2. tech-talk
  3. 1338579102

Use of isolation transformer

For about a week now I've been using a 160 watt isolation transformer over my NuForce DAC-9 D/A converter(power consumption: 9 watts). I was recommend this by an audio-friend who said that my HTPC and "analogue switching amp," a NuForce Stereo 8.5V3, could possibly "contaminate" the power to the DAC-9 (via the return-wires, I suppose?) being that they're all coupled through the same power distributor(i.e., I don't use a power distributor per se - the bare wires are connected directly; leadwire to leadwire, return- to return, and earth to earth). Actually, about a few months ago I started out by placing an isolation transformer over my HTPC, to good sonic effect, and then proceeded with an extra one over my DAC-9 to possibly "shield" it from whatever noise may be emitted backwards through the power cord from the power amp - or even from the power wall-outlet. There was nothing conclusive or overly presumptive about the use of isolation transformers as proposed by my friend(who has incorporated the same tweak in his, in some respects, roughly similar stereo setup) in regards to the hypothesized effect or its theoretical (dis-)advantages; it was simply a suggestive "what if?"

Now, the use of an isolation transformer over the DAC-9 has a definitive sonic effect, and one that I would also call an overall improvement. My immediate, and remaining impressions are that a more finely resolved/differentiated top end, a more full sounding and clearly outlined midrange(more organic, even), and a better integrated and "coherently distributed" low end. In fact, coming about these three frequency spectrums in a rather disparate fashion, necessary it may be, feels a bit awkward in that the overall impression is that of a rather homogenous presentation.

However, another friend of mine who came over some days ago, remarked, upon listening to my setup, that while he conceded the mids had become more full and present sounding since his last listen(i.e., prior to the iso. transformer over the DAC), and better integrated with the low end as well, he found that the reverberative nature of the top end had become somewhat constricted - and to be honest, I had thougt about this as well. Moreover, he now found the width of the soundstage had been narrowed, instead hearing a more center-focused soundstage. This, also, I could confirm via my own impressions, though contrary to him I find it to be a more distinct quality, and even disagreed on the narrowing of the soundstage width.

Being that my friend had made verbal the observations on the top end's reverberative less lively nature, and that I found this to be in tandem with my own impressions, I thought it possibly illuminating to remove the isolation transformer from the DAC powerline and see how its omission would affect the reproduction in this area. In short, after a few seconds of listening with the transformer removed it was clear to me that the sound had not only changed, but also (subjectively) deteriorated; the overall presentation seemed to have fallen apart as if a connective (invisible) glue was missing, the center-fill and fullness of the mids lacked sorely, the ease of flow likewise, and the top end appeared less resolved and now exhibiting a white-ish or pale "color" patina to it; a more withdrawn, less spacious and anonymous sound - simply not as involving. That is also to say: the top end energy or reverberative nature seemed in no discernable way to improve or correct the beforementioned "shortcoming," if indeed that's what it really is.

Having now re-inserted the isolation transformer over my DAC the sonic presentation has yet again fallen well into place, though periodically the round-ish nature of the highs, extremely well differentiated and resolved they truly are, continue to come off a tad uninvolving with some music as if the slightest "edge" is missing. Everything in me tells me the general imprinting of the isolation transformer is that of leading to a definate sonic improvement save for this small issue, making me believe that another issue in my audio chain could have been addressed this way. It could also be that over time one has become more or less accustomed to a slight excess of energy in the highs, or simply a specific sonic nature here, that the more finely resolved and organic presentation leads me to believe sometimes that something is missing. Or, that the fullness of the mids and (soundstage-)center presence has somehow reverted attention from the highs to the lower frequencies. Anyhow, it's an interesting and overall satisfying developement of the sound, but also one that may have exposed improvements or changes could be made elsewhere - if indeed over more time I should conclude that more top end reverberative energy is needed.

I would appreciate the input of others who're using isolation transformers in front of their stereo setups as well - be it either (though preferably) with smaller and separately placed isolation transformers, or large singular ones used over the outlet group feeding the entire setup - possibly even on a related note to what I'm writing above both with regard the general nature of the perceived sonic changes isolation transformers lead to, as well as more specifically, where noticed, the reverberative or overall nature of the highs.
128x128phusis
phusis's avatar
phusis OP
1,210 posts
 
UPDATE:

I've eventually decided to remove the isolation transformer over my DAC(though the one over the HTPC remains). Over time, in the wake of this ISO trsf's initial inclusion and being properly configured(/wired), I (still) had the recurring, fluctuating feeling of a slight "rounding" of or padded nature to the sound that left me wanting for a little more edge and reverberative breathing room, so to speak. Lower to central mids seemed to have grown in size and presence, bringing with them a beguiling warmth and intimacy, and high frequencies appeared slightly more resolved. However, the longer I lived with this sonic character, if you will, the more I longed for a more vibrant and expansive field of sound.

So then, immediately in the wake of uncoupling the ISO trsf over the DAC-9 I missed the presence and warmth from earlier, as if the presentation had turned somewhat out of focus, slightly more "pale" in its musical color, and becoming a tad uninvolving. Yet, at the same time the distribution of the soundstage now seemed more "even," no longer curving out towards the listener, and leaving more room/space to voices which sounded more dense and sharply carved out. Overall the presentation felt slightly more lean and distanced.

