Ayre QX-5 Twenty First Listen

[johndoe21ro]

Well... Any news?
__________________
Amp: BAT VK-655SE
Pre-amp/Digital: exaSound e32 w UpTone JS-2 Power Supply; SOtM tX-USBultra w UpTone LPS1.2; Apple Mac Mini w UpTone DC Conversion Kit & UpTone JS-2 Power Supply; Squeezelite w Logitech Media Server 7.9.0
Speakers: Triangle Magellan Cello II
Cables: AudioQuest WEL XLR, AudioQuest Everest, AudioQuest Hurricane HC, AudioQuest NRG-1000, AudioQuest Diamond USB
Rack: Solid Tech Hybrid
Tweaks: Omicron Stabilizzatore Armonico & Gold Evolution SE; IsoTek Sigmas GII w Optimum EVO3; Furutech FT-SWS (R) AC Outlet; Synergistic Research Blue Quantum Fuse

[BillK]

This has nothing to do with sound quality but in my research looks to be a bigger and bigger issue: the QX-5 Twenty lacks an HDMI input.

Most Blu-ray players that support SACD discs, including players from Sony and Oppo, can only transmit DSD from SACDs via HDMI.

As the QX-5 Twenty lacks HDMI… you're out of luck playing DSD except from files on a computer via USB.

It remains to be seen how big a real world issue that proves to be, but for me on a recent audition it meant no DSD for me.

[imprezap2]

If I understood correctly HDMI is not the best connection to a DAC, High jitter.
But you can buy HDMI/AES converters if you want to use this option.

The QX-5 already has a lot of inputs available.

Would love to hear a bit more about the sonic performance of this DAC here, still torn between the QX-5 and the Chord Dave.

[gaboudreaux]

My QX-5 Twenty just arrived at dealer. It will be a few days before I can pick it up and get it installed, then there's break in period etc. I will post my impressions once up and running and a little time on it.

[ctsooner]

Glenn, mine was shipped out to me yesterday so we'll get them at the same time. I'm very excited bout this. Yes, I too thought you could get a converter for the HDMI to AES/EBU. I personally have not DSD recordings and probably never will. I have too many different contents already and it's getting redundant for me. I fully understand those who use all formats though. I'll ask Ayre about this and post when Alex gets back to me.

[ctsooner]

Alex will get back to me tomorrow. I personally have listened to DSD run through HDMI (I forget the DAC, but it was a a dealer through Ayre ref stack and Wilson Alexia speakers (not a favorite of mine) and then heard the same recordings back through the same DAC using the USB connection and didn't hear a difference. That may have been the system and the way it runs or it may just be me or maybe there isn't a difference. I just search the web and got this off a site. I found it interesting as I've heard this before when speaking with a reviewer of digital equipment.

Here are many good reasons for this; among them are 1) the lack of processing tools for DSD (tone, EQ, bass management, etc. are all performed in the PCM domain); 2) the need to have some parts of the signal path be dedicated to DSD while other parts are dedicated to PCM (asynchronous USB and filtering to name two), thereby requiring duplication of circuitry and switching to select the appropriate path. The switches themselves compromise the signal, making it a questionable tradeoff; and 3) the questionable benefit of DSD over PCM. We don’t believe there is one.

It is a fact that DSD signals that are converted to PCM will retain their signature noise characteristics. In other words, you can convert DSD to PCM and it still sounds like DSD. The opposite is not true, however. Converting PCM signals to DSD makes them sound like DSD.

Most DSD recordings began as PCM or have some or all of their tracks converted for processing at some point along the way. There is no way to reliably tell if a recording has been maintained with all parts in the DSD domain throughout its creation (claims are often made about recordings that aren’t strictly true), but the number of recordings that meet that criteria is small.

If you have one of the rare pure DSD recordings and you want to play it back optimally, your best choice will be to use a high-end SACD player that is optimized for decoding DSD and output the signal to a preamp/processor in the analog domain. Or even better, convert the signal to PCM and let us handle it digitally. It will sound great.

Better to do PCM right than just make a box that “does” everything. That’s our philosophy.

[BillK]

Originally Posted by imprezap2

If I understood correctly HDMI is not the best connection to a DAC, High jitter.
But you can buy HDMI/AES converters if you want to use this option.

