Bitsream Micromega Overview Stage 2 Philips TDA-1305 SAA7321 SAA7350 TDA1547

Click pics to enlarge. Micromega Stage 2 to left of Yamamoto CA-04L.

Review: Micromega Stage 2
Overview: Micromega, Pinnacle of Bitstream

This article is about Re-Discovering an Old Love, or rather Sibling of one (it happens). Our memories (not just of audio) are both surprisingly reliable and unreliable at the same time.

My Digital Journey really started with the Bitstream era. Simultaneously in Hong Kong I was exposed to all the 14- and 16-bit classics, which immeasurably broadened my horizon. In HK I have owned the majority of the Bitstream Micromega, so this article will start with the Stage 2 player, which will be followed by an Overview of Bitstream and Micromega. My own audio journey is tightly coupled with my digital exploration; if interested, please read my last article.

The Concept Series, to which the Stage series belongs, are all housed in the same box. Here we will deal only with the CDP's. The rest will be treated in the Overview Section.

Recently, I chanced upon a Stage 2 at reasonable price. The owner had re-greased it (this is of vital importance and will be discussed later too in the Overview). Given my fond recollection of my old Stage 1 in HK, I decided to purchase it. It works flawlessly.

For the difference between the Stage players, I translated the included manual, which was only in French (owner had been in Europe).

Stage 1: it is the youngest of the range and yet stage 1 benefits from all the technological achievements of Micromega. It allows itself for a product of this level to be built with the same care as its elders, with the same type of components such as 1% film resistors, polypoprylene or polycarbonate capacitors and the latest models of "Bitstream" circuits, The result is felt from the first minutes of listening with a sound that combines accuracy of timbres and dynamics without forgetting the legendary transparency on which Micromega has built a reputation that many envy him.

Stage 2: thanks to an analog-to-digital conversion using differential time alignment mode, Stage 2 takes a new step in sound reproduction which, while preserving the qualities acquired on the previous model, goes much further in the low register with increased dynamics.

Stage 3: This is the player integrated at the top of the range and Micromega wanted to make it a figurehead.The analog section receives two specific transformers allowing to overcome the problems due to the interaction between the digital and analog sections and to go even further in the search for the primordial micro-information in the perception of the emotions of the performers.

All of these employ the Philips TDA-1305 1-bit chip. The 1 uses just one, The 2 uses two, and the 3 adds more power supply. The TDA-1305 has a very good reputation. Some regard the TDA-1305 as a cheap implementation and it was indeed used in quite a few budget CDP and DAC (like Cambridge). Nonetheless, Micromega's implementation was brilliant and, from transformers (Schaffner) to caps (Wima and Philips), Micromega used good parts. Google Images and you shall see.

I am not going to spend too much time describing the sound. Right off the bat, even from memory it is obvious to me it trumps the Stage 1 in every parameter. Surely 20+ years on I must have gained a little setup skill yet this simple system is not that different from what I used then. I mentioned in my detailed Review of Yamamoto CA-04 that a good bit of the excellent sound in CD replay should be credited to the Stage 2. I also did briefly compared the Micromega to the Sparkler S303 CDP (NOS). I also used the digital out of the Stage 2 with the Micromega MyDac (AD1835 chip) and Sparkler S306 NOS DAC. In the case of MyDac, there is little question I prefer the 1-bit Stage 2. In the case of Sparkler, the Stage 2 also proves to be as good in PRaT (!) and is simply sweeter in the treble. It is the highest accolade for me to say the Stage 2 is as good as the Sparklers! Or: I am in love with the Stage 2.

I also tested briefly the headphone output. As soon as headphone is inserted, the display above changes. As you see from the pic, a "4" replaces the "2". No, it has not become a Stage 4, as that is now the volume indication. Sound? Surprisingly excellent! Crisp and involving.

Overview: Bitstream

As chronicled in my last article, bitstream, particularly at the cheap end, can be thoroughly uninviting. This is unlike the 16-bit era, where the cheap TDA-1543 NOS players sound thoroughly enticing to some of us now (they were completely ignored by the audio press). For those who want some history of DAC chips, see DutchAudioClassics (rather incomplete).

