[HardstyleLoco96]

Crazy.

I'd take an EQd Ananda Nano over a non EQd Arya Organic or HE1000SE..... Yes the Organic and HE1000SE will stage a bit better and have a touch more detail. But an EQd Nano is so so soooo much more enjoyable to listen. A free parametric eq goes an extremely long way. and if anything. The EQ helps improve what the Nano is already great at. Staging feels a touch more spacious and cleaner. Low end slam is huge now with much more texturing and rumble. Tonality is smoother and more musical. And due to this, I find detail comed out cleaner. Really brings it to 94% of what the Organic and HE1000 can do. For $600, pure steal

 

[martel80]

Where I can found it to download?

Here:
Oratory Nano

 

[Phidel]

Here:
Oratory Nano

Yes I saw it but I reffer a link to download it directly this is an image/PDF.

 

[Barncore]

Crazy.

I'd take an EQd Ananda Nano over a non EQd Arya Organic or HE1000SE..... Yes the Organic and HE1000SE will stage a bit better and have a touch more detail. But an EQd Nano is so so soooo much more enjoyable to listen. A free parametric eq goes an extremely long way. and if anything. The EQ helps improve what the Nano is already great at. Staging feels a touch more spacious and cleaner. Low end slam is huge now with much more texturing and rumble. Tonality is smoother and more musical. And due to this, I find detail comed out cleaner. Really brings it to 94% of what the Organic and HE1000 can do. For $600, pure steal

$500 now, on sale on the Hifiman site

The difference between amps are definitely a lot bigger than the difference between DACs but they’re still a significant difference.

I think it all work together as one entity after all, so matching can be important when a specific flavour is desired.

A good experience I could share would be when i was using the Motu when I started and then way later on I bought the audient’s from the small model Until the ID44s. They had a very rich and warm tone. Nothing I could probably measure but it was definitely there. I later had a Burl DAC and again, there was this sort of cotton feel on top of the highest frequencies .

Just recently got my RME ADI-2 and it feel like I’m back at the Motu point. Everything is extra clean and very small issues are very bothering.

On the other hand, I now have a lot of issues pin pointing which frequency has to be corrected. It feel like a brand new system since I sold my UAD Apollo Twin X which I’d describe as in the middle of an ultra clean DAC and a vintage-ish Burl.

I think it’s worth investigating.

I had a similar experience going from my Audient id14 mk1 to the Antelope D4SC. Compared them side by side and the Antelope felt pristine clean compared to the Audient.

Random thought. It occured to me that it's possible that part (or all?) of the improved sound of the headphones could actually be because the Line Outs of the Antelope interface are using a better DAC than the headphone amp is.
Somebody on the ASR forum says that lack of power in an amp shouldn't affect the sound profile. It should only affect volume with planars.

 

[martel80]

Random thought. It occured to me that it's possible that part (or all?) of the improved sound of the headphones could actually be because the Line Outs of the Antelope interface are using a better DAC than the headphone amp is.

As far as I know, Antelope are not using a separate DAC (one single chip) for their Monitor output and their Headphone output. The ones that I'm aware that use different chip for their Digital to analog processing are the ones I mentioned in a previous post. Now if we're talking about the physical path from the Chip to the jack itself, then I think that this is a fair assumption that not all Audio Interface are created equal.

I also think it's important to keep in mind that the democratization of the audio equipment world has greatly improved such process in the pass 2 decades. Such difference are literally splitting hairs nowadays, unless we're talking about the total crap.

 

[martel80]

Yes I saw it but I reffer a link to download it directly this is an image/PDF.

I was not aware that oratory created files to download with preset settings inside. I don't use his presets so it's a bit out of my knowledge tbh. But looking at his parameters, I think I'd enjoy it when in party mode.

 

[Enther]

Loco.

Preferiría un EQd Ananda Nano en lugar de un EQd Arya Organic o HE1000SE... Sí, el Organic y el HE1000SE se presentarán un poco mejor y tendrán un toque más de detalle. Pero escuchar un EQd Nano es muchísimo más divertido. Una ecuación paramétrica gratuita es muy útil. y en todo caso. El ecualizador ayuda a mejorar aquello en lo que el Nano ya es excelente. La puesta en escena se siente un poco más espaciosa y limpia. El slam de gama baja es enorme ahora con mucha más textura y estruendo. La tonalidad es más suave y musical. Y debido a esto, encuentro que los detalles quedaron más limpios. Realmente lo lleva al 94% de lo que pueden hacer Organic y HE1000. Por $600, pura ganga

Same for me. Ananda Nano IS more enjoyable than my Arya Stealth.

