2. digital
  3. 1126769860

Reference DACS: An overall perspective

There has been many threads the last few months regarding the sonic signature of some of the highest regarded reference DACS (Dcs,Meitner,Ensemble,Audio Note,Zanden,Reimyo,Accustic Arts) here on the GON. I have been very fortunate to audtion many of these wonderful pieces in my home or friend's systems. I wanted to share, in a systematic way, my impressions/opinions with you GON members for a two reasons: 1)That my experiences might be helpful to fellow members interested in audtioning these DACS. 2)Starting an interesting discussion regarding the different "sonic flavors" of these reference digital front ends. I totally agree with the statement, "if you have not heard it you don't have an opinion". Therefore, I have no comments regarding DACS from Weiss,Goldmund,Audio Aero and Burmester because I have never had the pleasure of audtioning them. I would love to hear from members who have and share their experiences with us. My overall impression is that these DACS(Dcs,Meitner,Ensemble,Audio Note,Zanden,Reimyo,Accustic Arts) can be grouped into two molar categories regarding their overall sonic signature. By the way, all of them can throw a large/deep soundstage with excellent layering in the acoustic space with "air" around individual players on that stage. However, than they start to part company into two major categories. Category #1) These DACS "flavors" revolve around pristine clarity, fine sharp details,speed,very extended top/bottom frequencies,and great PRAT. These DACS never sound "etched" or "in your face" but are more "upfront" then "layed back" in their presentation. The DACS, to my ear's, that go into this bracket are Dcs,Ensemble,Meitner. My personnal favorite in this group is the Ensemble, which I owned for two years. These DACS remind me of the sonic signature of speakers such as Wilson,Thiel,Dynaudio, Focal/JM Labs. Category #2) These DACS "flavors" revolve around a "musical/organic" sense, natural timbres,and an easy flowing liquidity. Their "less forward" presentation my give the impression of less detail, but I think in this case its an illusion fostered by their more relaxed/organic manner. The DACS, to my ear's, that go into this bracket are Audio Note,Zanden,Reimyo,Accustic Arts. I did find that the tube DACS did not have the top/bottom frequency extenstion and PRAT of the SS DACS in this bracket. For me, the Accustic Arts DAC1-MK3 gave me the best of both categories, therefore it is now the resident DAC in my system. These DACS remind me of the sonic signature of speakers such as Magnepan,Von Schweikert,Sonus Faber. Well, it's all just my opinion regarding these digital pieces, but I hope this post was at least informative/somewhat interesting and would lend itself to other GON members sharing their impressions, not about what DAC is the "BEST" in the world, but your personnal taste and synergy with your system.
teajay
branimir
236 posts
 
Teajay,
I am not in tube-rolling... AA Tube-DAC II was designed with Chinese tubes.
I compare AA combo against ARC REF CD7 pretty extensivly and IMHO AA combo is better. BUT, in most areas it is marginally better(Ok, you can hear the difference. Just IMO it is very small for average audiophile). AA use much bigger digital processing power then ARC but, IMO ARC analogue stage is better and more elaborate then the one in AA.
Also beside my Esoteric D-03/P-03U/G-0Rb combo I had on hand Esoteric D-05/P-05/G-03X, Weiss Medea/Jason combos and Esoteric X-01 D2 player.
AA combo did not better either of Esoterics! I would personally choose Esoteric D-05/P-05/G-03X or X-01 D2 over AA combo as a single digital playback in MY system.
Weiss combo was bettered by AA combo. Here margin in some areas(midrange articulation or soundstage size, specially depth) was big.
Problem is that AA, although very, very good is NOT SOTA in current digital playback.
When I compare AA to Esoterics I invited two other person to get their respective opinions. One is true audiophile(and AA Player I Mk2 owner...), other is Classical Music Piano player. All three of us agreed that AA combo is adding something artificial to the music, specially to single acoustic instruments... Piano for example had some syrupy quality that it do not have in real life(or on Esoteric). To cutt the point-Esoteric sounded closer to real sound with Classical music. That "thing" that AA combo is adding(source-tubes?)is in fact very, very pleasing stuff. I like that way AA combo sound and it is much more #2 sound then #1 sound.
If any of you seek slightly warmer sound then typical #1 combo or player then simply go for AA Tube-DAC II! It is the best #2 sounding combo that I heard(if memory serves me well it is better then all mighty Metronome combo based on Kallisa!). Just one problem-AA sound signature is not fully my cup of tea. I will keep it anyway. Just as a warning to all future owners(potential as well) of AA Tube-DAC II, if your system(specially speakers) is already on the warm side of the spectrum look elsewhere... AA combo is fully, organic sounding stuff as Teajay described it in his review, I would just add that you got the impression how Teajay's system is sounding via his AA reviews.
BTW, Teajay-you really did a great job with your AA Tube-DAC II review!
ben
66 posts
 
Teajay, I know very well Shuguang 12AX7 tubes (I am still using them in my Unison Research tube amp)which AA used in Tube Dac,they have syrupy and blury low mids and upper bass as Branimir indicated. I guess you got better result replacing the stock tubes.
I would purchase Tube Dac if I have not tubes in my system already but did not
want to struggle with many those small tubes already I have 5
ben
66 posts
 
Branimir,
I thank you for your detailed comparison AA and Esoteric transport/dacs
Could you please write your observations about human voice(female especially)
violin and other string instruments comparing them if you have listened such instruments playing on both of them.
Thanks in advance
branimir
236 posts
 
Ben,
First about violin, Itzhak Perlman Stradivari sounded much more clear and alive via Esoteri D-03/P-03U/G-0Rb combo then via AA combo. There were also more details apparent like Mr.Perlman hand moves and his breathing while performing. Since I heard Stefan Milenkovic live playing one of the Stradivari's I know what I am talking about. Wood, body but, also nice string clearance is IMHO key to good violin perfomance-Esoteric combo is hear closer to real music then AA combo.
Human voices:Male-Andrea Bocelli for example sounded less chesty with more articulation and power on Esoteric then on AA, Female-Sarah Brightman sounded also way more powerfull and real on Esoteric with NO "Whiskey" like signature in her voice(that signature is apparent on AA but, I know her voice very well-it is a fake signature made by AA).
Cello is fuller but, way more clear on Esoteric then on AA.

All in all Esoteric produce classical music and voices closer to real music then AA. Live performace of classical music is(when really good) in my personal experience never syrupy or slow, in fact it is always very dramatic and entertaining!
ben
66 posts
 
Branimir,
Thanks a lot for your test report,though I have AA dac mk4 not tube dac and
only listen Esoteric combo in my friend s system (not in my setup doing A/B tests) I have similar observations mostly with yours
Esoteric is more powerful (more upfront)clearer (not having tube noises vs tube dac and better signal to noise ratio vs dac mk4) a bit better bass definition but dac mk4 is not syrupy or slow and I think it is a little more musical for long term listening,and as all we know digital interconnects and powercords make dramatic effects on transport and dacs
I again thank you for your detailed comparison
More to discover