Review: Accustic Arts Reference Tube Hybrid DAC II DA converter


Category: Digital

This will be my third go around reviewing a DAC from the German company Accustic Arts. In between having the MK-3, MK-4, and now their Reference Tube Hybrid as my digital front end, I have had the pleasure to auditioned many of the highest regarded DACS and CDPS in the last couple of years. Many of this digital pieces offered great performance, a few were sonic "turkeys" regardless of some steller reviews, but based on great performance without having to get a second morgage to purchase it, I keep coming back to Accustic Arts.

The MK-4 was a significant improvement over the MK-3 and I still believe it's one of the finer sounding DACS around today. That's way I was skeptical about how much better/different would Accustic Arts new "baby" would be compared with their older DAC.

As in all my reviews I do not get into specifications, you can go to Accustic Arts website to get the details, but always comment on build quality and physical appearance. Like its older siblings the Tube Hybrid is just beautifully built and really is "eye candy". The German engineering and craftmanship is very easy to admire. I know one important technical aspect that this is the first DAC in the world that does not use tubes in the analog section, but somewhere further upstream when bits are still bits before the analog conversion stage. What the tubes are doing and how they are used in the overall design circuitry I don't have the foggist notion, just that sonic bliss is taking place.

When I discovered that Accustic Arts new reference would use tubes I was somewhat concerned for the following reasons: 1) My past experience with tube based DACS, such as the Zanden and a very high level Audio Note, was that they offered a very wonderful midrange but they lacked macrodynamics and extension on both the top and bottom ends. 2) The transparency/clarity and very small details I love in the overall sonic perspective of my system were lost.

SONIC PERFORMANCE

I do not like to result to sonic cliches to describe the sonics of a piece I'm reviewing, but this DAC is a "killer"! I hope all of us can agree that once you get to a high level of excellence in audio gear, their are many great pieces and differences become more quantitive then qualitative. We also have to factor in personnal taste and system synergy in to the equation. Taking all of this into account let me try to explain way this is the best digital I have heard in my system to the present time.

1) The Tube Hybrid retains all of the transparence/clarity and microdetails of the MK-4.

2) I will not say that the Tube Hybrid's extension on the top and bottom are better then the MK-4, but the the overall slam and dynamics is slightly more "lively" and natural sounding. Remember, the MK-4 was no slouch in these sonic areas to begin with.

3) Now we get into the specifics of why the Tube Hybrid is a "killer" in qualitative terms.

A) Unlike adding a "warm/euphonic" aspect to the music this DAC adds what many would call a touch of "bloom/fullness" without destroying the overall linear cohesiveness of the sonic perspective. Another more concrete way of saying it would be that image density and the overall harmonic structure ( leading edge, body, and decay trails) is more natural or what alot of audiophiles would dscribe as "analog" sounding.

B) This DAC offers an overall more sense of liquidity and smoothness, but not at the expensive of slam/punch/dynamics or sounding "soft" to be pleasing to the listener.

C) I have a hunch that another reason why the Tube Hybrid sounds more "real" is that it is more tonally linear compared to the MK-4, and any other digital piece I have heard on Redbook, which makes it sound of one piece top to bottom.

D) The Tube Hybrid offers the most natural timbres I have ever gotten from a digital front end.

E) I don't believe that my system's overall soundstage dramatically improved with the Tube Hybrid, the MK-4 was a champ in this area, but the layering and the air around players also went to a qualitatively higher level.

When I wrote a review here on the GON on the Stealth Metacarbon IC's I struggled to use words to describe the sound of "nothing", meaning these cables just get out of the way of the music so the illusion of real music being played by real people just gets spills into your mind and gut. Well, this DAC hits my sonic ear's the same way, it just sounds more like real music then I have ever heard in my listening room before. The Tube Hybrid sonics can be broken down into specifics, as I have tried to do, but its the overall natural/easy/lifelike sonic illusion without the loss of details,prat,sparkle that makes this a very special piece indeed.