Even with mid-priced and high-end bitstream, truly outstanding products are few. Usually, bitstream is quite smooth, and some would call it musical. But usually, the last bit of detail is not there, and hall sound and bass definition is not as good as multi-bit designs. Also, few truly distinguish themselves in PRaT. Here are some famous and not so famous ones.

Philips The most beloved of their bitstream is probably the well-built 850 Mk II (SAA7350; and Mk I and 840 [SAA7321]). Many units are still working. I find it reasonably musical but lacking in some detail; many others find the same, and employ it as Transport (in this role it is above average, but still not the best). Its successor, the less solidly built 950 (SAA7350; and its cheaper siblings 930 [7350] and 920 [7341]) can be written off. Better sound can be found in the higher priced and better built statement LHH series. I have heard the LHH-200R, but it is definitely nothing special compared to the LHH-300R that I owned (very sweet and solid sound). I have not heard the even more expensive ones in the series. Earlier ones used the SAA7321; later ones, usually with an "R", used the famed TDA-1547.


Marantz The first Marantz that I heard was the excellent CD72 Mk II (TDA-1547; Mk I SAA7350). It was ubiquitous and always made a musical sound, preferable to Philips I thought. I still own the predecessor, CD62 (SAA7350) which is excellent. Later I owned and heard many of the wildly popular CD63 (including Mk II, SE and KI; SM5872) but they are not as good as the better built 62/72. I have heard the more upmarket CD10 and CD16 (TDA1547) many times but somehow they never impressed me. Neither did the CD17 (TDA1547) which I briefly owned. My thinking is the CDM12 machines, like the CD63 and CD17, have a lighter sound.

Studer The D730 (TDA-1547) is excellent and highly desirable, but I prefer the A730 (16-bit).

DPA (Deltec) Now, this gets interesting. I owned the 2-box DPM 1.3 (TDA1547). Designer was Robert Watts, now of Chord fame. There was a lot of then-cutting edge design, including re-clocking. 4 toslink connect the 2 units. If not for Micromega, this would get honorable mention. It was quite detailed and musical enough but, ultimately, a little too literal (as is always the case with Chord). I have also heard the lower-end Little Bit (SAA7350), which was quite nice and sweet!

Meridian 203 This used the SAA7321. Musical but kind of veiled and lacking in detail.

Pioneer I owned briefly the PD-T05, pretty good but not as good as the T-07 (SAA7350), which however is still lacking in ultimate resolution or excitement. The Stable Platter is a classic though and many use them as transports.

Metronome This is another French company that specializes in digitals. Mine was an early 1-bit unit, the model name of which I have forgotten about. Its resolution was not the greatest but unusually it excelled in dynamics, which made classical music replay superb. BTW, this company is OEM for the digital products of Jadis.

Audio Alchemy DDE 1.0 (SAA7323) This budget bitstream DAC was a bestseller and fairly good, but I prefer its non-bitstream sibling DITB (AD1853). Audiolab 8000 DAC (TDA1547) Pretty good but not very dynamic. Cambridge Audio Dacmagic (TDA1305) A bargain but it is a little coarse and lacks the last degree of slam and heft. Museatex Bidat (TDA1547) and Melior (7350) I heard many times in second-hand shops. Musical but still lacking. Naim I owned briefly the CD3.5 (TDA1305). Quite good, but it was bested by the 16-bit CD3, not to mention the CDI and, my favorite, the CD2. Proton AC-422 (Dual 1-bit) I bought at Harvey's clearance for $100. Smooth and detailed but lacking in slam and rhythmic finesse.

There are many others that I have heard but forgotten about. Just as well.

Overview: Micromega

Although not founded by him, Micromega is basically Daniel Schar. For some interesting French audio lore, read the first few paragraphs of this article. First, the products that Micromega OEM'ed:

Leedh When I first got to HK, I actually saw the leedh CD players many times in second-hand shops, commanding princely sums. They look exactly like the higher end Micromega then, except they have gold instead of black facades. Haven't come across them in a long time, anywhere.

Goldmund Only the original Goldmund CDP was a re-branded Micromega. Later ones range from modified Japanese multiplayer to designs that look like Metronome.

