NEW Musical Fidelity DAC

Thanks for your post Megasam and I agree with you all the way around. I considered the Bel Canto DAC 2 but I chose the Musical Fidelity product offing based on the fact that I live in the Bay Area and San Francisco Stereo is an authorized Musical Fidelity dealer. They had the unit in stock and I could audition it. That was critical to me. Additionally, they offered a no cost extended warranty on the A3-24. After reading Telligs’ review, this thread and considering this unit is manufactured “across the pond”, having a brick and mortar establishment I could take the unit to if I experienced a problem seemed like a good idea. Moreover, San Francisco Stereo offers a generous trade-in upgrade policy should I decide to purchase a newer piece of gear down the road. Let’s face it, after a year or two, some DACs tend to end up in the infamous audio closet bone yard or serve as bookends, door stops and god know what else. I also felt that the Bel Canto DAC 2 had all of the good looks of an adobe brick. To me, it looks cheaply made. That doesn’t mean that it is and like my mother always told me, there is no accounting for taste. And speaking of taste. One thing that stuck me oddly on the A3-24 was that the up-sample switching button is located on the back of the unit. The Brits never cease to amaze me.

I don’t know enough about digital workings to understand the benefits of up-sampling at 96kHz rather than 192kHz. Most of this digital science is beyond me. I just trust my ears as at my age, they are one of the few remaining body parts that still work!

Last point of interest. After auditioning the MF DAC, my better half and I were commenting on what a sweet system the MF A series of gear was. The salesperson who helped us audition the Musical Fidelity A3-24 DAC said that his system at home was identical to the set up we had just listened to. It really sounded nice.

While waiting for the upsampler from the AH! guys in Holland and having recently read the hype on the MF A3-24 I decided to give it a whirl. I borrowed a unit from San Francisco Stereo in Mtn. View CA for 2 days.

I must admit I was full of expectation for this DAC especially after the reviews in Stereophile, in Hi-Fi News, on AA and this list. Plus, I really like MF gear, have heard a lot of it although I don't own any. On return from the shop, I plugged the AH! Njoe Tjoeb 4000 (btw, I have Siemens 7803 tubes) in to the DAC in an A/B configuration so I could easily switch between "Tjoebed" analogue out and digital "MF" out.

At first I thought I had them wired up to the wrong inputs on my Creek 5350 but, no, I was not wrong. My immediate, instant impression was that the MF wasn't working. No, I was wrong again, so I switched the upsampling to 192. Not a real difference, maybe very slightly more detail in the highs. (Note, I had to have the Njoe Tjoeb on the lowest possible volume to match the levels). Anyway, I continued to switch between the units for several hours, listening to different types of music, from classical, chamber music, jazz, piano, downtempo electronic, REM and The Orb (lots of detail). I can honestly, categorically say, and sorry MF fans, that the Njoe Tjoeb 4000 does a much better job of DAC than the MF A3-24!

Why? The NT4000 presented a much more full bodied, up-front image packed with guts and life. It seemed to bloom so large when compared side-by-side against the MF DAC. I was convinced I should here more detail with the MF but no, it wasn't there. I searched and searched the MF tonal spectrum for the elusive special greatness it promised in the reviews but could not get it to impress me over and above the Tjoeb (honest I really wanted it to be better than it was!). The NT4000 does sounds more "analogue" that's for sure (it has tubes, it should) but it also has more musicality, tonal richness, you name it (I could go on and on with the superlatives here...)

I wouldn't say the MF failed though. It did maybe have the edge in the detail department and maybe it was subtler in presentation. But I think we all strive for mid-range definition and presence (without brightness) and it was certainly outdone here. I did try a test with a lesser DVD player (Sony DVP something) and the MF did make a convincing improvement there. Also, maybe the MF needed to be broken in a little - I think it was brand new.

In conclusion I couldn't possibly justify the purchase of this product (although it looks *great*) - for $1200 it's a bit much to ask. However, I'm sure there are many that will be buy the MF DAC on the strength of the Stereophile review.

All I can say is "can't wait for the upsampler chip from Upscale!!". Congratulations to the AH! guys - they really have done a great job with their tubed DAC (I always wondered what it could stand up to and now I know). I sure "upscaleaudio" will be rather chuffed too...

Next, the MSB Link DAC III...

PS. If anyone's interested the unit I borrowed did exhibit a certain "bug" I think others have mentioned - it became all muffled suddenly and I had to flick the upsampler switch on the back several times to get it back to "normal". Weird.

I think it will take more time to judge the new MF DAC as the units only seem to be trickling into this country. I currently own the Perp. Tech. P1A/P3A combo and am a believer in upsampling and speaker correction (I have the Speaker correction installed on my P1A for my Thiel CS 2.3). Ultimately I look forward to reading more good comparisons between upsampling products.

Cudos to Buckingham. More than just a lot of blah blah blah about Sam T and payola and who's zooming whom, Buckingham just listened and compared using his own real life ears and experiences. This is what adds to useful information for people who are interested in buying the highest quality audio. From the dozens of threads here, this one made me want to go listen and compare for myself. Thanks.