Thanks for sharing your experience with the Aeris DAC. Would I be right to conclude that you prefer the sound of the DAC through the Corus preamp instead of direct to the power amps? I am seriously considering getting the Corus to run in between my Esoteric K-01 player and Bryston 28B SST2 monoblocks. Guido, in another thread, prefers the sound of his K-01 with the Corus preamp in place. How much, to your ears, did the sonics change and in what ways, with the Corus in place? Thanks in advance.
Jeff Rowland Aeris DAC : my experience
I wanted to comment on my month long experience with the new Jeff Rowland Aeris DAC. I replaced a Berkeley Audio Alpha 2 Dac with the Rowland hoping to squeeze out a bit more musicality with my system which is JRDG Corus Preamp, JRDG 625 amp, Revel Salon 2 speakers, Esoteric transport , Audience AU24 SE IC (balanced), Audience AU24 SE digital cable, Audience AU24 E power cords, Shynyata power conditioner, and Cardas Clear beyond & Golden Reference SC (bi-wired.)
Right up front with the Rowland DAC clearly there is more center fill, deeper & better defined bass, better pace and timing, fuller lower mids, and a subtle sense of organic musicality that the Berkeley DAC did not produce. At first listening I thought perhaps the BADAC was slightly more detailed w/ more air surrounding the instruments. After the unit broke a bit more (now 200 hours) this is not the case. The Rowland is more dead neutral, reveals greater differences in recording venues, engineering technique and makes recordings sound more unique & individual where the BADAC tends to average these differences into a less distinct sonic experience.
The Rowland DAC reveals a deeper soundstage, wider by a margin and vertically able to reach the extremes of my 18' tall listening space on studio recordings w/ this kind of surreal musical space and information. Stage wise the Rowland is in another league than the BADAC.
The most significant aspect of the Rowland DAC is the revelatory synergy of the musical expression. Where the Berkeley Alpha 2 DAC tends to deconstruct the musical reproduction into elements , component parts in a slightly intellectual fashion the Rowland Aeris DAC take a different path and remarkably unifies the music (the whole is greater than the sum of its parts) in a way that seems to express musicality, expression, nuance and dynamic contrast well beyond the level of the critically acclaimed BADAC.
This organic, rich and humanizing quality is not a function of a warm or soft sounding DAC but rather seems a results of a very simple signal path, outstanding chassis, isolation , and a really determined audio designer. JR is someone who builds in redundant mechanical stability, exceptional structural designs that exceed most (if not all) DAC's on the market. In terms of the singular CNC milling process Jeff Rowland is the high priest!
My search for a better DAC sent me headlong into discussions with several dealers who carry both the Berkeley and Rowland DAC's. An odd finding was the lack of consensus : Is one actually better than the other? One theme that emerged was the notion that the BADAC was
more detailed and airy". Well this is simply NOT the case. In fact in strictly objective terms one might say the Rowland DAC creates less of a bandaid, effect (the BADAC does), has less of a signature sound of its own, and is basically a true chameleon. The Rowland DAC is sensitive to Digital cables. Its a unit design that stubbornly rejects AES/EBU digital inputs in favor of true 75ohm spdif BNC inputs (rad the JRDG white paper on this topic) Finally the unit wants 400+ of run in before it really does its thing. This alone may make comparison between DAC difficult for persecutive buyers.
On the plus side it is shipped w a beautiful outboard power supply that is so good it sounds exactly the same w or W/O an expensive Shunyata power conditioner (pretty amazing IMO). The output gain controls let the user play with DAC output relative to various preamp & lets you go direct into a power amp w/ balanced or single ended analogue outputs . I discovered by accident when using the Rowland DAC to feed my Rowland Corus preamp that tweaking the DAC outputs levels between the 0-60 blinking light increments (sorry, no numeric display which is a bit of a downer) that the soundstage gets much wider at the 50-52 level than it does wide open at 63 (which JR himself recommends.) For rock music I crank it up just to the point it distorts (app. 64 w/ blinking warning light patterns ) and its a beast.
Full disclosure: I am an early adopter of Jeff Rowland electronics and have owned several of the classic class A/AB amps and upper tier preamps. As such I do like the JRDG "house sound": But to be really honest there is not much house sound going on in the newest JRDG product line. It is some of the most honest, musical, engaging, neutral, step out of the way and let the music electronics I have ever heard. By contrast I recently borrowed a set of mono amps & a DAC that cost as much as my first house (Nelson Pass and DSC) the amps were dryish sounding and less musical (heady but not soulful) and the DSC DAC was unbelievable to my mind but audibly to my ears & to several friends dull(er) musical presentation compared A-B to the Rowland Aeris DAC. Pretty impressive.
