2. digital
  3. 1255246992

Mod my B C DAC 3, or just get another DAC?


Hi folks

As I suffer from the disease of ‘more’ and I’d like very much to gain another level of performance in terms of honesty in the tones, and greater immediacy with imaging and sound stage representation, I’m looking for input here so I can decide which is better for me right now:

1. Modding my current stock BC DAC3
2. Sell it and buy another brand & model entirely?

I’m guessing the modding route one of greater value as it could likely be less expensive a way to go for me to gain what I seek.

My hesitancy to have it modded, revolves around the possibility of me winding up with a DAC that is transformed into something so critically revealing and resolute so as to be without the involvement which comes from the truth & naturalness of real music, thereby reducing the music I can play through it.

I listen to everything but the baser urban genres. Rap & most Hip Hop usually aren’t my cup of tea. All else? Yep. Pretty much and now I’m starting to get into classical as well. Mainly though it is jazz, big band jazz, vocalists, Bluegrass, R&B, Folk, Country, World, Rock, Blues, etc, etc.

Anyone who has had a DAC3 modded and would take the time to provide some feedback as to the results would be immensely appreciated.

Of course, any other thoughts on the topic in general are welcome too, and perhaps in terms of which mod master tends to voice their mods in SUCH & SUCH A WAY… OR THE LIKE.

I feel naturalness & honesty in tone, timber, dynamic range, as well as ambient retrieval are of significant consequence to capture the soul of the musical recreation and enhance the illusion of they are here, or you are there, which I get a fair degree of now.

Naturally, a higher level of resolution is amenable to that end, yet it should not be the spotlit attribute of a presentation. I listen for hours on end now and would wish that frame not be truncated by listening fatigue.

I’ve seen only the notes from Underwood HiFi on their level one and two mods, and the recent claims of the new VBS technology available thru Bel Canto for some of their e One level components.

As all of my system is and will continue to be digitally sourced a DAC is the key item for me. I must add too I do like what the DAC3 does for my stereo and my HT rig presently.

Thanks a lot for the input and consideration on this inquiry.
blindjim
dpac996's avatar
dpac996
714 posts
 
How would one know if the resulting sound from say the BC DAC3 vs the Lavry is due to jitter rejection or analog filtering current/voltage conversion post DAC, or simply the dac IC itself? I think excessive attention to jitter performance can misguide many audiophiles, certainly myself. Yes jitter is bad, but once that is dealt with there is no shortage of other challenges. I have had the BC DAC3 (for over a year), a benchmark DAC1 (non usb) and just recently the Benchmark DAC1 HDR. In all cases the DAC's sounded different, not one clearly better over the other. In general I found that the Benchmarks to have a more vivid presentation, a touch more upfront, but the DAC3 somewhat recessed with a tendency to bunch the images, but with a good 'tone' nonetheless. Both dacs claim, and the data indeed does prove it, top notch jitter specs. Both dacs use well selected operational amps in the chip configuration (pretty much all cd players and dacs are implementing op-amps either with an IC or discrete). The DAC3 uses digital attentuation, while the dac1 HDR was a more traditional analog pot.

Back to the OP. I think modding the DAC3 would be a mistake and a misuse of time/effort. The DAC3 is a superb example of engineering with premimum parts already and I would bet that modding isn't really going to do much for you and may even produce a worse result.

For me, i've been pretty dissapointed after a few years of messing around with DACs and so called high end cd players. It's the same story: at first i'm blown away by this or that difference, and then I get bored... and after a long enough soak, I realize that the difference between these and lesser sources, like my squeezebox (with the linear) are actually pretty small, and certainly not worth the extra $$$. I think in my case, I am overly excited by the new toy and over hype the sonic results approximately in proportion to how much the new component cost (over the old). I thought the DAC3 would be the end all be all, based on the engineering and reputation, and reviews, but like Blindjim, I got bored with it. It's less a problem of the dac3 and more a problem of my subjective scrutiny of all these toys. Sigh. I need a new hobby. Sorry for the long blathering post. Maybe the Bryston Dac will be the one ;)
blindjim OP
3,092 posts
 

Mlsstl

Having heard them both, DA10 & BC D3 in my home, I felt the D3 did a better job in the jitter regard... and those other areas I mentioned. In fact I posted a review of them both here on the 'gon.

