Is DEQX a game changer?

Psag, maybe you misread what I said - here was my comment from an earlier post:

"when I compared the DEQX DAC to the Chord 64 I was previously using, it was more lively sounding and I happily used this as a replacement. I like very precise transient attack, including bass that is clean & deep but starts/stops very fast. Much more realistic to true life and the DEQX DAC has that"

The Graham Slee DAC sounds more life-like than both, being fed either CD or FLAC files. It's just as dynamic as the HDP3 DAC but more realistic at the top end. You are correct about the logic of converting an analogue signal though, it must surely have a tiny impact (I tend to judge a system on what I hear though)

Drewan77, I didn't realize you were using the DEQX mate, which does not have the digital inputs. I must have lost track of your contributions to this thread. Sorry 'bout that.

Psag: "Drewan77, I didn't realize you were using the DEQX mate, which does not have the digital inputs."

I am not using the DEQX Mate, that was a reply I gave to Ozzy as he was looking for something with only speaker correction. My DEQX is the HDP3 which has both analogue & digital inputs, including a DAC which I no longer use

I tried the a/b without DEQX/with DEQX online demo at the deqx site with a pair of decent headphones. Glad to say most of what I hear at home off my OHMs with CLS (Coherent Line Source) Walsh style drivers sound much more like the with DEQX samples, as I would expect. Also I can relate to how things degrade from there in some other cases I am familiar with to various degrees, though the "without" samples in the demo sounded pretty extreme.

No doubt the "with" DEQX samples are much easier to sort through than the "without" samples.

Drewan77 if you are using the HDP3, then you are utilizing its DAC. The device operates in the digital domain. The last step is digital to analogue conversion.