I want to thank all the good folks who helped me in my quest to create a dream system to fit my budget and want to notify my financial advisor that I will be taking X $$$ from my retirement account to get the 725, 825 or maybe even the 925 if I keep my nose to the grind stone.
Right up front with the Rowland DAC clearly there is more center fill, deeper & better defined bass, better pace and timing, fuller lower mids, and a subtle sense of organic musicality that the Berkeley DAC did not produce. At first listening I thought perhaps the BADAC was slightly more detailed w/ more air surrounding the instruments. After the unit broke a bit more (now 200 hours) this is not the case. The Rowland is more dead neutral, reveals greater differences in recording venues, engineering technique and makes recordings sound more unique & individual where the BADAC tends to average these differences into a less distinct sonic experience.
The Rowland DAC reveals a deeper soundstage, wider by a margin and vertically able to reach the extremes of my 18' tall listening space on studio recordings w/ this kind of surreal musical space and information. Stage wise the Rowland is in another league than the BADAC.
The most significant aspect of the Rowland DAC is the revelatory synergy of the musical expression. Where the Berkeley Alpha 2 DAC tends to deconstruct the musical reproduction into elements , component parts in a slightly intellectual fashion the Rowland Aeris DAC take a different path and remarkably unifies the music (the whole is greater than the sum of its parts) in a way that seems to express musicality, expression, nuance and dynamic contrast well beyond the level of the critically acclaimed BADAC.
This organic, rich and humanizing quality is not a function of a warm or soft sounding DAC but rather seems a results of a very simple signal path, outstanding chassis, isolation , and a really determined audio designer. JR is someone who builds in redundant mechanical stability, exceptional structural designs that exceed most (if not all) DAC's on the market. In terms of the singular CNC milling process Jeff Rowland is the high priest!
My search for a better DAC sent me headlong into discussions with several dealers who carry both the Berkeley and Rowland DAC's. An odd finding was the lack of consensus : Is one actually better than the other? One theme that emerged was the notion that the BADAC was
more detailed and airy". Well this is simply NOT the case. In fact in strictly objective terms one might say the Rowland DAC creates less of a bandaid, effect (the BADAC does), has less of a signature sound of its own, and is basically a true chameleon. The Rowland DAC is sensitive to Digital cables. Its a unit design that stubbornly rejects AES/EBU digital inputs in favor of true 75ohm spdif BNC inputs (rad the JRDG white paper on this topic) Finally the unit wants 400+ of run in before it really does its thing. This alone may make comparison between DAC difficult for persecutive buyers.
On the plus side it is shipped w a beautiful outboard power supply that is so good it sounds exactly the same w or W/O an expensive Shunyata power conditioner (pretty amazing IMO). The output gain controls let the user play with DAC output relative to various preamp & lets you go direct into a power amp w/ balanced or single ended analogue outputs . I discovered by accident when using the Rowland DAC to feed my Rowland Corus preamp that tweaking the DAC outputs levels between the 0-60 blinking light increments (sorry, no numeric display which is a bit of a downer) that the soundstage gets much wider at the 50-52 level than it does wide open at 63 (which JR himself recommends.) For rock music I crank it up just to the point it distorts (app. 64 w/ blinking warning light patterns ) and its a beast.
Full disclosure: I am an early adopter of Jeff Rowland electronics and have owned several of the classic class A/AB amps and upper tier preamps. As such I do like the JRDG "house sound": But to be really honest there is not much house sound going on in the newest JRDG product line. It is some of the most honest, musical, engaging, neutral, step out of the way and let the music electronics I have ever heard. By contrast I recently borrowed a set of mono amps & a DAC that cost as much as my first house (Nelson Pass and DSC) the amps were dryish sounding and less musical (heady but not soulful) and the DSC DAC was unbelievable to my mind but audibly to my ears & to several friends dull(er) musical presentation compared A-B to the Rowland Aeris DAC. Pretty impressive.
I want to thank all the good folks who helped me in my quest to create a dream system to fit my budget and want to notify my financial advisor that I will be taking X $$$ from my retirement account to get the 725, 825 or maybe even the 925 if I keep my nose to the grind stone.