Reference DACS: An overall perspective

Exlibris, Thanks for Zanden and Attraction initial comparo. I am sure you would like to break the Zanden a bit, even though it is used, before making a final rating scale on it. But inital comparision would indicate, per your earlier definition of 7 being perfect, Attraction to be more desirable? Which one's tonal balance, weight and articulation sounds like live music? If it is true that is some achievement at the attraction's going price. Let us know your final conclusion on these two.

Finally, I finished this thread from start to finish, over last few weeks. Lots of good first hand impressions on variety of Transport/DAC combos. Quite a few folks have done a pretty good job of describing the auditions they have had. Using the subjective sound parameters like describing what they heard : detailed, musical, time and space, sound stage, etc and finally 'assigning' the type of flavor the DAC presented. I thank Teejay for starting the thread and being proactive enough to get the thread and inputs going.

Throughout the thread I wondered, what does this all subjective impressions means to ME? What is a reference (close to live, right?) sound? Is it flavour 1 or 2? Surely it can't be both, i thought.

Not untill Ajahu's thread the term live sounding or realistic sounding came up! And only since last few threads classification of live sounding dacs describd as being 'between' flavour 1 and 2!! And I think to me only now it is becoming clear how and what to interprete from what long past posts were trying to describe in their subjetcive impressions. To me live sound IS between flavor 1 and 2, probably more towards number 2 than 1. More like Exlibris rating scale of 7.

Having said that let me post some of auditions that I have had in last few months. Thesa are my impressions. No offense intended.

Jadis JD1/JS2(?) DAC combo: Very detailed, great sound stage, mid range on slightly 'thinner side', very good bottom end, but still slightly digital sounding (sorry)I would give that sound as may be 3 or solid 4. This was auditioned in very well highly acclaimed and regarded (read expensive) amplifications and speakers.

MBL 15xx transport and DAC combo was somewhat similar. I was overwhelmed with lot of details, illuminated instruments less weighty midrange and wanted to stop the music like right now. Scale would be once again 4 or may be 5. This too was auditioned in very good rest of the equipment.

DCS stack (purcell. delius) blew me away at first listen, honestly. The strings were out of the world sounding at first listen. You can almost feel the srings being played in the soundstage rigt infront of your eyes. Well good, lets us proceed with other types pf music, say like guitar, orchestral and vocals and piano. While later CDs sounded good, i found later that the bottom end on mids was actually lacking and soundstage was rather weird I thought ( now it could be the set up, but I have heard very realistic sound in this system with Transrotor/triplanar/sheltor 501 as front end. In fact this was one of my reference sound, with anlogue as front end). Upon much thought the reason for my initial being blown away impressions could be slightly enhanced harmonics. Okay so the DCS set up gets may be solid 4.

Accuphase transport/dac combo: I am afraid the sound was rather similar to MBL combo. Not much to say here. A solid 5.

Audio Note DAC 5.1 Balanced with CEc T0 (?) Transport in all audio note system. WOW! was my instant reaction when started with chamber music and that wow factor continued thru rest of the music types i played. True, natural, dynamic but relaxed presentation. For once no faults to be found. Music sounded so good that you do not end of judging the sound but rather enjoying very realistic sounding music. True to life tonal balance, just the right amount of high freq content. Truely weighty mids. Not once it sounded 'funny or processed'. In other words a perfect 7!! It easily surpassed the Transrotor TT (Transrotor to of the line) sthru an audinote phono. (although i cound be wrong here since i auditioned only one record) The audio note sound reminded me of my own Classe CDT-1/DAC-1 combo, which I would rate as solid 6. I know it can use a just a tad little more upper high. But i will leave good enogh alone. High freq is kind of tricky. slightly more and scale tips to lower pretty quikly. Of course it is an 'ancient' design as compared to current mega bucks 'reference' dacs, but it still stunns me every time I sit down to listem to music.

Trust me I don't WANT my old Classe DAC to sound this good so that may be I have excuse to get one of these high $$$ proud of ownership dacs that makes a statement and I can brag about. May be Audio note would give me bragging rights (since it is rather expensive);-) Although this Altman Attraction Dac intrigues me.

Exlibris, Although it is only one week since you got the Zanden DAC, I (and I am sure many others) eagerly awaits your impression on the Zanden Sonics. And its comparision to the upgraded attraction DAC. Zanden reviews that I read are extraordinary glowing. But true test is listening with your own (or fellow agoners!) ears. Thanks in advance.

Thanks Exlibris. Let me know when you have completed trying both DACs out with different linestages. Different out puts may not make big difference if you compare with right volume match. Agree that synergy and system match big difference as to how DAC would perform, but still your comparisions will be helpful.

It sounds like Zanden bottom-end opening up will have overall sound to move towards the right reference number(7). - musical and warmer sound?

Exlibris, Does this mean you are going to let go the Altmann DAC? Why not go with Zanden tubed linestage? (Synergy). I am glad u provided inputs. That is one up for Zanden in my book, As I continue to struggle with my own Transport DAC upgrade, this kind of gives me a good valid data point.

Branimir, Could you describe (although #1.8 indicates what type of sound) little more on Metronome C-2A/Kalista combo sound? How much etching?, if any. What kind of music you auditioned? What sampling rate was used? Thx.

Branimir, very nice summary. I am reading in to your description of Metronome sound being bigger and fuller as being closer to lifelike bigness of sound as it is apparent in live jazz band. It is curious that you single out this description to Metronome sound and not others. Is Esoteric, AA and Orpheus have same big 'density' sound as compared to Metronome?

I personally value bigness and fuller sound since it move a lot of air and hence approaches life-like sound.

Also I will be curious to know if you have auditioned and compared these DACs sound to a well set up analog front end. Or if you have your own analog set up and compared to the best of the digital sound. Not to necessarily compare which one is better but the key differences that stands out. This is not a anlog v/s digital question or trying to hijack Teajay's excellent thread but to get a feel for what the best in digiatl has to offer in comaprision to best in analog. I hope Teajay does not mind this comparision.

My opinion on the MBL digital front ends differs from you guys. I have auditioned 1621/11 and 1521/11 in all MBL system. The 16xx with 6010d, 9011 mono blocks and 101 speakers. The 15xx 1ith 6010d, 9008 stereo amp and 116(?) speakers. In both cases I would describe the sound to be more on neutral and thus towards more on flavor #1 side than #2. The sound is very resolute, detailed and unforgiving (if recording is bad). But realistic sounding with good recordings but with a bit less weight than other reference systems I have auditioned. Better than esoteric one box model and the dcs combo. IMHO. In contrast audio note dac 5.1 and Metronome combo (very little audition time)has extreme bias towards # 2 flavor.

Prawax, thanks for the report! Which digital cable and termination type are you using with MT and CF DAC-040?