XXHighEnd

Hi,

My Hiface is broken, USB connector have loose contacts. If i have no warranty anymore, i want to buy a new converter.  What's the best converter sound quality wise for under 400-500 eu., Any opinions?

Martijn

Hi,

You could look at the Empirical Audio Off Ramp 4. Its around $ 1200 but is really good.

Arvind

Hi,
I have the Audiophilleo 2 for some days now, it is really a big improvement over the Hiface. You don't need a custom driver (only for 176 or 192 khz) and you don't need a digital cable. You also don't need a power supply, I tried with my battery powered USB-cable and there is no improvement over a standard cable.
Sound wise it is one of the biggest improvements I ever had from a digital source. And it is within your price range.

Bernd

I can suggest the Audio-GD Digital interface. It can be used without external power supply but you can simply buy one from audio-gd that is made for the Digital Interface. They are offering a upgrade of the clock to a TCXO 0.5ppm. I have the external PS and the clock upgarde and can say, both are worth their money. It will be about 220$ and it is a serious step above the hiface. I made a quick check and plugged in my hiface again. The hiface is not bad but the DI provides a bigger well sorted stage, a clearer sound and a lot more low level detail. The bass has more punch and the highs are a little more fresh. The hiface sounds dry and not as involving in comparison. It is recomended to use it with upsampling (upsampler build in, can be turned on an off). You can not use 88.2 or 176.4 khz but 44.1, 48, 96 and 192 khz. no driver needed. If you like to use doubling or don't like to upsample, I would look for something else. The Art Legato seems to be under the best usb-spdif converters up to 500$. I didn't listened to it but I think I read everything that was told in the internet about it. It has two drawbacks. It is 44.1/16 only and you will wait some time to get it.
And of course, I have a Hiface for sale ;)
Greetings
Adrian

Thanks for your answers. THe Empirical Audio Off Ramp 4 is a little bit too costy for me. I read some reviews of the Audio GD and the Audiophilleo 2 and they are looking promising. But i also looked at the moded Hiface MK2. So i think for now i have to choose between these three.

I read somewhere that the Audiophilleo clearly out preform the Hiface Evo, but is that also true for the hiface MK2? And there is a price difference of 100,- eu. So i think i try to do some futher research and if any one else on the forum have any useful futher info to make my choice easier you are very welcome!

if you compare the prices don't forget that the Audiophilleo doesn't need a digital cable. It comes with some adapters for BNC and SPDIF and can be directly plugged into a DAC (TACT Millenium in my case). I tried it with my Silent Wire 32 digital cable (400€) and even this is degrading the sound quality. The USB cable does not make a difference, I tried 1 and 5 m and could not hear a difference. As cheap digital cables always degrade the SQ I think the price for a complete solution is not so bad...
And Adrians descriptions of the sound differences of his GD compared to the Hiface is also true for the AP2, you hear new things on most recordings, much more energy, more space and more realism. And they offer a 30 day money back guarantee...

@Bernie, I'am thinking more and more toward the Audiophilleo 2, but i think it's still a awful lot of money for just a s/pdif adaptor. But if it gives such a enormous boost in sound quality i have to consider this seriously. What you are saying it will safe you the money of a good s/pdif cable and in compare of the modded hiface MK2 a good USB cable. Only think i don't know how needed it is for the MK2 to have a good usb cable or that it also will make not a big difference?

Empirical Audio has reduced the price of the std Off Ramp 3 to $ 499. In my opinion a great buy. They have some pieces left with them still.

Arvind

correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know the Off Ramp is still limited to 24/96 and is USB 1.1 compatible, so no asynchronous transfers...and still you need a good SPDIF cable. And with USB 1.1 the USB cable really matters...

Regarding USB cable: I'm only using a mid-price Oelbach cable (5 m), compared to the 1 m cable that comes with the AP I can't hear a difference. With asynchronouis transfers this should be uncritical. Also with the Hiface there was no difference between using a 5 m USB cable or directly plugging the Hiface to the PC. However using a 5 m SPDIF cable makes a big difference compared to a short one (much better).

