New McIntosh DA2 DAC

Has anyone listened to the new McIntosh DA2 DAC board in their new C53 or C2700 Pre Amplifiers?  Can anyone compare Mac's new DA2 to the Auralic Vega 2 or the PSAudio Direct Stream DAC's? Thanks!
275 views and no opinions?
I did get to listen to both the C53 and the C2700 through their onboard DA2 DACs.  Using both tube and SS McIntosh amps and amazing speakers at AudioClassics in Binghamton, NY.
The tube pre plus tube amp combo was a bit too muddy for me, and as I have nice SS amp I mostly listened with SS amp.  I did not care for the SS C5300.  I loved the 2700.  Wrapped me in a blanket of warmth.  That said, I do not think the McIntosh DAC was as revealing as my PSAudio DS DAC, but I did not have it with me to compare.
thank you for your feedback on listening to these preamps!  this help me out tremendously..
glad it helped!  I really wanted to like the McIntosh...Ended up buying an AudioNet Preamp and an Auralic Vega G2 DAC.  Could not be happier!
Full disclosure, I am a McIntosh dealer.

Now that that's out of the way; I did just install a C53 in to my system yesterday. It replaces a C48 which obviously has similar levels of functionality. I've generally enjoyed the performance of the C48 and from an integration standpoint, it worked flawlessly. But, I would say that the DAC in the 48, while perfectly good and flexible, left some performance on the table.

I'm also an NAD dealer and have a C658 in the system. This gives me access to BlueOS and also full MQA which McIntosh does not support. In my opinion, the DAC in the C658 outperformed the one in the C48 in most respects. Apples to apples, the C658 was a little more relaxed, warmer and with a bigger bottom end. Generally a little more engaging to listen to. With MQA files, I noticed improved depth and dimension of sound stage through the NAD, a hallmark of the new medium, for those who believe in it.

I've sold and tested many lines of product over the years. Some including very expensive DACs, stand-alone and integrated. And I would have to say that it's rare that I've been genuinely impressed. Sure, there are certainly differences but when taking in to account the ratio of dollars spent vs. potential performance gains, I've found myself less "moved" by improvements, DAC to DAC than other components.  I even emailed Ron C at McIntosh to get his impressions of the C48 vs. C53 as a result of my skepticism.

Enter the C53 and DA2. Even cold and with no run-in time, I was surprised to be able to hear distinct differences. Right out of the box, the DA2 is generally better than the DAC in the C48 which shouldn't be a huge surprised. However, I was intrigued enough to also want to do some A to B comparisons with the C658 and this is where I was more surprised. For everything not MQA, I think I already prefer the DA2 to the C658. I now find the C658 to sound a little "dark" and the bass a bit slow and round through the NAD in comparison to the DA2. Neither DAC sounds overtly "digital" in any negative ways but the DA2 , in my mind, takes another step toward some of the illusive analog qualities most find appealing. Mid-range texture sticks out to me. With certain recordings, this is quite noticeable and pleasant to listen to. Bass is well balanced and tuneful, not one-note-ish, but musical. And the top end has more air than either the C48 or NAD. Pace and timing is also very good. I don't know if I would yet say that the DA2 has the dimensional qualities of the NAD with MQA files, but depth of field with the new C53 is definitely better than the C48. This could be largely attributable to the line stage as well.

For reference, the rest of the system consists of a McIntosh MC462 amplifier, Rega RP10 turntable with Apheta 2 cartridge (I haven't done the comparison between the MC preamps in the 53 and 48 yet), Sonus Faber Electa Amator III speakers and REL S510 sub cabled with Audience AU24SX (power, balanced analog, digital audio and speaker) and an Audience Adept Response power conditioner. Digital sources are NAD C648 BlueOS and Sonos Port and the system is integrated with Control4.

So, I personally do think that the DA2 is a good DAC and solid all-around performer. I also think that this generation of McIntosh preamp and amp combinations are a noticeable step up from the previous. 
Post removed 
I have AURALiC Aries G2 and Vega G2 into c2700. Yesterday I tried connecting from Aries directly into c2700 and the result is very positive. McIntosh may not be known for their DAC. But from what I tried. DA2 is very neutral sounding like Vega G2. To my ears, DA2 may lose a bit at soundstage. Other than that, it is a fine DAC.
I applaud McIntosh for its move to a modular DAC design. I read elsewhere on this site that McIntosh chose a ESS Sabre 9028pro chipset for its DA2 (the DA1 incorporated the ESS Sabre ES9016). I like the sound of the c2700 with its DA2 and pair it with the mc312. For simplicity, I feed it by coax from a Sonos connect because streaming technology is moving too quickly for me to spend more on streaming hardware at the moment.
Post removed 
Post removed 
I have had the C2700 with the DA2 Dac for a week now. My previous DAC was the Oppo Sonica, which uses the ESS chipset also. My understanding is the DA2 uses the 9028pro, and the Oppo had the 9038. Which I imagine are close. Implementations are different of course. The C2700 of course has tubes.

That said, I am absolutely thrilled with the performance of the DA2 via USB in the C2700. (I’m absolutely thrilled with the C2700 though, and it was a bit of a spontaneous purchase and system change, using with a MC 462).

Understanding it is difficult to pinpoint the DA2 vs the Oppo since the Oppo I ran through a Pass XP12, then XP22, and even DAC direct. I would tell you this. I feel the DA2 is very detailed, but NOT bright (now, keep in mind the C2700 has tubes).

I would describe the DA2 as dynamic and neutral.  It does do a great job with vocals, one thing I have noticed is that I can hear vocals even more clearly now (but not remotely edgy etc, just more defined). 

My Oppo sold so quickly (great DAC), I only played with it one night via the DA2 through the C2700. They were close, but I prefered the DA2, now quite simply that could be because it was the internal DAC, with associated shorter runs and connections.

I will say this, I would be very surprised if anyone was not satisfied with the DA2 as a DAC. More of the differences I would expect would be related to the pre-amp used in association.

It’s a very good DAC IMO.

The C2700... thus far I find it to be spectacular and actually a bargain.

Did any of you try to connect the Oppo 105D's DAC to compare? I have C2700 and I'm debating whether to even bother get cables for the 105 to use its DAC or just sell it and use another streamer to connect straight to the DA2.