A few minutes after submitting my post just above I received my copy of the October 2014 issue of TAS, containing the Berkeley review and interview Erik referred to earlier. In the interview Michael Ritter of Berkeley addresses in a reasonable amount of detail his rationale for not including a USB interface and DoP capability in the design.
His comments about the lack of USB are very much along the lines of what I said earlier. His comments about the lack of DoP IMO represent a credible, plausible, and well stated design philosophy, especially for a component in this price range. I certainly recognize, however, that similarly credible and plausible cases could be made for opposing philosophies.
Accordingly, I would not categorize the arguments on either side of the coin as being BS, or as being grounds for either rejection or acceptance of a particular candidate. Again, "quality of implementation is likely to trump the theoretical advantages and disadvantages of any particular design approach." But after reading the review and interview, like Erik if I were willing to spend $16K for a DAC I would certainly put the Berkeley on my short list.
Regards,
-- Al