Tascam DA-3000 vs Benchmark ADC1 USB


In a previous thread the subject about using a Tascam DA-3000 to archive vinyl was discussed. I had posted that my initial tests with the Tascam were far from satisfying. I speculated that I thought the issue was the analog circuitry in the front end of the Tascam.

Well I just received a Benchmark ADC1 USB and have run a few test recordings to compare with the Tascam.

I set the ADC1 up to feed digital AES/EBU 24bit/96KHz into the AES/EBU digital input on the Tascam. Clock on the Tascam was set to DI (digital input from the ADC1). Clock rate and bit depth were set to match the ADC1.

So I was effectively using the Benchmark for the basic analog to digital conversion, and the Tascam to convert the digital data stream into a WAV file saved to a 4 G SD card in the Tascam. This way I avoided any USB and computer related variables in building the WAV file of the recording.

The analog inputs to the Benchmark ADC1 were straight out (DC out) of the Spectral DMC-10 phono preamp. I used custom built single ended RCA to XLR cables. Surprisingly, I found hum levels were about 6 dB better that the same inputs into the Tascam directly.

I recorded some quick cuts from LPs I am pretty familiar with (Steely Dan Gaucho Babylon Sisters, John Klemmer's Touch, and Blind Faith's Had to Cry Today that I used initially). The recording levels were very easy to set as the Benchmark ADC1 has really nice analog front panel controls for gain. Setting up the Tascam to "Monitor" confirmed the digital levels and both units agreed with each other to within a dB or so.

What about the results?

I was very happy with the recordings made with the Benchmark. When A/B'd directly with the LP, the recorded 24/96K WAV was not identical, but pretty damn close. Much better than recordings made with the Tascam alone. The original LP was a tad bit smoother and very slightly more detailed, but if you were not A/B ing you might not notice the difference. What was important to me was that the recording maintained the space and 3d sound field of the LP, and not crush it into a plane like many CD recordings.

All in all not the cheapest solution, but still cheaper than the Ayre 9A product. Plus using the Tascam gives you a stand alone solution with no need to connect USB to a computer, but it's there if you want it.

I would say Benchmark was pretty true to what they said their product would do.
dhl93449
Interesting post. But you have not yet done, is confirmed that recording using the USB output is any way less then the set up using the Tasman. Can you do the next logical test and compare the wave file created with the tascam with one recorded directly on the computer using USB input? If they sound equally good, one could solely use the benchmark, which would be more simple and cheaper. Thanks.
Peter:

My issue with the Tascam was the quality of the analog front end. By cutting that out by using the Benchmark, the recordings have improved significantly. Plus, the original recordings were made with the digital conversion in the Tascam, so the only variables changed were the analog and A/D conversion in the Tascam vs the analog and A/D conversion in the Benchmark.

I don't have a computer set up to stream USB at this moment, as my PC server is too far away from my sound system to run a USB cable. I bought the Tascam for about $700 so it's probably a wash buying a laptop instead, plus I like the idea of not dealing with the noise and conversion issues of a standard PC. That being said, the Benchmark is specifically designed to stream USB to a computer, so I doubt there should be any issues, even though the tech I spoke with at Benchmark actually preferred the Benchmark/Tascam system if I was going to keep the Tascam.

If you are paying full retail for the Tascam and the Benchmark, then spending a little more for the Ayre 9A may make more sense (which is about $4K). I paid about $2500 for both, which is a considerable differential with the Ayre 9A.
Glad the Benchmark worked. I suspect you would get pretty much the same result going directly to the PC via USB since the digital signal going to the PC does not depend on highly accurate timing information. But I also like the idea of writing to a disk rather than tying up a PC to do the recording.

You observations support the idea that the Tascam may be OK for moderate level systems, but its shortcomings become apparent on a higher end, more revealing systems.

Thanks for posting your observations.

What are you using for processing the files? Have you tried Vinyl Studio? It has a free trial and is only $29 to buy. I find it easy to use and like that it will look up album information, so I do not have to hand enter it. It also does click removal, hiss, hum, etc. non-destructively, so you always have the original to go back to. As any software, it takes a little to get use to it, but the workflow is pretty straightforward, since it was designed for recording, not general purpose editing.

Have you compared 96/24 and 192/24? I find a large difference between 44 and 96, but only a very slight difference between 96 and 192. I use 192 mostly because disk space is cheap and this is hopefully the only time I will digitize these records.
Dhl93449, would the Ayre be able to stream USB to the Tascam the same way as the Bencmark.