I don't believe those work for DSD.

DSD over HDMI is all about retaining an encrypted data stream from source to DAC.

[BillK]

Seeing a lack of other reviews, I thought I'd write up a quick description of my experience over a few days with a demo QX-5 Twenty.

In short - very good, perhaps the best DAC I've heard, short of my current reference, a Wadia S7i CD player/DAC.

Feeding it with digital sources via Toslink, USB and AES/EBU, the QX-5 Twenty was always quick to lock on with a minimum of drama or extraneous bleeps as some DACs emit. Of particular fun were the display LEDs denoting the playback of HDCD-encoded streams. It was interesting to note that NONE of the series of HDCD remastered Fresh Aire CDs issued by American Gramaphone some years back (all with HDCD logos on the packaging and discs) showed as being HDCD-encoded when played back through the QX-5 Twenty. All of my other HDCD discs did, which makes one wonder.

Regardless, you all want to know about the sound, and it was very enjoyable. A deep, rich soundstage, excellent image placement and overall one of the better digital presentations I've heard, beating the previous "second best" DAC I've heard in my home over the past few years, the ARC Ref CD 9.

However… I found two issues that stopped me from pulling the trigger:

1) Soundstage width. While the QX-5 Twenty provided a nice wide soundstage, instrument placement stopped at the outer edge of my speakers. By comparison, my Wadia placed instruments clearly to the left and right of the actual speaker placement.

2) High frequency "sizzle." The best way to explain this is that the QX-5 Twenty gave vocalists who normally have no lisp or other accentuation of "S" sounds a bit of one. This was heard via AES/EBU or Toslink, and whether I used the Wadia or an Oppo BDP-105 as a transport. Using the Oppo as a DAC revealed a bit of that same character, but not to the degree I heard with the QX-5 Twenty. It gave each track I played through the Ayre a bit of immediacy and openness but while it did not cause listener fatigue it eventually always registered as not quite right, in the same way (but certainly not to the same degree) using an EQ to boost a track's high end can make it sound more open and airy, but artificially so.

Now, I readily admit that I have been a long time Wadia fan. When I first heard my first Wadia DAC at CES in 1988, that was the first time I ever heard a CD sound like... music. To me, I've never heard another DAC sound as truly musical as Wadia's Digimaster software produced. I've since owned a variety of Wadia DACs, my last being the S7i as it was the last reference level CD player/DAC Wadia produced before being absorbed by Fine Sounds (who abruptly killed the ready to ship 24/196 upgrade for the S7i and eventually all their reference DACs.)

Of note is one area is where Wadia always seemed to have an advantage over others, and that's pure bass drive. Somehow, bass from the Wadia always seemed to hit a little harder and deeper than bass from any of the other DACs I've tested (and in fact, the loss of that bass drive is why I always used to prefer to run the Wadia directly into an amp... until I found the KX-R/KX-R Twenty, the only preamps I've ever found to actually make the Wadia sound better than connecting the Wadia directly to an amp!) (As a comparison, the ARC Ref 5 SE, like most others, deprived the bass drive of all immediacy.)

But many have long felt Wadia rolls off their highs unconscionably, and since I've lived with Wadia as my gold standard for about two decades now, I may be comparing the proverbial apples and oranges here. Yet to me, the Wadia's HF sounds natural, and many (especially more inexpensive) DACs still present what I consider to be an overly "digital" sound.

Getting back to the QX-5 Twenty, the bottom line here is it depends on what your expectations are for digital and what you are interested in resolving. To me, the Ayre sounds absolutely incredible with Red Book, especially at its price point, as even if you subtract some amount for the price of a transport, it handily beats the sound of the ARC Ref CD 9. Certainly it beats many of the more inexpensive "world class" DACs out there like the Mytek 192-DSD, Benchmark DAC2 or Berkeley Alpha DAC, all of which also sounded a bit harsh but far less musical than the Ayre. (The same is true of the analog section of my stock Oppo BDP-105.) I haven't yet been able to source a PS Audio DirectStream, which seems to get better sounding which each new firmware update they release, but I suspect that would be the next DAC to compare. Likewise, unless someone wants to offer up a loan of a full dCS Vivaldi stack, I doubt I'll be auditioning it anytime soon despite the positive things I've heard at RMAF.

