DCS Vivaldi

[Eichenbaum]

But the displays look normal as well as the back lit dCS logo.....and the labels aren't white

Photoshop

 

[microstrip]

But the displays look normal as well as the back lit dCS logo.....and the labels aren't white

Yes, they are - in the black model. See this photo taken from the DCS site.

 

[number95]

+1

PS, congrats on the clock !

Thx. What should I expect from clock to improve sonically apart from the technical part that it improves sync hence less jitter. Does it improve continuity and musical flow? Should one also expect impact over dynamic range?

 

[MadFloyd]

Thx. What should I expect from clock to improve sonically apart from the technical part that it improves sync hence less jitter. Does it improve continuity and musical flow? Should one also expect impact over dynamic range?

I would love to know what sonic improvements it makes as well.

 

[PeterA]

I hear you. I love my vinyl still. Just amazed every time I listen to it. Then I switch to digital...

They both have strengths. Well recorded digital on a dCS Vivaldi is just hard to turn off...

I agree. This reminds me of MikeL's comment that he likes listening to music in its native format. If I remember correctly, more and more, he selects the music he wants to hear, rather than the format. So, 50s/60s/70s jazz on vinyl, newer music recorded digitally on files or CD. As a committed vinyl guy, I have to admit, the dCS stuff sounds mighty good. However, it is expensive, just like great analog. To that end, has anyone directly compared, say, the AF1 with top arm/cartridge to the dCS stack? The conclusion might take us right back to MikeL's comment.

In my limited experience, I have found that the best sources are exceptionally good if properly set up in the right system, regardless of format, and to a lesser extent, regardless of price. The AF1 and Vivaldi just happen to be similarly priced, and at the top, reference products that some people have heard at shows and dealerships, so I mention them for the sake of argument. And this is WHAT'S BEST FORUM.

 

[PeterA]

I have another, perhaps radical, thought. I have been discussing with my Boston audio buddies, the advantages and disadvantages of internal and external clocks. I suppose the same would hold for transports and upsamplers, but perhaps not to the same extent. So here is a question: Would an all in one box approach to the Vivaldi stack sound better than the four box approach, assuming it would be built and designed to the highest standards, that is, have the same quality parts, just packed closer together without the need for expensive external casework and cables?

In theory, the external Vivaldi clock is better than the one that comes built in with the DAC, otherwise there would not be the reported audible improvements when adding the external clock. Is this true? If so, why not offer a one box DAC with the better internal clock? Could the same be said for the upsampler?

I understand customers like the flexibility to be able to add the expensive pieces as funds allow. And some customers are computer based, while others require the transport. The upgrade options are nice and rack space can be a consideration, but why not also offer a one box super unit in addition to the stack? In theory, could it sound even better than the four piece stack with all of its connections?

 

[jfrech]

Thx. What should I expect from clock to improve sonically apart from the technical part that it improves sync hence less jitter. Does it improve continuity and musical flow? Should one also expect impact over dynamic range?

What I hear is on a couple of dimensions:

#1 - seemingly lowering of the noise floor - you simple hear the notes as more defined, the bass gives a better foundation, textures and decays bloom
#2 - everything has it's place. instruments are more distinct both with in the soundstage and your ability to pick out and focus on one. Plus just more 3-d like...
#3 - timing - an example...I have a piano and cello recording. i've always clearly hear both instruments...but with the clock in place you can hear the piano leading the cello..it's subtle...but once you hear it..it's unmistakably conveying the musicians intent better.

Better clock cables matter. Even just going with Cardas and spending ~$300 each is clearly heard. Ditto for power cords/isolation.

Hope that helps !

 

[LL21]

What I hear is on a couple of dimensions:

#1 - seemingly lowering of the noise floor - you simple hear the notes as more defined, the bass gives a better foundation, textures and decays bloom
#2 - everything has it's place. instruments are more distinct both with in the soundstage and your ability to pick out and focus on one. Plus just more 3-d like...
#3 - timing - an example...I have a piano and cello recording. i've always clearly hear both instruments...but with the clock in place you can hear the piano leading the cello..it's subtle...but once you hear it..it's unmistakably conveying the musicians intent better.

Better clock cables matter. Even just going with Cardas and spending ~$300 each is clearly heard. Ditto for power cords/isolation.

Hope that helps !

cool stuff...which piano and cello recording is it?

 

[microstrip]

I have another, perhaps radical, thought. I have been discussing with my Boston audio buddies, the advantages and disadvantages of internal and external clocks. I suppose the same would hold for transports and upsamplers, but perhaps not to the same extent. So here is a question: Would an all in one box approach to the Vivaldi stack sound better than the four box approach, assuming it would be built and designed to the highest standards, that is, have the same quality parts, just packed closer together without the need for expensive external casework and cables?(...)

