Dangerous Music Source

Discussion in 'Headphone Amplifiers and Combo (DAC/Amp) Units' started by Psalmanazar, Oct 15, 2018.

  1. frenchbat

    frenchbat Almost "Made"

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2015
    Likes Received:
    1,369
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Guess i'm lucky, mine is still here.

    Joke aside, computer straight to rednet, 5 min of syncing channels, done deal. Make sure to hide the snake behind though, if the missus trips on it, I can't guarantee anything anymore.
     
  2. purr1n

    purr1n Desire for betterer is endless.

    Staff Member Pyrate BWC
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2015
    Likes Received:
    89,777
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Padre Island CC TX
    On the AIO aspect, the headphone outs on the source are OK. They are usable in a pinch, but I would rather not if I had something better lying around. It sounds like the signal goes thought yet another set of opamps. (I don't know if this is true or not. This is not my unit so I don't want to take it apart.) Even flatter and more boring. The lack of sub and low bass heft is even more noticeable. Highs are bit harsher. To put things in perspective, at least my head didn't light on fire like with the RME headouts.
     
  3. Psalmanazar

    Psalmanazar Most improved member; A+

    Pyrate Slaytanic Cliff Clavin
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2015
    Likes Received:
    5,345
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What's wrong with op-amps? I believe Dangerous uses a TI chipamp (that's what D-BOX uses http://archive.is/Gdenx) and it sounds fine for headphones. I don't care to open mine or hunt and peck board photos. Headphones are usable in a pinch...
     
  4. purr1n

    purr1n Desire for betterer is endless.

    Staff Member Pyrate BWC
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2015
    Likes Received:
    89,777
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Padre Island CC TX
    Inherent high gain which requires massive feedback and a shit ton of transistors in the signal path. Each opamp is almost like another full amp, but minaturized.

    Maybe ask DS and Chris Muth why they did discrete outputs and probably discrete IV (if applicable to the chip) for the Convert-2.

    Opamps are for measurebator losers like nwavguy and Amir. Played with enough opamps on a breadboard with so many designs to know that they ultimately suck. Opamps tend to work best in high gain apps where so much of the output isn't feed back, like MC phonostages. Even then, they suck. Too many active devices. It's like making a photocopy of a photocopy of a photocopy of a photocopy.

    As far as the TI chipamp, I'm surprised it doesn't sound worse. Sennheiser HDVD800 AIO cough cough.
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2018
  5. Griffon

    Griffon 2nd biggest asshole on SBAF

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2015
    Likes Received:
    1,309
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    Hipster capital of Canada
    HDVD800 should have retailed for max $500 to match its performance.
     
  6. purr1n

    purr1n Desire for betterer is endless.

    Staff Member Pyrate BWC
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2015
    Likes Received:
    89,777
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Padre Island CC TX
    44.1 JTest 16-bit played by ARTA with balanced inputs into AverLAB

    DM Source Eitr | USB-SPDIF-xformer-AES
    DM Source Eitr.png

    DM Source XMOS USB
    DM Source XMOS USB.png

    Gungnir MB A2 Eitr
    Gungnir MB Eitr.png
     
  7. purr1n

    purr1n Desire for betterer is endless.

    Staff Member Pyrate BWC
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2015
    Likes Received:
    89,777
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Padre Island CC TX
    1kHz FFT

    Gungir MB A2 Eitr
    Gungnir MB Eitr 1kHz.png

    DM Source XMOS
    DM Source XMOS 1kHz.png
     
  8. Raicorl

    Raicorl Acquaintance

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2018
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    TH
    How close between gen5 USB Gungnir Multibit and XMOS Source If USBs were considered a bad connection?

    Sorry if those were already mentioned.
     
  9. purr1n

    purr1n Desire for betterer is endless.

    Staff Member Pyrate BWC
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2015
    Likes Received:
    89,777
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Padre Island CC TX
    No idea. I don't have a USB card in my Gungnir. The Gen 5 and Eitr are supposed to be similar. The Eitr uses the Gen 5, but in an external box. I'd guess that the Gen 5 is slightly better than Eitr because it's internal, inside the chassis, the signal paths are shorter, and there is no extra conversion to SPDIF to i2s.