Revox Micromega made at least all the electronics in the Elegance Series. Note the familiarity to the later Micromega Minium series. I once owned the S22/S25, and they sound no different from the Minium.

Now, the Micromega brand:

Digital Although Micromega make full systems, they make digitals best. There is no if's, and's or but's, Micromega Bitsream products represent the Pinnacle of Bitstream! They are even better than their later designs, which are no slouch.

CD F1 and 16-bit Era These all use the classic TDA-1541. The CD F1 series, integral players and transport, are rarely seen now, and coveted. The original bread loaf Duo DAC is 16-bit and I never managed to get one in HK somehow. I also had a Micromega badged Modifed Philips CDP but I forgot the name - it could be the Optic, but I think it is even earlier.

Modified Philips Bitsream CD Players The Leader and Logic (SAA7321). This happened very early on, as lower-end offerings. I have not heard them.

Solo, Duo, Trio These represent Micromega at their best. They span the time of the classic Philips swing arm mechanisms, from CDM1 to CDM3 to CDM9/9 Pro. They are all top-loading players with a puck that is attached to a CD sized disc (there is knot pattern that looks somewhat like kevlar, surely for damping). The Solo is obviously a one box player. Earlier ones have a slanted front (I still have one). The sound is musical. The Duo obviously comprise a Transport and a DAC. There are several iterations. The Transport is named Duo CD, with later 2.1 and 3.1 (the original has either CDM3 or CDM9 Pro; the 2.1 CDM9 Pro; the cheaper 3.1 CDM9). The cheaper Duo DAC is a slim bread loaf (The BS and BS2, using SAA7321; I still own the latter) This sweet DAC is probably no better than the one in the Solo and can be improved (like others) by adding a anti-jitter device. But the Duo Pro DAC is another story. It is designed to be placed underneath the Transport (which has spike feet). I still have the Duo CD 3.1/Duo Pro combo. The sound is a big step up from Solo. Much higher resolution and dynamics. It also has balanced out. The Trio adds one more box of re-clocking/anti-jitter, and the sound is for sure the best Micromega has ever produced (still SAA7321). It has the most amazing dynamics, fantastic for classical replay. I used to have one but unwisely sold it to conserve space. Tip: 1) be careful with the heavy acrylic top lid, which can come banging down if improperly handled; 2) as with any top loaded machine, the disc initiates after the the lid comes down. Disable the mechanism and operate manually with the lid open; this will improve the airiness; removing the cover or box of an ordinary CDP will achieve the same result)

The Concept Series After Philips moved to CDM12, Micromega launched the Concept Series.  all are housed in the same black box with blue display and red buttons (this is French red and blue, quite beautiful to my eyes; unfortunately our own red and blue are much more problematic). The first CDPs were the Stage 1, 2 and 3 (treated in the first part of this article in detail). The lasers often developed problems. Although there were other theories, I think it is fair to say we now know it is due to grease drying up. A proper cleaning and re-grease (with something like lithium grease) usually solves the problem. This problem was Philip's problem, and in this era many other CD players also suffer from the malaise. No matter, the problem basically capsized Micromega and it never recovered its scale before the plague. The problems were probably what led Golden String, then distributor, to dump them in big sales. I bought a Stage 1 and had to exchange a couple of times. One time I put in a disc, and the drawer suddenly opened and the disc came flying out with a spin (much like 007 Goldfinger, remember that hat?) It was the first time I heard the CDM12, and I was entranced by its openess. Mind you later I acquired my second-hand samples of Solo, Duo, Trio and I still held the Stage in esteem, which was why recently I bought the Stage 2. There is something unforgettable about it. My friend Hoi auditioned all three and bought the 2, saying the 3 was too hifi for him, but should a good and reasonably priced sample of the 3 (or 6) comes my way I shall grab it to complete my assessment. Stage 4, 5, 6 When the European Union made a rule that all machines must have an on-off switch, Micromega revised the Stage series (if you google pics the circuit boards are somewhat different from the corresponding 1, 2, 3) but the sound (and the problems) remain the same. Drive 1, 2 and DAC 1, 2 These separates are similar in design to the integrated players. I bought the Drive 1 and DAC 1 and the sound was certainly a cut above the Stage 1 alone, difference likely due to separate power supplies. The Concept Series was a Full System, and are here some of the other products. Tempo 1, 2 These are amplifiers. I owned the Tempo 1, which runs fairly warm. It is very sweet sounding but not quite powerful enough for loudspeakers like LS3/5A, but if you paired it with a more efficient loudspeaker like Audio Note UK AN-K, the sound is astonishingly good (I found out when I sold that as a set to a friend). There was also a tuner, but it was not cheap and I never got to hear it.

