Six DAC Comparison

This is not a Product Plug, as the Design to be mentioned is not a sale item.

A EE minded Friend with many years of experience of Building Audio Devices. Today has a very clear understanding of what they are looking for as a End Sound from a particular Audio Device they build.

Amp's both Pre and Power,  Phonostages, Head Amp's, DAC's, CD Transport and a large selection of Speakers are all produced by this individual.

For a very sensible outlay of money, a DAC has been produced that over the Past Year has been compared and come out much more in favour of a Denafrips Ares II and a Venus II. It required the latest FW Update to be put on the Venus II to create a comparison where the Venus was to present itself as a worthwhile alternative consideration. 

Home Built DAC approx' £300, build knowledge, careful schematic design and topology, along with knowing how to isolate within the Circuit, will create a lot for little. Fortunately these skill sets do not all belong to the main influencers of a design for the Big Brand Names. 

Was not the not too long passed Ken Ishiwata from Marantz a Pioneer of this way of thinking with works he undertook for Digital Sources produced his Employer of 41 years.   

Hey Jim, glad you asked since I was going to list the pricing anyway, along with the chipset used in each, and provide a link to additional information. Three of them are R2R DACs, and one is a hybrid R2R topology. None of them use discrete resistor ladders. There is no link or published information on the specific SMc DAC-2 GT-24 as it is my understanding there are only about a dozen of them in existence.

For purposes of this post, I will stick with original retail list price of each, and will not add the additional cost of the chip upgrades in the Mojo Audio DACs, which would increase their list prices by about $1K each.

Linear Tube Audio Aero $3,950, one AD1865 chip, R2R

Merason DAC1 MkII $8,500, dual BurrBrown PCM1794A chips, hybrid R2R

Mojo Audio Mystique X SE NCZ, $9,999, dual AD1862N-Z chips, R2R

Mojo Audio EVO Pro, $9,999, dual AD1862N-Z chips, R2R

SMc Audio DAC-2 GT-24, $6,000+ est., one CS4328 chip

Benchmark DAC3 HGC, $2,399, ES9028PRO chip

I can’t even imagine spending this kind of money.  There must be some very wealthy people in this group.

@helomech I did not find the top end Topping DAC (forgot the model) sounded better than the DAC3B. I had both at the same time and was using them with my uber revealing RAAL SR1a earphones. Both DACs were not ideal with this phone, but DAC3B was the lesser of 2 bad matches.

@audphile1

I stated “objectively,” not subjectively.

In my personal experience, some Topping DACs, such as the E70 Velvet, subjectively outperform some much pricier units that also perform quite well objectively. For example, the Chord Qutest and Electrocompaniet ECD-2…especially the Qutest.

In fact, it was the DAC within the $2K Eversolo DMP-A8 that inspired me to try the Topping E70 Velvet. After which, I sold both the Eversolo and Electrocompaniet (the latter which objectively measures a little better than the Benchmark DAC3 IIRC).

No, I am not an ASR Zealot who believes that SINAD is the end-all, be-all of sound quality. However, I also strive for an open mind and go through the hassle of level-matching my components when conducting comparisons. I do my best to not let the retail price of a given component influence my judgement. Similarly, I do not presume a component will sound good simply because it measures well. Somewhat recently, after acquiring some Børresen speakers, I sold my Revel towers despite them qualifying as an ASR readers’ wet dream speaker. I don’t need to see graphs to hear that the Børresens are not as objectively accurate as the Revels, however, the former are without question the all-around better speakers to my ears.

Regardless, as for all known OBJECTIVE measurement parameters, there are indeed some DACs from Topping, SMSL, and the like that measure better than the DAC3, and by a rather wide margin in terms of noise and distortion. That is simply an indisputable fact. It seemed the OP was unaware of this fact. I am not here to claim that one should not subjectively prefer the DAC3 to those performing better in a bench test. I am merely pointing out that the DAC3 is no longer state-of-the-art, even by Stereophile’s measurement battery.

Based on my subjective experience, I do believe many audiophiles would benefit from giving some benefit of doubt to these “Chi-Fi” components, and judging them by sound rather than impact on the bank account. I realize that some avoid these brands for sociopolitical reasons, which is perfectly fine, but to conflate that stance with a component’s actual performance, subjective or otherwise, qualifies as implicit prejudice.