I've been very pleased with the JKenny MK2 modified Hiface. Has anyone compared this to any of the other offerings named in this thread?

I have completly the oposit experience. If you got a high quality SPDIF cable, even 5m are fine and could be better than a short one. Sound differences of usb cables are big with the hiface.

Look here:
http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=1425.0

My experience with the stock hiface, best without USB cable. With normal USB cable it gets worse. More expensive cable i didn't test. 

Yes, with the Hiface a 5m digital cable is really a big improvement over a short one, but with the Audiophilleo it is not. Plugging it directly into the DAC gives the best result. I think the Hiface has a problem with too much voltage in the output signal (2,5V instead of 0.5 or so), so this could be the reason.
I have used a modified USB cable with the Hiface, I have used a battery to replace the power line from the PC and this is a big improvement for the Hiface, but it seems not to improve the Audiophilleo. But here I'm still testing all combinations to get the best result. But in the end the Audiophilleo with no SPDIF cable and a standard USB cable is much better than the Hiface with battery powered USB cable and long SPDIF cable.

Off Ramp 3 is limited to 24/96 but the Off Ramp 4 is asynch & supports upto 24/192. A good USB cable is reqd with the Off Ramp 3 or 4. Both support USB 2.0. USB cable upto 5 m gives no problems at all. S/PDIF cable should be good irrespective of which convertor is used.

Then I read your previous post wrong, ok!
The hiface has a 50Ohm bnc plug, (Did Jkeny said that? don't know?) and probable a bad impedance control. I guess this is the reason why you get better results from a long cable. The reflections arrive later. The attenuation of a cable is not enough to explain the better sound. But it should improve with an attenuator about 10-20 db, according to Jkeny and also others who affirmed that.

the Off Ramp 4 seems to be new, it was not available when I checked their site some weeks ago... but 2400$ with 2 Ultraclocks to support all frequencies is another pricerange than the Audiophilleo...

Could someone tell me if the Audiophilleo2 ($495) is worthwhile over the Audiophilleo1  ($895)?

I think the sound quality is the same, so if you don't need the additional features you can go with the AP2 I guess...

In the mean time ...

(if this is appreciated as commercial talk, so be it. But it is well meant anyway)

Whether you guys think about spending 200, 500, 1200 or 2400 dollars or euros ... what you're actually thinking about is the upgrade of an interface. I know, for some this is the hope for better sound, and for others it's about the sheer possibility to connect an existing DAC in the first place. The latter ? may be a good reason. The former ? also, but only for the price of 200 IMO. I mean, if you'd only know what a waste that 500 already will be compared to some slight improvement on sound which will be (and stay) so wrong anyway ...

Yes, I said "wrong", and I mean that.

Even when you are supposed to spend "only" 1200 on a well designed interface and only to keep on using your DAC which wouldn't connect otherwise, that DAC too will be "wrong" to my own standards.

As said, I mean well. It is just that my eye fell on the current DAC of juanpmar within a same topic where Arvind responds genuinely - and where I recall he just had a (very similar) device which he open heartedly recommends to others and where he also could try to sell his own old one, and this combined with him having the same (or similar) DAC as juanpmar has - which really should be "had" on Arvind's side because he replaced it with ... well, see his signature.

So yes, that is more money again, but wouldn't it be better to save some (longer) instead of spending 1/3 of it already and be not satisfied in the long term ?

I can't be 100% sure yet that the DAC Arvind now owns will be world's best. But, it was meant to be, it should be, and no signals against that yet (but it's also too soon to well judge really).
Just try to keep this in mind; it was made for you (and not for me).

Sorry if this all sounded somewhat strange. :)
Peter

Hi Peter,
you are absolutely right, I would never spend much more than the 400€ for the Audiophilleo, otherwise I would buy your DAC. But I'm using a TACT Millenium digital amplifier so I can't use an external DAC. All I change is the digital output of my PC...

