|
|
Post by Greg on Sept 2, 2016 9:44:55 GMT
Clive, note that manhattan24 is quoting something he read on another forum, hence my blunt response!
|
|
|
|
Post by Clive on Sept 2, 2016 10:21:31 GMT
Clive, note that manhattan24 is quoting something he read on another forum, hence my blunt response! For sure it's meaningless without context and not at all in line with the experience of many others. Probably it's like saying a Ferrari useless - you then find out it was tested in an off road situation. Yes I agree, it's BS. |
|
|
|
Post by manhattan24 on Sept 2, 2016 19:53:54 GMT
The discussion on the forum was about getting new Adam active speakers and using the DAC because the source was a computer. This technology is new to me, was just wondering if adding a moderately priced addition would be worth trying, but by the sounds of it the answer is a no.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 2, 2016 20:16:44 GMT
As been pointed out no issues with the volume control in most cases
Are you planning going active yourself if not I really would not worry about it
|
|
|
|
Post by manhattan24 on Sept 2, 2016 20:20:50 GMT
Yes I have just bought some active speakers and will be listening through the DAC using a computer as the source. Would adding something else be beneficial?
|
|
|
|
Post by Clive on Sept 2, 2016 21:11:01 GMT
You need to understand the specs. If the active speakers are a tough load then any passive pre might struggle. You might be better with an active preamp. The comments on the other forum suggest to me it's the speakers which are the issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Sept 2, 2016 22:13:58 GMT
I'd expect active speakers to be a line level load. The pre-amp (whether it be a passive pot, a variable ouput DAC or an active pre) should just be 'seeing' the inputs to a power amp.
Surely this is entirely a matter of the quality of the pot in question, no more, no less?
|
|
|
|
Post by Clive on Sept 2, 2016 23:22:42 GMT
I'd expect active speakers to be a line level load. The pre-amp (whether it be a passive pot, a variable ouput DAC or an active pre) should just be 'seeing' the inputs to a power amp. Surely this is entirely a matter of the quality of the pot in question, no more, no less? If you have a really easy load of say 100k for a typical valve amp then a 10k pot will do fine. Use the same pot into a 20k load which many solid state amps are then the source can slew into such a load. Modern opamps shouldn't behave too badly but it's not just about the quality of the pot. You'd expect the pot value to be around 1/10th the impedance of the power amp input. Frankly an even ALPS Blue should do pretty well in terms of quality. If there's a real problem here I suspect an impedance mismatch. Bear in mind that the source has to drive the passive pre and poweramps, whereas with an active preamp the source only "sees" the preamp. Maybe the i/cs were high capacitance and therefore attenuating the treble. Again its dependant on the value of the pot. It's not bad design when this happens, it's bad system matching. |
|
|
|
Post by manhattan24 on Sept 3, 2016 0:00:40 GMT
I bought these speakers www.adam-audio.com/en/multimedia/products/artist-5/description and the DAC on the advice of others. I am not complaining about the current sound it was just someone mentioned getting a Tisbury Mini passive pre-amp would improve what I currently have. Sorry I don't understand any of the technical information, hence looking for advice from people that do before commiting to anything. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by Clive on Sept 3, 2016 0:01:15 GMT
Were the active speakers Adam A5s I wonder? 10k input impedance.....crazy! Very passive unfriendly. Of course active speakers may have long interconnects too. It's all a recipe for disaster (in terms of SQ).
|
|
|
|
Post by Clive on Sept 3, 2016 0:06:06 GMT
Artist 5s are better at 30k input impedance. I'd have thought a Caiman would be fine if the interconnects are short but that's a problem with active speakers unless you keep the speakers close together..
If the sound is fine then simply enjoy it. There's no need to spenf money on a different passive pre.
|
|
|
|
Post by manhattan24 on Sept 3, 2016 1:07:17 GMT
Yes I have the Artist 5s, I connect them directly to the DAC using 1.5m Van Damme RCA cables. They are kept close together as they are on my desk, if you are interested, here is a picture - i.imgur.com/gpE7AHI.jpg |
|
|
|
Post by Clive on Sept 3, 2016 5:50:43 GMT
That setup should be absolutely fine. If it sounds good to you then don't fret over some internet comments. Adding another volume control with an extra set of interconnects adds complexity aside from cost. I'd be surprised if you have a problem there, the Caiman is ideal for what you are doing. Enjoy what you have and keep it simple.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 3, 2016 6:44:47 GMT
As Clive says this should work fine
Adams make some nice speakers
Let us know how it works out
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Sept 3, 2016 7:02:01 GMT
Remember there is now the Caiman SEG which is designed as a DAC/preamp. I haven't yet tried it as a preamp direct into my power amp, but I will once I have the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by stanleyb on Sept 3, 2016 10:51:20 GMT
It's worth bearing in mind that the Caiman SEG and the Capella headphone amp both have an active preamp, set up for driving active speakers and power amps. The Caiman MKII only has a fixed/variable output. The variable output is not active, but passive. Thete is nothing stopping anyone from using the SEG in DAC mode, and then use a separate preamp instead of the preamp in the SEG. The DAC output is a raw signal with only the DAC/Preamp switch in the signal path. Not even a resistor or cap is in series with the signal path from the audio output pin on the DAC chip, to the RCA/PHONO socket on the back of the SEG.
I designed it that way so that users could use any alternative preamp option to get the best possible amplified signal out of the DAC chip itself if the internal preamp is not sufficient.
|
|
|
|
Post by manhattan24 on Sept 3, 2016 12:49:17 GMT
Great, thanks for the advice. It defintely sounds excellent to me, but as mentioned previously, when someone adds a remark it starts to make you wonder if adding something else would indeed improve things. Now all I have to do now is sort the issue I'm still having with 192khz playback, my feeling is that the problem might stem from the computer output not supporting the higher resolution. Here is a link to the motherboard, perhaps someone could have a look with better knowledge than me to see if that is indeed the case? If not, no worries. uk.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4519#ovAll I have managed to find out is the following: Realtek® ALC892 codec - www.realtek.com.tw/products/productsView.aspx?Langid=1&PFid=28&Level=5&Conn=4&ProdID=284 High Definition Audio 2/4/5.1/7.1-channel Support for S/PDIF In Support for S/PDIF Out |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Sept 3, 2016 13:26:41 GMT
I thought 192kHz was outside of the single S/PDIF specification? In other words, it may work or it could be problematic depending on the quality of the link.
|
|
|
|
Post by manhattan24 on Sept 3, 2016 13:32:52 GMT
I am afraid I am not familiar with this technology. The Realtek codec does say it supports the following, but again in reality it is probably not the case:
All DACs supports 44.1k/48k/96k/192kHz sample rate
All ADCs supports 44.1k/48k/96k/192kHz sample rate
Primary 16/20/24-bit SPDIF-OUT supports 32k/44.1k/48k/88.2k/96k/192kHz sample rate
Secondary 16/20/24-bit SPDIF-OUT supports 32k/44.1k/48k/88.2k/96k/192kHz sample rate
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Sept 3, 2016 13:38:11 GMT
Ah ok, as you were then.
|
|
