KEF LS50 Wireless Internal vs External DAC ??

as usual lots of answers from people that do not own the speakers, have never tried them or even listened to them...:)

itzhak1969356 posts08-13-2018 2:35am "I am not a big fan of all-in-one solutions for example this speakers it’s usually a compromise and I will never consider such speakers solution ,the best way is regular speakers and seperate dac and streamer unless you are in a limited budget and you are willing to compromise the sound quality."

Well, the LS50W sounds a little better to me than the passive LS50 with a $1500 amp. I think it’s the DSP that the wireless version is using that makes the difference.

robr45314 posts By running analog into the ls50s, all you are doing is adding a conversion from analog to digital to the signal chain (assuming this source has a digital out). That digital signal is then sent to the same dac that the digital inputs on the Kef route to. All the kefs dac limitations are still in play. There is no native dsd benefit to be gained, no way to bypass the 192khz ceiling.

The best explanation for these various reports are pyschoacoustics, and that you are hearing what you want to hear. This can be an extremely powerful phenomena.

For those of you unwilling to accept that, then all that is left is that whatever sonic signature the analog source has, is being captured by the analog input, converted to digital, and then preserved all the way through the signal chain to the drivers. There is nothing “gained” here, nothing added other than the sources “color”.

I own the LS50 and am currently demoing the LS50w. My experience is the same as some other posters in this thread, that using an external Schiit Modi Multibit through a Schiit Saga preamp into the LS50W RCA is a step up in pleasing sound versus connecting my PC directly to the LS50W using the internal dac. It sounds more lively. I was thinking of selling the Schiit gear but now I can’t because I would be compromising what sounds best to my ears.

Returning to this post after originating it, I remain convinced that the USB input of the LS50W is not as pleasing a source as their RCA inputs fed by a listener's preferred mid-range or higher DAC.
I also feel that the absence of a passive crossover (and the presence of driver-tuned bi-amplification) greatly exceeds any deleterious effects of digital resampling in the speakers when run this way, as compared to the passive LS50s run with same DAC (and no ADC>DAC conversion) and even a high-end amplifier.
To recap: streamer to DAC to LS50W exceeds streamer to LS50. Streamer to DAC to LS50W also wins hands down against streamer to DAC to pre/amp to LS50. I have made these comparisons with numerous units in the system, and these results are consistent for me. YMMV.

p.s. I run a very carefully considered system of separates now, but the LS50W remain in my eyes a screaming bargain :)

transience OP17 posts11-10-2018 5:12pmp.s. I run a very carefully considered system of separates now, but the LS50W remain in my eyes a screaming bargain :)

I’m using LS50 because it’s all I need for my 10 x 12 room. How much do you think I would need to spend to beat the LS50W for a small room? :)

bug84342 posts10-09-2017 12:26am
With Hugo as an external DAC and run RCA into KEF LS50 wireless, it sounds more spacious and detailed.
However, there is a big problem which made me come back to use USB rather than RCA port.
When I use Hugo, the vocal is apparently not as clear as internal DAC, this is a huge difference, you need not AB test to tell the difference.
I think buy some USB isolation gear EX:Schiit wyrd and Singxer UIP-1 is the best way to make LS 50 wireless Hifiest

I think Schiit Eitr may solve that problem as well. It’s what I’m using and I haven’t experienced the issue you describe in my LS50W vs LS50 listening tests so far.