• 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!

Next Upgrade - DAC or Preamp? What’s the science say?

Peace. I meant no provocation. My point was simply that there are analog purists who would argue that the ADC / DAC conversions degrade the value of a pure analog chain. I’m clearly not that hard over on the principle or I wouldn’t have purchased a Waxwing nor would I be running a WiiM Ultra with Class D amps. I’m a hybrid guy whose gear is leaning heavily toward the digital realm.
Sorry if my reply was a little abrupt. No provocation was taken.

I simply find it necessary to point out the nonsense of analogue puritanism whenever it crops up (And obv I realise you are not such). Digital is so far beyond the capability of typical analogue sources that the ADC/DAC steps are no more detrimental to the signal than a piece of wire is. One of the reasons why the whole MOFI controversy was such a facepalm moment.

Peace! :p
 
Peace. I meant no provocation. My point was simply that there are analog purists who would argue that the ADC / DAC conversions degrade the value of a pure analog chain. I’m clearly not that hard over on the principle or I wouldn’t have purchased a Waxwing nor would I be running a WiiM Ultra with Class D amps. I’m a hybrid guy whose gear is leaning heavily toward the digital realm.

the way i learned it was as a example of function.

streamer or computer > dac > analog signal preamp > poweramp.

the last thing in your digital lineup should always process the signal in a nalog fashion. even if your sound wuality is marginal from a digital source, having it rounded out with ss or tube can actually be the magic dust on the cake.

i practice

digital(compouter streaming) > dac-tube analong output > preamp > poweramp.

i have what i would call "decent dac functionality" but my magic i believe im hearing comes from my dac doing a pretty dynamic job of giving me a warm depth like quality. i think if i just used a digital dac box with a simple ss function i would not have that sound im hearing.

point being, its not really just the dac function....its how the sound is handled once it leaves the dac stage asnd goes into the "output" stage of the device. and yes per consumer reviews ther are subjectively very very good advanced ss outputs on some dac that have a superb sound quality.
 
You can set the waxwing to unity gain, and turn off the RIIA.

Not much point though. The waxwing has a very good preamp stage, and the RIAA is done digitally - as such probably much more accurate than any analogue implementation. Simply sell your existing phone stage.
is there data to that claim? input freqs vs output freqs?
 
My point was simply that there are analog purists who would argue that the ADC / DAC conversions degrade the value of a pure analog chain.
Worth testing
 
Would that accomplish anything like the same? I’m going to guess no. I’ll stew on this one…
Hard, non-porous surfaces tend to reflect sound... it's probably better than glass because it's an irregular surface (will scatter a bit rather than just reflect sound straight back) but curtains might help more.

This is where REW comes in - you can do really detailed measurements and see what frequencies are taking too long to decay, which reflections are most objectionable, etc. Would definitely recommend getting a UMIK and borrowing your son's laptop for a couple hours to do some measurements in REW. I think the WiiM RC is supposed to be OK but it provides a lot less information than REW. If you're still hearing any boominess or deficiency in bass, (or harshness in the highs) it might be worth the effort.
 
is there data to that claim? input freqs vs output freqs?
The puffin (predecessor) has been reviewed here. I'd expect the waxwing to be better. At least it has double the sample rate, so the 20kHz band limit on Riia shouldn't exist any more.

 
Last edited:
the last thing in your digital lineup should always process the signal in a nalog fashion.
Every DAC has an analogue output that does just this. In particular the reconstruction filter.

You don't particularly need additional analogue devices after a DAC to "round it out" as evidenced by the audibly perfect - analogue on the output - performance of almost all of them (though an amp is obviously useful for driving your transducers :D ). You certainly don't need anything with tubes in.
 
Save up for a better TT? (given you spin a lot of vinyl)

Peter
 
Do you run:

TT -> phono stage -> waxwing -> preamp -> amp

Or

TT -> waxwing -> preamp -> amp

The difference being keeping your analog phono stage in the chain with the Waxwing. If so, don’t you risk doubling up the gain (clipping)? Or can that be controlled in the Waxwing app? What about RIAA? Eager to get my hands on mine… Thanks much.

