2. digital
  3. 1271735409

I need help - Better DAC or NEW CD player?

I am in the middle of purchasing some components for my new system, unfortunately, reading posts on a rainy night on Audigon only makes my "upgradeatitis" syndrom more acute.

The problem is that some time ago, I bought a squeezebox Duet, to use as transport for lossless files. The idea obviously was to get a good DAC to go along with it.

The one I was almost set on was the Dacmagic, which gets very good reviews here and almost everywhere you look. But, on the other hand, I am willing to spend a little more......Now, the thing is my current CD player is a Rotel RCD 1072, and was wondering whether this Dacmagic would give me any improvements if I use the rotel as a transport for it.

Or, I could get for example a Wyred DAC or a Benchmark DAC1 and use the Rotel for transport, but I dont know the limits of the Rotel as transport alone, I dont want to spend 600 more bucks on a better DAC to be fed with 2 "not so good" transports (the Duet and the Rotel).

So I am kinda stuck!! On the other hand I am contemplating getting the Dacmagic to use only for the Duet, and getting a new better CD player altogether, which puts me into another doubt, I dont know if the little money I can for the rotel + lets say 1000 more will really give me any improvements in the system if I purchase a whole new CD player since the Rotel is said to be very capable.

FWIW my amp will be a W4S STI500 and speakers are B&W 803D.

Let me know what you think about this and your suggestions on what you would do.... thanks in advance for all your help!
demianm

Showing 7 responses by mapman

mapman's avatar
mapman
21,838 posts
 
4est,

I think the thing is that no two DACs sound the same, much like phono setups, but that is where the similarites end.

I think Kijanki is correct in asserting that with the BEnchmark, its sound will not vary much based on transport within certain wide and easily met (with more modern transports) limits, due to the BEnchmarks specific design which essentially eliminates external dependencies that can affect the sound, mainly the clock signal needed to convert the bits to analog accurately.

How one takes to the sound of the BEnchmark or any other DAC is still largely a matter of preference, but at least with a DAC like the Benchmark, as Kijanki indicates, you should get pretty much the same sound with most any transport up front. That may not be so much the case with other DAC designs that rely on an external clock signal provided by the source in order to convert the bits to an analog soundwave.
mapman's avatar
mapman
21,838 posts
 
" I hear differences with USB cables, spdif and toslink. Furthermore on different cables of the same type and usb converters such as the hiFace- not to mention transports especially. "

That is interesting and surprises me a bit. I'm not sure exactly how to account for those kinds of differences with the BEnchmark specifically but I imagine there is an explanation. Perhaps there are bits being dropped or something like that in certain cases. maybe someone else can offer a technical explanation for what you hear.
mapman's avatar
mapman
21,838 posts
 
4est,

My comments were regarding the Benchmark DAC design and what differences might be heard there and why. My system really is not even relevant to that discussion.

That aside, I think you underestimate the ability of the OHMs to resolve detail for whatever reason. I hear significant differences with the OHMs whenever I change something, including ICs and wires so my experience is not consistent with your assessment.
mapman's avatar
mapman
21,838 posts
 
back to the OPs question, I would go for the DAC in his case rather than a new player.
mapman's avatar
mapman
21,838 posts
 
The Cambridge did not sound thin to me when I heard it. That might be partially due to the quality overall of the system I heard it on. It impressed me as much as any player I have heard.

It fruitless to assert that all source devices are created equal in any case. That's not what I'm saying.

Timing can be an issue with transports or optical drives reading optical media in real time fast enough to apply error correction and keep the bits flowing. Music servers that avoid real time reading of optical media to provide the audio datastream and devices like network music players that cache data locally before sending to the DAC help assure that all bits available from the source media get captured and sent in time.

In the case of the BEnchmark, I suspect that there are many source devices at all price points that sound essentially the same, more so than otherwise. Which ones specifically do and which ones do not? Try specific units and find out I suppose.

But I think I would apply the strategy that I would not assume I need to spend a lot or even more in order to find a suitable source with the Benchmark specifically as perhaps might be more the case with some other DACs.
mapman's avatar
mapman
21,838 posts
 
I heard the 840c on ARC pre-amp and Rogue poweramp running PSB Synchrony speakers. The results were top notch, one of the best I have heard.

I've heard DCS and other high end units on other systems. The sound in each case was different but top notch still. The system the player reides in, particularly amp, speakers and room obviously are major factors in determining the resulting sound. My conclusion was I could live easily with teh Cambridge in the right system for me with no reservations if needed. I would not look at the way more expensive units without some kind of direct a/b comparison possible which I have not heard.
mapman's avatar
mapman
21,838 posts
 
You might get a different and perhaps "better" sound with different sounding DACs at that price but nothing clearly better in a player IMHO.

I have been very satisfied with both mhdt DACs I run ( SS constantine and tubed Paradisea). These can be had used for much less than a new 840c. They both work extremely well with the all the modest sources I drive them with ($400 Marantz DVD, $600 Denon recorder/player, Roku Soundbridge network players).

The differences in sound between SS and tube mhdt DACs are quite significant, as are the tube Paradisea with different tubes. Which one sounds best would largely be determined by personal taste, the rest of the system and to some extent possibly kinds of music listened to.
More to discover