I always end all my reviews with the statement their is no "BEST" in high end audio, but many fine pieces along with the factors of personal taste and system synergy. The new Accustic Arts Tube Hybrid DAC II is among one of the finest DACS on the market today, and while it is not inexpensive it competes with DACS triple its price. This German company sure has some talented thinkers with great ears when it comes to digital gear. If your in the market I highly recommend you audition this DAC before you purchase another.

Associated gear
Click to view my Virtual System
teajay
I noticed that the AA Tube DAC accepts a maximum input sampling rate of only 48kHz; I was surprised to see this, particularly for a DAC at this level. Do you know why they limit it to this? A lot of digital sources today upsample to 96kHz and beyond, which would be incompatible with the AA DAC unless the sampling rate of the source is reduced. Do they feel that there is no sonic advantage of accepting a higher sampling rate?
FWIW: My previous Metronome T1A transport had both 48 and 96 kHz switch. I did not hear any difference...
I'm still surprised that AA only accepts up to 48kHz. My Tact 2.2 XP can output up to 192kHz. I've noticed that some folks think they can hear a difference at the higher sampling rates; in any case I find it puzzling why AA has it limited as it seems to be de-rigeur among stand alone DACS these days.
Smeyers, my EMMlabs samples upto 5.6Mhz, both CD and SACD, however the same CDs and SACDs I compared sounded better through the AA Tube DAC II, more analog, better imaging, better defined and clearer sound stage, more depth. All I'm saying is that you've got listen to a product and see past the statistics and techno babble. Ofcourse, the same product can sound different in differing systems.
Mtkh, I wasn't really comparing sound quality between sampling rates; all I was wondering is why does AA not actually support higher input sampling rates. There are some digital sources that output a non-adjustable sampling rate higher than 48kHz, which then would not work at all with the AA DAC. It just seems odd to me that AA has decided not to support those data sources at all, even if they felt 48kHz sounds better, especially considering how expensive the DAC costs.
OK, I see what you mean. Yeah, any company's choice to limit their product specifications to best match their own transport, or even in the case of the Accuphase DC801 which only works with their own DP800 transport. Can't blame them for following this strategy. Well, if you're looking for a 32-bit DAC then Esoteric's D-05 is about the same price...
In the current issue of Sterophile (June 2008) there is a review of the Cabasse La Sphere speakers, which do a fair amount of digital processing. Analog signals are digitized at 48kHz which let to the Author's comment: "A lot of processing goes on within the Sphere system, and unless CD is your only source, 48kHz is a barely sufficient sampling rate. With the exception of vocal sibilants, this processing wasn't grossly audible per se, but it certainly affected the system's ability to sound real, as opposed to sounding really great."

I realize that the AA DAC is not digitizing analog sources, but it's not the first time that I heard the notion that 48kHz is barely sufficient, which leads me back to the original question.
Understand, on the other hand I have a few very, very well recorded 16-bit 44.1Khz RBCDs that puts the majority of recordings, including most SACDs, out there to shame...

I think the sampling question is a relevant one, but it shouldn't be taken out of the context of the whole recording and reproduction chain, its IMHO a smaller part of the overall performance. Maybe in an all digital system its more important though, like what you mentioned above.

At least my CDSA DAC's ability to upsample to 5.6Mhz did not lead to a better musicality vs the AA Tube DAC II on the same music. Maybe I liked the tube coloring ... who knows

Just my 2 cents.
Last week I replaced my AA Drive MK11 with a MBL 1521a transport. I was expecting a difference, but frankly was very surprized, happly so, with the significant improvement across the sonic landscape.

1 A larger soundstage with more air between the players.

2)A much greater ease/liquidity without lose of dynamics or slam.

3)Extension on the bottom end with more power and speed. I believe its the best bass I have ever had in my system.