Hi Peter,

How can you be so sure about the quality of your dac and call other dac's doing so wrong? I have bought the Lampizator DAC new version 3 and Lukasz also tells that his dac out preform (almost) every dac in the world. But i know that a lot of manufactures also call there products the best (for marketing reasons or they really think that there products are sounding the best). And then you have buyers of a product which are so happy with the new sound and give a good review. But how can you objectivaly measure the music quality of a product when every person have a subjective opinion about what he defines as the ultimate musical sensation. And then you have the different  audio hardware, (tube) amps, cd player, cables, speakers etc. which all should sound different with a specific dac.

Sorry if i sound sceptical it's not really ment that way ;-) and don't see it as a that i defending the Lampizator dac because all the above is also true for his dac's.

Maybe you can explain what makes you think that your dac is really one of the best?

I want to add to my last writing that is really not ment as negative about the NOS Phasure DAC or Peters hard work to develop, i'am sure, such a fantastic sounding dac. Only thing is that i'am not sure that his  develop philisophy can only lead to the best sounding dac. I think there are more ways to Rome ;-) BUt i'am really curious about the quality of Peters DAC. So i hope there will be a time that i can compare or only listen to the Phasure DAC.

So Peter keep up the good work with xxhighend and your Phasure DAC!

Greetz,
Martijn

No, Flecko, I didn't say that - it came from the Head-fi/audio-gd crowd when they were trialling their Digital Interface against the Hiface - unfounded assertion, btw. Have a look at the ComputerAudiophile review of the Hiface - impedance comes out at 73ohm.  Last we spoke you were buying an RF attenuator to try on your Hiface - didn't happen?

Digitalman, here's what I suggest, I offer a money back home trial of the MK2 Hiface, no questions asked, so, if you want to compare it against another device, it's available.

BTW, Keng from the Netherlands (a member here, I believe but I don't know his handle), might like to pitch in as he recently acquired a MK2?

Haha, Martijn, of course you are right. And maybe I shouldn't have posted such a "message" at all; it just reminded me of saying somewhere else that I never had said such a thing as "you should really ..." ... and now I did.

But still ...

I am quite (100%) sure I am right.
What is absolutely wrong though is that I'd be saying that "your" DAC is wrong. And this is not only about you or your ideas/feelings about it, but also about no matter what manufacturer which I respect very well, especially when it is about our polish friend (and quite some more in this area). So ... :sorry:

But still ...

You may look at each manufacturer's writings - but you should come to the conclusion that it's all commercial talk of which you (or I) wouldn't understand to real merits in the first place. I will name one exception : Dan Lavry. And btw, if you can name one who rather explicitly like he did explains why we should do "this and that", I'll be happy not to forget him/that the next time. But the little problem is :
I am 100% against exactly such explanations of how things should be approached, listened to, or bought. And mind you, DL just wrote his "white paper" in a very general fashion, so it's not even to be seen as a commercial story. But maybe that's why I name exactly him as a single good example.
But I am still 100% against that, and explained how or why in maybe a 1000 posts by now. I wouldn't call them white papers, but they sure would suffice. And oh, those posts are foremost not in here, but throughout time you will be able to find some 100 in here anyway.

Well, if you have read a few of those there is nothing much to add, and if you didn't, what to say in a few lines; That the NOS1 is different for about all aspects won't tell you much of the merits, although the *why* may make you wonder. But let's try to summarize it with this :

Suppose (and for you maybe, just suppose indeed) that all those "NOS" (non oversampling) lovers are right that their (1541 etc. based DACs) are indeed more "musical". That they just sound better. That the OS modern people just don't know what they miss. And also : that OS die hards only can point out that NOS s*cks all over because of poor measuering figures. They wouldn't know because they refuse to listen, but their only counterweight is that NOS lovers must like distortion - and which is what it would come down to, scientifically speaking, not knowing the whole story. Now :

It is this "whole story" I am always talking about including the explanation why it is a completely wrong story;
It is from this where some real story sprung, and how I created "NOS" with good figures for the first time, at the same time telling why OS figures are as fake as you can think of. It is this why not only the NOS1 should theoretically be the best there is, but also why it sounds not better by some marging of which one would say "hmm.. maybe I like it", but of which people immediately say "djeez, how can this be possible". At least I didn't meet anyone not saying this, and it includes NOS lovers in the first place, them being used to NOS, but also to the most heavy distortion indeed.

