Benchmark dac - why such diverging opinions?

"you can't handle the truth!"

That's very accurate observation. One person even expressed opinion that Benchmark is too resolving making each instrument sound independently while he got used to all instruments mushed together. My experience was similar. Sound was so clean that I thought some instruments must be missing. Now I enjoy clarity of Benchmark and can see why it became a benchmark in audio.

Apropos of perhaps not much, but tracks these days are mixed with all sorts of divergent goals in mind, and often done for the genuine lowest common denominator (ie, mixed to sound good on a car system with a percentage of the speakers blown, downsampled to AAC, at 60 miles per hour with the windows down). But when the mixing goal is absolute fidelity -- and it often is not, but when it is -- this is frequently done with the most etched, unforgiving, resolving, analytical gear achievable, on the express theory that if one can make something sound listenable on that type of setup, it will sound good on anything. (And, inversely, the type of system that many things will very much NOT sound good on...). That is the extreme that I understand really good professional gear to be designed towards -- and by all accounts, an extreme that the Benchmark excells at. In other words, no-compromise professional gear is designed to be a tool, a magnifying glass if you will to reveal and accentuate every last flaw. Home reproduction gear, very frequently, is designed with different -- not mutually exclusive by a long shot -- but certainly very different priorities.

Putting aside whether "truth" is subjective or objective or whatever, that particular flavor of "truth" in home audio reproduction is simply not something that all folks, playing most software, will want to live with on a day to day basis. Hell, wouldn't eat chocolate every day, either. But, if that's what you want, you'll by all accounts love the Benchmark. If it's not what you want, you may not like it one little bit. Whether or not this adds up to an accurate verdict on Benchmark, however, is perhaps beside the point. As I understand it, the Benchmark is professional gear designed with that goal in mind -- and the fact that it has developed a huge following and achieved real success in the non-professional market says about all you need to know regarding whether it's a viable design goal. It obviously is. Whether it's the piece of gear for you or not, or could find a happy home within your particular system firing ideosyncratically in your particular room, however, that one is up to you and no one else. Or, at any rate, my theory at the moment (and, incidentally, what drove me to consider other DACs when it came down to the one I wanted to live with).

Excellent comments above. Yes, the DAC1 is clean, fast, pristine, dynamic, with powerful bass, but it may be too "clean" esp. in the mid bass, for those who like some richness. I haven't found it harsh or bright at all. It takes excellent ancillary equipment (esp. the transport and digital cable) and some time to appreciate the above virtues v. other dacs.

However, it also should be noted that many negative comments are simply the result of a vocal minority, i.e, a few individuals, literally only a handful, of naysayers who for some strange reason post negative comments about the DAC1 over and over again, while the majority of owners - the thousands and thousands who love the Benchmark, both pro and audiophile alike, do not participate and are silent. This gives an unfortunate erroneous negative view of the DAC1

For example, on this forum there's Macdadtexas, who, while otherwise lucid, has posted dozens of negative comments about the DAC1. As an example, see his comments above on this very thread.

Then, on Audioasylum, there's four or so posters who almost obsessively post negative comments dozens of times, often together. If someone says something positive about the DAC1, they join in together to disparage the DAC1 and often the poster himself. These individuals, none of whom state what equipment they have, mainly consist of posters named Regor Ladan, carcass123 (I think that's the name), mbxlc, and maybe one other. Carcass123 in one post admits he "heard the DAC1 once" - I guess that makes him an expert - and from this one listening draws the conclusion that the DAC is a "bad" dac, which he can state a dozen times. Nonsense.

Fact is, the Benchmark DAC1 is an outstanding dac that, imo, fully warrants the praise it has received, notwithstanding the handful of naysayers.

I would be shocked it you didn't like any one of those better.

I am quite sure I would appreciate them all. They all have a great reputation but I am sufficiently happy with the DAC1 that I have no urge to change. I think there is a stage you reach where things begin to be only a bit different but not necessarily a lot better and the DAC1 is sufficient for me. I don't doubt that by trying ten different DAC's or spending five times as much that I might find one that is slightly more suited to my tastes but the difference will not be material enough to me to be worth the money or time. To be honest I found the difference between the DAC1 and stock Sony CD player to be audible but not huge...nothing even remotely approaching the difference I hear between one room and another or one speaker and another.

I'm puzzled ...

Mizuno (Threads | Answers | This Thread)

Very simple ... same reason there are more than one flavor of ice cream.