In the days since, now a week ago, I've settled into the sound sans DAC ISO trsf, and haven't felt wanting for more warmth or intimacy nor experienced any fluctuating "there's something not right with the sound"-feeling. I can still recall, if prompted, the sound now being a bit leaner, but it's not lean as such - I find. Now I treasure my NuForce poweramp being warmed up over a couple of hours and what it brings to the sound(although it sounds just fine when immediately turned on), whereas before (with DAC ISO trsf) I almost felt as if the sound became a tad too smooth and warm/closed-in when the poweramp had been left on for some hours; if it's any bearing I believe it tells me something important about the sonic balance as is..

It's worth mentioning that my initial trying out the ISO trsf over the DAC was recommended by a friend who'd tried out the same in his system, and so the initiative was not inspired by my own ears in search for a corrective tweak to the sonic balance, or otherwise, of my audio setup. It would appear then that at least in this regard - i.e. the overall tonal balance - my setup is pretty much spot-on to my ears as is.

Right now I'm not in a hurry to try out another isolation transformer solution, but I suspect there're combinations that would work very well without adding the, to my ears, too pronounced softening and enlargement of the sonic image.
timestretcher
4 posts
 
Just to add to the thread:

I believe that any soundstage variations heard without the transformer, whether they are preferable and pleasant or otherwise - are distortion, artifacts caused by the "imperfect" power that an isolation transformer seems to rectify. I use isolation transformers in my setup and I think that they provide clean power and cause the black background of the audio to be deeper, and the music that springs forth from that blackness is all the clearer because of it.

But, "distortion" is such a loaded word. A play of pleasing distortions can do wonders that perfectly boring and clinical clarity cannot. In some cases, adding a small bit of barely audible noise as DSP to a track can create harmonics that cause an impression of significantly increased clarity. I guess it's like how some people actually swear by adding the tiniest sprinkles of salt into their soda, as it will sharpen the taste and actually cause a sweeter effect if the amount of salt isn't excessive. Crazy, right? If an isolation transformer mutes those good distortions by removing slight irregularities in power from your wall outlets, then that can be a bad thing and result in a sound that is less desirable to some human ears, regardless of whether or not an audio analysis tool measures it as clearer.
phusis's avatar
phusis OP
1,210 posts
 
Timestretcher --

Thanks for your reply.

I'm thinking: why even presume the effect of any given isolation transformer automatically equates into what is always essentially "right," i.e. that is supported by actual lowering of distortion figures and less "artifacts," and would otherwise result in a more "true" audible presentation - whether we like it or not? I'm not trying to turn this into a "all is relative"-matter, but it's the presumption that "even though it's right [say's who?] THEY may not like it."

I could also ask: why do you prefer the sonic outcome of the use of an ISO trsf in your setup and not I in mine? Are you more in-tune with the essentially more "true" sound this is supposed to produce, is it a matter of preference(then why the claim of a reference?), because of the synergy effect that falls out either positively or negatively, or..? From a rather simplistic standpoint I take it the use of an ISO trsf in general would result in a more clean, or should one say a more "desirable" power, but what is the possible multitude of factors that could arise with regard to the different implementations of an ISO trsf, and its specific characteristics into size and type and so on? Would they not also bring variations into the sonic picture, so to speak, that puts into perspective whether the use of an ISO trsf is always essentially for the better?

The use of a specific 160 watt ISO trsf over my D/A-converter proved to have some merits, mainly lending an added sense of warmth and intimacy to the sound, however the named "rounding" of the highs gave me the impression of a cushion-effect or a slightly padded and (too) gentle sonic nature; I found it placed a damper on agility, edge, and sense of dynamics, even though the overall presentation with its notably smoothness, presence and warmth was very inviting. I'm not really saying the sound of my setup sans ISO trsf over the D/A-converter is (again) all for the better, but it's notable how I now seem to find the overall balance of the sound more natural and clear-cut, saved perhaps for a slight lack of warmth. Also, and not least: the enlargement of the lower to central mids (w/ISO trsf over DAC) to me always felt slightly out of proportion, and so doesn't translate into what I regard as a "natural" presentation of the soundstage. Any which way you want to put this, to me it's a slight deviation from what is intuitively "right."
timestretcher
4 posts
 
>Any which way you want to put this, to me it's a slight deviation from what is intuitively "right."

Is it possible that "natural" and what is in the recording on the CD or source you use for playback are not the same. Adding some small bit of power line distortion to the signal from the CD could produce a more natural sound, whereas a "pure" reproduction of the CD itself would seem artificial? As hearing is ultimately subjective (everyone has slightly differently shaped ears and ideas of what is pleasing, too), it could be down to that.

And who knows, I could be wrong about an iso transformer being a magic bullet solution. What it fixes in clarity, perhaps it could compromise in some other area? And then there is the question of specific iso transformers - are some better or worse than others? Maybe some models actively harm your signal path, others have no effect and some are good? I do not know how their designs would impact these things but in my ignorance I'll open-mindedly say that anything is possible.
sabai
2,027 posts
 
In series from the wall receptacle I am using a medical grade transformer into 2 power conditioners into a power regenerator (for DAC and transport) with excellent results.
More to discover