The above is only the commercial story if you don't know about these 1000 other posts. If you do, you wouldn't question it, BUT, always had to listen first; you might believe in my explanations allright, but, for example, if you'd believe in the DL stories in the first place, you would sure want to check it out. So, the both "explanations" how digital audio should work are plainly me against the whole world of others. I will never deny that, until I'm not alone anymore. But at least it is totally different, *plus* (and let this be important) I have been able to 100% explain why NOS lovers could ever be right in their judgement, while it seems so wrong regarding measurement figures. It intrigued me, I bought an NOS (18 bit) DAC for the purpose (traded that for a well expensive Audio Note), agreed with the sound everybody was raving about, and next set myself to explaining it. I did.
Who's next ?

Let me finish this by once again telling that this doesn't mean I disrespect enthusiasts like the person behind Lampizator. As a matter of fact I received quite some emails and PM's right about him, and what my opinion was. Coincidence ? no way. Why ? well, because he's en enthusiast exactly like me as it seems. And so I responded to those emails (people concerned will know). But there *is* a difference, because I have well thought of - and extensively explained theories, while others have none at all. So, I too use the very best parts I can find, but it really is not all there's to it. It matters (a LOT), but it's the last part of the process. The design philosophy comes first, and for that matter - what I am saying I'm stating for years and in the end it's a long strategy which included everything and all. Maybe I can refer to Arc Prediction Filtering only, to refer to a phenomenon which comes across to you as something nice and which may do good even to your DAC. But it really was a necessary "technnique" to let the NOS1 do what it is supposed to do and which I knew from the start not knowing a bloody thing about filtering at all. I did it because it had to work, and it is only one small part of the whole philosophy. In the end the whole of XXHighEnd can be included. Think about that, now you know it anyway.
A monster of a project really, but a real project, and not a commercial story only. The latter would have been cheaper ... a lot.

I will stop here, and I hope you can dig up the remainder somewhere. But remember one thing please : my post maybe was inappropriate - even on my own forum. But really, if people are going to talk about 2400 whatever money, I just like to express that maybe that is not the right thing to do. Maybe I say this because I feel it as a waste of my time. Sounds strange (again), I know. But if I had done this for myself I would have been finished long ago or the NOS1 would have been at least double its price. Or even tenfold. But then I would have welded to cover to the chassis, because otherwise the shown costs of the parts really would not have justified for that.

Peter

Hi John,

I noticed the other day that you somehow seem to be keen on shouting rather outloud people's private names, or all the further nick names they use otherwise; I only want to say : as you know I don't care much about some support for your own enthusiasm and then in the context of my own last post. But please let people decide on their own under what names they make themselves known or otherwise stick to their "handle". No big deal really, but again, people ought to decide that for themselves.
Thank you.

That the same "Keng" apparently will be one of the few that may express his ideas about the subject from my two posts in this topic, is a complete other matter - and a funny coincidence. I'll leave it up to him how he judges, and whether some, say, 200 euros can be justified against that other much larger amount. Pure coincience I'll say, and in the end we just posted along eachother.
But remember what I said in the first place : to me that 200 or whatever euro *is* justified. Regardless.

Regards,
Peter

Am I keen on doing that? Never noticed - can you show me where I've done so before?

OK?

Haha, as I said, not really a big deal.
Ar-t.

Sorry. Mixed up something...and I know now what...! Kingwa has found the bnc connector he was first using in his DI was a 50Ohm, although it was sold as a 75Ohm. He has replaced it by a true 75ohm connector.
I tried to get the attenuator but I don't have it yet. Shipping from america was to expensive and the german distributor didn't respond to my question about the attenuator. I will go to the local electric shop and order some attenuators there. But at the moment I don't find the time. Meanwhile I replaced my Hiface by a Digital Interface from Audio-GD. The attenuator maybe helps there too. Also I still have the hiface and can test it. I will report as I have done the test.