    To put things in further perspective, I sold my $$$ Off-Ramp converter after I installed Gen 5 on my Yggdrasil and I'm not sure I heard much of a difference between Eitr and the Gen 5 card. I didn't use USB for long though since I mostly rely on the CD spinners.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2018
  10. Mr.Sneis

    Mr.Sneis Friend

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2015
    Likes Received:
    1,321
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    I can't defend the position but opamps are in freakin' everything. There's no escaping them in phono stages, CD Players, DACs (pro AND audiophile), HP amps, etc.

    And are you guys saying the Eitr isn't "all that"??
     
  11. purr1n

    purr1n Desire for betterer is endless.

    Staff Member Pyrate BWC
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2015
    Likes Received:
    89,777
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Padre Island CC TX
    No, Eitr isn't all that. I still prefer my CD transports.

    Until someone develops from the ground up a dedicated audio PCM or even DSD USB receiver that can tightly couple with a good clock... Hmmm.
     
  12. purr1n

    purr1n Desire for betterer is endless.

    Staff Member Pyrate BWC
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2015
    Likes Received:
    89,777
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Padre Island CC TX
    And unfortunately in modern sound houses, in mixing consoles, etc. They don't make them like they used to. A lot of the gear I see in machine rooms of these sound houses isn't too shabby though. There are good / decent quality AD DA, effects, compressor, limiter boxes that I am pretty sure still use discrete circuits; often older and from lesser known boutique brands. The scariest most iffy stuff in terms of analog outs are those Digidesign boxes. Those are full of opamps.

    Very few places run the $$$ stuff like the high end Forssell, Crane Song, Dangerous Music gear. It's too expensive if you have several sound bays or mixing stages. I might have seen a Forssell once since they have been out for so long.

    ProTools / Digidesign singlehandedly destroyed fidelity in audio production. I'm sure one day, Avid will make a box for automatic color tinting, e.g. Michael Bay mode, Tarantino mode, Del Toro mode, etc.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2018
  13. alubis

    alubis Acquaintance

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2016
    Likes Received:
    90
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Jakarta Indonesia
    I bought this dac used about 3 weeks ago and quite impressed with it. I don't like Dangerous Music Source with the stock smps, hence I always use it with HDPLEX lps (bought several years ago when I tried to fix my USB transport).

    Transport: Focusrite Rednet d16 (always with AES output)
    Music: John Coltrane - Both Directions At Once: The Lost Album; Miles Davis & John Coltrane - The Final Tour: The Bootleg Series, Vol 6 and some tracks from blue note/impulse jazz albums.

    First setup: Eddie Current Black Widow with HD800

    DMS sounds more dynamic and punchy compare to Yggdrasil A2. Yggdrasil A2 sounds slightly brighter and softer compare to DMS in this setup. Softer in the sense that instruments have sharper edges with DMS. Both are enjoyable in this setup, but my preference sligthly leans toward DMS.

    Second setup which is currently my main setup: Freya and ATC SCM19A

    I tried to compare Yggdrasil A2>Freya (Passive/JFET)>ATC vs. DMS>ATC, however Yggdrasil A2>Freya sounds mushy in this setup compare to DMS, so I took the Freya out and use DMS as preamp instead. I much prefer DMS preamp to Freya with ATC, and the Yggdrasil A2 sounds much better with DMS as preamp rather than Freya in this setup (It might be impedance mismatch. ATC SCM19A input impedance is 10kohms which is usual for active speaker).

    Soundwise, I thought DMS and ATC combo would be too much of a good thing, but somehow it really works well. Very punchy, clear, and dynamic, but sounds more forward compare to Yggdrasil A2. Strangely, I don't find Yggdrasil A2 brighter here, but cymbals, snares, kick drums, and bass sounds better defined with DMS. John Coltrane's sax and Miles' trumpet sounds similar in both, but piano sounds better with Yggdrasil A2. I think Yggdrasil A2 midrange is better compare to DMS.
    Overall, DMS is more enjoyable in this setup and I like how simple this setup can be: DMS + ATC SCM19A.

