Reference DACS: An overall perspective

Hi Pubul57 and Karl, you both have had me thinking about the issues of what Pubul57 refers to as "warmth" vs less resolution/detail. I totally agree with what Pubul57 says about system matching/context, I have heard very good pieces of gear not shine in different systems.

Karl, your concern regarding having to switch the standby/tubeon, I leave my DAC on all the time. The type of tubes, 12AX7's, and how this DAC uses them means that they should last about 3 to 4 years before you have to retube.

Since, I have had the AA tube DAC, and recently hearing/auditioning some of the most highly regarded CDPs and DACs, I still struggle to put in words the difference between the AA tube DAC and what I hear when listening to the other digital front ends. I believe that it has much resolution and details as anything out there on redbook CD, however, it also offers an "ease" and "fluidity" that is not euphonically tube-like in its sonic signature. So, I don't know if it would be to much of a good thing in an all tube system or better matched in a SS system. I also still find that it offers the most natural/beautful timbres of all the DACs I have listened to.

Pubul57, I see that you replaced your AA combo with the EMM Labs CDSA SE player. I'm quite interested in what you heard in your system that lead you to make the move. Please share some details regarding the sonic differences between them. I do know that when a friend auditioned a totally broken in EMM Labs SE in my system in comparsion with the AA Tube DAC, he returned the EMM to the dealer and then purchased the AA Tube DAC. In my system the AA DAC was much more musical/natural, all on redbook CDs, and that's way my friend chose to purchase the AA Tube DAC. I realize your AA DAC was not the Tube reference, however, it is a terrific sounding piece, so what did you hear that lead to making the move?

Hi Teajay. Of course I did not ever hear the TubeDac, so I have no idea if I would have liked it better than the DAC IV or how it might compare to the EMM CDSA SE (current version with upgraded transport and feet). Like the AA gear, I bought it essentially without an audition, but did hear it for a while in a similar system to my own with Merlin speakers. I liked what I heard and was of a mind to move from seperates back to an integrated CD player (the SACD was just added value, though I as of yet don't own a single SACD, but for the demo SACD provided with the EMM).

First I will say that just about any of the DACs and digital gear mentioned in this thread would undoubtedly sound good to me; this is afterall all good/great gear. My reason for going integrated is that I own two preamps and I could not get them both on my equipment rack with the transport/dac combo; so the change was ergonomic and not for thinking I was going to improve the sound much, I was very satisfied with the AA combo, no doubt. I'll say this for the CDSA SE, it in no way makes me feel like I have taken a step backwards and in a few specific regards it betters the AA to my ears and in the context of an all tube preamp/amp combo (Joule, Atmasphere, Music Reference). I listen to a lot of jazz and the sound of a trumpet and saxaphone is what I usually fixate on; when I come from a live concert, it is usually the fall of in the timbre of these two instruments that makes me really feel the difference between live and recorded (and dynamics); the EMM gear seems to handle these two instruments in a way I prefer over the AA combo. The simplest way I can say it is that it is much easier to hear that these instruments are metallic, and I can more easily hear the blattiness (I think that was HPs word for what I am referring to) of the trumpet and the bite of the saxaphone come across in a more realistic manner to my ears. I also notice that the cymbals, and percussive instruments seems to have a more incisive portrayl of their dynamics, with fast and detailed transients, making them sound more like real instruments.

That is all I have been able to focus on so far listening to Mingus, Tijuana Moods and Blakey's Moanin'. That being said, there was nothing wrong with the AA at all, but I think one can safely purchase the CDSA as an alternative to the combos and feel they have first-rate digital production. Let's put it this way, it is more than good enough that I'm not worrying about it. I'm afraid to actually start buying SACDs as this is suppose to be the EMM gears raison d'etre and I can see myself buying all my favorite jazz cds all over again. Ugghhh.

Anyway, this is a thread on DACs so that's all I'll say on this player. It does beg the issue in my mind whether the advantage of seperate DACs is mostly flexibilty and the "advantage" of separate power supplies between transport and DAC, versus the thorny issue of jitter connecting them. Anyway, I'm happy (for now).

Hi Teajay, great to read that you are still enjoying the AA Tube Dac as I am. Have you made any further tube changes, if so what and your thoughts. I'm really enjoying my latest being the MBL 1621A but still feel the the Oracle 2000 I had surpassed it in musicality slightly, not a lot but ever so slight. In every other area the MBL's improvements are most welcome and obvious. You should check out the thread titled What is the best DAC ever made? I tried putting some info. here but for what ever reason again they would not allow it and didn't post the thread.

There are some interesting responses specifically one which has left me scratching my head, still trying to get some more info. but in the end just feel it's a different flavour thing which is okay.

Hi Dev, I have not changed the tubes in the AA DAC because I still find the long plate Bugle Boys still sound best to me. I also have read what you posted on the thread regarding the "BEST" DAC in the world, which is so silly of question to begin with, and found your responses right on target. If any would find the AA Tube DAC shrill or disorganized regardless of what there system gear is, something very strange indeed had taken place some were along the line. That is not negating that based on personnal taste/synergy someone else could like the performance of other DACS better, but I find it hard to believe that the above descripters coming from the AA tube DAC regardless of what it's being compared to. As I stated on this thread I have listened recently to some of the highest regarded DACS/CDPS and none sounded better to me then the AA tube DAC, different yes, very good sound, but not to the point when you know you have heard something which is better then your present reference. And as Hamberg stated on the other thread if you want to customize the sound of the AA tube DAC you can roll the right tubes to get what you want.

A question for the OP, Teajay. Did you have room treatment as part of your system when you auditioned all of the DACs? Bass absorbers and mid to high freq reflection point absorbers? Also curious how big your room is, and how far out in to the room your Maggies are.

Thanks!

Bryan