I didn’t believe in cables, but I do now! In general, I wouldn’t place them above upgrades to the core system, but they do (or can) make a difference.
Most decent manufacturers will offer a trial of some description through their dealers.
2 Likes
True but @Bfjones01 seems to be buying used so will presumably not have the opportunity to have a demonstration. In any case there is no point unless there is a home trial as the characteristics of a given cable in one context do not necessarily replicate themselves in another.
Yes cables make a difference but whether that difference is of importance or even desirable will vary from person to person and system to system. I therefore make no recommendation as it is a suck it and see situation.
3 Likes
Fair points - I agree, buying second-hand generally doesn’t provide this opportunity and, even with the same equipment you have at home, listening to a demonstration of a cable over a short period of time probably isn’t decisive.
On the other hand, I wanted my reply to be applicable not only to the original poster but to others considering this route.
1 Like
Well, I was actually thinking about a couple routes re: cables and questioning my decision to buy used.
First was to try a test-at-home program I saw from The Cable Co where they let you try models at home and you pay a 5% deposit, payable toward your ultimate choice
Second was noticing that Transparent (where I did hear a noticeable improvement once before) has a trade-up program that always values your cables at 70% of their original retail price. That makes the price comparable to the used market, at the expense of locking you into the brand.
3 Likes
I disagree with this logic in general, though it may be true, by design, for dCS products. Note the MSB Select, a $100k DAC, and actually none of the 3 MSB high end DACs even offer a separate clock.
My Puccini clock was an empty box with a tiny (tiny!) circuit board. I paid for (beautifully) milled metal, and then for the requisite cabling.
There is no architectural reason why a great clock can’t be put inside the box. Though, if your architectural/business choice is to sell more boxes, and this results in, for example, separating the Upsampler from the DAC, then it does make sense to have an external clock to coordinate the boxes.
MSB chooses instead to isolate the power supply, and keep the DAC and clock together, which to me is totally sensible.
Note1: No dCS products are offered with separate power supply. I find this interesting.
Note2: At this time I own a dCS Rossini, sans clock, and own no MSB products. I’m just posting for interesting discussion and feedback.
Cheers,
R
1 Like
Actually, there is, from electrical noise to temperature variations to reliance upon a shared power supply.
MSB also uses an oven to control the temperature of the clock, where dCS prefers to use a microcontroller to adjust the clock as the temperature changes.
Regardless, this means MSB and dCS have different approaches to clocking, and MSB’s approach does mean that their prices always include the price of the clock, increasing the pain point of entry.
dCS products are based upon studio origin. Although dCS left this professional market some years ago the architecture for the flagship and for compatibility with legacy units and with current units is based on this.
The first domestic system ( Elgar and Purcell) was basically studio products put in nice cabinets for home consumption. In studios many digital components are used together depending upon the production needs. However it is necessary for them to be synchronised and that is the primary purpose of a wordclock.
As the then home system was technically very similar to the professional products it had the pro architecture. However originally there was no wordclock made for this home system. Of course the individual pair of boxes ( DAC and D/D converter) ran well on their inbuilt clocks. If you had the pair synchronisation occurred by slaving the D/D converter to the DAC for clock purposes.
Later dCS added their first source unit, the Verdi transport. The wordclock output arrangement of the DAC did not allow a second unit to be slaved to it and a wordclock unit had then became necessary and this was introduced; the Verona.
So a separate wordclock is necessary in the flagship system for synchronisation of the multiple units. Provision for inputting a wordclock is also available on the other ranges so that there is flexibility and compatibility enabling a degree of synchronised mix and match between the ranges. This would not be possible if there were no clock source that could feed the units simultaneously.
If a dCS DAC is considered on its own then the primary need for an external wordclock in a multi unit system is obscured as the wordclock can only be thought of in its second capacity to provide a more accurate and stable timing source. Incidentally the clock in the component is not bypassed by the external clock . It is more a case of the internal clock being referenced to the external one.
Yes you could imagine separate power supplies for each component. So a four box Vivaldi system becomes an eight box system. However the practically of this, let alone cost, would not make it feasible for most users. You have to stop somewhere.
2 Likes
In this hobby? 
Quite!! I just saw the announcement of the new top of range Ansuz cables. How about a 3 m ( I assume stereo pair) of loudspeaker cables. How does $108,000 grab you?. You’ll need interconnects at a bargain $51,000 for 2m though. Power it through the mains cable. $68,000 for 3m.
1 Like
2.5x of my MSB DAC. 3x of my dCS stack. Just SMH.
108K ? Oh so you only want ONE channel sir?
:-)))))
A.