I do not know what are the arguments of your audio buddies, but IMHO the arguments of the "packed approach" can be misleading - it it is built on problems that can exist if there are faults in the implementation, such as cable impedance mismatch and improperly designed paths inside the DAC. The situation is similar to that of people claiming that integrated amplifiers sound better than separates because the noise and distortion inducing interconnect disappears and associated probable ground and noise loops are eliminated.

However, if the designer takes care of all the details an external clock has advantages - a completely separate power supply and control circuits, that can result in less interference in the DAC and a more perfect clock signal, that is not subjected to the noise of the DAC and asynchronous circuits recovering the data stream.

IMHO the rules when designing at a target cost are different from those when you are designing SOTA equipment without cost restrains.

 

[Kingsrule]

I really don't like all the boxes but it is what it is. The cabling dynamic w/dCS is the most troubling part of the system from my view point. dCS should provide the best cables and be done with it. And that includes power cords.

BTW, I've been told the clock doesn't make much of an improvement unless you are using the transport

 

[ksalno]

To that end, has anyone directly compared, say, the AF1 with top arm/cartridge to the dCS stack? The conclusion might take us right back to MikeL's comment.

In my limited experience, I have found that the best sources are exceptionally good if properly set up in the right system, regardless of format, and to a lesser extent, regardless of price. The AF1 and Vivaldi just happen to be similarly priced, and at the top, reference products that some people have heard at shows and dealerships, so I mention them for the sake of argument. And this is WHAT'S BEST FORUM.

I have no experience with the AF1 but I have a Clearaudio Master Innovation table and the rest of the equipment you see below. In my system, I don't have a strong preference for one versus the other. I prefer the convenience of my digital setup for long listening sessions or when I'm working with music to accompany me. For concentrated listening, I will listen to either and tend to follow MikeL in terms of preferring music that was originally recorded AAA to be played back on my analog setup, especially for the old mono jazz recordings. More recent music where digital was used for recording, processing, and/or media I tend to prefer my digital setup, usually upsampling PCM to DXD and DSD playing in whatever the native format was (64 or 128). Digital tends to have better dynamics and better bass control. Analog really gets the mids right especially with strings and voices. I enjoy them both.

 

[BMCG]

I really don't like all the boxes but it is what it is. The cabling dynamic w/dCS is the most troubling part of the system from my view point. dCS should provide the best cables and be done with it. And that includes power cords.

BTW, I've been told the clock doesn't make much of an improvement unless you are using the transport

Not my experience .. wanted to dispense with the clock but the deterioration with it out ...was blatant....irritatingly and expensively the impact of better clock cables was also black and white ... again to my annoyance and cost (two bnc ChordMusic ...not exactly a small % of the clocks cost either)...

In contrast I passed on the upsampler.....preferred the simpler signal path...

.the transport remains on my list to evaluate.

 

[Altanpsx]

AF1 vs DCS, i believe this is not a fair comparison. It is more dependent on records, then the equipment, if analog and digital system are at the same level. However i did this, i did with a couple of friends, and yes in the same system. DCS vivaldi played fantastic, before this occasion, i listened vivaldi stack on many shows, and i did not satisfy with the sonic results. But this listening, changed my mind.

Vivaldi, probably one of the best and most versatile digital source in the world. I can name a few good digital source(ypsilon cd(+dac), metronome kalista, orphues ...), but if u looking for the best results wiht a high versatility(streaming, sacd/cd, upsampling, dsd, dxd, long dac chip life(at least dcs says so)) dcs is way to go. But someone, who wants to buy vivaldi, should consider a cable investment. Many power cord, many digital cords, many clock cables etc. Probably u have to invest %60-70 of the vivaldi cost to cables. At least i would do, so buying an vivaldi is the half of the decision.

I listened/Demoed many high end turntables, caliburn, clear audio statement, kondo tt, af2, af1 etc. Arguing, one is better then another would be very bold claim. All I can say, af1 is one of the best performer. So, making a comparison between the best digital and analog source looks educatiional, informative. But in analog system many things change the game, a bad alignment, bad tonearm cable etc.

The system i listened, is a top notch system without a question. But the analog setup, at least the phono stage and tonearm cable is not a match for this system i believe. Phono stage was whest(two boxes)with tock power cords, and the tonearm cable was aq leopard i guess. Cartridge was techdas titanium cartridge(very very good cartrdige). Tonearm was graham phantom 3, which replaced with elite, but this is another story(used with goldfinger). On the dcs side, power cords were nordost odin, all other cables were transparent top of the line(owner of the system was not sure odin's or transperents are better at that time).

