Optical @ Bigman (Away fixture)

Great part one.

I will add some thoughts of my own at some point, if thats ok?

Fantastic Chris! Such a wordsmith, thoroughly enjoyed that.

I might wait for all the parts and binge on it like a box-set!

I enjoyed that 

Great write up Chris, lovin it😁

Salted or sugar ?

It’s always been homemade and heavily salted here.
Sugar?
Nah.

Sweet and salty for me! Is that sitting on the fence!?

Part 2 . . . .


So the SP10 motor was allowed to rest for a few minutes at least and the Windfeld and Pmat safely stowed as we made the switch over to the digital realm.

So kit wise we were Aqvox Dac and Oli's Mutec.


Played a few tracks we both knew well, some more Beck, Eva Cassidy and more.


First thing that struck me was the genuine clarity of the setup, with these speakers given as clean a signal as this it was actually quite startling. Now there is a big difference between clarity of sound and having what a lot of people describe as too 'clean' a sound which could often be labelled as 'dry, cold' and ultimately 'fatiguing'. This had all the clarity and resolution you could hope for, I've honestly never heard anything so resolutely transparent but it was portraying the music in a very natural and human manner at the same time. A very difficult act to get right.

Was it absolutely perfect? Well as near as wouldn't make much difference for all but the most discerning listener, which fortunately or unfortunately happened to be sitting right next to me . . . LOL. 

To be fair I picked up on it a bit too (as Oli had already mentioned that the system could skew towards being slightly 'bright' with the digital format), there were a few parts, cymbal splashes, cow bells and the odd high or string where it strayed into being a tad high. High being a relative term here, it may be spot on for some people but both of us found a few bits perhaps a smidge 'hot'.

Again, like the Ekta's we're being highly critical here, mainly because we're not interested in second best, no point in covering any shortcoming here at all if we're after absolute maximum SQ, and we are.

The rest of the frequency range was just about spot on and the mids and low end managed to retain that real human element that was portrayed so well with the vinyl setup. The main criticism volleyed at most digital setups is that they don't sound as good as vinyl (to a lot of listeners), and it doesn't, BUT this was getting mighty close to that analogue reproduction. That's the thing here, vinyl isn't digital, as digital isn't vinyl, it just cannot be due to being a completely different format by way of dramatic physical differences. We can argue about sampling rates and bit depth and accuracy vs human limits of hearing etc etc until we're blue in the face but it will always be a flawed comparison from the off. They are not the same and nor can they be in my amateur opinion reached only with my own ears.

What digital can do (that I've yet to hear vinyl really do quite as well) is present that pin point accuracy sound staging from a pallet of absolute blackness, it's cleaner, it's distortion free for better or worse . . . . but does it have the same 'soul' or pull on emotions in quite the same way . . . .

Well listening to this setup as it was right now, it was getting darn close. Okay to do a real comparison we'd have to A/B the same song, level matched etc etc, which neither of us were interested in doing because it was just more fun listening to great tunes. I think we're both in quite a good place where we only want to prove anything to ourselves for the fun of it, so that's where we continued . . . roll on a few cable and component swaps!


So cables . . . digital mainly.


I wanted to test out my favourite BNC cable (Neotech NEVD 2001), a 75ohm rated cable with a pure silver conductor with AECO BNC connectors at both ends. (seen here on the left, although trust Oli to have a carpet that is almost the same colour and pattern as my cable  )





In my system it's beaten anything it's come up against including some decent AES cables going from Mutec to the DAC. Unfortunately we couldn't try it in this position as Oli only currently uses BNC from his streamer to the Mutec, so that's where we put it.

It would be going up against Oli's "Airbow" cable. Oli had reported very favourable findings after replacing various AES cables and others in the same position with this one, and I must say after listening to it, it certainly hadn't done much wrong in the session so far.

(Airbow on the right)







Engage the swap. (Airbow to Neotech between streamer and Mutec)

To me the general impression was good, it sounded on par in most departments. To me at least it did seem to highlight the vocals a little more, maybe not for better or worse but just a slightly different presentation. Of course this is purely subjective but I trust my ears to be able to remember what a song sounded like two minutes ago at roughly the same volume on otherwise the same system . . .

