Valab NOS Dac VS. Cambridge Azur DacMagic

Interesting read so far. FWIW, I prefer the Valab (after 300+hrs of burn in) in my digital amp based set up over the Bel Canto DAC3 for sheer musicality and emotion.

Mine is currently the early 2009 iteration. Not sure if yours is of the current or original batch but there's been notable improvements. To me the NOS sound is more analog-like and thus, closer to the real thing.

The BC was definitely in the accuracy/analytical camp but killed the music in the process and devoid it of emotion. I think a warmish or tube-based system can use the accuracy and high resolution of the BC DAC3 to compliment and balance out its attributes better. My digital sytem doesn't need help in that department and thus the result I've observed.

YMMV,

Kenobi

Rooski,

Having had the Onix XCD-88 for a while (few years), it mostly acted as a transport as I found the internal DAC lacking. Not sure what kind of digital cable you have going from transport to DAC, but quality there makes a huge difference (Acoustic Zen MC2 on mine). In my system, the Onix was never competitive at all with either the Valab or any of my previous DACs.

Again, in my system, the Valab bested a BC DAC3 and all others I've tried--more analog-like, non-digital and very fullsome, 3D sound with flesh and blood feel the vocal presentation. Admittedly, it isn't as silent as the OS DACs but it preserves the original intent of the music better.

But hey, if you can do sans DAC, put the dough toward more software instead.

Kenobi

Rooski,

That explains it. The top end roll off wouldn't compliment the Valab for sure. I have silver cables from Valab to pre and I think it better serves the top end. In the end, musical satisfaction is in the ear of the beholder.

Regards,

Kenobi