT CD player I can find like your model number is VK-D5SE - is this correct?
It seems to be a €5,000 player ($7,000 here
http://www.musicdirect.com/p-359-bat-vk ... layer.aspx) with Tube output stage & Paper in oil output capacitors upgrade (six-pak?).
Is it restricted to 16/44 or does it play upto 24/192?
Remember the JKDAC is a €500 USB-DAC that plays 24/192 high res files natively (no upsampling)
It's not the best DAC in the world (although, I'm working on that but shhh....:))!! but it's doing well to match the BAT in a number of areas & beating it in some considering the ~10 times multiplier on price.
There aren't any issues with the Hiface drivers (these aren't the same as the Young drivers)
It's not a good idea to run the software player very low as you will be losing resolution. With a 24 bit DAC if you are playing 16 bit material you have 8 bits you can lose in the software volume control i.e -48dB
I haven't had any reports of distortion so I'm interested in the outcome of this!
Btw, some points which may have relevance to auditioning of any device. If one has already tailored the sound signature of your system to balance it out to a sound that you like, introducing a new component (source in this case) will almost certainly upset this balance. So, if, in the past, you had to introduce something which gave your sound more presence & stopped it being too polite/laid back, then when you introduce a new device, it may seem too strident, dry, or not rich enough - what you are hearing is it's interaction with your system. The opposite also applies - a system that has been adjusted from too strident to sound right ay well sound too relaxed when a new, less strident source is introduced. This hobby is a head-wrecker, isn't it?
This is a difficult one - how do you hear the sound signature of the actual device? I guess trying it in a number of different systems will allow you to tease out the sound signature of the device itself. So Fran's suggestion of a different amp is not only good for the distortion issue but also for the above teasing out :)
Here's something that might be of relevance in all this auditioning! It is from Bob Katz, a well known recording & audio mastering engineer who has no doubt listened to lots of equipment - posted here
http://www.digido.com/audio-faq/j/jitte ... sound.html
After an engineer learns to identify the sound of signal-correlated jitter, then you can move on to recognizing the more subtle forms of jitter and finally, can be more prepared to subjectively judge whether one source sounds better than another.
Here are some audible symptoms of jitter that allow us to determine that one source sounds "better" than another with a reasonable degree of scientific backing:
It is well known that jitter degrades stereo image, separation, depth, ambience, dynamic range.
Therefore, when during a listening comparison, comparing source A versus source B (and both have already been proved to be identical bitwise):
The source which exhibits greater stereo ambience and depth is the "better" one.
The source which exhibits more apparent dynamic range is the "better" one.
The source which is less edgy on the high end (most obvious sonic signature of signal correlated jitter) is the "better" one.
And a reply:
The better one, and it is better, is also easier to listen to. . . less fatiguing. I would also add to this that the low end just "feels" bigger and more solid. This is perhaps a psychoacoustic affect more than a measurable one. It may be that the combination of a less edgy high end and greater depth and width makes the bass seem better.
All of this makes sense if thought of in terms of timing (that is what we're talking about isn't it ;-]). With minimal jitter nothing is smeared, a note and all its harmonics line up, the sound is more liquid (a term probably from the "audiophile" crowd but one which accurately describes the sound none the less), and images within the soundstage are clearly defined.