Oli then pointed out that perhaps the vocals sounded a little different due to a slightly more recessed midrange . . . the more I listened the more I would probably agree with this assessment too. I think Oli's critical ear is far more attuned if not accurate than my own (even taking into account the gulf of 6 years difference between us LOL). I'm happy to bow to his experience in this department especially and considering it's his system and his room etc he knows it best.

However seeing as there was some debate as to any dramatic difference I think the cable held up quite well compared to the Airbow. Ultimately I don't think I'd be unhappy with either cable and which one anyone prefers may actually be down to system flavour or preference, if I had to give it to one cable though (just) it was likely the Airbow, like I say, hadn't done much wrong.


Just a quick note on how the speakers were now performing in the digital realm with their new treble setting . . .


Well it was certainly not as bad as I had assumed, yes there was that element of the treble sometimes becoming a little over-enthusiastic, again could actually be preferable to some and wasn't detracting from the music in any way and that's the main thing. The speakers overall, certainly sounded better for it. Also Oli's rockwool bass traps in the corners extend up to catch some reflections from the tweeter so were perhaps damping it a little, which could have accounted for some of the 'roll-off' first experienced at the beginning of the session and now they were serving to 'balance' the speaker out a bit more . . . anyway, we can theorise but things were sounding absolutely fine . . . however what we tried next did seem to make an appreciable difference . . . .

Whatever my setup at home, the first time I ran the streamer to the Mutec using an AES cable, it was a vast improvement. Better than coax/toslink etc. I'd brought along my Neotech NEDI 4001 cable. So in that went between streamer and Mutec, replacing the Airbow/Neotech 2001 cables.

Well, something happened. We played the Eva Cassidy track "People Get Ready" quite a few times during the cable swap because firstly, its a bloody wonderful track, but secondly it has very clear highs and lows with some spectacular vocals all playing individually at first and then all at the same time. It's a good highlighting track of how well a system deals with elements on their own throughout the frequency range as well as when they are all played together.

With the Neotech AES cable in place I think we just stopped being critical in any way. You just couldn't be. The track just unravelled before us and it was just right in every respect. To be honest the track had been sounding great before and I didn't think there was any way to improve things but the cable added an absolute coherence that we didn't realise was missing until now. The treble was now absolutely spot on, highs were so erm . . . high, and shimmer/decay etc were just right. Nothing was over-egged or synthetic, a bit of a cliche, but everything just fell into place throughout the frequency range, from top to bottom the cable just brought superb balance.

Okay so it's difficult to make these 'claims' and it's subjective sometimes if something sounds better and that opinion may differ from person to person but i think both of us would be reluctant to take THAT cable out of THAT position for the duration of the listening session. I think it was giving a foundation for the rest of the equipment to show itself at it's best. Again, perhaps something that can only be achieved (a cable showing it's potential) in a system this revealing. In another system I have no doubt that we would not have been able to hear this difference and the average listener would then probably form the opinion that the cable sounds pretty much the same as every other cable in that position. . . . That's no plight on other listeners or indeed their systems, just shows the levels that Oli has now elevated the system to, it's able to lay things bare like that.


So onto the next swap . . . My tank of a DAC. 





The Lindell DAC"X" (10 maybe? LOL) it's actually an identical model of the Xindac 20 (20th anniversary model). It has 4 separate power supplies for each section of the DAC (as it has a valve buffer section too).

How would it fare going up against the Aqvox . . . . well, it's not quite as good in the transparency terms. Well, I don't think it is anyway . . . I'll explain. With other bits of kit I have used this DAC with, the XLR output has always sounded a bit better to me, richer and with a bit more oomph. Not surprising considering it's balanced output is a few volts higher than the standard RCA single ended outputs. Using the XLR outputs (with my custom made SAEC 1980/AECO CLR plugs) cable, things did seem a little bloated by comparison to the Aqvox. Certainly not as enjoyable a listen as the Aqvox.

A little disheartened (as I like my custom cables and this DAC!) we tried it via the single ended outputs, this also allowed us to utilise Oli's higher end SAEC cables with WBT connectors (the same as we'd used with the Aqvox).