T Series Slightly earlier but overlapping with the Concept series was the T Series. T-Drive 1, 2 and T-DAC These are half-size components with are slightly more upmarket than the Stage series, with balanced input and outputs. I have never owned them but have borrowed them. Sound is similar to the Stage series.

Micro Series This mini-sized series predated the Concept series. It is also a full system (no tuner I think). I own a full set. Microdrive This small top-loader used the CDM9 and a small puck. Sound is excellent but as with many Philips servo of that era, some of the strokes of the display can go missing. Microdac This is a beautiful machine, the only one in the series with an acrylic top. Sound (SAA7321) is so sweet! I had two and sold one to my friend whlee. Our Toronto friend Joe (remember Quad system?) swears by it too! Variodac This is a DAC with Preamp function and extra inputs built in. Microamp This is the craziest one. It has the same size, but runs really hot, so there are two long and jarring heat sinks attached to the back. Stacking on it is not recommended. Sound? Surprisingly excellent and, unlike Tempo 1, it can drive LS3/5A to acceptable level! Considering this is before the time of space saving SM power supply, a super accomplished Mini Series!

Minium Series This is precursor series to their current products, after the debacle of the CDM12. The style harks right back to the Revox S Series. I have only heard the CDP, musical enough (the rarer TDA-1549). The sound is likely similar to the current products.

Aria and Classic Solo Much later Micromega made some half-hearted effort to revive the classic looks. The Aria was visually striking but expensive, but for the price CDM12 and AD1853 did not seem attractive. The Classic Solo was also a curious product. It looks very much like a Solo, but also uses the CDM12, though with the TDA 1547 chip, but its price, again was on the expensive side.

The Current Products For this I refer you to their webpage. The lineup hasn't changed in a LONG time. I have used the CD-10 and IA-60 (here) and they are quite decent and under-rated. Undoubtedly, the most striking direction of Micromega is the M series products, which take after Devialet (I wonder if they are OEM), but are significantly cheaper. I'd not mind a chance to hear the M-one in my system (I doubt I'll get it).

My Series I have to single out this series from the current lineup, as they offer compact form and great sound. In NYC I have the MyDAC, MyZic and MyGroov; in HK, the MyAmp. I have covered all of them in this blog. Incredible values!

I am sure I have forgotten something but, there, finally an Overview of one of my favorite companies.

Digital Transport DAC Convertors I2S Simple is Best

Boy, that little socket can give you headaches! Pic shows the butt of the Sparkler 512.
 
HiFi Basics X: Know Your Source(s) Brief Digital Front-End Buying Guide, Part II

Amended 4/6/20: I have incorporated into the text our writer mrgoodsound's advice

Part I (Recommended Reading if you haven't read it before)

Regular readers will recognize our spirited Russian friend who, after acquiring a Sparkler DAC, has again posted some questions (translated) in Part I (link above).  I re-read my article and there is not a word that I'd change. In fact I think it is one of my better articles, on a favorite topic. So I shall take this opportunity to write a bit more on the subject. First, his comments and questions. You can skip it if you want, as I will make a summary in my answer.