4)Microdetails are more apparent but in a very natural way, I believe I'm hearing more because this transport has a much lower noise floor then the AA Drive MK11.

I would say the musical/enjoyment level using the MBL transport with the AA Reference Tube Hybrid DAC went up another 25% or 30% in my system. I still believe that the AA Tube Hybrid DAC is one of the best sounding digital pieces on the market today and when you factor in its cost compared to what it competes with sonicly, kinda of a bargain. I have no idea if the new AA reference transport will perform better/different then the MBL transport, but either way it shows two things; 1) Transports really can make a difference 2) How much more potential performance can be gotten out of this terrific DAC.
Teajay, what digital interconnect(s) are you using between the Transport and DAC and from the DAC to your pre? Have you experimented at all with this and are you using any isolation under both?
Post OBO hotbird,

Differences between Accustic Arts Ref Drive2 and Drive Mk2

Drive Mk2 : CDM Pro 2 LF – drive module with cast metal frame and involved mechanical decoupling
Ref Drive2: CDM Pro 2 LF – drive module with heavy die cast metal frame and involved mechanical decoupling, embedded in a massive aluminium housing (subchassis-construction principle)

Drive Mk2 : Generously dimensioned magnetically shielded toroidal core transformer (75 VA)
Ref Drive2: Two generously dimensioned & magnetically shielded toroidal core transformer of premium quality (2 x 75VA)

Drive Mk 2: Optimum smoothing thanks to 45,000 µF power supply capacity
Ref Drive2: Very high power supply capacity (61,000 µF) for perfect power supply.

Drive Mk 2: Resonance minimising aluminium housing
Ref Drive2: Extremely stable, massive and resonance optimized housing, primarily made of 10mm aluminium plates, ultra stable and acoustically damped top load cover

Weight
Drive Mk 2: 15kg (35lbs)
Ref Drive2: 18kg (40libs)

Unique to Ref Drive2 only
1) Integrated, specially designed Accustic Artsâ„¢ line filter for perfect and extremely clean power supply (line filter switchable)
2) Polarity switch for correct phase of the mains voltage

Unique to Drive Mk2
Drawer with indirect blue lighting for Accustic Arts logo feature (lighting can be switched off)
Hi Mtkl567, here's the answers to your questions:

1) I use a Stealth Sextet BNC between the transport and DAC.

2) I use a Stealth Indra, single ended, between DAC and preamp.

3) I use a Townsend isolation platform under my transport, and have experiemented with different footers under the DAC and transport and have not discovered any great improvement regardless what product I have used.
Thansk TJ for your quick reply. I'm curious to know why you jumped on the MBL transport before seeing if the AA reference transport is something you'd consider. Don't get me wrong the MBL is magnificent stuff, but knowing that the AA reference transport was going to come out... I thought you might have waited to compare before committing yourself...
hello.
being in the same boat(AA tube dac, mg 20 speakers)
my next purchase might be the Lamm ref pre or the cary slp05
or the supratek pre's.

i also keep thinking about the kallista transport , anyone tried this combo?if the transport makes so much difference, then kallista and aa reference drive 2(can be had for $8500 shipped)should be compared as well as mbl 1621 transport.
Shahedk, just be aware that the AA tube DAC II does not handle SACD source material or DVD-A, only redbook CD.
Mtkhl567, to be quite frank there was three reasons I chose to audition and then purchase the MBL transport:

1) I heard the reference MBL in a good friend's system and was quite impressed with what it did with his DAC, which sounds very much like AA Tube Hybrid DAC, and became very interested to audition the smaller brother in my system.

2) I was able to set up an audition of the MBL and thought it was absolutely the best sounding transport I have ever heard in my system. In the past I have either owned or auditioned such highly regarded pieces as the ML 31.5, CEC TL-1, Oracle reference, Accustic Arts Drive MK11 and the MBL was much better sonicly then all of them.

