Absolute top tier DAC for standard res Redbook CD

I heard the Brinkmann Nyquist DAC about a  year or so ago (not totally sure, but it was just before it came to market).  I was really impressed and have probably mentioned it in this thread, but I know I have told Matt multiple times that it was a really impressive session.  I spoke with more than a few who heard it recently with the Vandersteen speakers at a show and were blown away by how great sounding the music was in that room all weekend.  I was able to bend RV's ear about the sound that weekend.  He told me that was the first time he enjoyed digital.  Keep in mind that he works the shows and doesn't get out to hear all the digital gear out there.  He's like Fremer, a true analog guy.  He said that he was surprised at how good the sound was with the Nyquist.  I thought it was a 14k DAC, but I immediately said that it was most probably better than my Ayre QX5/20, which is to my ears, a highly musical DAC and plenty detailed.

I just read Fremer's review of the Nyquist online for Stereophile.  He too feels the same way that I did the first time I heard it.  I did hear it with some MQA recordings that seemed to be very well recorded to show off MQA as well as the DAC.  I thought I'd share the review with you guys.  Hope you enjoy the read (this is for those who think I only like Ayre gear, lol).

https://www.stereophile.com/content/brinkmann-audio-nyquist-da-processor

JA pretty much trashed it in the measurements section. Perhaps another example where measurements and human hearing are at odds?

Dave

Not sure why Brinkmann opted for tubed output stage but it sure didn't help their measurements. But JA has measured many a piece of kit that sounds damn good and measures damn bad. 

Audio products that sound terrific per the Stereophile viewers and yet measure poorly per JA. This dilemma has been noted by quite a few observers  over the years. 
Charles 

This paper is presented at the Brinkmann site and seems to amount almost to a point-by-point rebuttal of the concerns JA expressed.  And in doing so I note that the paper goes considerably beyond what is said in the manufacturer's comment section of the Stereophile issue which presents the review.

IMO most of what is said in the paper is persuasive.  The only issue I would take with it, at least in the case of a DAC, is in relation to the statement that "over-damping (i.e., filtering) the incoming power might result in better measured values, but often kills the life in the music."  While lightening up on the filtering of incoming power might in some DAC designs result in sound that is subjectively preferable, it certainly won't make the sound more true to the source IMO.  But in any event the numbers cited in the paper and in JA's measurements are suggestive of that not being a significant issue in this case.

Regarding JA's measurements more generally, they are IMO of inestimable value in identifying possible or likely mismatches or incompatibilities between components, and often in diagnosing sonic issues as well.  I couldn't begin to count the number of times I and many others have referred to his measurements in responding to questions and issues that are posted here.  In that sense JA performs a uniquely valuable service to the audiophile community, especially given the thoroughness of his measurements relative to those that are provided in some other publications, and given the much higher probability that he has measured a component that is being considered, compared to other publications that provide measurements.   And every now and then some of his measurements raise legitimate concern about the quality of the engineering that went into the design of a product.  Beyond those benefits, though, I would certainly agree that they generally provide little if any insight into how a component will sound.

Best regards,
-- Al