Q. What do you think ? there is a secret to good transport ... if so, what is the reason for this ? ... a successful model will sound equally good in different systems ? or each combination is individual . I sold the player and already ordered 512 Sparkler DAC ... Which way is better to dig ? - I don't have (cheap DVD player I don't count) transport ... The manufacturer says the I2s output is 20% better than the coaxial one . I wanted to get away from the mechanical rotation of the CD and related errors , and buy a SD card transport ( http://www.tachyon.co.jp/~sichoya/SDTrans/SDTrans6.html ) ... to take the risk ? - I read (I didn't hear it myself - and this is the main thing in this hobby) that this is probably the best source . Buying mechanical devices on the secondary market is probably stupid - they are sold because they are worn out, and the new ones are insanely overpriced . Let me remind you that my ambitions are high ... I want to make smart moves-to get a great sound for a modest amount of money ... Yes, good food is important , but the skill of the cook is more important )))

It so happens that I have not used a separate СD transport before ... and I forgot a lot of audio theory... I had to update the information. My preliminary conclusions are as follows: several processes are running Simultaneously - reading data from the disk , correcting errors , correct timing (clocking - the source and receiver must keep pace) , the entire electrical circuit along which the signal goes must be clean of interference. Digital signal is not zeros and ones - it is a special analog signal ! ... if the DAC receiver does not recognize the ripple of electricity perfectly, it will confuse zero and one and get a bad sound. From this it follows that cheap Blu-ray or DVD players-with such a task will not cope! (((you are a practitioner and Sony 190 you like , but common sense is against-light weight is vibration; cheap drive - poor reading ; long signal path and an abundance of other functions (video or multi - channel) - this is a parasitic electrical voltage ... in addition, there are often switching power supplies. For the same reason, old devices from the secondary market or after repair are not suitable - it is enough to shift one of the components and there will be no sound ... it is as if a car suddenly has one (or several) wheels that will spin slower/faster than the others - it will not be possible to drive smoothly ... You wrote a coaxial Belden-a favorite cable , but it is not sold ready - made, and independent soldering is a lottery ... and all this is half the trouble - the second is how the record was created (if there was processing or retouching - you can forget about the quality)... Yes, I'm from Russia (remember the Nirvana audio system?)... But it was a good time - no digital music !

A. Something is always lost, or re-invented, in translation, but I think this is what our friend is saying: "I have just sold my CD player and acquired a Sparkler DAC with I2S input. I don't yet have a good transport and am thinking about the SD card transport. I'd like to avoid buying used mechanical transports. What is the secret of transport anyway? I believe in science and numbers." My views will be in several parts.

DAC The DAC is the heart of digital playback, and is the most important. NOS While there are good DAC's of various types and technologies, for me the minimalist Non-Oversampling (NOS), when well executed, has something special. This is true for my Sparkler S306 (read how it bettered a Weiss DAC; I still remember that day very well), and I am sure it will be the same for our friend's newer 512. Good choice. Anecdote: My friend Victor, of vkmusic (Elekit and Sparkler North American distributor), a participant in many audio shows, including RMAF and Capital Audio Fest, told me that the sound of his room always get praised by many dealers of smaller "artisanal" (but not inexpensive) brands, and you can verify that in TAS and Stereophile reports; also, I won't mention names, one dealer actually uses for his own enjoyment an all-Sparkler system. So much for Sparkler. Now, not all NOS are the same! My Sparkler S306 I am pretty sure is better than Audio Note UK (I have owned 2 lower-level ones long ago and have heard often their relatively recent high-level ones before I left HK). A friend in HK also ditched his Metrum after he got his Sparkler. And I never heard the qualities that Sparkler displays in my good friend jules' 4-box TotalDAC. I mentioned this to our Toronto correspondent, mrgoodsound, who is a young tech guy who has gone through the whole computer audio thing and, like me, is now a fan of 16-bit vintage CD players.He thinks discrete R2R DACs are generally a "travesty". He mentioned the problems of terrible linearity and temporal temperature drift, and the much higher quality of earlier chips. Perhaps that explains it. Incidentally, he has also tried and sold his Border Patrol NOS DAC. I also think the chip is important. Personally I love the 16-bit TDA-1541 and 1543 chips (the latter used in Sparkler).

CD Player In my next article, you shall read about the renewed Klipsch Heresy system in my living room. The CD player is a very cheap vintage Magnavox player that I acquired only last year. It uses the TDA-1543, without oversampling. I am hearing the same things that I hear in my Sparkler. In the near future, mrgoodsound shall also write about a fabled vintage player that he had recently acquired. This is to tell you how much a role the CD player can still play in our lives (and many classic models are very good when used as transports too). But I understand there are very real risks in acquiring vintage CD players, so I understand our Russian friend's reluctance. For the common folk, if you ever come across a vintage CDP (not on the net), think about trying it out.

