Back to the original thread…I can’t comment on the difference between Vivaldi and Rossini as I have never auditioned either.
I part exchanged my dCS Network Bridge, Purcell, Delius and Mutec clock system for an unheard Rossini DAC. This was a decision based on wanting to reduce the box count and interconnections and to some extent the budget available.
I may just have been able to afford a Vivaldi, but didn’t want the expense and complexity of additional components.
I’ve had my Rossini for a month now and still find myself laughing out loud at how good it is.
BTW, I tried the Mutec clock with the Rossini and thought the combination sounded worse.
I have been having a private dialogue with another community member and he wrote effectively the same thing to me yesterday. As he out it, the Mutec sounded cleaner but it also robbed the music of something.
I forgot to answer the OP’s question. I do know both the Rossini and the Vivaldi systems, but not the Network Bridge. Having said that, I prefer the Vivaldi no matter what (and I do like the Rossini, nothing wrong with it, in particular from a quality/price ratio point of view, but it’s not that the upsampling capability will make up the difference between the two, also, don’t forget upsampling is most relevant for redbook CD resolution playback, even if that may make up a great part of one’s collection). Among other things, I’m thinking of DSD64 on the Rossini versus on the Vivaldi, or even RBCD playback on the Vivaldi with upsampling disabled (the Vivaldi is the only dCS DAC whose RBCD playback I thoroughly enjoy with or without upsampling, so yes, to my mind it is that much better).
I did the same A/B experiment after ordering the Bartók and thinking… maybe I should see what this Rossini is all about before I’m married to this purchase… well, there was a noticeable difference in favor of the Rossini, especially in the electric bass guitar on the track I chose (George Benson & Earl Kluge Mimosa with Marcus Miller on bass)… Suffice it to say, I didn’t even want to hear the Vivaldi because I don’t want to spend that kind of money on something … but the difference was quite noticeable…
My question is, and I posted a different thread on this is… why? What does the Rossini have that the Bartok doesn’t? especially since I didn’t use the external clock.
I do not know, but I’m a parts and power supply fetishist, so my money would be on that. I won’t say the actual D/A conversion can be overestimated, but the importance of a DAC’s output stage for example can’t be underestimated. I mean, there are hundreds of audiophile DACs out there, some of which sound pretty darn good, whose actual D/A conversion (usually based on off the shelf chip sets) is nowhere near the sophistication of a dCS, so one can safely assume that the greatest part of their sonic prowess is based on the quality of their power supply/-ies and output stage. I have some specific products in mind, but won’t name brands, who achieve more than respectable results yet make me wonder if the engineers behind them have much experience or knowledge beyond amplifier design - but that in itself appears to be going a long way in building a nice-sounding product.
Made the mistake of borrowing a Vivaldi DAC. Can anyone confirm the cabling/settings for connecting to a Network Bridge please? No clock or upsampler. I have got dual AES working now. I’ve also connected the dac clock out to the NB clock in. Sync mode in the dac to Master. All seems good. Saw some advice that sync mode should be Universal Master or possibly something else but could be for different situation. Any other important settings? Advice greatly appreciated.
Yes that looks correct. Master is the correct synch setting in this configuration. However the user manual is ( for me anyway) a little ambiguous on the sample rate available from the single wordclock output from the DAC.
NWB ideally requires two clock inputs, one for 44.1kHz based rates and one for 48kHz based rates. The manual states that the sample rate of the Vivaldi’s sole wordclock output port will be the same as the input of a single wire source. That suggests that this configuration may be unsuitable for DSD or DXD. I wish that dCS would improve the wording of this passage to make it clearer for idiots like me.
I have used a Vivaldi with NWB but I have a system wordclock so never tried it with the DAC as synch source.
Pete, I had not noticed that ambiguity. However, I don’t think there is anything to worry about: my transport is connected to the clock output of the Vivaldi dac, and remains sync’ed to it when using DXD and DSD. This has to be expected behaviour, given that the two signals are both multiples of 44.1 kHz and are ‘clocked’ by that frequency. Or were you alluding to something else?
I saw the comments about two clock inputs. I have tested all frequencies and it seems fine to me. The “M” icon remains which I believe indicates good clock.
It seems to me, not having heard the Upsampler, that the biggest drawback with using the Network Bridge with Vivaldi is having to make all Vivaldi settings changes (other than volume, input, filter etc which are on the remote) on the front panel. Which is a pain.
Hmmm. I was unaware of this distinction. I have not owned or used a NB, but I had always assumed its control through Mosaic would be similar, if not identical, to the Upsampler. Is this not the case?
Greg, casting my mind back to when I used NB (or NWB) with my Vivaldi DAC the control options in Mosaic were sparse. You need Vivaldi Upsampler to see the Vivaldi DAC control options as the Upsampler is the hub. Basically the Mosaic control software appears to be designed in “suites” for each product range.
The Vivaldi dac does not appear in Mosaic if connected to NB it seems. A bit last millennium. But I imagine the reason is to keep network noise out of the dac.