A very nice improvement was made . . . in all honestly it was still not quite as pure in clarity or precise as the Aqvox but it was much closer. Using this DAC in this setup with the aforementioned cable connection (bar one which I'll mention in a minute) I would actually be very happy. Except when I compared it to the Aqvox, in a lot of areas it sounded on a par (or there abouts to me), staging, tone, low end and midrange, BUT crucially the Aqvox just gets the high end completely bang on, it's better. It also holds the instruments together in a more convincing way, allowing the performance to feel a bit more real. Overall my DAC is darn good but the Aqvox seems to shine a bit brighter in ultimate SQ stakes. There are probably a couple of things I can do to try and improve the Lindell, for instance we had to use a BNC adapter to use Oli's SAEC digital coax cable, so if I re-converted the DAC back to it's RCA/coax input it 'may' give a little improvement . . . or it may not.

Now, that SAEC digital coax cable. (4000 I believe?). Anyway, it was the one that could not even be debated about during the listening session. We tried the BNC cables between the Mutec and the DAC (well mine at least as I don't think the Aqvox has a BNC input) and it wasn't even close. This cable is serious, very very serious.

As is the Aqvox by the way, it's just superb top to bottom (especially with the right cables in the right places it would seem), it's the best digital I've had the pleasure of hearing. 10/10 to the Aqvox from me . . . 


So having enjoyed the digital listening session immensely (albeit confirming my DAC is not quite as good as the Aqvox overall, but put up a credible fight) we decided to do one more comparison, swapping Oli's Mutec for mine . . . we almost didn't do it as the day was getting away and we just wanted to slot the Aqvox back in with the best cable combination we had happened across, or even stick some more vinyl on and kick back.


- My Mutec swapped in for Oli's -


Anyway, we popped mine in, with it's ebay bought 'custom built' 5V linear PSU . . .


Two words . . . one is dog and, well . . . .you can guess the other one . . . and it's not "'s bollocks" . .


The human element that had been genuinely present throughout the session with nearly all of the digital equipment . . . was gone. Things were muffled, incoherent and generally sounded off. It was instantly noticeable.

We pulled the supply out of the system immediately, this wasn't worth listening to, a waste of electricity by comparison. Yes it was up against a well build custom PSU on Oli's one but this was a serious hindrance to the music by comparison.

We pulled it apart in the garage and Oli exclaimed that the parts were fairly sub par and it really was a "DIY" looking job, but it should still have sounded better than it did, it must have had some serious issues.

Anyway, not to worry, Oli had a couple of spare 5V PSU boards hanging about the garage and the transformer looks more than adequate, so the swap took place.


Now this is not Oli's first rodeo with a power supply . . . not by a long shot. But, we couldn't get the thing to power up properly, some LED's on, no LED's on, varying power outputs from 0 to 13V . . . very strange.

Live action shot of Oli wrestling to get a replacement board in super quick!





Only explanations were that the board had issues or that the original design incorporated some sort of feedback/voltage regulation that we had overlooked and could not implement with this transformer on the other board. Anyway, no one's fault (apart from the original builder) and Oli tried very hard to get the board working for which I'm extremely grateful for the efforts.

Ultimately though from the ashes of disappointment, a phoenix can arise so we're going to do a proper PSU build for the Mutec with a little added spice . . . more on that in a future post!


So in summery, my phono stage sucks, all bar one of my cables are crap and my DAC isn't as good as Oli's and now my power supply for the Mutec is in the bin . . . . I had a great time thanks Oli LOL . . .


Honestly though, I didn't mind about any of the above, not even a little bit. The kit I brought along mostly held it's own by way of comparison with some absolutely top notch kit. It would be a test for any bit of kit believe me. I really REALLY enjoyed listening to the Ekta's, they are a special speaker and almost better than any speaker I've heard before

Oli's Avalon and preamp/686 etc are also completely mind blowing. Proper engineering executed with the knowledge required to gear the kit towards maximum sound quality. It's one thing to build equipment that ticks the boxes measurements-wise and sounds good too, it's quite another feat to build kit that not only ticks those boxes with a plomb but also takes things to the next level and has that element present that enables you to enjoy the music to it's full potential. It's not just transparency, clarity, distortion figures, noise floor, materials etc that make the difference. It takes a team of knowledgeable engineers dedicated to the pursuit of actual sound quality to come up with these designs and ideas. A full technical understanding of the electrical workings of our kit is only a part of it, the rest is experimentation, drive and above all, passion for the hobby. When all of those elements collide, you get kit such as I have just experienced.

