New HiFace Drivers

Hi Gavin,

I've recently gone for a Mac source and am really enjoying all the benefits you describe. Being able to control the Mac from the armchair using iPhone has meant I've listened to loads of music I didn't even know I had. In terms of ripping my understanding is that sonically AIFF and WAV are identical - but WAV is unable to store the metadata, which makes AIFF the better choice. Like you I'm using iTunes - I have tried XLD which was straightforward to use, but frankly I couldn't hear any difference into Supernait + Proac D28s. No intention of returning to any CD based source.

Cheers, Paul

quote:

"one bit zero point crossover error"

But you guys dont think XLD is worthwhile....
I thought Macs "just work", and dont require external what-not.

Patrick

XLD is for ripping - not in the playback chain -

Macs / PCs whatever. Its all software - and software has bugs. Just happens that is rare for OSX and common place for Microsoft.

iTunes is fine to get you going - set up correctly it beats many a CD player.

There are better ripping (for damaged CD's) and playback options. These are trivial to install and use; all thanks to Apple's intuitive OS and UI.

How is your testing going with your disk packs and USB cables

Cheers

Richard

Thanks Patrick for your response as regards codecs; you have confirmed my own thoughts and succinctly summarised the pro's and con's.

I will stick with AIFF, and ALAC (for iPod). I use PC at work because I have to, but have a MBP at home because the interface is so much more user friendly and logical. I can't really forsee any reason why this is likely to change, and therefore WAV and FLAC will have to pass me by. I hope that I won't live to regret it !

"quote:
Originally posted by pcstockton:

- No digital cable whether Toslink, Coax, USB, etc, regardless of price or contruction has EVER been audible. Although I do appreciate a nice braided cable so maybe they sound best."


quote "Bold statement"

Well I intend to put this to the test with my nDAC in the very near future; as I am somewhat sceptical that a DC1 plugged from my CD5XS into the DAC will sound significantly different from a 75 ohm BNC to BNC cable that I am having made up for me by a company whose principal business is making cables, and who list some major recording studios and world renown rock bands as their clients. The production manager has also shared my scepticism regarding "the burning in of cables" and this is from someone who is a cable expert. I am quite prepared to be proved wrong in this matter, and if the DC1 sounds noticeably different I shall buy it. But the cost differential between the DC1 and the other unnamed cable is in a ratio of over 20:1

For a comparison there will be a brand new DC1, a "burned in" DC1, and my alternative BNC cable. (I am intending to get hold of a HiFace in due course.) If I discover that I have been a complete plonker I shall put my hand up and say so, however, if I am unable to detect any meaningful sound difference I will conclude accordingly and save myself some £££'s. It will only be my subjective view and therefore worthless to anyone other then myself.

One more thing before I go:

Gavin, many thanks too for your response which appreciated.

Dasher

I received my HiFace last week (thanks Keith at Purite) and am very pleased with the results.

I am using it with my iMac and a Musical Fidelity V-DAC and so have been able to compare the following:
- TOSlink direct from iMac to V-DAC.
- USB direct from iMac for V-DAC (Wireworld Ultarviolet USB cable).
- HiFace over co-ax cable to V-DAC S/PDIF (Atlas Compass co-ax).
- USB Extension cable to HiFace and then coupled directly to V-DAC.

The results are fairly predictable. The TOSlink was the poorest, slightly improved on by using USB. The HiFace made a more significant improvement to the USB cable and clearly sounded best.

I compared the two options of HiFace over co-ax and HiFace directly coupled, as discussed in some of the earlier posts. Allowing for the relatively inexpensive equipment used, I was unable to hear any difference between these two options. I have stuck with the Atlas co-ax cable option in the end as it looks better

John

John

Thanks for the report.

The two HiFace wiring options being the same is - I guess - no surprise.

My primary interest here was mechanical stability. The HiFace is a bit exposed on the back of the Mac Mini. Would be nicely hidden and a more mechanically robust connection if plugged into back of the DAC via a coupler.