3) I was offered a great price that would be significantly less money then what the new AA reference transport would cost me.

Based on my experience with Accustic Arts digital gear I bet the new reference transport will be a great step forward over the Drive MK11, however will it out perform the MBL, that I'm not so sure of.

A final addressing Shahedk's interest regarding the Kallista transport. This line is no longer imported into the US because of a very high failure rate. My friend who has in his system the MBL reference transport at one time had the Kallista reference and believes the MBL is better sounding then the Kallista and is built to a higher standard then the Kallista.
I hope that even if you already bought the MBL Transport, you will have the opportunity to compare it against Acoustic Arts Reference Drive2 when it becomes available in your vicinity. IMHO, looking at the new specs of the Ref Drive2, the performance of the new AA Reference Drive should be at least comparable to the MBL transport or even their top model the 1621. The only thing it lacks is a bigger clamp...maybe AA will introduce a clamp upgrade in future ;-)
i agree totally regarding the metronome,
i have heard this company has problems in failure rates.
In Hong kong , when i visit,i tend to see a few of them in second hand shops for around 100000 hkd(us 12500 approx) .
however metonome and aero audio have many issues iv heard of from these sellers.
The germans make more reliable electronics then the french, thats what many people i heard also believe. i have yet to hear about any failures from a burmester, mbl,aa ect.

one thing though, iv never been able to see the insides of any mbl transports, does anyone have this? what are they using in there?
Wow, I recently heard the Metronome Kalista, and as impressive as it looks, the sound wasn't all that fantastic. The rest of the system didn't help and the room was a hotel room, so not completely fair assessment. However, they were quoting the new price at EUR 36000(!) or USD 57000(!!!) at todays FX rate. If on top of that there is a high defect rate... imagine what kind of damage you can to to your own wallet. Just goes to show that you really have to be careful in this hobby.

I'm going to try out the new AA reference transport/DAC soon, should be impressive.

Hi Mtkh1567 the Reference AA Transport looks interesting.

I have owned a few of the "AA" pieces and currently own the AA Hybrid Tube Dac which I truly am enjoying. I did own the Line Drive II Transport but found that it was not really offering the improvement that I was exspecting over the previous drive I was using so the search was on and I had the opportunity to demo the latest Oracle 2000 transport and a Kalista Reference transport. The "AA" transport was good but the two others mentioned most defiantly gave me more of what I was looking for, from the first song. I did find the Kalista superior but not by a large enough margin to pay the difference, suggested list price over $50K Wow! The Kalista Ref also did not play a few pieces of music that I had previously never had any issues with, this really disturbed me. A friend brought over his Forsell Transport and it was also really nice but again had issues with not playing pieces and then the seal for the lid just stopped sealing properly. I have heard from others that the Forsell when working properly is hard to beat but very sensitive and there are reliability issues.

I will say with the Oracle 2000 there is a substantial audio difference just swapping the Stealth digital cable from AES to BNC connection. I use Stealth's latest Sextet digital cable with their own connectors and have one in BNC-BNC and the other AES connection.

I own MBL 101E speakers so their Reference Transports 1621A and now the new Ref 1622 along with the one below 1521a spoken of in this thread here does have my interest but the list price of these are how much? The 1521 just alone list for more than $13K I believe which is substantially higher than my current Oracle 2000 so my expectations would be very high and so far just swapping the two different cables and tubes in the AA Dac make substantial sonic differences. The recently new MK2 CEC transport also has my interest but again the list price is double $18K+ and just slightly higher than than the MBL 1521a so again my expectations would be high.

Look forward to reading anyone's thoughts once they try the new AA Reference Transport and comparison against what???

I had made an error within my thread and not sure which one will be posted first but just wanted to make the correction, the MBL 1521a list for $10,950.00 not $13K so I just wanted to make the correction.