1 Like
Hi Ben, Brett here 
Regarding the APEX vs Clock upgrade - as others mention you should try to do a demo yourself, if possible at this point. When I compared APEX vs Clock upgrade it was right after APEX came out, so my dealer still had both a non-APEX and APEX Rossini for comparison. So I compared APEX vs non-APEX and then clock vs no clock. The upshot for me was the APEX was a big improvement over the Rossini’s already excellent sound. The clock added refinement, but not nearly as big of a change as APEX. However, everyone’s overall system, and ears, are different and I agree that you really need to evaluate for yourself to the extent possible.
I would suggest that you consider sorting out your cabling questions first. My experience is that there was a very large difference in going from the Transparent Wave and Plus level up to Ultra, and you can either take the Transparent upgrade offer or find Gen5 used for considerably less than new. And certainly there are other cable brands to explore if you have a local dealer where you live now that could help with that. My concern is that your cables MIGHT limit what an APEX or clock upgrade could do for you. But again YMMV, and so I recommend you explore cables and decide for yourself whether there’s anything (for you) to the better cables argument.
Cheers, and enjoy Ben!
2 Likes
I too was able to make this comparison, but and I agree the APEX upgrade made a bigger difference to the overall sound than the Rossini Clock did, for me the more surprising thing is without the clock the APEX still got “wrong” what the Rossini without clock did.
I’ve mentioned before that I would never have purchased a Rossini without a clock as it didn’t get one of my standard listening tests right, but when paired with the clock it did.
The same was true for the Rossini APEX.
3 Likes
Hey Brett! Was wondering if I’d see you on here. Thanks for the advice on the cables.
Billk - curious what the failed listening test was if you don’t mind rehashing.
Sure thing.
The track is Amy Grant’s If These Walls Could Speak from the original CD release of Lead Me On (Myrrh 7016871614 / A&M CD 5199.)
When played back on most DACs, and I include the pre-APEX Bartok along with the pre and post-APEX Rossini without a Rossini Clock, the piano notes have a sharp attack to them, almost as if the felt had been removed from the piano hammers - the notes have a distinct metallic edge to them.
With the pre and post-APEX Rossini, that harsh leading edge goes away only with the Rossini Clock, making them sound like piano hammers again; I can’t speak for Vivaldi as my dealer has never had one.
If this sounds confusing, try to seek out a real grand family piano (uprights often sound a little different) and hit a key. No matter how hard you hit that key, it always sounds like a felt hammer, you never get a sharp leading edge to the note. Become familiar with that sound.
Once you are, you can hear that difference on that recording immediately when a CD player/DAC gets it right.
My Wadia S7i did, as did my Wadia 830 before it, as did the Mark Levinson 390S and, surprisingly, several Pioneer LaserDisc players it was rumored illegally copied Wadia’s Digimaster filter algorithm.
It’s become a standard for me as I can play that track and walk away from 99% of CD players within ten seconds. (I did just that one year at RMAF, though when I did so on the PS Audio DirectStream, their FPGA code author Ted Smith was in the room and when I pointed it out he instantly could tell what he was doing wrong and how to fix it, though I don’t know if he ever did.)
The 2007 EMI remaster of the album did something to that note edge such that it is still there but isn’t as obvious, which is why I use the original release recording.
2 Likes
@Bfjones01 Welcome Ben. You made a wise choice with the Rossini. I found my Rossini improved in SQ based on the quality of the power cable. My dealer shipped me 3 levels of Shunyata power cables to try. From high to loOmega QR-sMy preamp and power amp didn’t real
@Bfjones01 Ben, sorry for my earlier incomplete reply. I have a Rossini and added a Rossini Clock and the Apex upgrade. In my experience, neither the Apex or Clock made as big a SQ improvement as the power cable did. My dealer sent me 3 different Shunyata power cables from high to lower as follows: Omega QE-s, Sigma v2 NR and Alpha v2 NR. I found that all 3 were good cables and the Alpha v2 NR was an amazing cable for the price and is serving me well for my pre-amp power cable, but the Rossini made significant SQ improvements when switching from the Alpha to the Sigma and even more improvements going to the Omega QR-s. For me this was the most worthwhile investment to improve the Rossini SQ - more than the Clock or Apex upgrade.
1 Like
Super interesting - thanks!
I have a power conditioner (Furman Elite-15) I plug most of my gear into (except the Lingo for my TT). For you or those in the know, would this impact the need or effectiveness of power cord changes in any way? Maybe the best answer is just to try myself…
You’re asking for a host of different opinions on the use of a power conditioner. I use a Shunyata Everest power conditioner mainly to get the number of high end receptacles needed for my components and to have a common grounding system for my components. I suggest using a high quality power cable for your Rossini and try it plugged directly into a wall socket and compare the SQ when connected to the Furman Elite conditioner.
I would also add that in my experience, a high quality power cable on the DAC significantly changed the sound in my system whether plugged directly into the wall or a power conditioner. So you’ll just need to see which one sounds best to you. I have a AQ Niagara as well as a Nordost QB8 (just a power strip). I personally prefer the power strip.