Ah, I see, but I only do it with that particular person :)

Yes, but I also saw that rumour spread from that thread i.e that the Hiface doesn't have a 75 ohm BNC connector. It seems head-fi has a tendency for doing that
There are other minicircuit distributors in Europe. Be careful what RF attenuator you use - they are not all the same - check the datasheets. Yes, it works on & helps the Digital Interface too :)

Isn't he the most famous of them all. That's why I didn't want to say anything about it at first.
:)

hi Peter,

Thanks for your explanation. I'll send you a PM because then i can write in Dutch, easier for me.

Regards,
Martijn

First off, let me say that the Hiface (modded by Jkeny) offers very good SQ and a quick soulution for it's price. I can't say what it sounds like exactly because I just got my Devialet which is still burning in so I'll wait before I jump to some (wrong) conclusions.

I think that ideally though in computer audio that you will not need an extra interconnect and a box between the computer and your DAC.

I just happened to have visit Peter yesterday. We traded some opinions, ideas and our view on the audio subject. Ofcourse I listened to the Phasure NOS1 DAC too :). The sound was very good. Very precise, clean and a lot of information. I can't say wether it's the best DAC ever, as I haven't listened to all the reference DAC's out there. But for the price he's asking for it, it's a steal. The price/ preformance ratio is unbeatable and he could ask a lot more for it, but he explained to me (very clearly) why he doesn't.

Was it the best system I've ever heard then? No... Not by a long shot.. It didn't have the same magic as some 100k systems I've experienced, but I suspect this because Peter doesn't believe in high-end cables, acoustics, amplifiers, speakers and the synergy of the whole as much as I do.

On the other hand I must say I was impressed by the SQ, because  of the cheap cables and amps Peter was using. And the acoustics were far from optimal ;). So I DID learn that the source (or front end) has more effect on the whole outcome than I first thought. But to create musical magic, I still believe that the front to the back needs to be carefully matched and fine tuned to create a synergistic complete package. And I believe acoustics play a big part in what you're hearing. But making a room 'dead' like many professional acoustic engineers do is not the way for High End audio imo, you need to make the room work WITH you.

:offtopic:

Haha, that's a nice one. But I guess it is true to some extend. Or at least it is proven by my crocodile wires which hold the xovers together ... for 3 years or so by now.
Also it is admitted that at least I don't do anything about it rather explicitly, already by pointing out *that* the xovers are connected like this - for years. And this is obviously not for the best possible sound ...

Well, while you could say that one can't do 100 things at the same time, and while this certainly counts for me, it may come across a little strange that someone claiming to have created a "best DAC" in the mean time deals with his cabling (and more) this way. Not a single piece of acoustic treatment either (ah, my curtains can be closed :)), and what else.

But the real explanation is this :

I think I have a fairly good "absolute memory" if it were for sound. With this I mean that it is not so very difficult for me to recognize a character in the sound from its origine from for example one year back, while that origine is supposed not to be there anymore. Hard to explain, but think about cymbals sounding some way, and when I change something in the software, I suddenly hear those cymbals sound from a specific situation that year back. That I can recall this is one thing, but that I'm usually also able to remember what caused this sound (one year ago) is another. Anyway, this is very important to "restore" things. But it is also important (and this can't be emphasized enough) to make progression. So think a kind of other way around : it may occur that a certain virtue occurs not to be there anymore, next I should be able to think back : since when has this actually gone, or IOW, what actually to do to bring it back. Then it comes handy to know *when* this changed, so I can re-capture *what* actually changed (for the cause), to next restore it.
That all you great people are a great help with this, is another matter (like : hey, the bass from 0.9y-xxx whatever was much better !).

