HDX magazine review.

I do not want to blame anyone here, but Toslink sucks: Way too much jitter. The only advantage is that you have an electrically isolated connection from Mac/PC to DAC. That is probably why Naim suggests using Toslink with their Supernait, too as far as I remember.

I tried Toslink in comparison to AES digital connection using the same CD drive and DAC. Well, my findings can be read above. It is sounding a little bit like MP 3... So at least I tried it myself and not based on what others heard.

So probably the Mac/Toslink/Lavry people can expect even more using a better connection.

But I stay happily with my production model HDX as it is already amazing and only run in for a good week. Way much better than the pre production models that were around. The HDX is not cheap in abolute terms but regarding its sound quality and its convinience it is great VFM.

AllenB,

Apparently munch isn't.

quote:

Originally posted by John R.:
I do not want to blame anyone here, but Toslink sucks: Way too much jitter.

10 years ago I would have agreed with you. But things have changed somewhat, and the use of improved buffering and local re-clocking of the signal have largely overcome jitter. Add in the much improved construction of optical cables and you have a connection method that is pretty much indistinguishable from coax.

quote:

Originally posted by thesherrif:
[Add in the much improved construction of optical cables and you have a connection method that is pretty much indistinguishable from coax.

That depends on which coax cable you are comparing to.

I had a fair share of coax digital cables in the past, and found that voicing varies depending on the make.

Also, all Toslinks are not the same. Plastic ones were the worst ( a kind that comes free with some entry level DAC ) and glass toslink with a decent termination came on top and those were pretty close in performance compared to *some* but not all coax leads voiced similar.

I see the benefit of running a Toslink if the cable run is long, but ultimately, I found them lacking in dynamics ( particularly in low frequency area ) and overall tonal balance too lean no matter which Toslink I tried for my taste.

Granted, I had far more coax cables than Toslink samples, but I stopped pursuing the Toslink route after about 5 different ones.

quote:

Originally posted by kuma:

munch says Lavry/mac/toslink is really close to a 555.

Maybe he's actually heard the comparison, so is in a reasonable position to offer a view. Along with John (JN), and Tony (tonym) and myself.

This was John's view of the comparison in Tony's 552/500/SL2 active system:

quote:

As a fully paid up member of the Naim flock (insert 'Baaaaa' noises as desired) and owner of absolutely nothing Mac-ish, I think I can give a balanced view on why this forum is 'going all Apple'.

A fellow forum member and friend brought his MacBook and Lavry DA-10 DAC over to another local Naimee with an active 500 system yesterday, for direct comparison with a CD555 (which I also own).

Correctly and optimally ripped and implemented, music off the Mac 'n DAC combo was frighteningly close in sonic performance to the 555 at a tenth of the price.

THAT is why there is currently so much interest here in Mac based sound-servers.

Irksome to some people maybe - but true, on the basis of what I've heard.

John.

None of us that were present would argue with John's assessment.

As for the Toslink, well the Mac digital output has proved to be better than (several) CD transports so far tried - connected by Coax. So I suspect it's yet another cable audio red herring. A quick browse around indicates these are not isolated findings. Get the settings right and the Lavry produces stunning results with a similar voicing to Naim players.

YMMV, of course. But there are increasing numbers with CDS3s that regard the Mac/DAC as better. In my case I have heard it now in three or four systems and results are consistently in favour of the DAC up to CD555 level where it is really close.

You will notice that a number of members (if you read some of the DA threads) have all found the same. Could be we are all deaf, of course.

Best regards,

Steve

quote:

Originally posted by thesherrif:

quote:

Originally posted by John R.:
I do not want to blame anyone here, but Toslink sucks: Way too much jitter.

10 years ago I would have agreed with you. But things have changed somewhat, and the use of improved buffering and local re-clocking of the signal have largely overcome jitter. Add in the much improved construction of optical cables and you have a connection method that is pretty much indistinguishable from coax.

SOME SANITY AT LAST!

quote:

Originally posted by kuma:
That depends on which coax cable you are comparing to.

I had a fair share of coax digital cables in the past, and found that voicing varies depending on the make.

Also, all Toslinks are not the same. Plastic ones were the worst ( a kind that comes free with some entry level DAC ) and glass toslink with a decent termination came on top and those were pretty close in performance compared to *some* but not all coax leads voiced similar.

I see the benefit of running a Toslink if the cable run is long, but ultimately, I found them lacking in dynamics ( particularly in low frequency area ) and overall tonal balance too lean no matter which Toslink I tried for my taste.

Granted, I had far more coax cables than Toslink samples, but I stopped pursuing the Toslink route after about 5 different ones.

If given the choice, I would choose coaxial simply because the connection is more robust. In the end, it depends on the DAC. Certainly in the case of the Lavry DA10 or Benchmark Media DAC1 it shouldn't make any difference theoretically.

