Good question @mahler123 😀
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.
- ...
- 47 posts total
Either the DA2 module is just simply phenomenal or McIntosh preamps and integrated amps homogenize the sound due to lack of transparency to such degree that all DACs connected to the McIntosh components sound the same. I’m starting to suspect it’s the latter. If your preference is for this kind of approach and you’re satisfied, good for you! |
I've never heard anything from DCS, But I have a C2700 preamp with the DAC2 board in it feeding Mac mono blocks. I also have/had a Chord Dave in my system. What I can say is the Mac DAC2 is better then many may think for the money. It punches well up into the much more expensive DAC range. But the Dave did show its limitations quite easily. The Dave has much better resolution, separation of instruments and bigger, wider, deeper sound stage. Its quite apparent when switching between the two. doesn't take an audiophile to notice. If the DCS is not apparent from the start its just not that good IMO. Regardless of price at the levels we are talking if its not immediately apparent send the DSC back its just not worth what they are asking IMO. DCS has fallen back on their laurels in recent years from what I read, in my limited opinion of course. Last note; new mac sound is not old mac sound, its not warm and mushy as people seem to think, and have commented on. |
If you think about signal-to-noise ratio as a proxy for how resolving a piece of equipment is - recognizing that this may be an oversimplification, but useful nonetheless - then the attached HiFi News review might provide insight: Notice in the lab reports section that while the A-weighted SNR of the DAC2 is 111 db, the SNR of the amp is only 87.4 db. So while the SNR of the Bartok Apex is about 117 db, I think, consistent with what some others have suggested, the Amp may not be sufficiently resolving for you to hear much of a difference. For the record, I do not believe all you need to know about a DAC or amp is SNR - don’t want to get flamed! - but it is a very helpful data point, particularly when we talk about low noise floors, highly resolving dacs and amps, etc. |
- 47 posts total