So they both have the same shiny acrylic front coating and matte black metal sides. Putting these 2 DACs side by side, the Sparrow simply looks like a shrunken version of the Colibri. This in turn forces the Sparrow to rely on the stability of the 5V output of the upstream source instead of consistently having a tightly regulated power supply through an internal battery. However, the biggest change between the 2 DACs is that the Sparrow doesn’t have an internal battery. This also translates to both DACs having the same decoding capabilities, which include MQA, DSD128, and PCD up to 32bit/384kHz.īoth DACs also have a balanced output, but the Sparrow has about half the power at 125mW into 32Ω while having closer power numbers through the single-ended output at 62mW into 32Ω. Earmen SparrowĪ side-by-side comparison between the two DACs shows that they have a lot in common, which includes the same ES9281PRO DAC chip that both DACs use. Images, on the other hand, end up blurring together as the space between each image isn’t as pronounced. On its own, the Eagle sounds spacious enough, however, listening to it together with its other stablemate, the Eagle ends up having a more intimate soundstage presentation. Vocal tracks also tend to have a comparatively drier presentation with less euphony while vocal texture and nuance are a touch harder to notice. The Eagle is outclassed by its stablemate in the amount of control that the DAC exerts over the driver, where it ends up being looser in the bass region.Īlso, the treble on the Eagle ends up being more prone to being sibilant, particularly with tracks that already have natural levels of sibilance in them. Performanceīoth DACs come from the same company, which means that they would typically retain a house sound which manifests itself in how both DACs have a generally even-handed tonal balance with ample bass lift. Instead, it’s just a straightforward device with a single 3.5mm output that you can plug into any smartphone, PC, or MAC through the large USB-A port which makes it a comparatively less elegant solution, particularly with smartphones or tablets. Thus, it looks more like a flash drive.Īside from the much smaller footprint, the Eagle doesn’t have any buttons on the sides. However, the Eagle is a much smaller device designed to be a dongle. Both DACs have the same shiny front and back while having a matte black finish on the sides. Physically, the 2 DACs have a striking resemblance, which really leaves no doubt that they come from the same stable. Also, the headphone output section on the Eagle is limited to a 3.5mm single-ended output having even less rated power at 62mW into 32Ω. However, the big difference is that the ES9280CPRO doesn’t have MQA decoding capabilities, but PCM decoding is left at 32BIT/384kHz while having DSD128 decoding capabilities as well.īeing a pure dongle DAC, the Eagle doesn’t have an internal battery, instead, it takes its power from the USB A port. This means that most of the functionality is built into the DAC chip, such as a headphone output section, and even a USB controller. Instead of running an ES9281PRO DAC, the Eagle uses an ES9280CPRO DAC chip.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |