Digital Front End: Critical Listening


I'm motivated to write this post after some initial comparisons I made between the DAC in my Marantz DVD player and my Levinson 360S. Using the Marantz as transport, these units fed into a Mccormack RLD1 pre, a Levinson 334 amp, and Celestion SL12si monitors. I realise this system is not your typical "high-end" system used for comparison.
The problem is that I couldn't hear much of a difference between the Marantz and the Levinson. Actually I felt a little foolish for having paid over $3000 for the Levinson when it doesn't seem to offer asignificant improvement. The Marantz is a mid-level DVD player with their "HDAM" technology which is said to replace op amps.
Can anyone offer an opinion as to why I'm not hearing not only a significant difference but drastic improvement with the Levinson. Could it be the Preamp not passing on the improved resolution offered by the 360S? Or maybe it's the speakers but I really don't think so.

Any thoughts?
sjh32
First, jdaniel, you bring up a very good point that I had considered but sort of dismissed, thinking that any general improvement should be at least audible with any well recorded music, regardless of genre. But I guess complexity of the signal is your point, and the subtlies of largescale acoustic ensembles. I have only a handful of classical disks. I don't have a classical music education so I think a lot of that stuff is just lost on me. I am beginning to get into Jazz so maybe there's hope.
About the transport issue, the Levinson 360's has what they call intelligent FIFO. This technology, says the user manual, makes the quality of transport and digital cable less crucial. It's a kind of buffer or resevoir that reclocks the data in such a way as to render jitter practically non existent. The manual goes into more detail and basically says their FIFO is different from some other recent attempts in several important ways. Considering that Levinson sell transports, why would it be in their interest for marketing to lie or misrepresent this feature if it weren't true? Now I know much heated controvesy exists surrounding the claims made about digital technology, some saying digital is digital and expensive cables are theoretically a waste of money and all claims to the contrary are the result of self-fulfilling auditory anticipation, etc. I haven't made up my mind simply because I don't think I have enough experience, listening wise, to weigh in on either side. But judging solely from arguements I've read, I have to at least partially side with the aforementioned critics.
I find the differences in digital front-ends to be significant but subtle. I can't tell much of a difference with A/B comparisons between most "hi-fi" digital components. But in extended listening the differences are huge. Digital is fatiguing in general. But I listen to digital exclusively. And for that reason I spent more money on my source than any other component in my system, including the speakers!

I tend to listen to music for extended periods, upwards of 3 hours at a time. With a low quality digital front end I never listen for that long. When I turn off the music after an hour, I get a momentary feeling of relief. It's like stepping out of a loud party into the bathroom. You think to yourself "ahhh... silence for a moment."

The better the digital front end, the less significant I find the effect of "digital fatigue." My advice would be to try keeping each setup in your system continuously for a week or two. Monitor how much time you actually spend listening to music with each one.

A personal note, there is a possibility that I am unusually sensitive to this. But I've been listening exclusively to digital for over a decade, and I was never into vinyl before that.
Hmm. Sjh32 it would seem a USB fed buffer (or IEEE1394 or similar async bus) would be the next logical step for the Levinson DAC, IMNSHO. A USB interface could, in theory, offer better performance for the same or less money. But it's all speculation until USB transports and DACs appear on the market.
what interconnects, digital interconnects and speaker cables are you using ?

mike
I have to admit, Aroc, that your suggestion is over my head. A USB fed buffer sounds like it uses a USB cable, but why that might be superior (bandwidth?), I can't figure out on my own. As with most of my hobby knowledge, I pick things up slowly over time, and that's what interests me in your post; I should probably have at least a conversational grasp of these subjects if I'm dropping over $4000 on digital gear (I love it when some bored looking saleperson tries to wow me with some marketing technobable and you just know they're full of shit,).
Is there a newletter or other publication for laymen that follows advances in digital audio, like Speakerbuilder was to DIY speaker building?