Hi WJE. I use it as main DAC for listening too. What I found out was that a coaxial input has better sound than USB. We compare Khadas to Lindenmann CD1 SE player from 2012. USB source was notebook. FLACs or WAVs were CD Rips of played CDs on Lindenmann. There were three listeneres at room. After the listening we all agreed that ouput from Lindenmann was better. We could define the shortages of khadas very well. So we deciede to play SACD and 24 bit same albs against Lindenmann. The winner was Lindemann. I got idea to try to use Lindenmann as a transport. After listening we all agreed that the khadas sounded better than with USB close to Lindenmann which was still the winner. It´s a pitty we couldnot try any other Coax. transport to confirm our findings. After that experience I decided to try a very good linear power supply for USB input. I know Amir´s measurements. They say no difference. But I prefer listening with It. It sounds better for me close to sound like from COAX input. After ALL It desnot mean that khadas is bad DAC. I enjoy listening it. I must say to Lindemann engineers they made a very good CD player.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Khadas Tone Board -Thank you ASR!!!
- Thread starter Lavawood
- Start date
What I get out from that is you like seeing larger boxes and that gives you a better psychoacoustic perception of sonic performance. I bet if you get a hold of Schiit Yggdrasil (pretty large chassis for a DAC), you’ll definitely say you prefer that too
.. in uncontrolled conditions (sighted, not level matched to 0.1 dB), I assume? In this case you cannot trust the listening results.
I know, I'm repeating myself.
Yup, big boxes are much better.
Actually, I was looking at some DAC specs on-line last evening and happened upon Audio Research DAC 9. And by no means am I criticizing Audio Research, but their DAC weighs 32 Lbs. and runs $8,500. A lot of engineering went into building such a beast. But, if I had such funds to purchase such a DAC, I doubt that it would be something I'd just be comfortable with. Or, I'd be swapping tubes in and out of that DAC in attempts to change the sound or tweak it a little. The cycle would never end.
Hey that’s not science! Don’t make a fool out of yourself!
Correct and why? Because this is a sounded DAC, and rolling tubes may change the sound. Any decent engineered SS-DAC will sound transparent out of the box.Yup, big boxes are much better.
restorer-john
Grand Contributor
For a "new" D/A converter, it sure has a lot of dust on the header and RCA sockets.
You may want to put it in some form of case.
After living with the Khadas Tone Board for the past several days, as well as using it with some different amplifier and speaker configurations, I have following updates/impressions:
1) The Khadas Tone Board is an impressive DAC for the price. However, it is a highly-detailed DAC - for those who love great levels of detail in their listening.
2) The Khadas Tone Board was an excellent match for my B&W DM602 S1 and S3 speakers as well as the Paradigm 200B speakers. Both of those speakers have a slightly laid-back approach in their sound - especially the Paradigm 200B.
3) The Khadas Tone Board wasn't the best pairing when used with my Elac DB6.2 and Monitor Audio Bronze 2 speakers. I find that these two models offer an extremely detailed presentation. For those speakers, my ears prefer the sound of the Schiit Modi 3 Multibit DAC.
1) The Khadas Tone Board is an impressive DAC for the price. However, it is a highly-detailed DAC - for those who love great levels of detail in their listening.
2) The Khadas Tone Board was an excellent match for my B&W DM602 S1 and S3 speakers as well as the Paradigm 200B speakers. Both of those speakers have a slightly laid-back approach in their sound - especially the Paradigm 200B.
3) The Khadas Tone Board wasn't the best pairing when used with my Elac DB6.2 and Monitor Audio Bronze 2 speakers. I find that these two models offer an extremely detailed presentation. For those speakers, my ears prefer the sound of the Schiit Modi 3 Multibit DAC.
Greetings! No, I didn't do a proper DBT test. I was basically sharing my "impressions" after using the DAC for several days. For me, though, it did require careful pairing with the right speakers. To my ears, the Tone Board made the Elac Debut D6.2 speakers unbearable to listen to and I was ready to write those speakers off. However, when pairing it with the more polite sounding Paradigm Premier 200B speakers, it provided a nice balance to their sound.