Edit: I’m asking as a reviewer on Head-Fi.Org stated his chain included both an analog phono stage and a waxwing.
If you haven't already, you should download the waxwing app. I did so before purchasing mine and it is what made me really want one. There are a bunch of settings and selecting the name of one opens a very useful description of the setting and what the options are for it.

If you were to use your existing phono stage before the waxwing then I would start by loading the CD -4dB preset under the File setting. You have to make sure the the File setting is unlocked, then move the slider so that the preset name CD -4dB shows up and then press the download button and press the Load File button. After that I like to look at the Levels setting and raise the Gain setting until Peak In (ADC) gets up to around -10dB at most while a record is playing. Hopefully this isn't confusing.

Personally I just use the waxing as my phono stage, nothing external necessary.
 
The puffin (predecessor) has been reviewed here. I'd expect the waxwing to be better. At least it has double the sample rate, so the 20kHz band limit on Riia shouldn't exist any more.

There are some measurements of the waxwing here.
 
Do you run:

TT -> phono stage -> waxwing -> preamp -> amp

Or

TT -> waxwing -> preamp -> amp

The difference being keeping your analog phono stage in the chain with the Waxwing. If so, don’t you risk doubling up the gain (clipping)? Or can that be controlled in the Waxwing app? What about RIAA? Eager to get my hands on mine… Thanks much.

Edit: I’m asking as a reviewer on Head-Fi.Org stated his chain included both an analog phono stage and a waxwing.

The Waxwing is a phono preamp.

I run turntable -> Waxwing > Wiim Ultra -> amp -> speakers. I use the line out from the Waxwing connected to the line in on the Ultra.
 
Every DAC has an analogue output that does just this. In particular the reconstruction filter.

You don't particularly need additional analogue devices after a DAC to "round it out" as evidenced by the audibly perfect - analogue on the output - performance of almost all of them (though an amp is obviously useful for driving your transducers :D ). You certainly don't need anything with tubes in.

The bulk of the reconstruction filter is digital in oversampling DACs (see signal paths for ES9039 chips below). There is typically also an analog low pass filter as well but well above the audible band.

the last thing in your digital lineup should always process the signal in a nalog fashion. even if your sound wuality is marginal from a digital source, having it rounded out with ss or tube can actually be the magic dust on the cake.

Preamps cannot improve fidelity for properly designed DACs at unity gain. At lower volumes, the noise level may be reduced compared to using properly designed digital volume control in or before the DAC but at the cost of less headroom for the DACs interpolator increasing the likelihood of intersample overs.

If the DAC really is marginal, instead of getting a preamp to "round it out" (low pass filter, even-order harmonic distortion or what?), one should just get a decent DAC.


1733930086438.png

1733930140577.png
 
my thing is the more foam the bette
I’d consider doing this, but I literally don’t have the wall space. of the 4 walls in my room, my lounge, one entire wall is a window (which is nice to see the outside world so I have blinds), one is opening to the kitchen and hall to the rest of the house, one is the entryway to the house and the last is covered by a 65” TV. There are small areas where I could theoretically add some foam, but it’d be a trivial amount. Unfortunately, I live in an old house which is quite small. It’s a nice house, but people and homes were smaller in the ‘30s and ‘40s when this house was built. It limits my options in this particular instance… TY for the reply though!
 
i like vinyl for mostly one reason. pick one you like. and play it. theres no convenient forward or bounce setting. you have to get up and do it. or listen to the whole side. and i think thats a lost personal acheivement people have. vinyl takes patience to finish it or else you gotta get another ready and be deejaying through the day bouncing song to song on each record. i think this is very cool.
I was a DJ on air and in clubs (spinning vinyl in both cases) as a kid. My connection with vinyl goes back >35 years.
 