    In conclusion, I think DMS is a good value DAC and preamp. It definetely is not a warm dac and sounds forward even compare to Yggdrasil A2 which can be fatiguing for some.

    [​IMG]
     
  14. Rthomas

    Rthomas Friend

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2015
    Likes Received:
    966
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Hi Guys,

    I've bought a Source to try out. Any problem with connecting the Source's balanced outputs to the XLR inputs of the Massdrop 789 amp? I use medium gain usually for the HD800.

    Will the high output voltage from the Source damage my THX 789 in any way?
     
  15. Armaegis

    Armaegis Friend

    Pyrate BWC
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2015
    Likes Received:
    7,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Winnipeg
    Bringing down the source level so you have useable range on the amp's pot is probably the best way to do things...
     
  16. damaged-goods

    damaged-goods Acquaintance

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2017
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Europe
    "Source" is in the house. As AIO unit from PC sounds good fun, slams hard, and a lot.
    Doesn't leave much on the table for Fulla 2 and RME ADI 2 DAC.
    XLR and AES cables are still in the post, looking forward to test it on the big setup and I'll post impressions when I got used to it.
     
  17. damaged-goods

    damaged-goods Acquaintance

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2017
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Europe
    I've been running the RME ADI 2 DAC for a few months and the Dangerous Source for a few weeks and as I learned a lot about audio equipment from SBAF I would like to add some impressions of these DACs.

    My audio chain is:
    Raspberry pi with 502 DAC via coax/AESEBU > DAC (balanced) > Phonitor e > HD650/600

    I'm using a Sbooster 12V PSU for both DACs, which results in an important improvement for the DMS and a slight one for the RME. I'm not using any power filters etc.

    RME is used balanced Ref Lev +7 plus some attentuation via the digital volume control (-4 to -12 db) to reduce listening fatigue a bit. I find the RME generally a bit fatiguing. Filter is mainly "sharp" (linear phase sharp rolloff).

    DMS is used balanced via the "Speaker 1" outputs as I use the volume control (ca 11 o'clock) to attentuate the output volume. Compared to the direct heaphone output I don't notice any additional colouration via the speaker output.

    I also have a Holo Audio Cyan and these three DACs are the most high end units I listened too.

    Review comments:

    Some comments here are exaggerated, sometimes differences are much smaller than the written text might suggest.

    With the stock PSU the DMS main attribute is it's ability to slam the music into the listeners face. It has a pretty closed in soundstage that is flat and somehow off in the phantom center. All this is solved by the Sbooster which makes the sound smoother by adding low level information (or lowering the noise floor) and results in an excellent soundstage with excellent intrument placement. It's not a huge holographic soundstage but it's mid sized with realistic depth. I like this a lot, it worked with all recordings I listened to and fits my imagination better than most other DACs I've had.

    My subjective impression of the DMS is that it sounds just right. If there's something like "studio neutral" I'd expect it sound like this. The RME is a slighty bit darker and warmer and more polite sounding apart from the steely timbre.
    The RME punches deeper in the bass, the DMS kicks harder. The difference between these two isn't massive in this regard and I wouldn't call the RME wimp DAC in my setup.
    Transient attack of the RME has lots of energy, it has lots of macrodetail and is a bit sibilant and has a steely timbre. It's extremely detailed. It has a very black background and instruments hoover within this black background. It's very clean sounding and more thin than I like. The minimum phase filters are worse in regard of fatigue. Using the digital attentuation helps a bit albeit at the cost of some low level info.
    Moving from the RME to the DMS I get the impression that this DAC has slightly soft transients and it a hair rounded. This is very very slight actually and after a day or two without using the RME it sound right. The Holo Cyan is closer to the DMS in this regard.
    The DMS has more mikrodetails and is more revealing than the RME. It's easier to listen into a mix with the DMS than with the RME. The DMS is very resolving. The DMS offers a more coherent picture of the music whilst the RME is mainly displaying seperate intruments within a black background. The DMS is much more neutral with sibilants and treble in general sounds excellent with this DAC. Macrodetails don't stand out. The DMS fatigue level is very low, pretty much in line with the Holo Cyan.