The MBL 1621 $24K and the MBL 1622 $27,500K Oracle 2000 is around $8K.
Hi Dev, thanks for sharing your thoughts and experiences. I loved what the AA Hybrid Tube DAC II did in my system and after I've done my room tuning, its next on my list. With regard to their new Reference transport, it lists for EUR 7000 over here and is easily gotten with for a decent price. I'd have to believe that in terms of value and craftsmanship the new AA transport is up there with the DAC when compared to others. I'm a fan of Sergei (stealth) too, and I only use his hyperphone cable now but heard/read very good things about the Indra etc.

I won't get to try out the AA combo until later this summer though... and I am a bit partial about its inability to process DSD signals
teejay
where and for how much did you get the reference clamp for the mbl transport?

have you checked the inside of this transport,
as i have not been able to find any pictures of this.

thanks
Shahedk, I was very lucky that dear friend and fellow audiophile had an extra reference clamp and sold it to me for what he had bought it for. The retail price is $600.00, he had obtained it for $300.00, don't know were, and that's what he charged me. By the way, it really makes the transport perform on a higher level compared to the standard clamp.

I never opened up the transport, so I can't help you out regarding the layout or parts that MBL uses in it besides the description on their website.
Hi guys,

I just replaced the stock tubes with cryo'd Mullard CV4004's. Quality of sound is even more pumped up: more 3D, warmer, full bodied voices and instruments, detailed sound. Recommended !

Renaat
I also have the Accustic Arts Tube DAC now. It reminds me of Lavry sonically. Btw, do you think the Tube DAC is sensitive to a variety of transports?

Chris

Hi Chris, I answered your other thread without seeing this one posted by so I have my answer. What transport are you currently using?, have you changed the tubes as of yet? and if so what did you go with and what were your findings?

Great piece and will be hard to replace, to answer your question about transport. The answer would be yes! along with digital cables, not too sure about PC's as I have not got around to those comparisons. I'm currently using a Stealth Dream PC and the IC from AA Dac to pre is a balanced Stealth Indra latest version all with Stealth's connectors. Currently I'm comparing two of the most current Stealth Sextet digital cables, one being AES and the other BNC and the difference is very obvious. Now the problem arises which one do I prefer and why, well that answer is still to come.
I have compared Stealth sextet AES with BNC terminated both are latest version
the BNC ended is belong to my friend and my AES one is between AA Drive II
and AA DacII MKIV, Stealth cables both are very good performer BNC one is more solid,it has more tight bass and more dynamic,AES one has more weighty
and rounded bass and more textural midrange,BNC one has more sparkle on top frequency AES top spectrum more smooth,these are my observations in my system and the differencies are not big but very small margin.
As for the new AA transport I could not find any information about its price here in Europe does anybody know how much its retail price?
BTW one of my friend has an Audio Note transport and claims it is better than AA, has anyone tried Audio Note transport with AA dacs?
Ben
Mtkhl,thanks for your information, wow its price nearly two times more expensive than AA drive1 MK2, so Audio Note CDT3 might be a good contender
with its cheaper price...
Ben, if you want to compare Audio Note CDT3, you can only compare it with the lesser Drive1 Mk2, which is of similar pricing. The new Reference Drive is the Accustic Arts statement transport, with no-hold-pricing but yet is still less expensive than the MBL 1521 MSRP(2nd tier in MBL range, top is the 1621) which Teajay has just upgraded to. For an equitable comparison of transports at this level, one should compare the new Accustic Arts Reference Drive to the MBL 1521/1621 as firstly both are made in Germany (so share same quality of build) and secondly, are in the similar price bracket (though with MBL still commanding the higher premium)
If you check earlier threads in this review, there's already a comparison of differences between AA Drive1 Mk2 and the Reference Drive, to illustrate what you get for the price difference. There's also a referenced URL to MBL transport specifications to show that the AA's specs are as good as MBL's if not better in certain areas. So make sure you check those links to make an educated comparion between the two. Of course nothing's more accurate than listening to both side by side. But until the AA Reference Drive production units are already delivered to the distributors world-wide (my local dist. still's awaiting delivery), Reference Tube DAC2 owners can only wait with anxious expectations ;-)
There's a new German review of the Accustic Arts Reference Drive 2 and DAC 2 at
http://www.accusticarts.de/pages/en/reviews/imagehifi_2008_04.html
As it's not in pdf but screenshots, I cannot cut and paste to some language translators to get the gist of that review.
If someone knows german, would be keen to know what the review says in conclusion. Thanks in advance.
Ok, here a translation from Dirk Sommer's review in Aprils Image HiFi:

Liked: how much room and dynamism the DAC II solution extracts from standard redbook CD (16bit/44.1khz).
Surprised: how incredibly high value of price to enjoyment ratio you get - even when you have to pay a hefty sum in absolute terms
Missing: the possibility to play at sample rates above 48Khz
To do: compare this dream combo against clearly more expensive components

So obviously he liked the sound of the AA reference combo a lot, but also clearly states its limitations. I loved the sound of the AA DACII as well, and for playback of RBCD its the best I've heard. That doesn't mean much though, as I have not heard a whole lot. My wish would be to be able to have 24/192 or DSD level detail and the wonderful sound of the DACII. Clearly this limitations lies in their unique 32bit DAC implementation. Maybe Steffen Schunk is working on that ...
Hi Mtkhl567, I am actually already sold on the virtues of the Tube DACII, what I am wondering is what does that review actually says of their latest Reference Drive2 transport? Thanks again in advance.
Hotbird, Mr Sommer compares the Drive II with the Wadia WT3200 (I don't know this piece at all) and says it is slightly better in portraying a realistic soundstage, provides a little more air around instruments. He stresses the difference is not very big though. So pretty much audiophile bla bla speak. He falls short of saying its the best combo he ever heard, but does praise its relative price/value ratio. He says the same about the DAC II vs his PS Audio DLIII. I'm surprised he is not able to articulate more, or better, the differences with his gear.
Just read up on a Wadia WT3200, here's the link:

http://www.lampizator.eu/LAMPIZATOR/REFERENCES/wadia%20WT%203200/WT3200.html

Its basically a Marantz transport (Philips 960) from the early 1990s when CD first came out. I can't believe that Mr Sommers believes the Drive II only slightly better than his ancient transport. Same is probably true for his DAC. My regard for this reviewer has just gone down the drain...
My goodness, horrified to know that this reviewer Mr Sommers is comparing brand new SOTA digital equipment with his antique digital setup, namely his PS Audio DLIII and Wadia transport and then hear little differences. Guess I don't want to find out more of what he writes after this revelation,as it appears to me that this reviewer certainly do not have a setup with a resolution like Teajay's to do proper comparisons ;-)
Just wanted to share that I recently listened to three very highly regarded digital front ends and the Accustic Arts Tube Hybrid really "hangs" sonically with these other reference level pieces. I'm not saying that the AA DAC was better, however I did not go back to the tube Hybrid with any sonic regrets at all. But here's the punch line the other digital pieces cost at least $8000.00 to $30000.00 more then the Accustic Arts DAC! So, I still believe that for what this DAC sells for and how it competes with hughly more expensive reference pieces that's it is still one of the great bargains in very high end digital front ends.
Well like Teajay, I have heard the AA Tube DAC2 and Drive Mk2 combo against Esoteric X01D2 with external Esoteric clocks combo, dCS Pucinni, emmLabs combo equipment that have combined prices many times the AA combo, and still preferred the AA Tube DAC2 stuff. Thus for those who wants to save big money but yet still get the SOTA digital performance, AA digital equipment is the way to go to stretch your falling dollar. Just hoping I can get my hands on the Accustic Reference Drive2 soon, which I am sure would be a big upgrade over the old Drive Mk2 ;-)
I just recently bcame aware that Accustic Arts has come out with a special edition version of the Tube Hybrid DAC. My past experience with all Accustic Arts digital pieces has been when they come with a new MK generation or brand new gear that the sonic performance is an improvement over the last generation. This company has integrity and only comes out with new stuff when they know that have gotten a real improvement sonicly compared with the older generation. So, I'm thinking about making the move, anyone else, what do the rest of you Tube Hybrid DAC owners think? It's hard to believe that the SE version would be that much better considering the stellar performance of present DAC, but you never know.
Special Edition?? This is the first time I hear the news that the Tube DAC2 has an SE brethen. Any weblink to this news where I can get more info on what makes the SE version so different ? I have still yet to get my hands on the Reference Drive2, and now the Tube DAC2 SE. I wonder will there be a Reference Drive2 to match. Hmmm.....
Teajay, I'm not so sure that the SE version is going to bring a whole lot of musical improvement to your system in particular. The SE version is only an improvement of the output tubes (Super Premium Military Outputtubes) and the quality control (production) procedures are more elaborate vs the standard DAC II. Knowing that you've tested all output tubes under the sun, maybe all you want to do is find out what exact tubes are that they have in mind. In Europe the SE version will be EUR 400 more than the standard version costing EUR 6390. Acoustic Arts themselves say that not everyone will be able to hear the sonic improvements, the SE version will sound ever so slightly softer with same level of precision. I'm getting my new DAC (different brand) soon, and then I will decide whether to buy the DAC II just for RBCD playback or not.