 

[Barncore]

As far as I know, Antelope are not using a separate DAC (one single chip) for their Monitor output and their Headphone output. The ones that I'm aware that use different chip for their Digital to analog processing are the ones I mentioned in a previous post. Now if we're talking about the physical path from the Chip to the jack itself, then I think that this is a fair assumption that not all Audio Interface are created equal.

Not true. I emailed them this question 6 days ago and this was their reply:

The headphone outs use a separate DAC from the main monitor outs.

 

[martel80]

Not true. I emailed them this question 6 days ago and this was their reply:

Have you asked them which chip they use for each ?

There's this confusion that a lot of people make where they interchange the DAC signification from the Chip vs the circuit Path.

If separate DAC is meant as a circuit path , then all audio interface use different DAC for their Monitor Output and their Headphone output cause if not, you'd be hearing your monitors and your headphones at the same time on the same circuit path. If you look at one of their former product, one review even mention a Dual DAC per channel (Topaz Premium) (So four DAC if you think of it as solely the Digital to Analog Converter which is the chip itself). That's where the red flag should be evident. Your Digital signal can't converte multiple time for a single channel or you'd have to mix it in the analog domain. It would look like this :
LEFT Channel:
Digital to Analog conversion 1 to Analog path
Analog mixing to Analog output Left .
Digital to analog conversion 2 to Analog path
Analog device.
Right Channel:
Digital to Analog conversion 1 to Analog path
Analog mixing to Analog output Right.
Digital to analog conversion 2 to Analog path

I know you know about the basic of audio engineering and what happen when you multiply the same signal by itself so the dual DAC in a single channel doesnt make sense.

The only dual DAC (One for each channel) I know from Antelope is their Mastering Grade product called Pure2. It literally has 2 chip that process the left and right chanel seperatly which help its spec.

I would definitely take the time to double check with them which DAC chip they have for each output and if they use seperate DAC chip for each channel or each output seperatly.. That would definitely get rid of the DAC use case confusion. Especially because they are so proud of having a dual DAC for their highest grade converter (Which they should) which would actually completely defeat the purpose of investing in their higher grade product.

So yeah, a good 3000$ worth of investigation right there so everyone can jump on the Discrete and get rid of their Pure2.

 

[Rakyan]

Same for me. Ananda Nano IS more enjoyable than my Arya Stealth.

Can u explain that why? I just bought the Nano, doing my first listen now, and holly molly this is very good! Using it with fiio K7 and tripowin granvia copper cable. Its not too bright for me, actually very well balanced. Just thinking about, if Arya is better huh than that could be insane piece of headphone. In your opinion the Arya objectively better just not your cup of tea or its not even "that" much better if any objectively?

 

[Enther]

¿Puedes explicar por qué? Acabo de comprar el Nano, estoy haciendo mi primera escucha ahora y, holly molly, ¡esto es muy bueno! Utilizándolo con fiio K7 y cable de cobre tripowin granvia. No es demasiado brillante para mí, en realidad está muy bien equilibrado. Solo pensar, si Arya es mejor, eh, eso podría ser un auricular loco. En tu opinión, Arya es objetivamente mejor, simplemente no es tu taza de té o ni siquiera es "eso", ¿mucho mejor si es objetivamente?

Vale todo está bien.
No sé si has estado en una tienda de televisores. Cuando veas muchos quizás el que te guste/te atraiga visualmente no sea el que tiene los colores más realistas sino el que da un buen contraste, tiene algo de saturación en los colores, sombras....
El Ananda Nano no es perfecto. Es más “perfecto” como tal el Arya Stealth pero, personalmente, cuando quiero escuchar música quiero sentirla. El Arya Stealth es un poco más relajado y tranquilo. A veces me lo quito y me pongo mi Kz Zsx (40€). El Nano es más emocionante. Por eso tiendo a preferir el Nano para todo.
En términos de aspectos técnicos, el Nano tiene una escena más pequeña en el eje X pero más ancha en el eje Z. Dicho de otra manera. Da más capas y profundidad. La textura en el sonido me parece incluso algo superior.
En cuanto al Arya, tiene aproximadamente la misma resolución pero te muestra más coherente y sin destacar tanto ni tener un borde de nota más nítido. Su escenario sonoro, especialmente en los medios, es espacioso.