Thanks again.

"- No digital cable whether Toslink, Coax, USB, etc, regardless of price or contruction has EVER been audible. Although I do appreciate a nice braided cable so maybe they sound best."

quote "Bold statement"

Following my own comments last week: "Well I intend to put this to the test with my nDAC in the very near future; as I am somewhat sceptical that a DC1 plugged from my CD5XS into the DAC will sound significantly different from a 75 ohm BNC to BNC cable."

I have now had the opportunity to follow this up briefly following the delivery of my nDAC on Friday evening last week; once everything was unpacked and plugged in, we (my Naim Dealer & I) started with the 75 ohm BNC to BNC cable that was made for me for the princely sum of £7.60. We compared this to a DC1 on back to back tracks played from a CD5XS. We did this over the next hour or two, and our conclusion was this.

The KL SD1 cable was surprisingly good and initially was difficult to distinguish between that and the DC1, but with careful listening to the same tracks over and over again it became apparent that with the DC1 the music had more depth, weight and sound stage than the cheaper cable. It was for me at least not significantly different, but there was a difference. But that is not to denigrate the cheaper cable which still delivered the smoothness, detail and musicality that the nDAC delivers. Even a new one straight out of the box.

To put it in a different context, this was like a wine tasting between a bottle of Cote De Rhone and a fine and rare vintage Burgundy. Drunk on its own a Cote de Rhone can be a most pleasurable experience, but in a tasting against a top class Burgundy the complexities and subtleties of the wine will become apparent, and the lesser wine for most people will lose some of its appeal.

The difference here was much more difficult to quantify in terms of pricing because the sound quality between the two cables was not immediately apparent and I have to say that it was a difficult decision to make, knowing the DC1 was over £200 more expensive. But I bought the DC1 because it was to me audibly better, but not by a huge margin and I am sure that I could have lived with the cheaper alternative had I not done the comparison. But to go back to the wine comparison for a moment; once that immensely expensive bottle is drunk and a few lingering tastes gradually dissipate the memory and experience are gone forever. Not so with the DC1 as it will be there every time I listen to music and that is why I favoured it. To give credit where it is due I thought the KL SD1 was exceptional value for the money, and it was for me an interesting exercise to undertake for little outlay. To give Naim their due the DC1 was the better cable, as for better value I will leave that for others to judge.

Now that I have the nDAC I am much looking forward to getting my hands on a HiFace.

Hey Allen. Just heard the INT202. It's definitely better than the TC. Well done. Used it through a PC/XP with Wavelab/ASIO and a MAC with Pure Music. PC was clearly better in this case but it's probably program related and it was still good. Also the MAC was battery powered so that may have accounted for some also. Who knows without having more time with it?

$1800 here. I wonder if DHT will say I only like it because it's expensive.

Dasher,

I am playing with the NDAC right now as well. Day 1 was with M-Audio Transit and standard fare Monster Toslink ($40). Results... HUGE improvement (obviously) over same cable with the Beresford. Huge. I also am demming a Hicap2 so no doubt that is playing a factor as well. (yes I did add the Hicap first before swapping in the NDAC.)

Day 2 M-Audio Transit with the Chord Opticord Toslink.

Day 3 (right now) moving to the ESI Juli@ into the Chord ProDac Pro Digital (coax).

Tomorrow I will slot in the Naim Coax.

So far, I have to admit, I would say the Optichord offers VFM over the cheaper Monster. I can hear VERY subtle differences. But regardless of how slight, it is worth an extra $55.

On Thursday I will play with the ESI and all four digi cables. I am 99% sure I am going to use the ESI for the time being and it has the option of coax and tos. So this should bear out a final solution for me (for now).

By the way, the NDAC is making me understand the synergy of an all-Naim kit, the abilities of the 102/180/HC/Arivas, the truth behind "source first".

This is plenty good for me. And for a fraction of the price, is far more enjoyable to me than some $100K+ kits ive heard at various dealers. Far more.

Back to listening.