    I like the Source a lot, it complements the Holo Cyan nicely which I also like a lot. In the right circumstances the Cyan has a great magic but sometime NOS isn't what I want and the Source is simply better than the Cyan in OS. It's a great allrounder. This does pretty much complete my headphone setup.
     
  18. limesoft

    limesoft Friend

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2016
    Likes Received:
    489
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    London
    I have to agree the Dangerous Source seems to be crippled by it's power supply. I was a little underwhelmed at first - it was a little harsh, with some grey background, closed in and just a little lowfi sounding, but in a strange way like there's potential there and it's fighting to break free from something.

    I don't have a linear supply, only a little ifi DC iPurifier 2 dongle that attaches on end of power supplies to filter crap out - I never thought it did much with my other gear but with the Source it opened it up and decreased that slightly grainy closed in sound, the harshness decreased and it's more enjoyable now. If a little dongle can do this, I though i should try the ifi x power, so I have this on order now and look forward to testing it. As for linear power supplies, I'm feeling a bit stingy not sure if i should spend so much money on the Source.

    I do like the Source's no nonsense directness, it doesn't add any hifi sheen or pretend sweetness, it just rocks out with punchy dynamics and slightly damped highs (which I like). It's headphone out shows potential - it has good reserves and doesn't sound stressed with hard to drive headphones when going loud. I do wish it showed a little more refinement, depth and bloom.

    Anyway for sure I don't think it's quite competitive with it's factory switcher, let's hope I can squeeze more performance out of it just with the ipower x to save me from going down the LPS rabbit hole.
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2021
  19. limesoft

    limesoft Friend

    Pyrate
    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2016
    Likes Received:
    489
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    London
    Apogee Element vs Dangerous Source.

    They sound very very close - the apogee going into the source pre amp for easy switching comparison on iems and speakers (Neumann KH120).

    Comparing the DACs: the Element has bit of beautification going on; a little refinement in the mids making them more liquid and smoother, and seem a touch more extended on both ends with a touch warmer more etheral sub bass. The Source is touch more direct and forward (in the mids), does not apply any beer googles to the the music, it also has slightly less "air" and a touch more mid bass, also sounds more dynamic/punchy/aggressive. Because the Apogee has this sweetness in the mids it might not be as good a production tool as the Source - the source will slap you across the face if something is off, but if it's good you will also feel it immediately. I was a bit taken aback with this comparison as I expected the Element to wipe the floor with the Source, but this was not the case.

    Comparing the head outs: the Element is a little brighter and more extended on both ends - has smooth mids but slightly excitable lower treble. The Source is more tempered in treble, more punchy, but with less sub bass and a touch drier. The Element's head out sounds more hi-res - but over long listening sessions I might be leaning towards the source more as I like that it doesn't get too excitable up top with it's slightly damped treble which works nicely with neutral headphones. HD650 sounds rather good; it's very fast, dynamic- driver control seems to be better than the Element..

    To get the Source sounding very good a better supply is required and a good digital source (I use ifi iusb micro + m2tech hiface 2). The Apogee Element doesn't really need this i find.

    Which one is better for someone will boil down to a matter of preference - a more direct/dynamic approach vs bit of sweetness and refinement. I might lean more towards the Element as I feel it's got a sprinkle of magic and refinement, it's a touch cleaner sounding, but then I also like the direct old school approach of the Source - if a track is produced very well the source will slap you across the face and say listen now this is fantastic, like a talented dominatrix.. the Element will invite you to sit on a nice sofa with a nice drink.

    The way I explained the difference here might sound they are significant but in truth they are very close, we are talking few percent, at least for my ears. Both of these are resolving and proficients tools which communicate audio to a very high standard.. but if one had 1000 usd and just needs the DAC feature you can do better than the Source probably.. For me I have a good use for it's feature set.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2021

Share This Page