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
Germanboxer, as far as I know the X-03 uses a lighter, cost engineered version of the VRDS transport mechanism, which may explain the sonic difference with UX-1 that Branimir is suggesting. As far as I know, this is the simplified/cheaper VRDS that TEAC also sells to other manufacturers, such as WADIA.
Ok, here we go...
Jordan, difference between X-03 and UX-3 is indeed very small. I will correct myself-both are around 65-70%, depending on the system. But, to my ears X-03 sounded little bit better in bass(RBCDs) then UX-3.
Since I own DV-50s,UX-3 and P-01/D-01/G-0s combo I think that I have enough Esoteric experience...
One other thing-all these ratings are with balanced(XLRs) connection. All Esoteric gear sounds better that way and most of them use differential dacs configuration.
If you do not need DVD-V/DVD-A playback then simply go for X-03 and save some money(more CDs or maybe new G-25U clock that I will try in two weeks time with UX-3).
Arnie, I agree with you 100% that X-01LTD is the best buy currently form Esoteric(Although, both X-03 and UX-3 are very good players for money also, IMO) and maybe the best buy in that price range on the market!
We shouldn't forget that build quality of all Esoteric gear is way better then most of the competition.
Teajay, difference between X-01(I did not yet audition X-01LTD in my system) and Accustic Arts Drive1/DAC1Mk3 combo?
X-01 is better in bass definition and tightness, midrange is little beat leaner then Accustic Arts(but, this is really small difference) and highs are more open on X-01 with a lot more details. All in all X-01 is excellent #1 flavor player and Accustic Arts is excellent #2 flavor combo. They are different sounding so, final choice will more depend on system synergy(Here I go again!!) and/or your personal music taste.
If any of you want little bit warmer sound from Esoteric then P-03/D-03/G-0s combo is the answer. But, I do not know why yet, this combo is sounding warmer without G-0s then with it! And to my ears sound of this combo with G-0s is definitely better and more "Esoteric like" in flavor...
Branimir, thank you for sharing your experiences...this has been very helpful!!! You are certainly the Esoteric man!! What is the cost of the G25?

Guidocorona, I was speaking of the UX-3 versus XO-3 comparison. These two units use the same transport and it appears identical digital and analog sections. The only difference is the video on the UX-3. The XO-1 uses 4 BB PCM1704 DACS/channel versus 2 BB PCM1704 DACS/channel in the UX-1, UX-3, and XO-3. I'm pretty sure I'm right on this?
Germanboxers, I believe you correct about DAC config. Yet, I seem to recall Tim Crable at TEAC telling me that the transports on X-03 is a lesser brother of those found on X-01 and UX-1.
Guidocorona, you are correct, the UX-3 and XO-3 have a "lesser brother" transport of the UX-1 and XO-1. That's why I was a little confused with the relative ranking of the UX-3 / XO-3. I have never compared them, but I assumed they would be very similar in sound since the UX-3 and XO-3 are identical in transport, DAC, and (I think?) analog output stage, the only difference being that the UX-3 has 6 video DACs for DVD and supports DVD-A.

The UX-1 / XO1 comparison is more interesting because both use the top shelf VRDS transport, but the UX-1 uses only 2 BB PCM1704 DACS / channel (same as UX-3 and XO-3) and the XO-1 uses 4 BB PCM7104 DACS / channel. I think the XO-1 Ltd also uses better internal wiring and has a few other upgrades, but I think fundamentally (transport, DAC configuration, Analog design) are the same. I'm not sure of this though?