- Joined
- Jan 28, 2017
- Messages
- 657
- Likes
- 843
Their components are not cheap either. From The Ear "The euro price for the Heritage preamp alone is €38,590, and the Heritage power amp sets you back €42,200". Makes Benchmark look even better
What a cool idea! And yes, the photos that @NTTY did, are kind of the most beautiful I’ve ever seen from the inside of electronic stuff.Thank you very much as always for your reviews, very interesting.
great devices, and once again with surprising performances for the age.
Thanks as always for the internal photos of the devices, which I really like!!
PS I saw that you live in Switzerland, who knows, one day we can't get together, so I'll bring you the Mark Levinson 31.5 to test.... I'd like to find out if its 28 kilograms of weight justify the fame that goes with it!!
It should rather look like this:
As would a lot of others, for that matter.If I am reading these graphs correctly the $500 Denon DCD-900NE when used as CD transport offers the same measurements as the $10K Orpheus CD Player?
We haven't seen how they handle hard-to-read discs though.
PLL?I have to note that the signal is extremely stable and would facilitate the job of the DAC's PLL reading it.
PLL?
I though a CD player has its own master x-tal clock at n*44.1KHz?
Actually, it should look like the below:
Mac optical out-to-in using 24/48 jtest signal from Audacity as the source:
View attachment 396671
The window function doesn't really make a difference in a digital loopback with a well spaced set of peaks like here.Using a rectangular window is essentially using no window at all.
Orpheus Zero - Measurements (Analog outputs - From CD)
Jitter test (16bits/44.1kHz) shows a beautiful trace:
View attachment 396536
Red trace is what is on the test CD (digital output), it can’t be better. The Orpheus (blue trace) does not add jitter.
Orpheus Zero - Measurements (Digital out)
A number of you are into using CD players as transports, and like to know how the digital output performs.
Well, it is perfect. I’ll keep it simple, with what I believe to be the most representative measurement of the digital output quality, and that is a 1kHz sine at -90.31dBFS which shows the 3DC levels of the smallest digital signal in 16bits sign magnitude representation:
View attachment 396549
I have to note that the signal is extremely stable and would facilitate the job of the DAC's PLL reading it.
Well, I was so anxious to test it, I should have done that way before! Fact is that this player equals the best nearly everywhere, and does better in some cases (ie intersample-overs resistance).
You’re correct, that’s the Jtest from REW and it’s flawed. That’s the reason why I always overlay the digital and analog results to show the differences, as the digital is not quite what it should be.This looks strange.
It should rather look like this:
View attachment 396625
This reminds me that the REW generator 16 bits Jitter test signal was wrong last time I tried.
(24 and 32 bits are correct)
I'll check again.
EDIT: I retrieved my original test files.
REW 16 bits J-test signal gives this, with a digital loopback
View attachment 396619
while theory -and signal generated with another software- gives this
View attachment 396620
The 24 bits version of the signal with REW gives the expected plot profile
View attachment 396621
I don't know if the last version still has that wrong.
I'll check later.
PS: of course, anyway, this was just a very small bug in an otherwise immensely usefull and brilliant tool provided by REW's author @JohnPM . This is not diminushing this great tool's value by any way.
You may easily create this kind of signal with Sox.If someone knows how to create a 16bits/44.1kHz Jtest WAV file correctly, I’d be happy to update my test CD.
Cheers
I’d love that and that’d be fun. Sure let me know if/how we can make it happen!PS I saw that you live in Switzerland, who knows, one day we can't get together, so I'll bring you the Mark Levinson 31.5 to test.... I'd like to find out if its 28 kilograms of weight justify the fame that goes with it!!
6sec to read after inserting the Stan Getz you see in the review, and 9sec after inserting my test CD.Nice one, thanks for that!
A few comments:
I missed comments on the speed of reading in CDs after inserting them.
Does this unit have quick search aka scrolling quicker through the song with monitoring?
Yep, once I have a correct WAV file, I’ll update this review and the others too.As others already pointed out ( @Rja4000 is right) this is not a good but quite bad result. The peaks should descend from left to right. The higher peaks around 1 kHz mean lots of lower frequency jitter. But maybe (as also mentioned) the source was already wrong.
True. Since it forces massive changes around bi-polar 0 in 2’s complement, I thought it could highlights some instabilities. If there’s a better way, I’m happy to use. How can I do what you suggest?I do know this kind of measurement from Stereophile, but it was always taken from the analog output, as further demonstration of the capability to resolve low level audio. For testing bit transparency and full 16 bit resolution it might also make sense to copy a file with known CRC-32 checksum to your test disc, then read its CRC on playback. Or use our simple bit test files.
Yes, its DAC outperforms my beloved Technics SL-PG500A, but on the other hand seems to lack many of the Technics features that make using CDs with it so much fun. Not to mention that Technics unit is on the used market for 50 bucks, so I was able to easily repair mine by exchanging the transport PCB when it stopped working.