Well it's started and I'm not the least bit surprised. With all of the recent praise for the Mac/Lavry combo, finally there is someone who has actually listened it (including the pro-audio model)and reports that he thinks it's not up to snuff and is being criticized for that opinion. Interesting!!

quote:

Originally posted by gary1:
Well it's started and I'm not the least bit surprised. With all of the recent praise for the Mac/Lavry combo, finally there is someone who has actually listened it (including the pro-audio model)and reports that he thinks it's not up to snuff and is being criticized for that opinion. Interesting!!

Who is that? I do not think that Kuma has claimed that she has heard it - yet ( )

quote:

Originally posted by gary1:
Well it's started and I'm not the least bit surprised. With all of the recent praise for the Mac/Lavry combo, finally there is someone who has actually listened it (including the pro-audio model)and reports that he thinks it's not up to snuff and is being criticized for that opinion. Interesting!!

People should be (and are) listening for themselves. You make it sound like it's a relief to you Gary.


Steve

quote:

Originally posted by glevethan:

quote:

Originally posted by gary1:
Well it's started and I'm not the least bit surprised. With all of the recent praise for the Mac/Lavry combo, finally there is someone who has actually listened it (including the pro-audio model)and reports that he thinks it's not up to snuff and is being criticized for that opinion. Interesting!!

Who is that? I do not think that Kuma has claimed that she has heard it - yet ( )

Forenc I assume. I'm writing this on an iTouch, I carry my music and control my iTunes with the same device sounding better than a £15000 555. My Sunday dinner in local pub has just turned up. Now, that's the future. Peter

Dont forget there is a huge advantage to optical over coax -- no earthing issues and no RF interference (either in or out)

quote:

Originally posted by Steve S1:

quote:

Originally posted by gary1:
Well it's started and I'm not the least bit surprised. With all of the recent praise for the Mac/Lavry combo, finally there is someone who has actually listened it (including the pro-audio model)and reports that he thinks it's not up to snuff and is being criticized for that opinion. Interesting!!

People should be (and are) listening for themselves. You make it sound like it's a relief to you Gary.


Steve

Steve, my point is clear. People who've reported less than stellar results with other DAC/computer combo's have been criticized for making comments without having actually listened to the beloved Mac/Lavry. Now someone has auditioned the kit (Ferenc) and it appears fairly extensively at that and says that he thinks it's not up to snuff and from the comments generated thus far it is apparent that the flock that love this combination do not like it when someone else speaks negatively of it. Who's right is certainly someone's personal opinion, but maybe he's onto something.

Gary,

The danger here is that we end up not comparing like with like.

I certainly have no view on what Ferenc has found. I assume he has used a new Intel Mac and the same settings but I don't know. It would help to know we have compared exactly the same things, because mine were the same findings as his until recently. The new Macs seem different.

I never got a PC/DAC to work to my satisfaction either, so perfectly understand your caution. However, you are using emotive words like "flock" to describe people who have listened for themselves and reported their findings. On the other hand, you have not heard this combination at all. But, you have left little doubt as to how you seem to want it to sound.

Your apparent relief at finding someone who might agree with your pre-judgement, merely underlines the impression you have given. Bottom line is - nobody is suggesting you have to agree. But at least do us a favour and listen to it before you tell us it's not for you. You might not have to rely on "people who've reported less than stellar results". Whatever value that is.

Regards,

Steve

Steve, I'm very impressed with your patience mate!

Seems like all of us folk who thought your Macbook/Lavry combination sounded pretty damn near the quality of a 555 got it wrong! Well I never!

I think I can give a fairly unbiased opinion as a 555 owner. The Mac 'n DAC (Lavry) comparison at Tony's place recently was one heck of a surprise to me.

Whilst I thought the 555 sounded better, coming in to the room and not knowing what was playing, I would have guessed that the Mac 'n DAC was the 555.

I have also stated in a related thread that on a blind dem at Steve's place, I preferred the Mac 'n DAC sound over my CDX2.

Assuming that Naim's DAC advances the sound quality further, things will be very interesting indeed.

Irksome though it may be to those of us who have spent a lot of money on top-end CD players, a correctly implemented Mac 'n DAC seems to get bloody close at a fraction of the cost.

John.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve S1:
Gary,

The danger here is that we end up not comparing like with like.

I certainly have no view on what Ferenc has found. I assume he has used a new Intel Mac and the same settings but I don't know. It would help to know we have compared exactly the same things, because mine were the same findings as his until recently. The new Macs seem different.

I never got a PC/DAC to work to my satisfaction either, so perfectly understand your caution. However, you are using emotive words like "flock" to describe people who have listened for themselves and reported their findings. On the other hand, you have not heard this combination at all. But, you have left little doubt as to how you seem to want it to sound.

