I have had many Dacs but my most recent is the LAiV Harmony.
I’m glad you like the RD 160 and hope I will feel the same way when I receive mine.
StandardModel
I’m pretty sure you’ll be happy, unless you have really high standards, like $50k dac standards. But maybe it is good to keep your expectations low, you know the saying, underpromise, and overdeliver.
I think the Laiv by all accounts is a very good dac. I have a Gustard x30, which some regard as similar or better. I can tell you the Rose is significantly better than the Gustard with the SFP setup.
I have read many positive tests on the Rd160.
I have not read reviews as mentioned above
I had the Rs150b for a year and I took the Rd 160 home for 3 days before buying it.
The Rs150b was simply drier, the rd160 has a more analog rendering
Amplifier Accuphase E5000
BaW 802d2 speakers
The room is 42m2
My Dac before the LAiV was a Gustard r2r R26. The LAiV was an upgrade for me.
I’m hopeful this is not a lateral move but an upgrade as well.
StandardModel
I hope the rd 160 will be an upgrade for you. I tested the Gustard r26, Laiv harmony, PS audio direct stream and even the mola mola tambaqui. For its price point the 160 was a clear winner for me. Paired with the 130 using the sfp connection the sound is sublime. The bass is not overwhelming, the mids and highs are not harsh.
Separation and detail are exact. For me the sound stage is perfect, I know it’s a cliche, but listening to live tracks does feel like you are there. On the whole the 160 is one of the most analog sounding dacs for that price I have heard.
The above is all very subjective, but in my room integrated into my system and my cables and speakers the 160 was a no brainer for me.
Good luck, happy listening
2 Likes
My experience is nearly identical.
1 Like
@Bustahip @Bicycle Could you take a photo of your SPF unit and how it is connected to 160/130 (photo from the back of the devices) ??
Hmm, as far as I understand, I won’t be able to couple the RS150B and RD 160 in this way… 
Thanks for the pics !
There are usb 3.0 to sfp converters on the market you could use. I have never tried them and do not know how good they are in terms of sound quality… maybe an option ?
I’m also no expert, so if anyone has any other suggestions I’d be happy to be educated
In fact, there are already some good USB optical isolation solutions on the market, such as the one I use in the photo.
It has a transmitter that converts USB signals to SFP signals, and a receiver that converts SFP signals back to USB signals. The chassis and power supply are independent.
The compatibility is very good, plug and play, and I have never encountered any problems.
RS130 is not necessarily required to achieve USB optical isolation on RD160.
3 Likes
I don’t even need to click to know what the ASR members will say…
Sharisselis,
True. I was ripped to shreds when I reported on ASR that I had purchased a LAiV Dac and asked if anyone had any thoughts about it. They ate me with salt for paying over a couple of hundred dollars for a DAC literally running me out of the forum tarred and feathered for suggesting that there could be ANY audible difference in Dacs and that SINAD was the only measurement mattered. I tried to express my opinion that there is an audible difference between R2R and Delta Sigma Dacs and even a very audible difference between the ESS and Akai Dacs. The members then came at me with torches and pitchforks and it digressed to ad hominem personal attacks so I left.
Still, a SINAD of 86dB is disappointing. It should be a LOT better. SINADs for DACs are running >100dB some even reaching 140dB.
I wonder why The RD 160’s SINAD is so low.
A word of caution. Adjustments are made in the calculation of SINAD. I don’t know if this number is before or after those adjustments. Perhaps the Rose folks will clarify.
StandardModel
Sharisselis,
If you weren’t so superficial and conceited and read the link, you’d find out that it’s not about the opinion of ASR members, but about how hifi rose was caught lying in the published specifications!
I discovered this a long time ago, long before ASR posted.
It is no news that Hifirose has different information on different websites in different countries. Even the internal photos of the RD160 have several versions.
If you had really paid attention to this, rather than reading second-hand information from ASR, you would have known that the information on the original website about 132 dB SNR was followed by a note called TBC, which means to be confirmed.
So this is most likely a spec that has not yet been finalized during development, rather than what you would call lying.
This is probably related to the fact that RD160 uses muses02 as I/V and output. The ideal THD+N of muses02 is 0.001%, which will definitely be worse in actual application. Therefore, the RD160 only achieves a THD+N of 0.005%, or a SINAD of 86, is very reasonable.
If Rose used a higher performance OPAMP like the OPA1612, I think they could get very good SINAD, just like the RS151.
But when SINAD is already below the limit of human hearing, why bother about which one is higher?
Can human ears distinguish between SINAD of 86 and 140?
I think that once SINAD is below the hearing threshold, it is no longer a concern.
Of course, some people think that spending more money means getting better measurement performance. For such consumers, they can choose low-priced and ultra-high-performance products such as Topping, each getting what they need.