I have the Brooklyn, and it is my favorite < $5k DAC so far.
The only glitches I have found is that, rarely, switching to 96/24 from 44/16 it doesn't do that right, but this may be due to my streaming software. You will hear it start to distort, and get very sibilant.
Lastly, play with the digital filters. I have disabled MQA so I could choose other digital filters I like better. You should listen too.
Thanks, but I was asking specifically about the Brooklyn DAC+ which is the updated one released in October.
I will definitely try the filter choices.
Take it EZ,
Has anyone directly compared the Mytek Brooklyn and Benchmark DAC3? I'd be very interested in how they compare sonically as DACs, as well as their use as preamps.
Based on the lack of responses to my query, nobody here apparently has the new version. Reviews of both lead me to believe the DAC3 is a bit better than the original Brooklyn. Of course many of us actually want MQA and the Benchmarks do not do MQA.
My expectation is that the new Brooklyn DAC+ will equal or better the DAC3 in non MQA quality. They did quite a bit of work on the new model.
Y'all have some fun,
I think it is safe to say you will be happy with either DAC. The Benchmark DAC 3 is glitch free on switching formats and syncs within 6 msec which is practically instantaneous.
Advantages of DAC3 will be for intersample overs which exist on the majority of pop rock redbook CD or files. Benchmark designed extra circuitry to handle this problem and remains the ONLY DAC to address this problem in nearly all pop rock digital music. I think this explains why it sounds so smooth like vinyl yet with more detail.
The problem is widespread and even affects audiphile quality CD like Steely Dan Gaslighting Abbie with hundreds of overs. All other DACs will clip (square wave at digital saturation)and distort hundreds of times on every track you play.https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/application_notes/intersample-overs-in-cd-recordings
Thanks for the reply but I was not the one asking about the DAC3. As I said I want MQA (I currently use an Explorer2 for that) and the DAC3 does not have it.
I did read Benchmark's reply in Stereophile about the intersample overs. I had not heard of it and find it interesting. I am pretty much avoiding Redbook pop/rock these days as the LPs are usually not as compressed.
Again, I am interested if anyone has compared the new Brooklyn DAC+ to the older model or it's competition. I have one on order and want to know what to expect.
Hope you have a good eve,
PS: Since this is not Twitter, I am not @robob. And I am not that on Twitter either:-)
I think you will be delighted with the DAC+ it has the ESS 9028 chip and offers all the filter options that come with the chip. Benchmark also bypassed the filters on this chip in order to achieve a more transparent sound but this gives the user less flexibilty (no filter choices)
I understand your confusion about the "@" syntax but this is a convention that Audiogon uses too. Typing @ when you're replying to another responder (instead of the OP) in the thread pops up a list of everyone in the current thread. Selecting one of them (or simply typing out their handle) allows Audiogon to alert them that someone posted a response directed at them.
Please follow up when you get the DAC+. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it.
"I understand your confusion about the "@" syntax but this is a
convention that Audiogon uses too. Typing @ when you're replying to
another responder (instead of the OP) in the thread pops up a list of
everyone in the current thread. Selecting one of them (or simply typing
out their handle) allows Audiogon to alert them that someone posted a
response directed at them."
Thanks for that, I never knew it. I get really annoyed at folks doing the @ thing all over the Inet.
I will report on the DAC+. I am working at a possible workaround for sending full resolution DSD out of my Oppo 105 so I can compare it to the DAC+. Unlike current convention I will also swap cables between the Parsec I ordered for it and the Cardas Neutral Reference that are on my JC3+. Both of those are XLR and I will also try some Hero RCA's. My Hero's are the older ones with the WBTs.
Apologies for the @ comment and thanks for your comments. I am really looking forward to the DAC+. I imagine I will stay with the apodizing filter but I will audition the others. Lack of filter selection may hurt the DAC3 sales.
Hope you folks have some fun,
Supposedly on the white truck for delivery today. I will let it reach room temp and then run it for a couple of hours before really listening.
Parsec XLR cables give more weight than the low cost Analysis Plus RCAs they replaced. Also apparently stronger deep bass. Highs are still there. This from my Oppo 105 to Classe CP-500, etc.
Hope you folks are well and good,
I'm very interested in your findings as I'm extremely interested in the DAC+ for MQA. Please keep us posted!
Christmas comes early!!!
"Christmas comes early!!!"
Preliminary listen shows more extended and cleaner/more detailed high end and cleaner bass along with more detail top to bottom. Not sure I knew I could still hear that much on top. But don't be thinking it's bright, it is not. Not nasty or analytical sounding.
