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
teajay OP
1,703 posts
 
Branimir, Guidocorona, Kops, I got a chance yesterday to listen to the Esoteric X-01 Limited, in a very good system that was totally different that I'm accustomed to listening to, and thought it was a terrific sounding CDP.

Since, you guys are the "Esoteric" experts, how close does the X-01 Limited come to the performance of the very expensive high end Esoteric seperate transports and dacs? What precentage of performance does the X-01 Limited give compared to its more high end siblings?

If, any of you have had the experience of listening to the Accoustic Arts DAC 1 MK3 and transport and the X-01 Limited, how would you describe the differences/similarities in their sonic signatures?

Finally, Guidocorona, I never heard from you regarding if my response regarding the Pass Labs XA-100's had answered you questions regarding their sonics compared to the 350.5. So, should I assume it was helpful enough or you just got into other things audio and otherwise and still would like to discuss the topic?
branimir
236 posts
 
Teajay, I am glad that you liked sound of Esoteric X-01LTD.
Precentage of differences? I would say that X-01 achives about 75% of P-01/D-01/G-0s combo. X-01LTD is little bit better then X-01 but, difference here is within 5%, IMO.
As Alex very nicely pointed out P-03/D-03/G-0s combo is different sounding then P-03/D-03/G-0s combo since it is using AD1955 dacs(D-01 or X-01/X-01LTD are using BB1704) which are warmer sounding devices by design. So, you can even say that D-03 is #2 sound flavor but, not IMO. It is very closr to #2 flavor but, still #1 flavor for me. All Esoteric gear is #1 flavor with D-03 sounding warmer then others.
Let put it this way:
P-01/D-01/G-0s combo 100%
P-03/D-03/G-0s combo 90%(in some systems up to 95%)
X-01LTD 80%
X-01 75%
UX-1/X-03 65%(or 70% for X-03)
UX-3 60%
DV-50S 50%
As a comparison(IMO):
Weiss Medea/Jason combo 85%(in some systems up to 90%)
Krell Evolution 505 80%(XLRs, with Krell CAST up to 90%!!)
Audio Research REF CD7 75%(but, emotional champ!)

All comparison are made in my system No.1

Teajay, are you starting to consider some of Esoteric gear for your system?
guidocorona
4,298 posts
 
My apologies Teajay, your info about XA100 and X350.5 was actually very useful. . . and a little depressing, as the implication may be that if I ever acquire MG 20.1 I may need to by amp them, keeping my Rowlands 7M on the bottom, with XA100 or similar at the top. . . which shall certainly cause She-Who-Must-Be-Obeyed to come down on me with a bloody axe, or perhaps even with a rusty draguinasse! I'd love to discuss, but may be not on this thread.
On X-01 vs X-01 LTD, I have heard both, on the same system, but not during the same session. I have the suspicion that the difference may be relatively significant. Ltd seems to have even greater grace, authority detail, and musicality than original X-01, but until Babybear and I get both units on the same system for a good comparison session, I can only give educated memory driven impressions. On P03/D03 vs X-01 Limited, my experience is solely hearsay by dereferencing. I have heard from one experienced listener who is familiar with both models in very similar systems, but not played in an a/b situation. They appear to favor X-01 over P03/D03: the combo may be perhaps sweeter, or slightly euphonic, while the X-01 may have an edge in detail, authority and realism. Yet, until I have the opportunity of trying things for myself, I will truly not know even my own brand of totally subjective truth.
germanboxers's avatar
germanboxers
241 posts
 
Branimir, why do you suppose there is a significant difference between the UX-3 and X-03? You rated the X-03 at 65-70% and the UX-3 at 60% of the P-01/D-01/G-0s combo.

They appear to be completely identical (parts and execution) through the digital and analog sections with the exception that the UX-3 offers video and DVD-A capabilities. I believe the UX-3 also shuts down all video circuitry when playing non-video discs. Do you have an opinion why they sound different? Thanks,

Jordan
babybear's avatar
babybear
106 posts
 
I think than Branimir has done a good job of ranking the relative improvements as you move up the Esoteric line. While its all very subjective, I have heard both the X01 and X01 LE in my system (but not at the same time), and I would say that the difference is probably more than 5%. The X-01 LE compared to the X01 has better bass extension, its smoother and more textured in the mid-range and most definitely sweeter in the top end. Now, to put all of this in perspective, the list price on the X-01 LE is $13,500, the P03/D03/G0s combo has retail price of $38,000 and the P01/D01/G0s combo has a retail price of $63,000. So, the X-01 LE besides being a great one box CDP, is a relative bargain (if you can call something that lists for $13,500 a bargain). Having said all of that, if I had an extra $63,000 (along with the money for the extra cables and power cords), and the space for a 5 box unit in my listening room and I could convince my very understanding wife - I would get the P01/D01/G0s as well. Arnie
More to discover