dCS Bartok Apex vs McIntosh DA2 - Trouble Hearing the Difference


I am currently playing a new set of Focal Scala Evos with a McIntosh MA9500, fed by a Wiim Pro playing Tidal Direct. This set up uses the McIntosh DA2, which sounds remarkable to my untrained ears. 

I borrowed a dCS Bartok Apex from my local dealer. Given that I can run balanced out (using Transparent Reference Gen 6 cables) to the MA9500, I can switch inputs to compare the DA2 & Wiim vs the Bartok (DAC & Streaming) very quickly. I level matched the best I could.

What I am confused about, though, is just how close the DA2 sounds to the Bartok. The most noticeable difference is how forward and prevalent vocals are with the DA2. They seem anchored to the center image and several feet more forward into the room, whereas in the Bartok they are a bit more recessed, and integrated into the rest of the music. The Bartok soundstage is also wider, but not shockingly so. The sound is definitely smoother or "rounder" with the Bartok as compared to the DA2. 

I admit I am relatively new to critical listening, but I think I expected the difference between the $20K Bartok and the built-in DA2 to be more profound. I'm not anxious to spend the money on the Bartok, but am willing to do if it is a significant step up, which I think it should be. 

So what am I missing? Am I perhaps limited by the MA9500? My dealer doesn't love autoformer-based Mc products, but many do, so I would have thought the MA9500 is sufficiently resolving. Room acoustics are not the best, but certainly not terrible. 

Interested in any thoughts or feedback.

ripordaff

@ripordaff awesome room man! With that said, those chairs blocking the speakers are a potential problem. That could be contributing to why you don’t hear the difference in DACs. But the main reason is you’re not giving yourself enough time to acclimate with dcs before you switch back to DA2.

Also, and this will probably ruffle some feathers, that McIntosh amp is not on the level of your speakers. You’re not realizing the full potential of the Focals. Amplifier is an extremely close second in contributing to the final presentation to the speakers, if not as equally important. 
 

My Dad has a 8950 with DA2 card and it sounds great will USB, Coax, eArc...no need for optical in his setup.  

It's all in the implementation.  Look how many DACs use the ESS chip that is in many devices,  Mac uses 8 of them.   That DAC is no slouch.     

My Cyrus Amp uses the same chip and I think it sounds really good with its internal DAC, I sold my RME dac that I had planned on using with it.   The internal DAC is that good. 

The Eversolo A6 uses the same chip I believe or something really close.  Sounds good through it's XLR and RCA but sounded a lot better connected to the two amps mentioned above via digital.

I just added a SMSL SU-X to my ma352 today. It was only 1k and measures better than most other DACs so I said why not, if it’s a dud I didn’t risk too much money relatively speaking. Well, using the Node as a streamer, I got amazing performance out of it, and I say the sound quality increased at least over 20 percent than using the Node alone. I am running SF Olympica 2 speakers.

Also, I’m running XLR audio cables from Amazon, they made a significant improvement also. These no-name, cheap Chinese audio companies are seriously holding their own. This SMSL SU-X sounds better than a 4k Wandla set up , and the SU-X even has a tube mode. Using tube mode, with my integrated tube amp, and SF speakers, I am in total audio bliss now. So satisfied. Thank you SMSL for not ripping us off and giving us world class performance!

I have got the MolaMola Tambaqui and the Meitner MA3. I have sold them both when I heard the DA2 in a (now my) C2700.