Without wanting to argue in anyway about your findings, in your scenario,

* the 588 will send an analog stream to the 568,
* the 568 will then convert it from Analog back to Digital
* assuming Direct (stereo) mode, the 568 will then convert back from Digital to Analog (assuming you are outputting to an Analog amp and speakers)

In that scenario, the 568 would use the same DAC`s as if you had sent it the Digital out from the 588 in the first place. Therefore, I am not sure how the “DAC`s are better in the 588 than the 568”.

I believe that the perceived difference may be due to other reasons, as essentially, the final D/A conversion is done by the 568, whether it is connected by Analog or Digital out to the 588.

Also interesting that the CD goes thru Three conversion stages (D to A in the 588; A to D in 568; D to A in the 568) and still sounds better than a One stage conversion (D to D transfer and then D to A conversion in the 568)

Certainly, the Meridian (and other manfacturers`) people would be very surprised at this, as it is generally accepted that keeping the conversion stages to a minimum, is best practice.

The Nordost Red Dawn Analog interconnects are obviously very good. Is there any chance that the perceived performance difference is due to the Digital interconnect being used is not of the same high standard?? Also, I assume you are using the Coaxial digital out (rather than the Optical) from the 588??

Certainly, my own experience has been that a 598 (as a transport only) is at least as good, if not ever so slightly better, than the 588 for normal Redbook CD replay. (For what it`s worth, Meridian also claim that the 598 is a better CD transport better than 588, as it offers lower jitter)

As they say, One man`s meat is another man`s poison!!


[This message has been edited by RHurley (edited 09-16-2003).]

[This message has been edited by RHurley (edited 09-16-2003).]

-