So before we start, I was thinking, dcs will tear apart af1, beacuse of the analog system weaknesses. But it did not happened the way i expected. On many recordings, we did play the cd/sacd and vinyl version. Winner was af1. I believe the cartridge made a superb job. For example, Lyn Stanley Potions album, it was great in dcs, everything was very good, until u hear af1. We bored with this comparison, because it was meaningless. If u buy this kind of sources, u should have good collection of records, both as a vinyl, and digital(cd/sacd/digital media). Some u may find as a vinyl, some u may find as a digital, and I highly belive the owner of a this kind of system tries to listen music in best possible ways(analog/digital), not trying to find which one is better. If u ask my opinion, af1 is a better performer. But if you have 30 vinyl, 500 cd, dcs is the best one without a question. If u have 2000 records, and 2000 cd/sacd, enough money, enough space u should have to go for both of it.

 

[jfrech]

cool stuff...which piano and cello recording is it?

Fidelis Records Violoncello: Vivaldi, Bach, Kodaly (SACD)

This label has 3 recordings as far as I can tell. Each are very well done...

 

[jfrech]

I have no experience with the AF1 but I have a Clearaudio Master Innovation table and the rest of the equipment you see below. In my system, I don't have a strong preference for one versus the other. I prefer the convenience of my digital setup for long listening sessions or when I'm working with music to accompany me. For concentrated listening, I will listen to either and tend to follow MikeL in terms of preferring music that was originally recorded AAA to be played back on my analog setup, especially for the old mono jazz recordings. More recent music where digital was used for recording, processing, and/or media I tend to prefer my digital setup, usually upsampling PCM to DXD and DSD playing in whatever the native format was (64 or 128). Digital tends to have better dynamics and better bass control. Analog really gets the mids right especially with strings and voices. I enjoy them both.

Well said. +1

 

[number95]

What I hear is on a couple of dimensions:

#1 - seemingly lowering of the noise floor - you simple hear the notes as more defined, the bass gives a better foundation, textures and decays bloom
#2 - everything has it's place. instruments are more distinct both with in the soundstage and your ability to pick out and focus on one. Plus just more 3-d like...
#3 - timing - an example...I have a piano and cello recording. i've always clearly hear both instruments...but with the clock in place you can hear the piano leading the cello..it's subtle...but once you hear it..it's unmistakably conveying the musicians intent better.

Better clock cables matter. Even just going with Cardas and spending ~$300 each is clearly heard. Ditto for power cords/isolation.

Hope that helps !

Those sound very promising!

I ordered another Transparent XL clock cable for the clock connections. Since I don't have upsampler, Just 44.1khz based clocking is sufficient. So all I need is two clock cables, one for transport and one for dac. When upsampler comes into equation, cabling complexity increases a lot.

 

[microstrip]

Those sound very promising!

I ordered another Transparent XL clock cable for the clock connections. Since I don't have upsampler, Just 44.1khz based clocking is sufficient. So all I need is two clock cables, one for transport and one for dac. When upsampler comes into equation, cabling complexity increases a lot.

Yes, five BNC clock cables and five AES/EBU XLR cables are needed for a complete Vivaldi system ...

 

[MadFloyd]

I really don't like all the boxes but it is what it is. The cabling dynamic w/dCS is the most troubling part of the system from my view point. dCS should provide the best cables and be done with it. And that includes power cords.

BTW, I've been told the clock doesn't make much of an improvement unless you are using the transport

I've been told something similar. So did you skip the clock? What dCS components do you have/use? I assume whatever you have is better than your NADAC?

 

[number95]

I've been told something similar. So did you skip the clock? What dCS components do you have/use? I assume whatever you have is better than your NADAC?

I tested Rossini player and its clock. Without its clock, it was fine but nothing extraordinary or spectacular. At least when compared to my Emm Labs XDS1 v2. When clock enabled, then came magic as if it was a different player. The difference was almost dramatic. If Vivaldi clock has the same impact, it is a winner.

 

[Kingsrule]

I've been told something similar. So did you skip the clock? What dCS components do you have/use? I assume whatever you have is better than your NADAC?

Yes. I have Vivaldi DAC and Upsampler (v2 versions) using roon as an end point. QNAP for storage. The ethernet end point is a game changer vs. usb for me. For now Vivaldi cabling is Transparent Reference XL digital