But now think further : how would I be able to restore and check (!) when in the mean time I would be working on my crocodiles and all ?
It just couldn't ...
And so it happens that I *do* create new interlinks as I showed you, but will never use them, and will only measure them when I can find some time in between jobs. You saw it happening, that one interlink with its nice Neutrik connectors being on the floor somewhere, if you only believe that a. I made them 2 months back, and b. there really weren't used at all one single time.
Who does that ?
The why I just told about.
More physically : I told you about this new cable in advance, and how and why it should be better regarding "some" theories (about SE vs. balanced ad such). So, for fun we measured it, and it was *worse*. There went the theories, and no lies about them being apparently wrong. But also, no lies in general, because looking at the result, what would I be looking at, at measuring a next DAC (which could be yours, haha). No lies ever, and expecially not to myself !

Lastly, the "acoustics" example, which almost is more important. Well, to me it is;
People may know, and I told it to you too, that it is my belief that all room anomalies are FIRST *created* by the source. The better the source is, the less problems room anomalies will be noticeable. I told about my PEQ and stuff with which I started out in this house, and which is all in the garage because it's not "necessary" anymore. But wait ...
We have special corners in the room where things are critical if it were for real standing (bass) waves. So, this is a "check it out" corner. For example, where before W7-SP1 this was still a place not to be, from off W7-SP1 it just can. It is of major importance to find differences in areas not profound in the first place. So, software change, another setting - mwah, looks okay ... but if this corner is not, it is thrown out. Hmm ...
So, although still theory (but for sure a working one), what to do if I started decorating the room with bass traps and everything ? ... all would be judged as ok on this matter, not knowing how it progressed really. And believe me, if I use Foobar and some old DAC ... you wouldn't want to be anywhere in this room, especially not with something like that Yello ...
The theory works, but I can't use a decorated room to make progress on this !

Well, I hope this is not appreciated as "this guy wants to have an answer to everything", because it's really the way how I operate and how things *do* progress.
That's what I hope anyway.

Thanks,
Peter

I would admit to what you are saying but instead of FIRST, I would say SECOND. Because the FIRST thing you have to look for, when it comes to room acoustics is the speaker. If it is non linear on axis and/or has some peaks off axis and/or has resonanaces in the waterfall diagramm, it is the first place where coloration come from. But as it is a chain, with a bad source no good speaker can shine and with a "bad" speaker it doesn't help if you have a good source.

@SilckenSmooth: Thanks for your info on JKModded Hiface. Hope you can tell me more when your amp has burned in!

Interesting ... But maybe it depends how one "operates". I mean, when you build your speakers and depend on the sound merely (and which would be a very good idea btw), you will never know when the speaker would be first. You wouldn't even be able to judge amplifiers when the source would not be first.

I can imagine this is all way beyond you imagination, but please trust me. With the software alone (referring to XX) you can TRUST that this is eliminated largely already. With this at hand, *and* knowing that the speakers are ok too, you will be able to throw out an amplifier within seconds. It will produce standing waves in the higher frequencies (well, if so of course), and it is SO easily audible (the sound buzzes while it shouldn't). You will not able to judge at all - when this happens in the first place - when the source is not ok to this respect.
So believe it or not, but by this means an amplifier can be rejected really within seconds. But you have t trust the source (and speaker, for the amp example).
I took amplifiers as the example because I can tell it from experiene (read : I did not take speakers for the example, because I don't have the experience from those (acting wrongly)).

Point is : the source can be trusted (once proven for once and for all), while all those random speakers (amps) can not be trusted at all. You would be tweaking the wrong thing ...

