@fuzzbutt17 @mitch2 How large is the power transformer and chokes on the Mystique DAC's. I can't tell from the pics. On other DAC's they may have several transformers but usually look smaller.
Six DAC Comparison
I am in the middle of comparing the sound of six different DACs in my system. I own them all (I know weird) but one of them is still within a trial/return timeframe.
Not to share specific comparisons today, but a couple of observations so far are that first, they all definitely sound different from each other. On one hand, they all sound pretty good and play what is fed to them without significant flaws but on the other hand there are definite sonic differences that make it easy to understand how a person might like the sound of some of them while not liking others.
Second, raises the observation that most of them must be doing something to shape the sound in the manner the designer intended since one of the DACs, a Benchmark DAC3 HGA, was described by John Atkinson of Stereophile as providing "state-of-the-art measured performance." In the review, JA closed the measurements section by writing, "All I can say is "Wow!" I have also owned the Tambaqui (not in my current comparison), which also measured well ("The Mola Mola Tambaqui offers state-of-the-digital-art measured performance." - JA). The Benchmark reminds me sonically of the Tambaqui, both of which are excellent sounding DACs.
My point is that if the Benchmark is providing "state-of-the-art measured performance," then one could reasonably presume that the other five DACs, which sound different from the Benchmark, do not share similar ’state-of-the-art" measurements and are doing something to subtly or not so subtly alter the sound. Whether a person likes what they hear is a different issue.
- ...
- 332 posts total
@rja -Take a look at this review of the Mystique Y DAC, where Ken Redmond asks the same question you just asked, and received this answer:
|
@brbrock - This review of the Mystique EVO shows a good image of the insides of the full-sized chassis that was used through the EVO Pro model and changed to the narrower but longer extruded chassis first used for the Mystique X. You should be able to gauge the size of the chokes from the image showing five of them in the full-sized chassis. |
MERASON DAC1 MKII Merason DAC1 MkII Reviews
Merason DAC1 MkII I expected great things from the Merason DAC1 MkII based on the positive published reviews I read, which all commended the thoughtful design choices, fanatical attention to detail, and excellent sound quality based on the DAC1’s tone, bass, drive, and refinement. So, I was a little surprised when I first connected it and heard…nothing special. It was a good thing that I kept listening. It has not been very often that my first impression about audio gear is so off-base. Not that the Merason did anything wrong when I first heard it, because it didn’t, but rather what I was hearing didn’t seem to engage me to the same level after listening to my Mojo Audio DACs and the LTA Aero. However, after the Merason DAC had been powered up for a week or so, and after I moved it to a location in my rack where I could connect a better digital coax input cable (Oyaide 5N silver DB510 vs. Canare L-4.5CHD by BJC), it sounded much better than what I first remembered. The final touch was when I replaced the Totaldac filtered USB cable I was using between my Sonore Signature Rendu SE Optical and my Singxer SU-6 DDC with a Network Acoustics Muon USB cable, which seemed to increase incisiveness. The design and construction of the Merason DAC1 MkII is explained in more detail in the reviews linked above, as well as on Merason’s website, which describe the galvanic isolation, dual DAC converter modules, Class A buffering technology, fully balanced circuitry, and special attention to the 12 power supplies used in the DAC1. These features and more demonstrate the fastidious Swiss engineering that has gone into the Merason DAC1 MkII. The Merason DAC1 MkII uses two Burr-Brown PCM1794A chips, which are hybrid DAC chips in that they use both R-2R and Delta-Sigma conversion topologies. I found the following quote about the PCM1794A chip, "Segmented PCM1794 is described as having 'true' multibit DAC for the most significant bits, while a multi-level delta sigma modulator for lower bits.” So, how did all of this Swiss engineering translate to music? On my test tracks, and on other selections from Tidal’s and Qobuz’s streaming libraries, the Merason DAC1 MkII has been incredibly engaging to listen to. Clarity is very good as is the tonal quality. Bass is full, plump, deep, and powerful. Detail is also good but the strong suit of the Merason seems to be the