Well…They interacted with me today 
…It is not because it is me of course, I think they interact when they think that saying nothing could lead to a misuse or not optimal use of their products.
In a word they interact to Support and not to Sell or to Market.
As a customer, for me, the most important is Support.
Very reasonable answer
Considering current situation and products in the market, ideal would be to redesign Vivaldi eliminate need for an external master/word clock. Combine upsampler and transport to create a new matching transport. This can be a new model above Vivaldi. dCS has to reduce number of boxes and to maximize profitability modularize. Customers can choose what modules to buy and there may be an upgrade path. Software can still be free upgrades.
You mean like Vivaldi but everything in a single box? Surely dCS would never come up with such a thing ? Oh, wait a minute…
Disagree.
On a cash basis, I would be pretty sure that the Vivaldi is the most profitable in the lineup. On an income basis, it depends on how dCS amortizes its R&D, as dCS uses the trickle down approach, letting some innovations in the top line (Vivaldi) flow into the middle (Rossini) and “lower” (Bartok) tiers.
I’m a huge fan of dCS. I just wish they would take a stand on MQA and help kill in. Just sayin’… ; )
@PAR - Pete, I remember the frustration we experienced waiting for dCS to be MQA certified. Funny to think that if Qobuz was introduced a bit earlier, most of us wouldn’t have even noticed if dCS supported MQA.
We’ve made such huge & rapid advancements in digital source equipment from the early days of digital with Gordon Rankin’s Wavelength products. Is it possible that the boys that design and build the digital front ends have run short of ideas to improve the SQ?
I admit I still haven’t purchased a clock to mate with my Rossini as I’ve heard many dCS users say to first focus on the power cable. So I did just that and replaced a Synergistics Element CTS cable with a Shunyata Omega QR-S cable. I couldn’t believe the improvement. I’m not pitching Shunyata. I’m merely saying that the quality of the power cable seemed to matter more to the Rossini than my Gryphon Antileon EVO amp or Gryphon Pandora preamp.
@ChrisK - as I’m still on the fence re: adding a clock, I’m interested in what you meant by saying ‘maybe dCS should be selling a clock which does not need to be improved by a non dCS product would be a bright idea’. Can you elaborate on this?
Hi
I think what @ChrisK was referring to is that dCS has published that the Vivaldi clock can be further improved by adding an ultra accurate reference clock, which they don’t manufacturer, as I believe @PaleRider has done…
This is at the ultra top end, and out of my league (though I am admiring Pete’s system from afar!)
Cheers!
Hi,
Most people after they bought a dCS Vivaldi clock want to improve the result adding a word clock. As dVS does not sell such a product they buy it elsewhere.
So my suggestion was to build a dCS clock (even in the Vivaldi box) that is so good that adding a word click would be completely useless.
A Vivaldi 3.0 clock. And of course owners of a Vivaldi 2.0 clock would have the possibility buying the upgrade…
Thanks @ChrisK and @keiserrg
A friend recently added a Taiko Extreme music server and said the SQ upgrade was impressive. There’s a rather complete review of the Taiko Extreme here, https://taikoaudio.com/taiko-2020/2020/05/26/audiophile-style-extreme-5-part-review-series-sgm-extreme/
I’m guessing many of you out there may have added a music server to your system. Most of my listening is via Qobuz. Do music servers also improve the sound of music subscriptions such as Qobuz? I’m guessing I would use the Taiko as the music streamer to bypass the Rossini streamer and go from the music server to the Rossini DAC via USB. Is that correct?
No a music server per se only handles local files ( I am distinguishing between server and streamer here) . In the case of dCS, Mosaic is what provides the internet link to Qobuz. Although I have a Melco that is used as my server the internet connection is really just a pass through from the router. Of course if I used Melco’s function as a USB streamer ( as can the Taiko), then it would provide Qobuz via its own dedicated control app. However that would entail a USB rather than network connection to Vivaldi which would be retrograde.
However I did find that that adding the Melco S100 network switch made a significant improvement to Qobuz SQ affecting timbre, dynamics and soundstaging. I realise this is controversial but I was persuaded to purchase the S100 via a demonstration of it here in my own system within about 4 seconds - it was that obvious even given the supplied SMPS.
