Bel Canto 1.1 - Convince Me.

Chelillingworth: Thanks for the info, it sounds like a good go. I am looking into very expensive upgrades to my SET amp at this moment in regard to those very areas of sound and may just first upgrade the BC and go from there. Gunbei: I went from the AR Complete and CAL Icon MKII players to the Bel Canto DAC 1.0 (I preferred the sound of the CAL as a stand alone). The BC has a deeper sound stage, improved separation between instruments (especially on more complex material and at higher volumes), reduced but more defined bass than the CAL (the CAL was too bass heavy in my setup and I prefer the balance of the BC) and last but not least I just like its smooth sound and overall balance. I also discovered at a later date that the BC's phase switch can come in very handy with some music tracks. I use the BC DAC with the CAL as a transport, a BMI Whale power cord and Mapleshade and Homegrown Audio IC's in a 300B SET based system with Reynaud Twins.

Thanks Sam: I should probably send mine in now, while the rest of the system is still in a state of turmoil.

Without getting too technical, what advantage does 192 up sampling have when one is playing back standard (Redbook) CD's? I mean, does it effect the playback of this type of software?

Thanks Craig: I will give you a call this week. Best regards. David

Thanks Craig: I will get it out this week, just need to dig out the shipping box. Best regards, David Keil.

Hello everyone, sorry this took so long. I had a problem with the first 1.1 unit that I received (which turned out to be a cold solder joint). The upgrade took one week and the repair of the cold solder joint a little less than a week (back and forth). Customer service at Bel Canto was both positive and timely. I was not that impressed with the second unit that I received (in regard to how it compared to my original 1.0 version) - But Don't Stop Reading Now. We had also assumed that since I had run the first unit 250+ hours that following the repair of the cold solder joint that the unit would not need to be broken in again. Well, this was not the case as at the 200 hour point the unit has opened up sound wise to what I now feel "is" an upgrade to the original 1.0 version. When I first received the unit (not broken in a second time) I found the sound to be somewhat recessed in the mids with less harmonic detail than the 1.0 version. The receding midrange made the high frequencies sound tipped up and unnatural to me (again compared to the 1.0 version). Bass was about the same (though a little tighter) and the sound stage was not as wide nor as deep as the 1.0 (again the recessed midrange). OK, this was then, but in the past 40-50 hours (I am at approx. 200-225 hours of play now) the midrange and sound stage finally opened up and bloomed (hope this is a good word for it, it got bigger and fuller). The sound is no longer on the thin side and in contrast the high frequencies no longer sound out of balance, though they are a bit more extended over the original version. The bass response is much improved on the 1.1 as it is not only tighter, but it is deeper as well, which is apparent on "Contate Domino," a new reference and pipe organ CD that I now use, (thanks Charlie). The harmonic information (that had me hooked on the 1.0 version) is back on voices, strings and brass percussive, but overall the sound is not quite as warm as the 1.0 version. It is however more dynamic and perhaps the added dynamics just gives the impression that there is less warmth as the presentation is still very smooth and natural sounding (again what originally attracted me to the BC DAC). Sensing less warmth could also be because of the high frequencies sounding more extended on the 1.1 version, in any case I do not find this a fault, but felt that I should mention it and once again the unit is very smooth and analog like. The overall sound also has a bit more air (which I call reverb) than the 1.0 and does not congest at all that I can tell on complex material given that I listen at moderate levels due to the power limitations of my system. Speaking of the system, it can be viewed in the "Virtual Systems" area and is listed under "SET Hide Away System." All in all the 1.1 version is enough of an improvement to keep me sedated until SACD and the other striving formats run their course.

Thanks Sam, and yes the unit is not to be considered bright at all. I think that they have done a nice job of adding detail and dynamics while still holding on the the natural and realistic sound of the first version. I stayed up until 2:00AM unable to tear myself away from the music as it has been a while since the system sounded this good.

Gunbei: Very good advice, and I second it. I did not find the 1.0 version lacking in dynamics once I replaced the stock power cord (first with a Harmonic Tech Pro 11 and then later with a BMI Whale Elite) and also after I stopped resting it (on its stock feet) on an MDF shelf (as recommended by a pro reviewer of the unit) as this muddied up the sound. I did not mention it in my review above, but I have also auditioned the 1.1 version with a Musical Fidelity X-A1 integrated solid state amp (I use both the SET and this amp on everything that I audition although the SET's main use is in the living room system where the BC DAC resides as well. This particular MF amp is warmer sounding than the newer models and when kept running at 3-5 watts it runs in Class A. I did not get digital glare with this setup either, but once again this is not what I would call a high definition solid state amplifier, such as the Bryston sound for example and from what I have read your Sim also has an extremely detailed sound. If you want to reduce the HF's a bit on the DAC 1.1, resting it on a couple of Vibrapods with a small amount of top weighting will do the trick (no cones, just Vibrapods between it and the shelf and approx. 8 oz. of top weight). I do not have enough Neuance shelves for all of my equipment and am still playing around with this on the DAC (which is on one of the stock shelves in the equipment rack). I have mine on Pods and cones again, but did notice that this other setup killed some of the HF's which may be beneficial in some systems.

Gunbei: Do a search under Neuance and you will find my recent review of the shelving. You might want to consider one for the new Theta, for a start (if it can be placed on the top shelf of your rack). Does the top shelf rest on upturned spikes as I am pretty sure that this is the best support for the shelving (and is what I use)? Funny, I don't ordinarily top weight anything either, for the same reason (it kills harmonics). I have not tried the DAC on the Neuance as I only have two shelves at this time for the amp and player/transport. Try placing the DAC on a mouse pad and see what it does to the HF's. This is not the same sound as the Vibrapods, but will give you a good idea of what a soft footer does to the HF's.

It kills Charlie. Thanks again.