wonderful tonal qualities and presence of the middle frequencies down into the bass. Both female and male vocals were handled in a manner that placed them as a main feature, underpinned by warm, full, deep bass lines and augmented by whatever other instruments were playing. However, unlike some equipment that seems to thrust the mids/vocals forward in the soundstage, the Merason kept everything in its place, and provided the effect of enveloping the listener in sound. As other reviewers have discussed in their own words, I also perceived high frequencies to typically play a bit of a supporting role as opposed to being part of the main attraction. This may account for what some have discussed as the “refined” sound of the Merason DAC1 MkII. Attack seems to be harmonically a bit lower in priority than decay, sustain, and release. As a result, the Merason is easy to listen to and never fatiguing although one trade-off may be a slight touch of smoothing-out of some rough edges, and not quite as “raw” a sound on music or vocals that are intended to sound “gritty”. To my ears, the effects described above are subtle and are not a detraction, especially given all of the other positive attributes the Merason exhibits. Some may simply say the Merason sounds “smoother.” Interestingly, when listening to the Merason, I do not perceive any loss of high frequencies or details but, as others have mentioned, the result is subtle and might be described as a sound we more commonly associate with vinyl records than digital sources. I was ok with this since the opposite usually leads to listening fatigue. I suggest reading the High Fidelity review, which I thought was well-written and accurate as to the salient features and sound of the Merason DAC1 MkII. The reviewer, Wojciech Pacula, described the DAC 1 as having, “perfectly balanced proportions, with an internally complex, refined sound. The latter is slightly lowered, with strong support in the mid-bass and in the breakthrough with the midrange. The treble, on the other hand, is selective, resolving, but also dense and more ‘loose’ than ‘biting.’" He goes on to conclude, “It's a dynamic, energetic presentation with a clear sonic signature in which richness and density are the most important features.” I agree that richness and (tonal) density are stand-out features of the Merason DAC1 MkII. Those are desirable attributes in my sonic world, which may be why I found the Merason DAC1 MkII engaging to listen to, although some listeners may wish for a more incisive type presentation. Not every DAC is going to engage every listener on every parameter to the same degree. On track after track, the Merason DAC1 MkII captured the organic beauty of vocal presentations and provided a rich, engaging delivery through my system. From Chris Cornell on “Songbook,” to James Taylor on “Steamroller Blues,” to Dominique Fils-Aime’ on “Birds,” to Sara Bareilles on “Gravity,” and more, the vocals were tonally dense and musical. Even the rock selections were presented with force, weight, and believability. The Merason never faltered, distorted, or became congested regardless of the material or the volume I played it at. Of course, there are trade-offs. To my ears, the Merason DAC1 MkII sounds a touch smoother and less “organic/natural” than what I hear when I play music through my Mojo Audio R-2R DACs. Going back and forth between the Merason and Mojo’s Mystique EVO Pro, I hear more granularity and front/back dimension through the Mojo Audio DAC, resulting in a sound that is slightly more incisive and could maybe be described as more “exciting,” while the Merason is perhaps slightly smoother and more focused on tonal density. What I hear may simply be the difference between listening to a DAC using (hybrid) Delta-Sigma conversion processes vs. DACs using R-2R conversion. Delta-Sigma conversion involves interpolation, noise shaping, and error correction to approximate the waveform, and is a process that can result in a smoother, idealized sound. In the end, these differences I have described do not make listening through the Merason any less engaging, just a bit different from what I am used to. This is a good example of how there is no one path to achieving a sonically gratifying result. The design choices Merason made have resulted in a DAC that is very enjoyable to listen to, even if it sounds a bit different from my other DACs. I am sitting here with Gov’t Mule’s version of Cortez the Killer blasting out of the speakers and it makes no difference to me that the Merason and Mojo Audio DACs sound a bit different from each other, all I can think of is how much I like listening to Warren Haynes and Gov’t Mule.
|
- 332 posts total