How does it compare to other more expensive DACs? Admirably.

In particular, I found it much more musical than the (still very good) Simaudio Moon 780D, with the Moon presenting a slightly wider soundstage but less musically satisfying than the Ayre, which as usual just seems to get musical drive "right" somehow (except for the aforementioned HF sizzle, which the Moon also added.) Thing is, the Moon, for a little worse sound quality, would set you back about $6K more than the Ayre.

The Esoteric K-03 (I haven't had a chance to hear the K-03X or the K-01/K-01X) presented sound without as much HF sizzle as the Ayre, but the soundstage was definitely a bit foreshortened by comparison, along with slightly less precise instrument placement. Note the K-03 comparison was with Red Book, as due to the lack of an HDMI input on the QX-5 Twenty, I had no way of getting SACD DSD from my Oppo BDP-105 into the Ayre.

In short, the QX-5 Twenty is an excellent piece, not quite good enough to earn a place in my rack (yet) but it would certainly be one of the contenders should my Wadia die. Further, it provides a sound far above its price point, and may cause some of those producing pricier DACs to reconsider their MSRPs.

As a final note, it quite frankly makes me wonder what Ayre could do if they decided to produce an R-series DAC.

Feel free to ask any questions and I will answer as best I can based on the experience I had; the unit has since been returned to the dealer so I can't really comment on "What if you do X?" scenarios.

Note that I don't listen to any streaming audio, so I can't comment on the Ayre's efficacy as a network streamer, either of local content via a NAS/UPnP/DLNA or via the Internet and the mconnect control app.

[imprezap2]

Hi Billk,

Thank you for the effort to write your thoughts on the QX-5.

I am a Wadia fan myself, still have the 381i in my system, but also have the Ayre DX-5 (functioning as a USB DAC for my Aurender N100H)

In my system the DX-5 gives more low frequency pressure, but important to mention is that I am using a Cardas Clear XLR interlink (This interlink works very well with Ayre products), No "HF sizzle" also.

The DX-5 is throwing the same width soundstage as the Wadia 381i, extending well outside the speakers, only difference is that the soundstage of the DX-5 is a little bit closer to the listening position then with the Wadia. but both units manage to provide "the sound bubble" that I like.

Only way for me to find out is to get a QX-5 in my own system, but not yet available here.

[ctsooner]

Thanks for the write up Bill. How many hours do you have on that unit? The reason I ask is because I have two close friends who's ears I know and trust tell me that they too felt the HF was natural, but a bit too sharp until they heard the unit with well over 700 hours on it. With all the silver caps they use in this piece as well as everything else in there, it really does take that long to break in. I know on my AX5 Twenty, I need to break in every input for a few hundred hours. I'll ask Alex about the QX5 Twenty today to see what he says. Not making excuses, but one friend has Vandersteen 7 mk 2, The full Ayre stack running AQ cable and running the Melco N1A (not the N1ZH which is the unit I'll be getting) via Vodka ethernet. He says that this is the best DAC he's had in the store. Says is bests the Berkley Ref mk 2 by a lot. The AR isn't in the picture for digital. I have never loved their digital pieces, but that's me. The Aesthetix Romulus Eclipse is also a great DAC as is the new Brinkman I was told (haven't heard that one in person yet). Coming from an Empirical Audio ODSE/SE fully loaded DAC will have me on edge until it burns in fully. That DAC is a world class DAC that beat the pants off the Berkley Ref. I have heard the Chord DAVE a fair amount now and the highs and vocals are outstanding (the highs on some songs were a bit too much for my ears, but many love that), but it had no bass at all. I too like the Wadia digital and always have. Other than the time period when they lost the engineers in the 90's, they have made top equipment. All my top dealers sold them. The guy who's telling me about the QX5 with Vandy's sells the Wadia gear and likes it a ton. He feels this is the best DAC he's had in his shop by a far margin. As for an R series, I'm sure it's on it's way as Ayre needs it to complete the chain. Time will tell. I think I"ll just be getting the DAC in and turning it one with the TV and letting it run day and night for a month or so, lol.