Interestingly it may be a small amount less full in the mids than the OPPO 105 but it's early. This on 16/44.1 fed via toslink from the OPPO, including OPPO's TIDAL app. Output from DAC+ via Parsec XLRs to Classe CP-500, etc.
Take it EZ,
One of you pm'ed me asking for more thoughts on the DAC+.
I have now listened to MQA files and streams and SACD's converted to PCM by the OPPO 105 as well as more 16/44.1 material. As I somewhat alluded to, the real eye opener is how good it is with 16/44.1 sources. I am an analog guy primarily and have not been a fan of CD except in the beginning when I was impressed by it's clarity compared to most analog of the time. As I listened more I realized 16/44.1 was not enough bits to capture all the overtones and sustain we are accustomed to hearing with most analog sources.
Listening to a 16/44.1 stream from TIDAL as I type this, the electric Jazz guitar sounds nice and full and textural. Texture and high frequency detail are the two most noticeable improvements over other DACs I have had. The last time I heard 16/44.1 this good was in a MUCH higher priced system with a MUCH higher priced DAC. And I am not sure that presentation was as good in the mids as the DAC+. When a stick or mallet hits a drum you hear not only the hit but the reverberation around the hit. Clarity is there as well, such as delineation of voices in harmony. Also more sense of the space or air is retrieved compared to what I am used to with low resolution sources.
Of course higher resolution audio is better, more analog like, more air, pretty much more everything that is good. MQA is wonderful on most encoded recordings. As I believe JA (John Atkinson in Stereophile) said, MQA does not provide a benefit in every case but it does in most that I have heard. As I said elswhere in these forums, MQA brings one closer to the music. The old, "like lifting a veil" adage is applicable.
I hope to have time tomorrow for cable swapping and more direct comparison to the DAC in the OPPO. All my DAC+ listening so far has been over the Parsec XLRs.
My expectations were high but have been surpassed. It would be interesting to see what they could do by removing the phono section and spending the money on the analog out and an outboard power supply.
Hope you folks are well and good,
Why are you running such a good DAC through a preamp and a dated one at that?
Yes, the original Brooklyn has the same "weird symptom" of playing back Redbook far better than one would expect any DAC to.
However, a couple of other new DAC's also have this peculiarity. :) Something has happened recently, perhaps with the clocks, or digital filters, but we may be past the need for high rez music.
Hi resolution audio is still better.
The CP-500 sounds really good and I cannot afford to replace it with something that might be better. Remember, newer is not necessarily better. Also the interface and I/O compliment are very nice as well. Who offers a tape loop? And yes, I have tried others.
@pkaram. I have not directly compared it to my Explorer2 for MQA but because the DAC+ has a better analog stage, it should be better.
I have not tried the phono stage yet.
Y'all take care,
Thanks for the detailed impressions. Keep 'em coming if you don't mind posting. Like @kb54 above, I've been interested in the DAC-3 and the Brooklyn. Now that the DAC+ has come out it just makes the decision harder and the speed at which this sector is advancing leads to paralysis. I wish that I could listen to both but that's not an option for me. Also, I don't use MQA now but I'd like the flexibility if I were to switch to Tidal down the road.
This ESS 9028 chip does sound like vinyl. Gustard and Benchmark are other good examples of recent new DACs with this chip.
With such great low noise performance and great analog circuits to complement the leading performance of the new chip, I would definitely NOT run any of these through another preamp.
Robert, I think you should try your Brooklyn directly into your power amp, avoiding the CP-500! The Mytek has a nice volume control so why don’t you just give it a try? I’ll bet on the Mytek DAC for transparency, resolution and speed... We’ll see about the mid-bass..
I have many sources so using the DAC+ as a preamp will not work for me.
The CP-500 has numerous inputs, both RCA and XLR and several outputs as well. And I think I mentioned it sounds really good and has a tape loop. The control functions are above average as well.
On another subject, the MC input on the DAC+ is OK to good but I probably need to play it longer to see if it needs to break in. It’s unfairly being compared to a JC3+. So far it sounds a bit closed in and rolled off on top.
Y’all take care,
Robert - Thanks for your comments on the Brooklyn DAC+. Out of my price range right now, but, you never know...
I think your ability to clearly hear and describe the differences between the Oppo and the Brooklyn imply that your preamp is indeed revealing and clean enough for the task. I, too, have a complex system with recording devices, an equalizer (oh no!!!) and numerous sources. My McIntosh preamp is indispensable in my system. Sometimes, practical considerations have to take precedence over an incremental increase in sound quality.