2. digital
  3. 191150-21

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
helomech
1,702 posts
 

If you never listened to any how would you know? Maybe there is. 'Thomas and stereo' has reviewed and compared some of these Chi-Fi dacs very favorably with much pricier units placed in higher end systems. His reviews were very positive.

I have listened to many expensive DACs throughout the years. The OP cited John Atkinson’s opinion of the Benchmark based on quantitative measurements, not subjective quality. At this point I think it’s safe to presume you don’t know the difference between objective and subjective analysis. Yeesh…

 

mitch2 OP
4,008 posts
 

The OP cited John Atkinson’s opinion of the Benchmark based on quantitative measurements, not subjective quality.

@helomech - That is true but Jim Austin’s “subjective” listening review compared it favorably with his PS Audio DirectStream DAC and, in this follow-up review, John Atkinson spoke very favorably about the sound of the Benchmark DAC3 B in his system, concluding with, “Highly recommended for Class A+ in Stereophile's Recommended Components”

That said, while my listening so far has me surprised at how much I like the sound of the DAC3, it will probably not be my favorite out of the group.  Nonetheless, if I only had $2K to spend the DAC3 would almost be a no-brainer.  Keep in mind though, all of this is viewed through the lenses of partnering equipment and listener preferences.

 

 

bassdude
496 posts
 

This is a pedantic discussion of aspects of sound reproduction that is almost totally irrelevant to how "lifelike" a DAC or system sounds.  The ASR "BS" and "measurements" bear almost no relationship to how "lifelike" and "real" a DAC or system sounds, or how "musical" it sounds - there are many more aspects of the sound produced that are not subject to the "metrics."  

It is far, far more meaningful to focus on how a DAC and system sounds to the specific listener, and on the system matching / synergies and how "lifelike" it sounds.  In fact, the harmonics and distortion a DAC or system produces often contributes to the how "lifelike" and musical the sound is (e.g. as with tube components and systems, or ladder DAC's, etc.).   

Move on to those other threads that focus on those aspects and forget the ASR "BS" and measurements - they are irrelevant!

audioman58's avatar
audioman58
4,180 posts
 

Each dac will have something different to offer ,many times measured performance 

doesnot guarantee better sound  like other forums like ASR 

totally off eye a $700 topping dac measures better then many but doesnot have much life more neutral  and on not-so good recordings far worse.

mitch2 OP
4,008 posts
 

@bassdude - Please take your playbook, your mission and your own advice and, "move on to those other threads."

This thread has nothing to do with ASR, measurements only, or any of the other crap people here use to drive a wedge.  The discussion was about one DAC out of six being compared that happens to have the combination of good measurements, a low price, and positive comments from a variety of reviewers.  I found it to sound pretty good in my own system, even compared to the other five DACs.  The Tambaqui exhibits good measurements too and has many who appreciate the sound (although it does cost quite a bit).  I sold mine because I didn't find it quite as musical in my system as other DACs I own.  Please go find a Tambaqui thread to inhabit or start your own.

More to discover