Your apparent relief at finding someone who might agree with your pre-judgement, merely underlines the impression you have given. Bottom line is - nobody is suggesting you have to agree. But at least do us a favour and listen to it before you tell us it's not for you. You might not have to rely on "people who've reported less than stellar results". Whatever value that is.

Regards,

Steve

Steve, I'd love it if what you and others have found turned out to be true, it would potentialy save me alot of money. Thus far they have not and that is after having listened to a number, but certainly not all DAC/computer combinations. Even with combinations that were set up by someone with extensive knowledge of music recording and playback and using professional ripping/recording software, while quite good,unfortunately it wasn't until the addition of an expensive DAC that the quality and music started to shine with 16 bit (24/96 was an altogether different story). So far, I have relied on my own impressions and they differ from most threads and comments regarding the quality of playback with a DAC/computer (obviously Mac/Lavry aside).

My initial comments still stand.

Guys - we need to combine threads as we have various postings going on all over the place

Now back to a serious question - I already have my Flashback cable (great service from the UK to USA-thanks Dave) and I have also received an XTREMHD Toslink cable with 3.5mm converter from the Apple store here in the US. I am a bit concerned with the 3.5mm converter for the MacMini end. Are there any other optical Toslink cables which I can obtain here in the US which have no need for the adapter? Steve - are you using the EXTREMHD cable or have you heard it?

Thanks
Gregg

Gregg - Chord Optichord comes in the mini toslink to toslink flavour (i have this). Supra and IKOS also do cables in this config.

James

quote:

Originally posted by glevethan:
I have also received an XTREMHD Toslink cable with 3.5mm converter from the Apple store here in the US. I am a bit concerned with the 3.5mm converter for the MacMini end. Are there any other optical Toslink cables which I can obtain here in the US which have no need for the adapter? Steve - are you using the EXTREMHD cable or have you heard it?

Thanks
Gregg

Hi Gregg,

I have that EXTREMHD cable in a 2m version and it seems well made and works well with the adapter. I also have a QED 1m cable and a 5m unbranded cable. All of them use the adapter and I can hear no difference between them. I have ordered a 3.5mm toslink to normal toslink from Dave at Flashback, but not because I expect it sound better - more because knowing me, I'll lose the adapter at some point.

Seriously though, can anyone point to techy reasons why toslink cables should sound different? It's just light isn't it? It either works or it doesn't I would have thought.

Best regards,

Steve

quote:

Originally posted by gary1:

Steve, I'd love it if what you and others have found turned out to be true, it would potentialy save me alot of money.

OK Gary, that just isn't the impression you give, that's all. It's a pity you can't easily get hold of one - it would be interesting.

Best regards,

Steve

quote:

Originally posted by Steve S1:
I have ordered a 3.5mm toslink to normal toslink from Dave at Flashback
Steve

Thanks Steve - I did not know that Dave could also make these.

I am curious if the adapter changes things (for the worse) and if a non adapter solution would be better.

Regards
Gregg

As long as the cable is a decent glass grade (rather than plastic) then the next important part it the plug - the launch into the fibre is very important - to me that would mean an adapter adds another interface point between the emitter and the fibre. Correct cable sren't expensive so give it a go.

James

Gregg,

You could also swing by your local Apple Store an pick up a pretty white cable which has the mini toslink connector on the Mac end of the cable. Has anyone else used this? Is it glass or plastic? In my brief experiments with a new Macbook into Lavry (see separate thread), this cable sounded very nice indeed. If anyone else can make this comparison, please report.

All,

There has been a lot of talk about the Mac/toslink/Lavry combination as if it had some special synergy. I am doubtful about this. I suspect the Lavry is just an extraordinarily good DAC which can sound great if fed a proper digital stream. It would be premature for me to jump to conclusions, but I pose the following hypothesis: the magic that the Mac contributes as a digital source is the 24 bit output.

In comparing 16 bit to 24 bit out of the Macbook, there is clearly a reduction in digital artifacts - making the sound more 'analog' and 'organic' (at least to my ears). However with the Macbook outputing 16 bit, I felt a small preference for my SB3 DC-1 Lavry combo. Was this because I prefer the coax over the toslink? I dunno...
There are so many variables!

Still, I appreciate people posting their opinions and observations.


Charlie

quote:

Originally posted by Steve S1:

quote:

Originally posted by gary1:

Steve, I'd love it if what you and others have found turned out to be true, it would potentialy save me alot of money.

OK Gary, that just isn't the impression you give, that's all. It's a pity you can't easily get hold of one - it would be interesting.

Best regards,

Steve

Steve, Charlies comment at the bottom does make one think. Do you think that the Mac/Lavry is "upsampling" the 16 bit files that you are using. This might account for what you guys are hearing. Not to say that the Lavry isn't a very good piece of kit, but I would expect 24 bit to outperform a high end CDP. The final comments made by Charlie are also thought provoking since in 16 bit he prefers the SB3 to the Mac.