Perhaps, though I doubt that’s the case because, through the Upsampler, it connects and displays just fine. I suspect Pete is correct that this is about “product suite integration.”
Unfortunately that Vivaldi dac seems very good. Which has got me thinking about the Upsampler. Before spending an additional £14k on an upsampler over the NB can I ask when connected to the Vivaldi DAC can you:
Control all dac functions in Mosaic (filters, maps, inputs etc)?
Control the dac volume in Roon?
If you have a toslink input to the Upsampler and another toslink input to the dac how would you select one or the other via IR control (Logitech Harmony)?
How would you describe the sound quality improvement? Is it as significant as the upgrade from Rossini to Vivaldi DAC?
I don’t have a complete answer for #3, because I don’t use Toslink into either component, and I don’t use a remote (even the beautiful dCS blunt instrument), but Mosaic provides full control for selecting inputs on both boxes. These screenshots should help illustrate: The first two show Mosaic input selection options; the next three are Mosaic screenshots showing various settings, and the last is a Roon screenshot showing Vivaldi volume control in Roon. [FWIW, I do not control DAC volume in Roon because, as good as that digital volume control is, it’s still digital, and I prefer to control volume in the analog domain; I keep the DAC at 0.]
1.I can only answer that most of the normal operations of the Vivaldi DAC can be selected from Mosaic given the accompanying Vivaldi Upsampler. This does not include unusual ones like Factory Reset or engaging the system burn-in generator. Of course many of the control options , once you have had a few days to experiment with them, are really set and forget.
No doubt Greg has the correct answer on this. Not being a user of Roon myself I can’t add much.
Upsampler input and DAC input are entirely separate IR instructions. I do not know how that works with a Logitech Harmony but if you buy a Vivaldi DAC you get the IR dCS Universal Remote with it. This has a DAC IN button and a UPS ( Upsampler) IN button. Press either of these and all of the inputs to the DAC or Upsampler are cycled through until you reach the one you want.
There is certainly a sound quality improvement with the Upsampler compared to NB. Obviously if you are a fan of upsampling you could say that the increment in SQ is significant as this option is not available with Network Bridge. Solely regarding the network input with native format programme there is a very discernable increase of quality. However I suspect not as great as Rossini to Vivaldi. Earlier in the year I posted about my own upgrade from NB to Vivaldi Upsampler. For the initial three or so days I could not get a handle on it and even thought that maybe the NB was preferable. However, once it had had a chance to burn in I just sat there grinning . As soon you “get” it you won’t want to be without it. A bit like the system clock.
The above remarks refer to the network input. I am unable to comment on the Toslink port SQ as that remains a virgin.
Thank you very much for that. Seems like it does pretty much all I would want of it.
It’s strange the perception of sound quality improvements. Initially they can seem slight or different but not clear exactly what the difference is. But then when it does become clear what the difference is it can seem huge and as someone said: when heard it cannot be unheard and has to be obtained. I sometimes wonder if upgrades are actually downgrades of previously much appreciated components.
It also makes me wonder just how good sound reproduction can get and what it sounds like. Until you have heard it I do not believe you can fully comprehend it. The big change for me from Rossini to Vivaldi DACs was a much more 3D or holographic presentation with more solidity to the sound. Rather than a violin being a 2D instrument it seems like the instrument had depth. Not just position in the sound stage but the instrument itself had depth. Fantastic. If Upsamplers and clocks can add to that then I can understand why people like them. Consensus seems to be that the Upsampler is a bigger improvement than the clock?
It has to be if you think that upsampling is a game changer. I suspect that it is pretty well known here that I do not like upsampling so my motivation in buying it was its improved network performance. For me the clock was the first choice of the two, so when I bought the UPS I already had the clock which I had bought with the DAC.
A brief recap on a bit of my dCS history on this. When Verona ( the first dCS system clock for home use) came out I had one on loan and didn’t think that it made any difference at all. Around 2 years later I decided to buy a used one ( I cannot recall why). Anyway I subsequently thought it was worthwhile. Forward another couple of years and I had changed to a Paganini system and had purchased all four boxes together as an upgrade from the Elgar or Classic stack. I used this for a year or so when dCS upgraded the Paganini clock to clock 2. This introduced a better specified USB input in comparison to the original input which was on the upsampler. So I sent it back to dCS to be upgraded. I thought “No probs, I’ll just listen without the clock meanwhile”. That idea lasted about 5 minutes. There was just so much gone. So I played LPs for the two weeks it was away.
So I would vote for the clock in preference. However it is a moot point and lots of members will go for the upsampler instead, I remember a dCS review in HiFi World when the author ( David Price?) wrote how he had asked dCS staff which they though was more important. He just got as split an opinion as you will probably find here.
Pete has far more experience here than me. And I have never listened to my Vivaldi DAC without the Upsampler. But I generally do listen to it in either Clone mode or DXD or DSDx2. And I have spent a fair bit of time with all three modes without the Clock; none of the three is intrinsically superior on all recordings. However, to my ears, the addition of the Clock is more significant on all music. All listening is done over network.
. As soon you “get” it you won’t want to be without it. A bit like the system clock.