Playback Designs MPD3 Audition

Hi Zugusland

What I am referring to is the PDX Level 2 that costs about 4.5K depending on options. Lenehan Audio is basically a small outfit here in Aus and doesn't have much of a retail presence preferring to sell direct which keeps prices lower. In the US Swap Meet Audio handles their stuff:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=96253.0

At 44.1 the PDX easily outperformed it but when upsampled it was closer - but the PDX was still better.

This was not just my view - here is what another person said:

'Yep, the MPD-3 most definitely has a smooth sound (one listener used the term "lifeless") when fed straight 16/44.1 audio via USB. Kind of like NOS without the schweppervessence. A very clean and composed sound. With the right kind of music it'd be a most relaxing experience, with the wrong kind you probably "can't get no satisfaction".

And yep, it changes a lot with upsampling. I took it all the way to 352.8kHz (8 x 44.1) with both CoreAudio and Izotope SRCs in Audirvana Plus 1.3.5. The top end gained in clarity and sparkle, the bottom end in stomp and bite. Sounded pretty decent. The CPU load was pretty severe, though, and playback wasn't entirely seamless.

Then I switched back to the PDX (Duelund output caps but cheap tubes) and 16/44.1, and I'm sorry to say it was game over for the Playback Designs within a few seconds. Depth, texture, detail, colour and slam. Like when photographs get digitally enhanced by somebody who knows what they're doing without going over the top. More accurate? Who knows, but on the incredibly un-coloured speakers and amps these DACs were partnered with, the result was far more pleasing with the PDX.'

The amps were Mac 501's and the speakers were Lenehan ML2's which you probably don't know in the US but they are indeed extremely uncolored with stuff like being lined with steel and using a specially designed stand each of which weigh 53kg - as the same person that wrote the above expressed it 'they sounded like they were bolted to a granite mountain'. I know Doggie likes them because he got a pair.

I do agree in part with what Doggie said regarding valves- but only in part. We heard a NAD 390DD - a direct digital amp - and it was actually fairly close to the PDX and Mac 501's which makes me think more is going on here than valve euphonics.

If you hunt around on the internet you will find all sorts of comparisons with all sorts of outcomes. For example check out:
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-dac-digital-analog-conversion/look-what-wife-bought-me-my-birthday%85-part-2-a-11847/#post154528

The bottom line is before forking out for a DAC in the price range of the PD compare it to as much other stuff in that range as you can get a hold of in your system.

I would also suggest getting your hands on a NAD 390DD and see what you think - it impressed the bejesus out of every that has heard it and IMHO is up there with the PD and MAC501's - in fact some thought it was better.

Thanks
Bill

@APLHifi

I think there's a difference from the traditional warm and wooly tube sound and the modern tube design like what you get from Audio Research or Conrad Johnson.

iVe audtioned a bunch of stuff in the PBD mpd3 price range and to my ear room and system it was by far the sonic winner. It went up against the Weiss 202 , Esoteric k-03 , the new Audio Research Dac Pre, the Peachtress Grandpre and several lower price items. I did want to hear the Skylla from Ayon but was unable to do so. Also you say that you listened to the PBD in normal 44k mode and then tried it upsampled which makes me question the whole scenario as the MPD does not have a way to change the upsampled everything it is fed is auto upsampled to DSD. UNless you meant you fed it unsampled data and then upsampled they a software program first before it was fed to MPD3. In anyevent not sure If i have bought the greatest Dac in the world but I do think I have a very fine piece of audio jewelry that is better then most at its price point and will hold value and use well due to its future proof scorecard of 384 and dsd capable..

Hi Zugisland

Yes indeed the MPD 3 does internal up-sampling and when I said I was up-sampling it I meant the software player (in this case Audirvana) was doing the up-sampling. Why would it sound different than its internal up-sampling? - different up-sampling algorithms perhaps and I have also read jitter is improved if you feed a DAC at a higher sampling rate. Exactly why it sounds better I don't think anyone knows for sure but sound better it does - it has been verified by quite a few people that heard it.

Like I said when reading these comparisons you will find different results depending on preferences and system synergies - all such things mean is if a DAC that comes out on top it might be worthwhile seeking it out and listening to it. But of course auditioning has to stop somewhere and if you feel you have done enough then by all means stop your search and get the DAC you like best.

Thanks
Bill

I am trying to stay out of this discussion as much as possible as opinions are very personal.

However, the mistake is to let anything other than a good DAC do the upsampling. No computer software program can do as good a job as a good DAC.

Bill, you might want to try it again having our DAC handle every part of the conversion.

Jonathan Tinn
Playback Designs
info@playbackdesigns.com