Re: AT analog output

Following your suggestion I had a look on ebay for DACs. There is a huge variation in price. What do you lose buying a cheap one? What should you stay away from/look for?
Thanks
Grant
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Andrew Broome 
  To: [email protected] 
  Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 1:31 PM
  Subject: Re: [AT] AT analog output


  If you notice the difference in bass, you need to try
  a DAC (digital-analog converter). If you don't want to
  replace your receiver just yet with one that includes
  an internal dac, get a used external dac on ebay or
  audiogon.

  I use an Audio Alchemy Dac-in-the-Box made in the
  early 90s with one of my ATs, and a MSB Link DAC with
  the other. Major difference compared to the AT analog
  outs, particularly in the bass.  When I first got my
  AT, I was disappointed thinking mp3 encoding was
  responsible for removing the low end. Adding the DITB
  ($50 off ebay 4 years ago) brought my '-preset
  extreme' mp3s close enough to my CD player for me not
  to notice the difference day to day.

  If you do a search , there are arguments as to the
  difference a DAC will make.  Some people notice a big
  difference, some don't. For me, it made a world of
  difference.  If you notice your CD player has much
  better bass, you probably will too.

  -Andrew


  --- Jeff Baskin <[email protected]> wrote:

  > Recently, I plugged my CD player back in and
  > actually played a good old
  > fashioned original CD. I was suprised how good the
  > CD sounded after many
  > months of only playing music through the AT. So, I
  > tried a little
  > experiement comparing the same track ripped
  > differently against the CD
  > played through the CD player. Now keep in mind, my
  > CD player is nothing
  > special. It's a rather old Denon 5 disc changer
  > using analog outs.
  >
  > First, I compared the track ripped at 128 kb/s using
  > MusicMatch against the
  > CD. Well, I don't have to tell you what a joke that
  > was.
  >
  > I then compared again with the same track ripped at
  > 320 kb/s using EAC/LAME
  > preset insane. The difference was noticeable, but
  > the CD still sounded
  > significantly better.
  >
  > Finally I compared the WAV ripped using EAC. I
  > thought that the WAV at least
  > had to be at least close to the CD in quality, but
  > it was barely any better
  > than the 320 CBR mp3.
  >
  > Now, I am using the analog outputs on the AT, so I
  > had to adjust the volume
  > when comparing, but there was also a very big
  > difference in the depth of the
  > sound especially in the base. Even the WAV had much
  > less base than the CD.
  > So, here are my questions: Is the analog output on
  > the AT SO BAD to explain
  > such a difference? Is there any way to improve the
  > quality of the analog
  > outs without opening up the box? Should the quality
  > of a WAV played through
  > the AT digital out be at least as good as a CD
  > played through a decent
  > consumer grade CD player with analog outputs?? I
  > just would like to know
  > what kind of difference I should expect before
  > blowing $$  on a new receiver
  > with optical inputs.
  >
  > Thanks for your input.
  >
  > Jeff
  >



  __________________________________
  Do you Yahoo!?
  Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
  http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250