DS Audio Optical cartridges and phono preamps

[AnotherJohnson]

I had a demo of the top of the line optical cartridge and phono preamp today.

https://ds-audio-w.biz/info_optical_cartridge/

I think the phono preamp was $47k and the cartridge was $15k.

It was in a pretty high end demo at HiFi Buys in Atlanta.

David White was my demo host. He was quite knowledgeable about the way the technology works.

I was listening to familiar program materials but on unfamiliar equipment. My impression was very positive, in that I would not have expected it to be seriously competitive with the best conventional magnetic technology, and I think it was.

Here’s more info

https://daviddenyerpr.co.uk/2021/01/19/ ... i-fi-news/

https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articl ... cartridge/

My home system is quite good, and as I listen tonight at my house, I’m not pining away for the demo system. I think it was on the same level. But if I had it here for side by side comparison, I could tell more. The TT used in the demo was a high end Brinkman. I know I like my high spec LP12 more, but the Brinkman was impressive too.

We live in a Golden Age of home two channel audio.

[AnotherJohnson]

One record I listened to this morning on the DS Audio top of the line cartridge and phono preamp (with D’Agostino preamp and 400wpc amps, driving high level Vandersteens with two powered subs connected at high level) was side one of Donald Fagan’s The Nightfly.

I’ve been listening to those tracks in the following formats with volume matching as close as I could come.

Qobuz Roon Rossini 24/48

SACD MCT500 MDA200

SACD Levinson 5101

CD MCT500 Rossini

Original vinyl on my lower level LP12 (middle spec) with Kleos through the REF Phono 3.

All of these have more punch here than they did in the demo.

They all also have more detail across the spectrum.

The best of this lot is the CD MCT500 Rossini, suggesting that the Rossini really is a killer DAC.

Next is the original vinyl. Vinyl might be first if I had the better LP12 set up … it’s down for the Etna Lambda installation.

What I heard this morning was good and pleasing. But I am digging this set up better on my this material. No debate.

Is it because of the DS Audio/Brinkman system? Or something else.

There is really no way to know. The systems are too different. Mine is really tweaked to extract hyper detail, and detail is a major factor in my evaluation algorithm.

[AnotherJohnson]

Also available at Paragon in Ann Arbor

https://www.paragonsns.com/collections/ ... descending

[admin]

It's great that you get to play around with all the different formats and setups for the same album. Fun stuff.

[AnotherJohnson]

Being able to do comparisons with a known reference helps you understand why one thing is more pleasing, or even more delightful to you, than another pleasing and delightful thing.

I know that in the case of The Nightfly album, I’ve used it as a reference since it was released on vinyl, and it was one of the first CD’s I acquired.

I suspect that I like the CD and original vinyl best because my listening history established those as the reference in my audio memory.

All of the renditions of the first side of that record that I heard yesterday sounded great. There is no way to know which is closer to the mastering goals without discussing them with Bob Ludwig while listening together. Some magazine ought to set that up as a project before Bob is too old to remember things. (Tongue in cheek comment).

The differences in system and room synergy cloud everything.

I know I’m cueing in on layers in this recording. Which layers are more prominent compared to the mix I recall from the release and how they sounded on my system then are factoring strongly in my evaluation.

Over and over again I find myself gravitating toward the choice that most clearly reveals layers that my memory tells me should be present.

Incidentally, if you have Roon, look at the credits on this album. They’re endless, including many many legends. Joe Sample, Larry Carlton, Mark Knoppfler, Michael McDonald, … it is a virtually endless list of greats.

[AnotherJohnson]

I’ve had a chance to do more listening on the DS optical system at various levels, but in an unfamiliar system.

The TT “expert” who set it up said that it is harder to align the cartridge than it is with a conventional cartridge. This seems strange to me because the optical part of the DS system is at the motor end of the cartridge, not at the stylus end. The stylus is like a conventional diamond on cantilever. The optical part replaces the MM or MC at the body end of the cantilever.

The electrical output from the optical sensor is very high, hence the need for the DS dedicated phono preamp.

My sense is that it gives a clean sound, but it does not sound more real, nor as detailed, even compared to my Lyra Kleos.

I think this system is going to attract some buyers, especially since the reviews have been strong, and at their low end the cost is not “silly high.” If you’re interested in this technology, I’d recommend a personal demo. Once you’re committed, the phono preamp expense is wasted unless you decide to stay in their family of cartridges. Their range is larger than it once was, but it is not large.

[AnotherJohnson]

I had an epiphany about what the DS optical set ups sound like to me.

They sound like streaming. They do not sound like a world class phono cartridge and preamp.

At the low end, they sound like a Bluesound Node streamer and DAC. At the high end, they sound like the Bluesound Node played through the Levinson 5101 DAC.

Both of those are very nice options… but both are a whole lot less expensive than their DS counterpart.

[admin]

The DS optical system's (supposed) claim to fame is that there is no magnetic resistance and the moving mass of the assembly is lighter. I presume this would translate to lower distortion, especially when the stylus is oscillating rapidly. Do you think it sounded more "digital" due to this fact, or just an inherent property of the cartridge?

[AnotherJohnson]

Digital can sound pretty good.

They claim the optical sensor is analog, but it has to convert the light changes to an electrical signal, and I think they’re plowing a lot of new ground with this conversion.

The output is on the order of at least one, and maybe it was two orders of magnitude higher than conventional cartridges. They say that this buries the record vinyl noise and makes everything inkier and blacker.

I can hear the impact of this low noise floor, but it doesn’t seem lower than my setups, which admittedly are above average by rational measures.

It does not sound grainy. It is very smooth. Someone like Roberto might describe it as less organic.

I think it’s important to remember that their proprietary preamp makes it impossible to listen to just the cartridge change. The electronics come along too. Perhaps I’m spoiled by my long use of TEA2MAX, TEA1, and now Ref Phono 3, all first rate tube based phono equalization preamps. I could be hearing that as much as I’m hearing the cartridges.

Suffice it to say that the DS Audio optical phono and preamp are not on my bucket list… but that doesn’t mean that someone else might not love them.

[AnotherJohnson]

The DS optical system's (supposed) claim to fame is that there is no magnetic resistance and the moving mass of the assembly is lighter. I presume this would translate to lower distortion, especially when the stylus is oscillating rapidly. Do you think it sounded more "digital" due to this fact, or just an inherent property of the cartridge?

This idea that their system is more responsive due to lighter transducer mechanicals is always claimed in the snake oil world of new vinyl technology. The lower moving mass is what’s behind the whole idea of the super or ultra low output moving coils.

The idea of using an optical sensor as a switch is old. The idea of using an optical device as a conduit to transmit digital data is newer. The idea to use it to transform mechanical vibrations from a vinyl groove into music is something Thomas Edison would have been proud of.

But why an optical transformation would have an inherent advantage over the long understood electro-magnetic transducers is not clear to me.

The audio industry is fraught with obfuscation and B.S. All an explanation has to do is sound plausible to an English major. We know from long history that the only way to really know whether something works for you is to listen to it at home.

All I know for sure about the DS systems is that they do advance as you go from the low end to the high end of the line. They sound like credible players in the myriad of cartridges and preamps in the $5k and up playground. And that the high end of the line in a fancy demo system does not sound as good to me as either of my LP12s with Lyra cartridges in my system.