Should I go to a Benchmark DAC1 pre in my system?

On real problem I might have with the Benchmark DAC1 pre is my dbx dynamic range processor, which is analog and has to have the line level signal fed in an out.

Not sure I'd want to part with the DBX. It brings lesser source material with compressed dynamic range, both analog and digital, back to life.

I might be able to put in series between the pre and power amp in lieu of a processor or tape loop in the pre, but I am not sure how well that would work.

My current Carver pre-amp has two tape loops and two pre-processor loops, so it can handle a lot of peripherals. That's a hard thing to find in a lot of the newer pre-amps out there. They seem to go more the keep it simple route in general.

Regarding some of the posts above, skepticism is fine but it's a shame when conspiracy theories have to surface, as well as opinions from those who've never actually heard a Benchmark DAC1!!! But they have their opinions a priori because the unit just "can't" sound that good.

I've actually heard one. In fact, I have two of them, soon to add a third (for headphone listening in my bedroom). I've done a lot of comparisons and I agree with the reviews, not only last month in TAS but also the rave review the month before in HiFi News (by Ken Kessler), and the earlier ones in the various publications around the world, both pro and consumer (check out the Benchmark website). I think it's a great unit and I've voted with my wallet. I took the chance to try one initially and am glad I did.

One thing I would mention: while differences in transports and digital cables may be minimized with the DAC1, the differences still remain, so the better the transport and cable, the better the sound, in my experience.

I also found that using the DAC1 direct to the amp was better than using the DAC1 connected to a passive preamp (I used a fine passive for the test, as Reference Line Preeminence One, Series II). What surprised me was that the
DAC1 beat the passive in detail and transparency, which is one area where the Reference Line passive should have excelled.

DNe,

Thanks for the input.

What exactly is the difference between an active and passive pre-amp anyway?

The DAC1 pre is a pre-amp as well as a DAC. Is it active or passive or something else?

According to Benchmark jitter supression -3dB bandwidth is about 3Hz and supression reaches -100dB at 1kHz. They tested Benchmark DAC1 with 1000 feet of cable without audible difference in sound. I've never tried different cables myself - just put 1 foot long 75Ohm Canare RG11.

Kijanki,

I tend to be a bits is bits kind of guy, but realize clock related timing issues could impact how a DAC applies those bits to generate the analogue waveform.

The BEnchmark approach seems to focus on isolating this process from potential timing issues introduced between transport and DAC, so for what its worth, it seems to make sense to me and I like it.

The test data provided seems to support the claims and I have not those test results challenged successfully to-date. So, on paper and based on reviews, the thing does seem like a winner to me even if its not going to be every ones cup of tea (what is?).

I do tend to like the sound of good tube based systems though and my current Carver SS preamp does a decent job of emulating that sound though, so I do fear the resulting sound might veer more towards the SS/detailed/analytical side with the Benchmark in place. Regardless, I'd have to hear the result to know for sure whether I like it or not.