@PAR Thanks Pete. Thanks for letting me know about the Melco S100. I use a Ubiquiti UniFi Switch 8 but I figured there’s a better audio-grade switch I could use.
Not fully, Vivaldi one is an overkill for most people and it is a huge box reminding of old trunk box.
What I meant was leave existing products Bartok, Rossini and Vivaldi as is and let them die at their end of life, start a new line. Rather than providing everything pre-packaged let customers choose their configuration and price them accordingly, simple like Playback Designs and modular like MSB and TotalDAC.
Instead of 4 box stack create maximum of 2 boxes, DAC and transport, with possibly external PSU.
I don’t understand the need for another big box just for a word clock. There are several excellent master clocks in the market that couldn’t be used with dCS DACs without a seperate word clock. So better cut that item in future. Create a proprietary interface between newly created transport and DACs so clocks are synchronized when going thru that native interface.
I read the extensive +8000 post thread on another site regarding the Taiko unit and became very interested. I decided to fly down to Florida to have a listen. After listening to the unit for a few hours we decided to compare it to the Aurender N30. All three of us agreed that we preferred the N30. I was disappointed and shocked as I have never been a Aurender proponent.
Everything was exactly the same in he comparison. We just disconnected the USB connection from the Taiko running its TAS software and connected the USB to the Aurender.
Jim, someone I trust told me the same that he prefers the Aurender. He went on to say he prefers the N20 over the N30.
A good music server is essential. Initially I used the ROON Nucleus, but since I have the Antipodes K40 which feeds my Rossini DAC via the ethernet it’s sublime. The K40 is a music server which is very well suited to the Rossini as it only has one optimized ethernet output. The ROON core is located in the K40 and the Rossini acts as a ROON reader. Antipodes recently made a major firmware update and again a real improvement in sound quality. I know it’s controversial but the quality of the software is important. I was able to observe it.
Respectfully, this makes no sense to me. The software of a music server should have zero impact on the sound quality unless the server isn’t providing all of the bits to the DAC. In the case where you prefer to activate DSP at the server level, you shouldn’t waste money on a dCS DAC. Please explain…
I had the same experience with the S100 and also purchased one. In fact I also bought the Melco back up drive and disc drive which makes for a very good integrated set up for ripping, storage and back up.
@samre007 Rejean - I assume you’re using an Antipodes K40 as your streamer connected via AES/EBU to your Rossini DAC and experienced better SQ. That implies that the Antipodes K40 streamer is better than the Rossini streamer section. Does the SQ improvement apply to both streaming services (eg. Qobuz) and locally ripped files? Did you rip your local files via the K40 or other?
It seems that several Rossini owners have favorable results when using a music server such as the Antipodes K40/K50 or an Aurender N20/N30 as the streamer and the Rossini as a DAC.
Here comes the controversial question for Rossini owners. Is this the common thought that using a well regarded music server as the streamer instead of Rossini’s streamer improves SQ of music services such as Qobuz and locally ripped music?
Hello Brian, - The connection between the Antipodes K40 and my Rossini DAC is made via the Ethernet connection (RJ / 45). I am using a Nordost Valhalla 2 RJ / E Ethernet cable. The K40 does not have an AES / EBU output, nor a USB output. It is optimized for an Ethernet output, which suits the Rossini very well:
The K40 is perfect for me as I only use the ROON streaming service (via Tidal). I really like the ROON interface and I don’t use Mosaic. Thus, the K40 appeared to me as the best solution to host the ROON Core.
I burned CDs with the Antipodes K10 ripper. The quality is excellent. The sound quality of ripped CDs seems almost identical to streaming with Tidal (I don’t have a subscription with Qobuz). I compared and was pleasantly surprised.
I would say that if ROON is the main source of music then it is worth investing in a very good music server such as for example; Antipodes, Pink Faun, Grimm and even a Taiko if the budget is available.
If you’re playing from the Antipodes to the Rossini using Ethernet, you are, in fact, using the streaming board in the DAC and must therefore be using one of the streaming protocols - not using the DAC as a DAC-only device. If you’re using Roon, then you are using the Roon RAAT protocol and must have enabled the Rossini as a Roon-Ready device; and you’re using the Antipodes purely as a Roon Core only. Not sure if I see the particular benefits of an Antipodes Roon Core as opposed to a Roon Nucleus, a well-built (and properly fed with power) NUC etc.