OP
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2020
- Messages
- 127
- Likes
- 154
Yes, I do believe that's the case. The same was experienced with my Monitor Audio Bronze 2 speakers. Similar outcome to the Elacs. You're right, though. The Tone Board is an excellent DAC, especially for the cost. I can only imagine how it would make the Wharfedale Linton's "sing" and using a more polite DAC wouldn't do those speakers the right justice.
To me, I always scratch my head when someone describes a DAC as "polite". I have 5 different DAC brands including the uber-hyped Schiit Bifrost 2 DAC (some subjectivists calls this warm but it literally sounds flat frequency response to me) and the A&Ultima SP2000 DAP, and literally none of my music coming out of any of them sound "polite, rolled-off, laid back, forgiving" whatever new flowering subjectivist calls their DAC now. My IEM transducers are also no-slouch, Yamaha HS7 speakers and Campfire Andromeda IEM. My main reason to have 5 different brand DACs is not only to have a collection but rather test myself what these subjectivist call "sabre glare", "analytical", "polite", "laid-back" but I'm disappointed that they all sound the same to me once volume match is performed
That seems to be a new one making the rounds...
Polite...please... How about people actually trying to control for some bias? Oh...sorry...that's just crazy talk.
The ones that tell the truth I suppose!
Good morning, y'all. I guess the term "polite" wasn't the best. To me, it means more neutral - not emphasized really in any manner, but just plays the sound in a well presented manner so that you could comfortably listen to it for hours. I actually got into the hobby 40+ years ago. I used to live on the wild side and push in the loudness button on my receiver, click the bass control 2 or 3 to the right and the treble about 5 clicks. Oh, and I'd turn off Dolby NR when recording my cassettes because I didn't like what it did to the sound and it also added hiss.
So, in other words...a DAC that meets basic standards of competence.
Have you ever participated in a true level matched no peeking (blind or preferably double blind) test?
I know how surprised I was when I did, and found all the differences I had clearly been hearing magically disappeared. Seems that many people who have been in the hobby for decades, haven't spent much time learning about psychoacoustics...but then again, where would they? They certainly aren't going to be told about how to properly perform listening tests from the audio press...that would be their worst nightmare if people lost that bit of curated ignorance.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2018
- Messages
- 1,448
- Likes
- 4,813
When I gathered my DACs to finally found the guts to tell them face to face that they all sounded the same, the Linn suddenly became disconsolate, the Cambridge audio became lugubrious, the KTB heartbroken, the Fiio cheerless, the Marantz were mortified.
The first time I measured and equalized two very different speakers (the Focal Utopia and the Giyas) in the same room I spectacularly failed a blind test (partner switching the source). I would have almost bet a finger that I would pass it with flying colors. Two different speakers, two different amplifiers and the equalized FR and matched levels made them almost indistinguishable. I trained myself to tell them apart again by focusing on different issues but it remains amazing what you can learn from a half baked blind test.
There is, however, one DAC I can recognize as really inferior for some reason, and that is the AKM in the Chromecast Audio. I don't even think it is because of the DA conversion itself, because according to most measurements, I shouldn't be able to notice but I haven't really investigated since the Chromecast analog out is only useful on older, not so good, hardware.
The first time I measured and equalized two very different speakers (the Focal Utopia and the Giyas) in the same room I spectacularly failed a blind test (partner switching the source). I would have almost bet a finger that I would pass it with flying colors. Two different speakers, two different amplifiers and the equalized FR and matched levels made them almost indistinguishable. I trained myself to tell them apart again by focusing on different issues but it remains amazing what you can learn from a half baked blind test.
There is, however, one DAC I can recognize as really inferior for some reason, and that is the AKM in the Chromecast Audio. I don't even think it is because of the DA conversion itself, because according to most measurements, I shouldn't be able to notice but I haven't really investigated since the Chromecast analog out is only useful on older, not so good, hardware.
Similar threads
- Poll