Btw, anyone heard the AA DAC II against the GTE Trinity DAC? Maybe not a fair comparison...
Mtkhl567, thanks for your comments. When I contacted the new importer for Accustic Arts for the US, who seems to be a good guy and a fine gentleman, regarding the differences between the Dac II and the SE, they revolved around NOS Russian tubes vs the tubes sourced from China and as you stated higher tolerances regarding quality control.

Well, I'll stick with my long plate 1940's Amperex and the difference it would cost to change to the SE does not seem justified when the performance increase might be just a slight improvement/difference over the standard DAC.
"GTE Trinity DAC"...heard of it as the most expensive DAC ever made, costing EUR44,000.
TNT-Audio got a write-up on it 2 years ago, it seems that that they were offered for review, but they kind of turned it down (read their final conclusion)

http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/trinity_tech_e.html

At 44K Euro, it's really not a fair comparison with regards to pricing with the AA DAC2. But not sure whether the perceived performance improvement over AA is going to worth that much of price difference ;-)
Hotbird - the most recent retail I read was EUR 57100 !!! Outrageous price for sure, reserved for the super rich or super foolish, or both... as its only a small part of a full system.

But again a smaller new player in the business with a radical new design concept being pushed around by the establishment who are trying to protect their market interest with lesser innovative products at diminishing quality levels...

The value for money ratio of the AA DACII is again looking pretty solid!
Eye candy photos of
Accustic Art Reference Drive2 +
Accustic Art Tube DAC2 combo

HK Hifi Review cover

Demo setup

I have heard the combo and it's stunning.
;-)
TJ and others, do you think the AA Tube DAC's treble is sometimes a bit on the bright side? I prefer a DAC with extremely refined and airy treble.

Chris
Chris, my experience has been the opposite of yours. I found DACS like Audio Note and Zanden to be "closed in" with lack of extension and sparkle/airness on the high frequencies. The AA Tube Hybrid DAC has great extension on top, not rolled off at all, with lots of detail and beautiful/natural timbres. I would assume the tubes I use, NOS Amperex longplate D-getters have a helping hand in this great top end in my system.
Chris, I have to say I was shocked when I read your comments and disagree with your findings and would look elsewhere within your set-up.

What does your system consist of, my speakers are MBL 101E's which are very revealing and I'm fully enjoying this DAC.