Maybe we also must forget "old school" thinking, which is about "the speaker is the most important". It is not true. Not not not. I will try to back it up with one example :

I use horns. Well, horns are the most difficult to not let them sound like horns to begin with. Mine don't in the first place, crocodiles or not. You can tweak endlessly (let's say it took me a year of throughput time) to try to eliminate nasty habbits which won't go out; If one type of speaker will show a trumpet which really is a sax, it's a horn. Think about this ...
When a nasty (too square sound, which happens in a too small throad) is eliminated for one instrument, it shifts to the other because all you did it shifting a bump in the frequency. But, you test with music, and the music comes from this one source.
Now think standing waves again;

Standing waves will happen inside of that throad anyway. Unavoidable once too narrow, let's say. But now we have this voltage coming from the source (think DAC for easyness, but I really talk software here) and it's unevenly spread throughout the frequency within itself. It's an harmonic and it's a false one. It will be emphasized because of the standing wave principle. The horn will "shout".
That standing wave is really not much different from one in your room - be it a low or be it a high frequency. It is incurred for by reflections.
Now, all it actually takes (can I say after a few years of explicit experience on this) is eliminate the distortion in the source.
I won't say I wasted my time of this year on getting the xovers etc. right, but I will say that the source has way (way !) more influence and the attention has been on the wrong subject mostly. Today ? today I have no shouting or uneven frequency output from my horns. Still I didn't change anything anymore when I (or better "we") stopped with it.

A speaker must be good in its base. But it is so much more tolerant than you ever can imagine. I know ... (now).

Peter

The speaker surely is not the most important at first, but in the end it can become the most important.

I've been through this journey so I know. I had some cheap speakers in the beginning, with some cheap amps and cables and it didn't sound very good obviously. Then I bought some 2nd hand high-end pre and power amps and some better cables and guess what happened? There was a lot of the high-end sound coming from my speakers, which by then, I had only heard at dealers... My speaker sounded like a much more expensive speaker suddenly. But I don't want to give the wrong impression. Say my 1500 euro per pair speaker suddenly sounded like 6000 per pair speaker after I upgraded my amps but definitely not like a 20k speaker. Anyone who tells you that is mad hahah. Later I upgraded my source which was certainly a change for the better, but it wasn't as huge of a difference that the amps (and the cables) made.

Anyways given your amps, source, cables, audiorack and acoustics are of a high level (and create a good synergy all together) then the speaker becomes the most important factor as only a high quality speaker will let you hear the full potential and capabilities of all of your equipment AND the set as a whole. Will a lesser speaker sound bad? No, when everything before the speaker is of high quality and matched carefully it will not sound bad, it might sound very good. But imagine a prime Michael Jordan in the body of a 60 year old guy.. You get the point..

I do, heard and measured :)

That is exactly what I think but I would conclude different-> At first you need a speaker of a good base quality. If you have a realy cr*py speaker, you can put the best source and amp before it and it will not sound good.

How do you like to prove the software source is right? We messing around with this all day and still are not sure what is right or wrong. It is far more easy to prove a speaker is right. And as we can not measure the software at the limit we are working on, we must first trust our speakers.

Nevertheless, it is like the question: What was first, the chicken or the egg?

I would say: The speaker is the most overrated part in the hifi chain and the digital source is the most underrated. Plus, that a good digital source is the most difficult to get.

Personally, I think a stereo system can only sounds as good as its weakest link in the system. No $100,000 front end, speakers or amplifiers will  compensate for a cheap $1 cable in the system nor overcome a poorly recorded CD or LP completely. Nor a great system will overcome poor placement in a horrible room and a great room is not going to make a boombox sounds like a million dollar system. I am a afraid there is  no one magic bullet to make a system great.

I have to declare an up-front commercial interest here because we've auditioned a lot of USB > SPDIF converters with a lot of different DACs and computers. And when I find something I really like, I then try to sell it. No disrespect to the other converters we sell (like the Halide Bridge and KingRex UC192), but John Kenny's modified HiFace sounds significantly better at that price than anything we've heard before. It's a great shame, because it's not as profitable a thing for us to sell (in fact, most dealers wouldn't touch it), but the fact stands that it performs brilliantly. I don't think it's as good as the Sonicweld Diverter, but that is the product of mad genius and costed (dis)proportionately!

Hubsand,

Please stay out with strange posts like this.
It almost looks like computer-generated.

It's not about your commercial interest (not hard pressed anyway), but about the out of the blue nothing-worth posting.

Thank you,
Peter