Six DAC Comparison


I am in the middle of comparing the sound of six different DACs in my system. I own them all (I know weird) but one of them is still within a trial/return timeframe.

Not to share specific comparisons today, but a couple of observations so far are that first, they all definitely sound different from each other. On one hand, they all sound pretty good and play what is fed to them without significant flaws but on the other hand there are definite sonic differences that make it easy to understand how a person might like the sound of some of them while not liking others.

Second, raises the observation that most of them must be doing something to shape the sound in the manner the designer intended since one of the DACs, a Benchmark DAC3 HGA, was described by John Atkinson of Stereophile as providing "state-of-the-art measured performance." In the review, JA closed the measurements section by writing, "All I can say is "Wow!" I have also owned the Tambaqui (not in my current comparison), which also measured well ("The Mola Mola Tambaqui offers state-of-the-digital-art measured performance." - JA). The Benchmark reminds me sonically of the Tambaqui, both of which are excellent sounding DACs.

My point is that if the Benchmark is providing "state-of-the-art measured performance," then one could reasonably presume that the other five DACs, which sound different from the Benchmark, do not share similar ’state-of-the-art" measurements and are doing something to subtly or not so subtly alter the sound. Whether a person likes what they hear is a different issue.

mitch2

Thanks @norust - I am simply going to post what I hear from the DACs listed in my system.  I have been here about 25 years so will not be surprised regardless of the comments, but I also know some here will appreciate my observations.  

All six of the DACs sound good in their own way and I have no doubt that each one of them would have their fans.  That is going to be the hardest part, not to let my biases overly influence my comments so that they come off as judgements.  I will try and factually describe what I hear but, yes, I am going to like some of them more than others.  Some here seem to get wound up over which of something is the "best" when there are so many variables such as the room, partnering equipment, musical selections, and listening biases and preferences, that "best" becomes an individual choice.  I cannot tell somebody else what is best for them.   Each of these DACs have professional reviews (which I will link), except for the SMc Audio DAC, so I will try not to overly repeat what has already been written and would urge those who are interested in a certain DAC to read the reviews.

Just scanned these comments and didn't see the obvious thought.  The biggest influence on the sound of a DAC is the analog output circuit.  After it converts, it's that small Amplifier that outputs your 2-6 Volt signal.  My excellent dCS Bartok now sells for $22K due to a $9K price increase partially due to refinement in its analog output section.  

Yuck yuck yuck.

These days there exist $200 “Chi-Fi” DACs that objectively outperform the DAC3

“didn't see the obvious thought”

Please elaborate.  I don’t hear anyone arguing the importance of the output section.  Each DAC is the sum of its parts and design topology.  You get the whole thing, which is why they sound different from each other.

@coppy777  The analog output is a great way to get sound color if you're using a discrete circuit...R2R is another way....tubes another way.

If you don't want sound color in the DAC though...using an OP amp is fine. That's what Benchmark is doing. If there is brightness in your system or room, the Benchmark isn't going to be a tone control...it won't add harmonic richness or dimensionality that's not there to begin with. 

I like Chord DACs...my room is treated and my amp is warm sounding...so in my situation I'm not looking for sound color in my DAC. If my amp was lean, something like the Border Patrol DAC would be on my short list.