I am currently using a Squeezebox feeding a dCS Purcell upsampler via Transparent Audio Reference Digital Coax Cable upsampler and Delius D/A combo, directly into a Mark Levinson 336 Amplifier via Transparent Audio interconnect, and into a pair of B&W Nautilus 802s via Transparent Audio Reference speaker cable.
Squeezebox .WAV----(Transparent Digital Cable)--->Purcell----1334 Firewire--->Delius------(Transparent)----Levison 34---(Transparent Reference)----->B&W N802
As a preliminary matter, note that the Squeezebox replaced a formidable Goldmund transport. After comparing the two, whatever advantage the Goldmund might have offered was de minimis and more than offset by the convenience and value of the Squeezebox. I can't overstate how much switching to a hard drive based server has enhanced my enjoyment of this setup.
With respect to the Delius DAC, it originally replaced a Goldmund Mimisis DAC and Threshold T2 preamplifier. The Goldmund/Threshold combo was a very good setup, but there was always something about it that I did not like. It had incredible resolution and detail but there was a hardness or edginess on non-audiophile quality recordings. Only the best recordings (Brothers in Arms, DCC and Mobile Fidelity remasters) survived the scrutiny.
Enter the Delius, which replaced the Goldmund and Threshold. Significant improvement but again, there was something I did not like. It still was an unforgiving system if the recording was not perfect.
What brought everything into focus was the Purcell upsampler, which takes redbook CD and upsamples to DSD. With the Purcell/Delius combo, every CD in my collection sounds good. Bad recordings are now listenable. Good recordings are now great recordings, and great recordings sound better than ever. It is a phenomenal setup.
For example, I have the original CD version of the first Crosby, Stills and Nash album, which I never considered to be a good recording. With the Purcell, the CD really came alive, with a simply huge soundstage and lush, pristine sound. I never would have believed that disc could sound like that. That is just one example.
On recordings that I regard as good or very good, I noticed a dramatic improvement in dynamic range and bass response, among other things. It can be as laid back or in your face as the recording provide for.
The biggest difference, however, is in the imaging and soundstage. With the Goldmund DAC and even the Delius by itself, there was excellent imgaging and separation, but with the Purcell in the mix, it is much, much better.
For example, on Al Di Meola's Elegant Gypsy album, the instruments are separated with such precision that it sounds like each instrument is coming from its own speaker. Not only does the guitar itself have its own position in space, but the reverb and delay effects on the guitar also assume an appropriate position and are completely distinguishable from the ambient sounds of the other instruments. And that is just redbook CD upsampled to DSD.
The words neutral and analytical come to mind to describe the dCS components. What I hear sounds more like music than anything else I've heard, and unlike normal digital gear there is nothing I hear that I don't like. Even mediocre recordings are no longer hard on the ears. But, if you were to ask how I would tweak this setup if I could, I would say fatten it up a bit, perhaps darken it a bit.
For example, on Flight Over Rio, Di Meola's guitar lick before the head of the tune is more distinct from the other instruments than ever before, but the guitar itself also sounds thinner than expected. Is that the dCS's analytical sonic signature, or is that simply the way Di Meola's Les Paul bridge pickup and Marshall Stack were recorded? The mix as a whole is not thin at all, the bass is fantastic, and I know from experience that a guitar's bridge pickup is a thin sound that is supposed to cut through the mix.
Thus, at this level it is almost impossible to know if there is really a sonic signature, you are being bottlenecked by other components in the chain, or you are actually hearing what the artist and recording engineer intended. Sometimes, especially with electronic music, you could pull the mix apart and find that the synthesizer or electric guitar that is being used doesn't deserve the type of scrutiny the system is giving it. There is really no way to know if you are hearing your system or the brush the artist is painting with, other than by borrowing and comparing gear over an extended period of time.
I do think that the original poster's assessment of the dCS is pretty good. But I would add that the dCS is capable of giving pristine detail AND being fluid and organic. Fluid and organic are two words I would use to describe the Delius/Purcell combo.
For example, on Larry Coryell's Tricycles album, he is obviously using some sort of high-end stereo chorus effect on his guitar. Stereo chorus effects are designed to make the guitar sound lush and organic through delay and pitch modulation. I have always thought of it as twisting bands of yellow and blue together--from a distance it would look green. With the dCS I can hear more of what I would describe as "the modulation", not just the effect of the modulation. I can hear the yellow and the blue, so it sounds a little drier. But it is still lush and organic sounding. The dCS manages to pull things a part like that and still presents the big picture in a way that is pleasing to the ear. I really like this setup.
No wonder when I asked my dealer about the new dCS Puccini/Paganini components in the high end room he said, "Don't go in there!" The new setup is too expensive for me to even be interested in how much better it is.
At this level it comes down to taste, and unfortunately, your pocketbook. :)
