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
sns
3,351 posts
 

@mitch2 How long are your listening sessions with any one particular dac? Sometimes certain aspects of sound quality don't become clear to me with only short listening sessions. Longer sessions may expose very subtle anomalies of all kinds leading to a more analytical response and/or listener fatigue.

mitch2 OP
4,075 posts
 

@sns - Widely variable from as little as about 20 minutes to maybe 3 hours, with most being like a half-hour to 2 hours, sometimes listening intently and taking notes, other times reading or working on my computer.  For these comparisons, I have kept a small notebook handy to record impressions as they occur.

brbrock's avatar
brbrock
72 posts
 

@fuzzbutt17 @mitch2  How large is the power transformer and chokes on the Mystique DAC's.  I can't tell from the pics.  On other DAC's they may have several transformers but usually look smaller.

rja's avatar
rja
2,373 posts
 

Mr. Fuzzbutt,

Could you describe the sonic differences between the 3 levels of transformers offered in your DAC? Thanks!

mitch2 OP
4,075 posts
 

@rja -Take a look at this review of the Mystique Y DAC, where Ken Redmond asks the same question you just asked, and received this answer:

Since I did not have all three versions in-house, I asked Ben for his thoughts on the impact of the different metallurgy used in the chokes.

“With different types of chokes you get more micro details and micro dynamics. The total energy remains the same but resolution is improved.

With our ferrous core chokes picture a sine wave with tiny bumps all over the surface.

With our amorphous core chokes picture a slightly lower sine wave with tiny star bursts of energy all over the surface.

With our nano crystal core chokes picture an even lower sine wave with huge star bursts of energy all over the surface.

Each sine wave has an identical amount of area and an identical amount of energy. It is just that with the more advanced core materials the energy is a bit diffused into deeper textures which are less noticeable with the more common ferrous cores. Sonically you get more gestalt and slam with the ferrous core and you get less slam, more nuances, more pronounced textures, and more emotional content, with the more advanced core materials."

More to discover