Benchmark dac - why such diverging opinions?

I have it and I love it!

"Fact is though, on A'gon it seems that most comments about the Benchmark DAC's have been negative."

Perhaps because most of people seek very warm sounding gear. Let see what Benchmark's Technical Director John Siau said about it:

"We designed the DAC1 for maximum transparency. If you want to add warmth, you can't add it with a DAC1. Personally, I do not like what warm sounding equipment does to the sound of a piano. Warmth is wonderful on vocals, guitars and certain instruments, but it beats against the stretched overtones of a piano. The overtones in a piano occur at slightly higher than harmonic ratios, and these create beat notes with the exact integer ratios produced by electronic equipment (and speakers). Too much harmonic distortion will
make a piano sound out of tune."

That would suggest to me that warmth is not a virtue and more experienced listeners, including professional reviewers prefer neutral sound. It is also likely that rest of the equipment they use don't have many faults that Benchmark ruthlessly reveals.

I suspect it true that most who do not like Benchmark are seeking warmth in their digital for whatever reason.

I have a warm sounding tube DAC (mhdt Paradisea) in my second system with speakers that tend towards the transparent and analytical side and a similr more "analytical" sounding ss DAC (mhdt Constantine) in my main rig which needs no additional warmth otherwise.

Gotta get the mix of ingredients right and to personal taste in any system to sound good.....

What I have sounds really good, but I wouldn't mind hearing what the BEnchmark sounds like in my main rig. I was leaning towards the BEnchmark originally for a SS DAC but the mhdt came in at less than half the price and sounds fantastic and is hard to fault.

I was going to post about my experince with the Benchmark HDR, which I sent back and replaced with a W4S DAC-2. But Daverz wrote my post for me already, so I'll paste that:

I also auditioned a Benchmark HDR at home several months ago. Like a lot of people, I found it too lean in the mid-bass, and while the treble was impressivly extended, I found I didn't really like the sounds that were revealed "way up there" (I believe in a live situation that extreme treble frequencies never make it to the ears. I remember a cartoon showing two audiophiles walking out of a concert and agreeing, "Not enough treble!".) I did like the exceptionally clean and bell-like midrange. Also the sound was very immediate and "quick". I really wanted to like it more because it's such a cool piece of gear, but it's not really how I want to hear the music.

Maybe it's an issue of "you can't handle the truth!" Maybe all the other equipment I like is plump in the mid-bass and rolled off on top. Quite possible given that I gravitate towards tube gear.

"you can't handle the truth!"

That's very accurate observation. One person even expressed opinion that Benchmark is too resolving making each instrument sound independently while he got used to all instruments mushed together. My experience was similar. Sound was so clean that I thought some instruments must be missing. Now I enjoy clarity of Benchmark and can see why it became a benchmark in audio.