 

[Rakyan]

Vale todo está bien.
No sé si has estado en una tienda de televisores. Cuando veas muchos quizás el que te guste/te atraiga visualmente no sea el que tiene los colores más realistas sino el que da un buen contraste, tiene algo de saturación en los colores, sombras....
El Ananda Nano no es perfecto. Es más “perfecto” como tal el Arya Stealth pero, personalmente, cuando quiero escuchar música quiero sentirla. El Arya Stealth es un poco más relajado y tranquilo. A veces me lo quito y me pongo mi Kz Zsx (40€). El Nano es más emocionante. Por eso tiendo a preferir el Nano para todo.
En términos de aspectos técnicos, el Nano tiene una escena más pequeña en el eje X pero más ancha en el eje Z. Dicho de otra manera. Da más capas y profundidad. La textura en el sonido me parece incluso algo superior.
En cuanto al Arya, tiene aproximadamente la misma resolución pero te muestra más coherente y sin destacar tanto ni tener un borde de nota más nítido. Su escenario sonoro, especialmente en los medios, es espacioso.

Thanks for the response! So as u close the last sentence, the Arya has a bigger stage (except depth if i understand correctly), is it feels immadietly in the music or u have to A/B test and pay close attention to it to hear the difference? So its soundstage and "image size" is like a 5% better or its instead a 15-20% amount?

 

[HardstyleLoco96]

Thanks for the response! So as u close the last sentence, the Arya has a bigger stage (except depth if i understand correctly), is it feels immadietly in the music or u have to A/B test and pay close attention to it to hear the difference? So its soundstage and "image size" is like a 5% better or its instead a 15-20% amount?

From my experience. It's not a huge difference. About 5% - 8% in width and height. But depth. The Nano is different.

 

[Rakyan]

From my experience. It's not a huge difference. About 5% - 8% in width and height. But depth. The Nano is different.

"The Nano is different." - u mean different from the Ananda Stealth or different in sound signature compared to Arya?

 

[Barncore]

Have you asked them which chip they use for each ?

There's this confusion that a lot of people make where they interchange the DAC signification from the Chip vs the circuit Path.

If separate DAC is meant as a circuit path , then all audio interface use different DAC for their Monitor Output and their Headphone output cause if not, you'd be hearing your monitors and your headphones at the same time on the same circuit path. If you look at one of their former product, one review even mention a Dual DAC per channel (Topaz Premium) (So four DAC if you think of it as solely the Digital to Analog Converter which is the chip itself). That's where the red flag should be evident. Your Digital signal can't converte multiple time for a single channel or you'd have to mix it in the analog domain. It would look like this :
LEFT Channel:
Digital to Analog conversion 1 to Analog path
Analog mixing to Analog output Left .
Digital to analog conversion 2 to Analog path
Analog device.
Right Channel:
Digital to Analog conversion 1 to Analog path
Analog mixing to Analog output Right.
Digital to analog conversion 2 to Analog path

I know you know about the basic of audio engineering and what happen when you multiply the same signal by itself so the dual DAC in a single channel doesnt make sense.

The only dual DAC (One for each channel) I know from Antelope is their Mastering Grade product called Pure2. It literally has 2 chip that process the left and right chanel seperatly which help its spec.

I would definitely take the time to double check with them which DAC chip they have for each output and if they use seperate DAC chip for each channel or each output seperatly.. That would definitely get rid of the DAC use case confusion. Especially because they are so proud of having a dual DAC for their highest grade converter (Which they should) which would actually completely defeat the purpose of investing in their higher grade product.

So yeah, a good 3000$ worth of investigation right there so everyone can jump on the Discrete and get rid of their Pure2.

Interesting.
Well the problem is that getting info from Antelope about their components is like squeezing blood from a stone. 11 days ago i asked them what the model/brand of DAC is getting used for their headphone amp and this was their reply:
"Unfortunately, after consulting with the RnD department, I must inform you that we are not in a position to disclose such information. I sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this may cause."