Thanks Oli (and your family!) for a genuinely superb day where ultimately the gear was fun but listening to the music still won out in the end.

Okay enough cheesy lines from me but hopefully you get where I'm coming from on most of it!


Until the next fixture!


Cheers for reading.

Terrific write up.
Really interesting.
Have to say that the Ektas seem to be a match in heaven for the 686.
Could be why my order to Canada is going in this afternoon!
Great to hear of the other comparisons as well.
Thank you.

It's called a 'pensioners moment' Chris.  

As others have said, a great review, unfortunately you have finished with this remark "my phono stage sucks, all bar one of my cables are crap and my DAC isn't as good as Oli's and now my power supply for the Mutec is in the bin"

With the exception of the phonostage, which I am sure is more than adequate, and you said so in the write up, are you sure everything this comment is correct.  Until you can compare in your system, this may not be the case.  Will the Aqvox dac be more musical than yours when you get the Vaders installed.  I know a few on here enjoy the Mutec, lurch did until he improved his streamer and then found it took away the music, replaced with more a 'hifi sound'.

When Oli finds the next 'in cable' will that make his present ones crap, maybe he doesn't want to hear the ones I'm presently listening to.  

Pleased you both had a great day, and well done to Oli for going into his 'shed' and getting his hands dirty to help you while you were there.

Chris’s visit:

Ah, what a great day we had!

Yes, to share a day in the company of fellow audiophiles is good for the soul. Good music, shared interest and enthusiasm for investigation are what these occasions are all about, and in Chris, we have someone who is as relentless as the best of us.

That really was reflected in our day spent listening to my system, and Chris’s peripherals. I hope that conveys in this post.

The day started off as with vinyl. What better way to start the session!

I had been harbouring an intense feeling that the resistor change I had made to the Ekta was doing the HF no justice at all when using vinyl. Be that due to less HF energy or anything else you may care to assign it to, it was rolled off and I knew it. Within a few minutes of listening, I knew I had to say and do something.

The speakers just were not singing with vinyl, and I think that's most likely due to the amount of damping I fitted when i was listening to 100% digital, but it is difficult to find a balance when you are using two mediums for listening, and I certainly hadn’t even tried. However, taking the speakers down to the garage for some minor surgery brought about the change I was looking for.

The Edwards Vs avalon comparison took place when the speakers weren’t quite right, so I don’t think we got the real margin of performance that we could have had we revisited the comparison post surgery. However, that said, there was still enough to be heard to form what I think is a fair enough opinion of the Edwards.

We listened to a few tracks and the thing that stuck out to me was that the Edwards sounded a little “sticky” like the notes couldn’t find enough space to develop, decay or separate from other things happening in the soundstage. I think there was probably a bit of HF emphasis there too, but the speakers suffering a little roll off themselves in the comparison made it hard to be 100% on that. I could have/Should have measured it, but did it matter? No… We could hear enough of what was going on to know where things stood. The Edwards is far from the worst phonostage i have heard, but it wasn’t in the same bracket of HiFi as the Avalon, which neither Chris, nor i expected it to be.

Swapping to digital was a real bit of fun.

Chris’s Silver BNC cable was excellent. Failing only to keep a frim grip on LF. This cable made the LF sound a little loose, a little softer and a little less impactful. I think a lot of people would love that, or maybe not notice it as a negative, but then again people love Tannoys, Qual ESL57’s and valve amplifiers too…


…CALM DOWN...it’s just a joke

The Airbow is a stonking cable. Cohesive, impactful….but it suffers a little from the same thing most solid core cables do…it can sound a little hard, especially in the HF. There is no doubt in my mind that all of these digital cables convey all of the correct data packets to the equipment sufficiently, but the sonic differences are pretty obvious. Where the Airbow is tight, cohesive, snappy, almost tensioned, the Silver one was relaxed, airy and loose.

Sounds mad, but that was my impression.

The most interesting thing is that when Chris put the Third one in, the OFC copper AES from Neotec, he hit upon a sound that was almost perfect. The HF hardness had gone, and in it’s place was HF filagree. The cymbals no longer sounded like they were being played as hard, but there was a good deal more texture and timbre.