John Zorn's Ipos - Book of Angels Vol 14 just arrived. It is ripped and ready to go. Bottle of Knob Creek at the ready. Its on.

quote:

Originally posted by pcstockton:
Dasher,

I am playing with the NDAC right now as well. Day 1 was with M-Audio Transit and standard fare Monster Toslink ($40). Results... HUGE improvement (obviously) over same cable with the Beresford. Huge. I also am demming a Hicap2 so no doubt that is playing a factor as well. (yes I did add the Hicap first before swapping in the NDAC.)

Day 2 M-Audio Transit with the Chord Opticord Toslink.

Day 3 (right now) moving to the ESI Juli@ into the Chord ProDac Pro Digital (coax).

Tomorrow I will slot in the Naim Coax.

So far, I have to admit, I would say the Optichord offers VFM over the cheaper Monster. I can hear VERY subtle differences. But regardless of how slight, it is worth an extra $55.

On Thursday I will play with the ESI and all four digi cables. I am 99% sure I am going to use the ESI for the time being and it has the option of coax and tos. So this should bear out a final solution for me (for now).

By the way, the NDAC is making me understand the synergy of an all-Naim kit, the abilities of the 102/180/HC/Arivas, the truth behind "source first".

This is plenty good for me. And for a fraction of the price, is far more enjoyable to me than some $100K+ kits ive heard at various dealers. Far more.

Back to listening.

John Zorn's Ipos - Book of Angels Vol 14 just arrived. It is ripped and ready to go. Bottle of Knob Creek at the ready. Its on.

Wow. A ringing endorsement from one not prone to hyperbole. Thanks for sharing.

Allen - yes good point.

quote:

Originally posted by AllenB:

quote:

Originally posted by js:
Hey Allen. Just heard the INT202. It's definitely better than the TC. Well done. Used it through a PC/XP with Wavelab/ASIO and a MAC with Pure Music. PC was clearly better in this case but it's probably program related and it was still good. Also the MAC was battery powered so that may have accounted for some also. Who knows without having more time with it?

$1800 here. I wonder if DHT will say I only like it because it's expensive.

Good for you js, and it is a very nice little piece of kit, but at $1800, that makes it even more expensive than over here! Probably cheaper to import from UK at the moment? For me it's produced the best output from my Mac so far, but I will look into better programs or players to see if iTunes can be improved upon.

Interesting that you found the PC route to be better than the Mac, did you power the 202 off the firewire bus whilst the Mac was on battery? Never tried this (Mini has to be powered) and maybe this may have made a difference, don't know myself.

Allen

Used the 202's outboard supply on both laptops. We'll have another Mac book to use for a while shortly. Will try Wavelab with it and get a more direct comparison of platforms with fewer variables. Should be little to choose between them when running the same program and bypassing the mixer but we'll see. We'll try a few player programs but I still prefer audio kit to a PC though this is good. Of course the 202 is basically audio kit and Wavelab is not a media player, especially the better pro version and both are expensive. Unless you're already vested, I'd still get a purpose built piece. The cost here isn't really saving much any longer and the complexity isn't as friendly either. Of course we all have different needs and use requirements and even if you get a Sonos etc. you still need a way to rip.

That mini ripper with a dig out that Naim recently showed looks like it may be the ticket for a lot of users if it's also an ethernet player.

For the benefit of anyone who is concerned about the comments of awkward positioning of the HiFace and who is considering a macbook pro. I can say that this is not an issue. The HiFace sits fine with a DC1(BNC) into a MBP. The USB connector part of the HiFace seems to be angled so that the BNC connector end sits nicely on the table supporting the MBP.

Gavin.

The HiFace also works well hanging out the back of an iMac.

John

Patrick,

Man you are getting way ahead of me (and I daresay others) !

When I played my nDAC for the first time the only thing that was a disappointment was the SQ from my iPod which wasn't really a surprise. But I am perplexed as to why the ipod with AIFF files on it sounds so flat and dull in comparison to everything else. The Nano is solid state drive too.
As my dealer said "only good for background music" !

