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
kops's avatar
kops
478 posts
 
my friend who had x03 replaced by the p03/d03 told me the difference was huge with capital H.
Go figure then.
And the combo has upgrade path with the clock.
guidocorona
4,298 posts
 
Thank you KOPS, unfortunately the X-03 is not even at the sonic level of X-01, which is below sonic level of X01 Limited. If the $6K X-03 sounded just as good as the $25K P03/D-03 combo I'd be truly surprised.
dazzdax
599 posts
 
Mike, in the context of reference DACs, that means no compromise DACs, I have to say that, albeit a steady improvement in red book CD technology, the differences between those reference DACs (from 1992-today) are not very large compared to differences between mid fi and lower high end DACs (from 1992-today). I think it is because even older reference DACs are no compromise designs (Wadia 9, Krell Reference 64, Accuphase DC-91). They might have older digital technology, but the analog part (which is also very important) was and is still superb. I'm not saying they are comparable or better than today's SOTA DACs, but they are at least still no slouch sonically speaking (and certainly not "outdated" in my opinion). If you spend $3000 for a Krell Reference 64 DAC (from 1992) nowadays, I think it is still a good investment.

Chris
kops's avatar
kops
478 posts
 
This weekend we had the opportunity to gather with some friends and try some digital sources on a system.
The 3 digital setups where -Resolution audio opus21 -Accustic arts drive1&dak mkIII - Theta generation 8&carmen as transport.
The differences where audible and clear. All played well and the priciest the better. It was general impression that the Theta genVIII was smoother, grainfree relaxing and more organic. Isn't it a good contenter the Theta VIII? how do you compare it?
We all thought Theta needed a better transport but for some reason Accustic arts transport (very solid made and exceptional construction as a transport) don't lock with Theta unfortunately.

The rest of the system was Montana Xp speakers, Hovland HP100 preamp and Sphinx Project24 (Dutch made ultra highend amplifier Gryphon-like sound).
branimir
236 posts
 
Guidocorona-P-03/D-03 combo(specially with G-0s) is a lot better then X-01 or X-01Limited. Next month there will be a review on Soundstage web site by M.Michelson-very positive one! Esoteric P-03/D-03/G-0s combo is almost as good as P-01/D-01/G-0s combo...
Kops-Regarding Theta GenVIII I auditionit few months ago with Theta Compli universal transport(with so called Theta link connection between them) and was not that impressed...
Theta GenVII/Comli combo was warmer in upper midrange them my Weiss Medea/Jason combo but, whole sound quality was a lot better with Weiss. Weiss combo was more detailed, with more low level details and better upper level resolution. Biggest difference was bass, Theta combo was not that powerful or defined in bass(specially lower bass as organ pedal notes). Also build quality of Theta combo was well, not at the best level...
More to discover