Transport Now we come to the heart of our friend's question. Why one transport sounds better than another is complicated question. As mentioned in Part I, the difference can be astonishing. We can perhaps get some insight from the case of Theta. The very early and mammoth Theta Data (which I still own) is basically internally identical to the Pioneer LD player it was based on (which I have heard in other HK audiophiles' homes) but I can tell you the Theta sounds better. Later, Theta made the Data Basic (which I also still own), which is internally very similar to the PS Audio Lambda but in this case there were visible differences in placement of the drawer, power supply and caps. Read this Stereophile review and draw conclusions for yourself. Since I used to own a Lambda, I can tell you that the Theta is the better transport. But power supply and good parts do not make the whole story, as my own experience mentioned at the start of Part I attests. The most important part of design is listening. Many DIY people have all the skills and spare no expense, yet get terrible sound because they lack listening skills, not something easy to remedy. Laser Head Obviously, this is an important part of the equation, but it is not the whole story either.The Theta and Lambda I mentioned were high end designs that used the excellent and expensive Philips CDM-9 Pro. On the other hand, why then do the 47 Labs and Sparkler CDPs sound so good when they use low-end lasers (used in mini systems and portables)? Talking about that, I have never used the co-axial out of my Sparkler S303, and if I ever get the time I'd pitch it against Theta - that should be highly interesting. Built The Theta and Lambda were pretty well built for the price, but not to the crazy extent of the highest end, like the top Metronome, which I have heard many times. Take my Sparkler S303, although it looks very nice to me, it is very light (the small separate PSU is sturdier) but it sure sounds good and I'd not trade it for the Metronome. Again here, weight and sturdiness is not the whole story. In analog, witness the more expensive Rega's, which weigh very little and from reports sound better than many a heavier turntable. Similarly, the crazy overbuilt Clearaudio Statement turntable, I have heard three of them - while it is good in slam it is seriously deficient in other parameters, like PRaT. DVD and Blue Ray Players as Transport? I always encourage people to use their old DVD and Blue Ray players, even cheap ones, as transport. With the solidly built units, good sound is a given, and I have heard many systems in HK using these as transports. The DVD and BR players have much more powerful computing abilities than a CD player and getting the digital out is a piece of cake. And these players last a long time used as transport. The true wonder of this is that some cheap players still do an excellent job. Witness the famous (even legendary) el-cheapo Sony DVD player, DVP-PR50P (here). In HK, everybody back then had one, and everybody was amazed by how good it is as a player and as transport. A decade later, many are still using it. In the case of BR players, in 2012 I bought my first one, the very cheap Sony BDP-S190, which I used as a transport in my main system till I returned to the US in 2018. In the link above for Sparkler you have read that it sounded better than the Weiss DAC to me. It was my Best Buy of 2012 (here). I am big fan of Sony, always solid engineering. I only have experience with Sony but I suspect even lesser brand cheap DVD and BR players will still do a decent job as transport for CD. It would be wise for our friend to try it out for himself despite his skepticism. SD Card Transport Yes, I know about this. One of my yumcha friends, a DIYer, swears by it . And yes, I have previously read about the SDtrans384. But I have no personal experience, nor even an iota of desire to do things this way. Computer Music can be crazy enough when carried out to ridiculous extremes, and this may be one of them. Transferring music to the SD card is a hassle, but the lack of a good user interface is even more undesirable. Even if the SD transport has a small display it will never be as good as the one on the computer. Think if this is convenient or important to you before thinking of using one. The question is, let's say it sounds good, but will you find it a hassle to use? It would be a more of a hassle to someone with a large music collection than someone with little music. In any case, files are getting less popular and streaming has taken over.

