Wavelength Cosecant USB v3 vs Benchmark USB DAC1

I haven't had the Wavelength yet, but the Benchmark DAC 1 PRE is in my home now and is a really good little unit. Very smooth and dynamic with excellent detail and air, top end is very accurate without being harsh, I haven't tried the headphone outs yet...

I am not a fan of the Benchmark in its current form, nor its old one. I've tried both extensively an could not warm up to either one. On the plus side I found them tremendously detailed and neutral. On the (big) minus side they occurred to me as hard and etched, mostly in the highs. They definitely felt very SS for lack of a better descriptor. I tried listening and comparing both in at least two very different systems I was used to. I did not compare them to the Cosecant, but in the case of the earlier version, I did have a Wavelength Brick on hand, and with the latter more recent version I had a MHDT Paradisea as well as a Modwright 9000ES modded player without the tube output. In both cases the tube DACs occurred to me as more natural and relaxed, albeit in the case of the Brick, a bit too much so, though I'd still prefer listening to it over the early Benchmark I compared it to. The Benchmark had it over the tube DACs in the bottom end, and consistently occurred more foreward and aggressive in comparison. I just could not bear the highs, which ultimately caused me to send the latter version back to Benchmark after three and a half weeks. Overall the Modwright sounded the best of the four offering many of the strengths of the Benchmark which much better balance IMHO. But that is not a DAC. The Brick was nice, but had its limitations - though very listenable and throwing a great soundstage it seemed to soften things out and slow them down ...it definitely took the digital edge of things, but perhaps at the expense of rendering some detail. I don't think it is as good as the Cosecant judging from the comments of those who have owned both. Sorry I can't offer a direct comparison, but thought the observations may help. Obviously plenty of folks love the Benchmark (John Atkinson among them), so that's not to say you wouldn't. I just don't get it from the two I've listened to.

Hi Jax, it's a difficult thing: does the Benchmark sound as you described it because it is a very analycal and honest piece of hardware or does the Wavelength make music more palatable by softening the transients somewhat? I think the question is: which of the units comes closer to the sound of the master tape?

Chris

This could also be system dependent, FWIW I ran the Benchmark with Transparent reference balanced interconnects and speaker wires to an ML 433 amp and Escalante Fremont's, so my system is very accurate and revealing, and I found no harshmess in the Benchmark.

Hi Jax, it's a difficult thing: does the Benchmark sound as you described it because it is a very analycal and honest piece of hardware or does the Wavelength make music more palatable by softening the transients somewhat? I think the question is: which of the units comes closer to the sound of the master tape?

I'm not in the camp of neutral and accurate, analytical, honest, nor do I care about how the component brings the sound closer to that of the master tape (if it does, that's great, but it's not what floats my boat on face value). I care about how the music sounds coming out of my system in my room to my ears. I tend to like components with a boost in the lower mids, or on the warm side if you prefer. In the case of the Benchmark I did indeed feel that it did fit your descriptors (and my additional ones above). Perhaps some of my lack of enthusiasm for it came from that squeeky clean, sterile feeling. But I'm sure that 90% of why I didn't like either example came from the strident highs. I'm totally open to the idea that it could be something system dependent, though I did try it in three different systems the first time (2 tubed amps and 1 SS amp), and more recently in two different systems. Could be cabling...could be the rooms (several involved first time, only one the second), could also be break-in in the case of the latest as it was new and I probably only put about 200-300 hours on it. I did have a few friends come by each time and compare with the other DACs and my observations were mirrored in the first instance, and not quite so strongly in the second. I heard the Benchmark USB sounding outstanding with no such stridency in at least one room at RMAF, which would lead me to think it has the potential to do just that. Sadly I could not get it to perform as I heard it with the resources I had on hand. As far as your descpription of how The Brick made the music more 'palatable' - I did feel that DAC was indeed softening out the music, but I do not think that is simply because of the tube output, or rather I think there are implementations of tubed outputs in DACs and players that do not overly soften transients. Notably the Paradisea + I use, and even more so the Modwright player with tube output I use render remarkable detail, soundstage and clarity. As I said, I did not mean my comments on the Brick to be a necessary reflection on the Cosecant. I would imagine the later is a superior implementation of the technology, but I have not heard it so could not comment. Hope that helps clarify my observations.