dCS Bartok Apex vs McIntosh DA2 - Trouble Hearing the Difference


I am currently playing a new set of Focal Scala Evos with a McIntosh MA9500, fed by a Wiim Pro playing Tidal Direct. This set up uses the McIntosh DA2, which sounds remarkable to my untrained ears. 

I borrowed a dCS Bartok Apex from my local dealer. Given that I can run balanced out (using Transparent Reference Gen 6 cables) to the MA9500, I can switch inputs to compare the DA2 & Wiim vs the Bartok (DAC & Streaming) very quickly. I level matched the best I could.

What I am confused about, though, is just how close the DA2 sounds to the Bartok. The most noticeable difference is how forward and prevalent vocals are with the DA2. They seem anchored to the center image and several feet more forward into the room, whereas in the Bartok they are a bit more recessed, and integrated into the rest of the music. The Bartok soundstage is also wider, but not shockingly so. The sound is definitely smoother or "rounder" with the Bartok as compared to the DA2. 

I admit I am relatively new to critical listening, but I think I expected the difference between the $20K Bartok and the built-in DA2 to be more profound. I'm not anxious to spend the money on the Bartok, but am willing to do if it is a significant step up, which I think it should be. 

So what am I missing? Am I perhaps limited by the MA9500? My dealer doesn't love autoformer-based Mc products, but many do, so I would have thought the MA9500 is sufficiently resolving. Room acoustics are not the best, but certainly not terrible. 

Interested in any thoughts or feedback.

ripordaff

@ripordaff

I love your room. Do you allow people to bring red wine into this room?

I like amplifiers from McIntosh but don’t like any of their processors. They don’t like selling tube line stages without phono stage for some reason. They cram so much stuff into these processors and integrated components. You don’t know what you’re getting..

If you’re playing around with an expensive Bartok component I would consider getting a nice line stage preamp to use within your system. And then you can do all kinds of component comparisons without worrying about contamination from some crazy integrated processor. I use an av processor from nad with a line stage added on top of it for 2 Channel listening.

Also the streamer being used may not be the greatest in the scheme of things and I saw a comment up top it could be a serious bottleneck basically negating anything of quality that gets involved with it. Although streamer may be perfectly great I don’t know. I use a lumin X 1 streamer dac which I find ideal because I hate dealing with separate dacs all the connectivity issues that goes along with it.  lumin does a great job incorporating these things together and it's got a separate power box which always is a turn on

@audphile1 

Interesting observation! My DA2 is in my C2700. I also have an Aries Cerat Helene DAC in the mix. The AC is leaps and bounds better than the DA2, but I wouldn't have sought much more if I had never heard the AC in the system. I know this sounds paradoxical, but the DA2 is just that good!

@mdalton thats certainly an impressive resume. I don’t discount his findings I just don’t know how to reconcile his measurements with the specs from McIntosh. They might not be the same thing. I certainly don’t have the background nor have I read enough on my own to know any differences.  Thanks for the link though it was an interesting read.  And sorry OP for hijacking your thread.

@jastralfu 

pretty sure my theory is right (it’s the DAC spec).  look at Mcintosh-provided specs on MA252, which doesn’t have a DAC.  There, for “SNR -Power Amp Input” they show an “N/A”.  Regardless, you don’t really need - or want - to reconcile the two.  As i said, a reliable 3rd party allows you to compare across brands, and is probably more likely to be accurate, for obvious reasons.