But the MBP with just a QED Toslink was right up there with the CD5XS, and then we tried the USB with some WAV files which nearly blew my socks off ! At one point we had the same track (Sailors Tale from King Crimson's - remastered Islands) playing on the CD5XS, the Mac and a USB, and I have to say that we were both trying to figure out which source was actually playing. I will admit that this was all done in a slight rush and excitement on my part. But I would expect a HiFace / MBP to improve upon the CD5XS and who knows about the USB, other than it has certain limitations for a Mac user like myself.

But the nDAC is opening up a huge range of possibilities which you are now finding out for yourself rather than reading about them here !

Next stop for me is a HiFace sometime after Easter.

Dasher

I got my hands on an ‘as-recorded’ unmastered album in high(ish) resolution yesterday, 24bit 48kHz AIFF. I had a listen through my MBP/itunes/HiFace/nDAC combo last night. To me this is a real step up on the normal 16/44.1, much richer and warmer and really quite addictive. It’s slightly depressing when you drop back to 16/44.1, but I am sure to get over it.

I will have a play with the hi-res files on USB stick over the weekend. My impression the last time was that USB stick seemed a bit reserved and thin compared to the MBP/HiFace combo but this does seem to be out of step with most posts about USB sticks.

Gavin.

You'll find that some 16/44-48 can be quite good. Good conversion and 16 bit kit is often the issue. We've gotten some surprising results with 16 bit, good files and the Naim DAC.

I take your point js.

Interestingly, I have a commercial CD disk from the same artist, initially recorded and put together by the guy in his studio, the same as with the hi-res files. It is clearly a step down in SQ terms through my same setup. With all of the 16/44 that I tried straight afterwards I detected a slightly clinical thinness to it that I did not hear before. Hard to describe. I would have thought it was the resolution difference but maybe the post recording processes take their toll as well.

I guess you’re right though, with the magic touch you can ring more out of 16/44.

Gavin.

Following on from my previous post, I have now revisited (1) USB stick into the nDAC compared with (2) MBP>itunes>HiFace(BNC)>DC1(BNC-BNC)>nDAC arrangement but this time with 16/44 and 24/48 files.

Previously I found arrangement 2 preferable to 1 in terms of sound quality but was prompted to look again as many posters seem to say USB is (arguably) as good as it gets with the nDAC. In addition I had the 24/48 resolution files to play with.

Using either arrangement 1 or 2, I found the 24/48 files a richer sonic experience compared with 16/44. However, I take the point that js made, that the quality of these recordings may be simply better than most other recordings that I have, and my preference would be the same whether they were presented in 16/44 or 24/48.

In terms of comparing arrangement 1 and 2, I still prefer 2. I am not talking here about chalk and cheese but there is a clear sonic difference. I still find direct USB a bit ‘closed-in’ between the speakers and just a little bit dull in comparison to the MBP/HiFace setup. That is the case with both 16/44 and 24/48 files. Lucky-me I suppose, as it is so much easier to deal with files on the MBP than messing around with USB sticks. I am really impressed with the sound output from MBP>itunes>HiFace combination.

I will certainly have a look at other software players in the short term to see what they can bring. At some point I would like to have a play with the Weiss INT202 (which is the main reason why I went with the Pro rather than just the Macbook; to give me a Firewire option).

I have also had a brief look at the well trodden path of ripping methods. I have read the reams of posts about this question but I wanted to see for myself, so I ripped some CDs to WAV with EAC on my pc. As with many other posters, I can not tell an itunes rip from an EAC rip.

I personally don't think the USB is the best input and prefer the SPdif when you can get all your ducks in row ahead of it. Gav, I wasn't saying low def is as good on the same kit but it can be quite good. Your journey continues. Make sure your settings were correct on EAC regarding offset, secure rip and error correction etc. and if so, keep the file around. You may discover something as you go through more interface and player iterations. Perhaps you could do an Itunes rip on your PC and see if that still sounds the same also. Good luck.