I presently have a Proceed CDD transport which is the little brother of the Mark Levinson # 37. Initially, I started with a Parasound C/DC 1500 one box cd changer that played CDs in their native format of 16 bits/44.1kHZ that fed a B&K Reference 50 solid state preamp that was amplified with a solid state Parasound power amp. I found this system listenable but lacking that organic wholeness of vinyl. The Parasound C/DC had many great features:
Hybrid 1 bit/18 bit ladder DAC, Incorporates Burr-Brown PCM-67P hand-trimed DAC, 8X oversampling, High-resolution analog circuitry, and Independent regulation for digital and analog stages and more.
Let me explain the hook-up of the Monarchy 48/96 DIP Upsampling unit. I ran a digital cable out of the Proceed CDD into the (in) of the Monarchy Digital Interface Processor and the (out) from the DIP into the Monarchy NM24 Dac. With the DIP set internally to 96kHZ, the NM24 reads 2 960 on its front panel. As a caveat, Monarchy's latest DIP is a combo that allows its users to choose between 44.1kHZ or 96kHZ with a switch on its front panel.(HMMM!!!!)
Digital is a complex beast and getting those 1's and 0's as close as possible to the sound produced from vinyl is truly a daunting task. I have never tried the Audio Note dacs from Peter Qvortrup but he has taken a very different approach to this digital enigma. Peter Qvortrup has separated himself from the herd with his radical approach with regard to D and A conversion and I would be remiss if I didn't include some of his philosophy/thoughts on Digital in this blog.
The following is an abbreviated interview by Jack Roberts of Dagogo with Peter Qvortrup of Audio Note:
http://www.dagogo.com/view-article.asp?harticle=129
Peter Qvortrup On Digital
Jack: Peter, please share with us your opinion on the basic differences between CD and vinyl sound.
Peter: My view is that digital cannot resemble the original because of the inaccuracies introduced at the point of entry in the digital domain. The errors and omissions introduced by all current and past methods of conversion are so great that, at best, all we get is a card board copy of the original and it is clearly audible, as a quick comparison between a decent turntable and even the most expensive CD replay set up will quickly reveal.
This is because much like the flawed assumptions used by mathematicians to create the financial "innovations" which lie at the heart of the current financial crisis, the fundamental assumptions that created the way we digitize the analogue signal also fail to describe the content of dynamic wide band signals and the way they flow. The end result is a set of mathematical formulas that are sadly lacking in their ability to model the full range of variables in a music signal, and as a result when we come to make the analogue to digital conversion process, the bar is set at a level which is lower than it needs to be, resulting in conversion technology which does not do justice to the analogue signal it is being presented with, resulting in an anemic digital version of the analogue original.
It is therefore no major surprise that the digital medium, as we know it, lacks authority, authenticity, immediacy, instrumental medium and density, dimensionality, and overall presence when compared to its analogue version, to the point where even some digital recordings sound better on LP than the CD (the reverse is of course also occasionally true, but for sake of a proper comparison, we should always compare early all-analogue recordings on LP with their CD counterparts from the early to mid 1980s, my experience has always been that AAD recordings generally sound better than ADD, and ADD generally sounds better than DDD), which leads me to believe that the signal damage goes beyond merely the digital conversion process itself, as it would appear that the longer the signal stays in the digital domain the more damage it suffers, which may also explain some aspect of what I hear in music servers.
Peter Qvortrup's approach is leaving the data raw, and unadulterated (1x oversampling, I/V transformers and removal of the analog filter). Audio Note also claims that other conventional components contribute to data loss, too, and they replace them with aerospace-grade materials applied in a new patented way. The caveat here is a cost no object approach versus producing the best viable alternatives within budget contraints.
Well, back to my sojourn sans Audio Note Dacs: I immediately tube rolled the stock Jan/Phillips tubes in the NM24 with NOS E88CC 1965 Siemens-Halske tubes. I set the AC regenerator which powered the NM24 and the Dip 48/96 to 120 hz and internally set the Monarchy Dip to 96. I initially thought this sounded fantastic. All of these changes did ameliorate my digital front-end from my initial set-up but I still could not listen to it for any extended amount of time. For the last year, I consistently would not listen to my digital front-end for weeks at a time and everytime I did, I was disappointed. The inexorable part of me began weighing the options of modding or new components. However, money constraints dictated that modding would have to be the first option.
Several months ago, I replaced the Wima coupling capacitors on the DAC side in my NM24 with 3.9u Mundorf Silver in oil capacitors and endured a very lengthy break-in period of 500+ hours. This modification after the capacitor break-in did afford me the ability to listen for longer periods but the sound still lacked that "real", emotionally connecting and authentic, not to mention less fatiguing sound that my analog rig provided. It became clear to me my digital front-end was unable to differentiate the recorded events of the digital software(CDs) coherently. In other words, it wasn't demonstrating the individual character or "signature" that is unique to each recorded event.
Being the introspective individual that I am, I discerned that all my efforts up to this point involved "Additions", especially the Upsampling concept, and decided to try the opposite approach. Two weeks ago, I extricated the Dip upsampler from my system to analyze what effect a shorter signal path and the elimination of "Upsampling" would have on the sound. I connected my Proceed CDD transport directly to the Monarchy NM24 Dac whose front panel now reads 2 441 with its Burr Brown 1704 select ladder dacs and 8x oversampling connected with my Creative Cable Silver Bullet Digital cable. Personally, I believe Perter Qvortrup and Audio Note may be the path for the very best digital reproduction and this belief has led me down a more unadulterated road. I now know red book CDs sound more organic, more analog when played in their native format of 16/44.1. Suffice it to say, I am now anti-Upsampling. Perhaps "Upsampling" keeps the signal in the digital domain longer than not Upsampling. As Peter Qvortrup theorizes in the above cited interview,"it would appear that the longer the signal stays in the digital domain the more damage it suffers".
In conclusion, I believe my present system, sans Upsampler, with the modded Monarchy NM24, and AC Regenerator would give Audio Note's lower level Dacs(2.1/3.1) (http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1299469505) a run for their money. My digital front-end is now back to playing standard redbook 16 bits/44.1 kHZ as it did initially but with a greater analog perspective and presence. I attribute this transformational difference to the tube output of the NM24, the tube line-stage of the Harman Kardon Citation 1 and a transport with a sophisticated system for very diminutive jitter. My system now eloquently differentiates the uniqueness of the recorded events by rendering greater immediacy, authority, density, authenticity, dimensionality, and an overall presence with an emotional connection much closer to my vinyl rig. I am finally able to enjoy my digital front-end for hours and hours without fatigue. A case of "Less is More"? OH YEAH.