Digital Outputs In Part I I have treated the basics of this. In general, convenience is important to me, which was why I ordered my Sparkler CDP and DAC with coaxial inputs even if the I2S option was available, as I didn't want another can of worms. In any case, some of the differences between different inputs can be due to the difference in cables used - hard to be sure. I2S/IIS Yes, many people say this is the best, but within consumer electronic this is not the most practical. I don't have experience with I2S, but I do have some experience with Firewire, which many people regard as better than S/PDIF and some even prefer to I2S. I liked my Firewire experience with my cheap M-Audio used on the desktop (here), but I disliked a friend's very expensive computer music setup that employed a very expensive Weiss (a brand I dislike) USB to Firewire convertor (here). Back to I2S, our friend now has to find a way to connect the I2S of his DAC to the computer. Of course, he can buy the Sparkler transport with I2S output, but besides more money he doesn't seem to like mechanical devices. Personally I'd not go the SD card transport route, a hassle and not particularly cheap. Instead, read the next section.

USB Digital Audio Interface Convertors Let me start with USB to S/PDIF convertors. I didn't write about this, but now I am telling the story. My friend Paul uses a vintage ARC DAC-2 (bought from me) for his CDs and used to have a Taiwanese USB DAC (of good repute in many forums) for computer music. One day I took over my cheap Musical Fidleity V-Link II (USB to S/PDIF convertor) and hooked it up to his computer and ARC and it completely killed the USB DAC. This showed that conversion was successful. There is little reason why conversion should not be successful. These are basically computer related components, which can be dirt cheap if one can DIY (the boards cost very little). Hifi manufacturers just give it case, making it a finished product. Should someone gives me a DAC with I2S input only, I would buy a USB to I2S Convertor, and a cheap one only. Having gotten curious, I did some research, and this is what I'd buy: SMSL X-USB II. No body has reviewed it but, as I said it is just computer stuff. It is around $60 (Ebay, Amazon. The other reason is I have faith in SMSL: they have hifi roots and I am satisfied with their cheap and cheerful T-amp, SA-36A Pro (here), which does have a good reputation in T-amp circles. But there are even cheaper convertors out there, some even with a built in DAC. Also, Sparkler makes these convertors also, but I don't know how much they cost. There.

Simple is Best for me, but for you? Why does NOS sound good? Why does Sparkler sound good? Because they are simple. I chose the simple route, just connecting my BD player digital out to the co-axial input and it had served me superbly for 6 years. Our friend wants the "best", chose a different route, the supposedly better I2S, but now would have to face the problem of how to interface, and to me more steps mean less. To each his own. This is a dichotomy not infrequently seen in audiophiles. No matter whether we think we are sane or not, we often wade into unknown waters. This is true for all of us, myself included.

Audio Science This is murky water at best. Given our friend's penchant for science, I am actually a little surprised he chose a NOS DAC, which surely would measure terribly. But then he wants what he thinks is the best in transport, which is why he is interested in the SD Card Transport (which measures well). This illustrates the dichotomy mentioned above. We all struggle with our conflicting inclinations, but sometimes that produces unexpected results. I hope so. Who knows? We always have hope, and that is good.

To our friend: I am just thinking aloud, and have also waded into unknown waters myself. One thing I am confident about, though. The Sparkler shall not disappoint, no matter how you connect to it. Since you still have CDs, as mentioned above, I'd still urge you to try out an old DVD player as transport, if you have one, no matter how cheap it is. The problem is, you need S/PDIF to I2S conversion. There are very cheap boards that will do this but you need to DIY. It seems there may not be ready made products (except Sparkler I think). With this move, you are committed to Computer Music and would otherwise have to rip your CDs into files. That is a lot of work for you. I wish you the best. When you get it to play, please post a comment somewhere here. We here would love to hear from you. Finally, keep safe during these tough times.

Our writer mrgoodsound comments:
The second paragraph of the reader's email also has truths. I have enough to say on these topics to fill a small novel.

I will say that I came dangerously close to purchasing the Sparkler CDP several times, I was emailing back and forth with VKmusic. In the end my experience with the Border Patrol DAC made me go a different way, although I am fairly confident the Sparkler will outperform it because of its active I/V stage. Congratulations to the reader on his order, although I am concerned that the DAC is i2s input only, I am not sure why a S/PDIF receiver couldn't be included in one box, like the 'notebook' CD player they offer.

The SD card transport looks ergonomically challenging. If the reader is convinced he needs pure I2S transport, please consider a RasPi solution such as the Pi2AES. You will want to order it with the buffered I2S output for use with the Sparkler and it's unbalanced 4-pin input.