Yes, I did calibrate the Fluance arm / headshell when I first used the TT. WRT the AT carts, I was looking at the ATVM95ML vs the ATVM95SH vs the Ortofon. The gist of the reviews / impressions I read was that the blue was (in general) on par with the other carts / not enough of an audible difference to justify a 200$ to 300$ investment. I’m still not 100% sure there. I’ve had both carts in the past, but it’s been a while. For punk, alt rock and jazz / blues, would you have an opinion? Would you recommend one over the other(s)?
2M BRONZE stylus in your Blue body please, unless you can get a complete 2M Bronze (with posher plastic main housing) at a good price. The better Schiit Skoll phono stage may be worth a look as well if the overload margins are superior.

Regarding speakers, if money really is burning a hole in your wallet, the Super Lintons go louder with less distortion and better room matching if the boxes are placed close to the wall behind them (removing any low bass overhang from the room and speaker almost always improves the midrange clarity in a subjective sense I discovered).
 
Yes, I did calibrate the Fluance arm / headshell when I first used the TT. WRT the AT carts, I was looking at the ATVM95ML vs the ATVM95SH vs the Ortofon. The gist of the reviews / impressions I read was that the blue was (in general) on par with the other carts / not enough of an audible difference to justify a 200$ to 300$ investment. I’m still not 100% sure there. I’ve had both carts in the past, but it’s been a while. For punk, alt rock and jazz / blues, would you have an opinion? Would you recommend one over the other(s)?
The Ortofon Blue is pretty good, I wouldn't rush to change that - diminishing returns again.

Have a look at this to understand more about how some cartridges actually measure ... melts my head, but fascinating insights https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...he-phono-cartridge-measurement-library.46108/
 
The Waxwing is a phono preamp.

I run turntable -> Waxwing > Wiim Ultra -> amp -> speakers. I use the line out from the Waxwing connected to the line in on the Ultra.
If the Waxwing works as advertised, it’ll solve my connectivity challenge as well. That is, I’m using my WiiM Ultra as my preamp. I need to run a Sonos Port and the TT through it. The Port only has an analog out and a coax out. The TT phone stage (currently) only has an analog out. The WiiM ultra only has one analog in so I need either the Port or the phono stage to come in through the WiiM’s optical in (based upon Amir’s measurements, the WiiM’s phono stage is a nonstarter). The Waxwing has a native optical out (actually the lowest noise out) which gives me the alternate connection to the WiiM. That is, I can run the Port through the WiiM’s analog in and then the Waxwing through the WiiM’s optical in. Brilliant… Now if only UPS would deliver the box!
 
If the Waxwing works as advertised, it’ll solve my connectivity challenge as well. That is, I’m using my WiiM Ultra as my preamp. I need to run a Sonos Port and the TT through it. The Port only has an analog out and a coax out. The TT phone stage (currently) only has an analog out. The WiiM ultra only has one analog in so I need either the Port or the phono stage to come in through the WiiM’s optical in (based upon Amir’s measurements, the WiiM’s phono stage is a nonstarter). The Waxwing has a native optical out (actually the lowest noise out) which gives me the alternate connection to the WiiM. That is, I can run the Port through the WiiM’s analog in and then the Waxwing through the WiiM’s optical in. Brilliant… Now if only UPS would deliver the box!
Couldn’t you remove the Sonos Port from the chain altogether and simplify things? Is there a compelling reason to stream from it vs the WiiM?
 
Couldn’t you remove the Sonos Port from the chain altogether and simplify things? Is there a compelling reason to stream from it vs the WiiM?
I have 2 Sonos Arcs plus Subs and Ones on my TVs, another pair of Ones in my kitchen and (err) potty, and a pair of Fives with a Sub in my studio. My foray into the passive speaker world is something new. The rest of my home is filled with black Sonos equipment… So to keep my place “connected” when I’m entertaining in more than just my lounge, I need my lounge to be part of my Sonos ecosystem. Hence the Port. At the time I filled my home with Sonos, there weren’t the range of choices we enjoy today. But to be fair, unlike many others that have experienced issues with the app, my experience with Sonos has overall been pretty positive. However, I wanted more than they offered for my music listening (which I think the WiiM Ultra + NCx500 + Lintons gives me)… Does that make sense?
 
Back
Top Bottom