Using USB as a main interface is not something I'll do predominately. It's just a nice thing to have about.

The remote control switching of sources, and it's use as a preamp, if needed or desired, also swayed my vote and justified the added cost of the DAC 3 over the Lavry. But again, that is my circumstance and preffs. All my gear resides in another room from my listening room so remote switching of inputs was quite nice the preamp part? used it once or twice so far. I use it mostly as a test tool not a preamp. I have a preamp I prefer more.

Thanks at any length though. I appreciated the thoughts.

Tvad

Yeah. I believe I get it now completely having thought more about it since it's first mention here. If following a mod it is something I disagree with, I'm lost. I'd probably be unable to live with it in that new condition.

A part of me keeps saying any modder worth his or her salt would not transform a good thing into something worse, or in this case something less musical.

Thanks for the reminder of 'Audio Note' too. I've been very curious about them for a while prior to the BC D3 buy. Additionally, the Wavelength DACs have always been on my short list, yet feature sets being what they are in his line up, and my seldom seeing them for sale preowned, kept me away.

Richard_stacy

The B.A.D. review I read at computer audiophile dot com put it on my radar. It's price tag took it off again.

I'm figuring on putting around $1000 into mods on my DAC 3, if I go that way. So even selling my DAC and adding in that additional balance I'm out of that club altogether... if new, for sure.

Thanks kindly for all other thoughts here folks, I sincerely appreciate you for them. Keep 'em coming please.

Maybe someone in the modding game professionally, will chime in and provide another perspective or two, like Chris, Steve, Walter, or Dan, on what one should expect a mod to accomplish for them, or the like at some point.
usblues
1,217 posts
 
I wouldnt mod it.Something completely diff for a diff sound?I have one and thats what I would do,YMMV,good luck,Bob
mlsstl
1,438 posts
 
Dpac996 makes an excellent point - how can one ascribe all audible differences between two DACs to a single factor, especially when the jitter figure differences between the two are fairly insignificant?

While the word may conjur up a certain mental image, I don't believe DAC jitter exhibits as a single phenomenon (e.g., as tape flutter or record wow might.)

There are a lot of other design and parts differences between the two pieces of gear. Some of those likely play a role in the differences you hear.

If I were you (and I'm obviously not) I think the thing I'd want to do first is identify what specific parameters I'd like to see improve. You might even find changing another component a more effective route to accomplish your goal.

Sometimes the hardest thing to do is step back and reevaluate priorities and see if we're really spending our energy where it can make the biggest difference.
blindjim OP
3,092 posts
 

Mlsstl

Very thoughtful remarks, thanks.

I'm simply investigating the prospecs of improvements which can or are gained from modding. I clearly see the possible dollar loss in that venture. I wonder not so much about that though viable it is, but as to peeling back another layer from the onion, or mist from the window and thereby gain greater insights into the reproduced musical event.

I felt the DAC3 the likely candidate for the injection of mo' dough.

From several sources querried by an online mag writer, all were asked the same 10 Q's. All I've read thus far attribute jitter as the most likely candidate for poor sound reproduction in the digital realm.

Sure, there's more to a DAC or player than just the ckt that addresses jitter reduction. Of course. sorry I pointed to that single item as the why of things when I compared the Lavry to the BC DAC.

I'm thinking I'd like to get a bit more transparency, more liquidity, some bit more depth in the stage, and more immediacy in the images. I doubt seriously I'll get that with $2500.... consequently enhancing the DAC seems a likely path... as I've already got the DAC.

$1000 won't get me another amp and I want to keep those I have now. It definitely won't do me better in the preamp arena, I feel mine's a keeper. I'm doubtful I'll make much of a step up by selling my speakers and adding another grand there.

I've been putting off trying out another set of ICs, and heard using a better sound card could help. I've also contacted BC to inquire about their new VBS tech... so we'll see what they say about that.
More to discover