07-Aug-2014, 10:32
Just heard from Devialet (not Thierry):
1. Since they are linked via a digital connection, wouldn't the sound of the slave be dependent (and vary depending) on the quality/flavour of the digital interconnect used? Or, has the slave unit been "voiced" based on the Crystal cable digital interconnect?
> There has been no 'voicing' to the supplied interconnect. As a matter of fact, Devialet proprietary technologies make it rather insensitive which cables are used (be it power supply, speaker, or digital interconnects). We do not believe there will be 'flavour' differences between different digital interconnects between both units, and have not noticed any.
2. Plus, Devialet has chosen to use RCAs instead of BNCs so there may be impedance mismatches since the impedance is not 75 Ohm throughout the transmission chain?
> RCA connections electrical properties are taken into account in the transmission between the Master and the Companion (new name of the Slave).
3. For dual mono DACs, there is usually a clock sync connection between them. In this case, unless there is a clock sync function implemented by Devialet, it would appear that the slave has to extract the clock from the signal sent by the master, leading to potential timing issues?
> The clock sync is indeed catered for between Master and Companions (you can add up to 7 Companions, in active multi-amplification set-ups).
4. With AIR, Devialet could have chosen allow data to be streamed to both master/slave units either wirelessly or wired. If wired, then if the same type of ethernet cable were used for both units, the "flavour" would be the same. Was there any reason why this was not implemented? This does not solve the clock sync issues though.
> Indeed, the clock sync issue is solved by having only the Master receive the audio stream, then sending the audio to the Companions in a sync'ed way.
Not sure that I quite understand or agree but c'es la vie.
1. Since they are linked via a digital connection, wouldn't the sound of the slave be dependent (and vary depending) on the quality/flavour of the digital interconnect used? Or, has the slave unit been "voiced" based on the Crystal cable digital interconnect?
> There has been no 'voicing' to the supplied interconnect. As a matter of fact, Devialet proprietary technologies make it rather insensitive which cables are used (be it power supply, speaker, or digital interconnects). We do not believe there will be 'flavour' differences between different digital interconnects between both units, and have not noticed any.
2. Plus, Devialet has chosen to use RCAs instead of BNCs so there may be impedance mismatches since the impedance is not 75 Ohm throughout the transmission chain?
> RCA connections electrical properties are taken into account in the transmission between the Master and the Companion (new name of the Slave).
3. For dual mono DACs, there is usually a clock sync connection between them. In this case, unless there is a clock sync function implemented by Devialet, it would appear that the slave has to extract the clock from the signal sent by the master, leading to potential timing issues?
> The clock sync is indeed catered for between Master and Companions (you can add up to 7 Companions, in active multi-amplification set-ups).
4. With AIR, Devialet could have chosen allow data to be streamed to both master/slave units either wirelessly or wired. If wired, then if the same type of ethernet cable were used for both units, the "flavour" would be the same. Was there any reason why this was not implemented? This does not solve the clock sync issues though.
> Indeed, the clock sync issue is solved by having only the Master receive the audio stream, then sending the audio to the Companions in a sync'ed way.
Not sure that I quite understand or agree but c'es la vie.
