SodaBoy
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2011
- Posts
- 177
- Likes
- 60
Can anybody comment on the quality difference between using the digital volume control of the Gustard directly into an amp vs fixed output through a preamp? Possibly even a passive.
Basically I'm newish to the scene and am moving from integrated to separates. I'm trying to decide if I should go for the Gustard as a dac/preamp or get a separate preamp. I basically only use my desktop USB (mostly 24b & DSD, some rebook) as a source so the only function I really need is volume. This is also why something simple, such as a passive is appealing. I'm on a budget so "trial & error" can get expensive!
Thanks!
Dan
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The digital volume control has nearly no channel imbalance. You would have to go very high end in the analog realm to match that. The downside is that even with internal 32-bit internal processing, there is a limit to how much attenuation you can get without reducing the audible dynamic range of the recording. In analog volume control, when you turn down the volume, both signal and noise are attenuated. With digital volume, when the volume is turned down, the signal is attenuated, but the noise floor remains at the same level, so dynamic range is reduced. The ES9018, if implemented well, has more than enough headroom in dynamic range to have useful attenuation without affecting audible dynamic range. I don't own the X20, only the X12, but I'd trust Gustard to do a good job on the implementation of the ES9018 and keep the noise floor low.