This could be due to a swap from BNC to AES, but the cable definitely took the sheen off. The Aqvox itself doen’t really sound harsh in the HF, but it can sound energetic, but with the right cabling, it removed that slight push into the realm of synthetic and put it firmly back into natural. What a result!

There is a slight downside after listening to this cable for a few hours, and i am not 100% convinced that i have the precise timing, the laser focussed soundstage that i got with the Airbow, but it’s a miracle that this AES cable has landed and done what it has done, so 10/10 for Chris for finding that cable. I am now more convinced than ever that i need a second SAEC DIG4000 for the link between Aria and Mutec.

Yes, That cable was so hilariously better than ANY of the others we tried, that i am still chuckling about it now. I just need to find another £400 for one and then dismantle it to fit BNC’s lol.

DACs:

The Lindell…..initially it was too forward, too forced, like a starving American trying to get past you into the all you can eat buffet. We dialed it back to RCA and put the XR-3000 in and the Lindell started to pick up a little.

The bit it didn’t do was the soundstage carved from a black hole. The Aqvox creates sound from a massless black hole around the speakers. The soundstage is razor clean and the portrayal of all and any detail is there. It isn’t forced, it isn’t harsh and it isn’t unnatural….but its as clean as a whistle. I didn’t quite get that from Lindell. We also didn’t get the “pops” from Eva Cassidy singing into a live microphone on the P of “people get ready” until we put the XR-3000 on. Even then, the Lindell remained less convincing to me and somewhat behind in overall SQ.

That said, the Lindell is a pretty impressive DAC. It didn’t sound synthetic, it didn’t sound harsh, it actually did a great deal of things really well.…but the Aqvox is special. Seriously special. It is maybe the only DAC I have heard that does the things I want it to, and doesn't do things i don’t. If that makes sense.There isn’t much that's a compromise when listening to it, and yes, i agree…whilst it’s still not vinyl, it’s equally as easy to listen to and it is as close, if not better in some aspects to the vinyl. That's the biggest compliment I think I can ever give to digital.

It is going to take something seriously bonkers to dislodge it from my system, and i am not even sure what that would be.

Apologies to Chris that we didn’t manage to reassemble his power supply, but after hearing it i am sure the mutec sounds better without any power supply than with that one lol. New one will be betterer….with something cheeky thrown in


Round 2 will be at Chris’s place when his speakers are settled in. Then we can really see whats going on!

Okay . . . maybe the context wasn't made particularly clear . . . it's very much a tongue in cheek comment. I've certainly sensationalised the outcomes there but at a base level, the phonostage was not as good as the Avalon . . . I mean, it wasn't ever going to be. What it is, is a very good phono stage which I really enjoy listening to in my "2nd" setup which actually runs side by side with my "main" setup, it's just so I can chuck a record on and not worry about hours on stylus/life of valves etc.



No the cables aren't crap either but the comparison with my Neotech bnc and Oli's Airbow bnc cables were that the Airbow pipped the Neotech (although admittedly it was close), same goes for the DAC really, I have no doubt the Aqvox would come out victorious in any other system actually. I can say that with confidence because Oli's system just gives the full story laid bare. So, unless you have a system that is maybe a bit bright or indeed "too analytical" (which is probably not even possible ) I doubt the Lindell DAC would be preferred to the Aqvox, it was simply better.



To reiterate what I've said, I don't think these comparisons could have been made so confidently in a lot of systems. I think it's one of the reasons Oli seems to be able to discern so quickly what's going on with different cables and indeed components, the system is truth, or near as necessary to make these comparisons quickly.



I could be wrong but that's my feelings.



When the Vaders land at mine I hope it will help give me that window of transparency to highlight differences between components and cables that we were able to do on the day.





So anyway Dave . . . tell us more about these cables pray tell . . . .

Okay, well will give your new speakers chance to bed in then sort something as deffo interested in hearing what the Arkes do.
Had the BI up against an HGC2 on Tuesday which was interesting, very articulate and detailed but a tad cold to my ears. Put the BI back in and all was right with the world again, had the detail but also richness, texture and nuance aswell. First time to ve a/b'd it since the latest round of mods in December and made me realise how far the BI has come since I put up against the twin psu MSB Descrete and a Rossinni, in October at Studio AV.