Wadia 27/270 vs. dCS Delius+Purcell

Hallo, I want to spend some kilobuck in a new cd-combo and think to buy either a Wadia 27/270 or a dCS DAC Delius with upsampler Purcell. Does somebody has experiences? I have the following questions:
1. Is the Wadia or the dCS the 'better' one?
2. For the dCS I need a transport too. Some people told me, that the transport for the dCS do not neeed to be super expensive because the Purcell will 'upsamle' some weeknesses of the transport as well. A transport of about $ 2.000 would do. Is this right or do I need to buy an superexpensive transport as well? Which transports go well with the dCS?
3. The Wadia and the dCS do not need a preamp, theoreticlly. Here at audiogon one can read that the experiences with Wadia with or without pre are very incoherent. Half people strictly recommend a (good) pre, the other half strictly recommend no pre. How about the dCS? Does this combo need a (good) pre or does it run as good without?
Best regards from Germany and thanks for good advice in advance! Sebastian Hatzfeldt
You might want to read the Aug. 2000 HiFi News article (pg.32) which compares the Wadia 860x to the dCS Purcell/Delius combo. (Perhaps a 27ix/270 for the Wadia would have been a better choice.) Looks like it may come down to which "flavor" of CD reproduction you prefer. They both clearly do the job well, and offer top engineering. Wadia may be the best "oversampler" available now, and dCS the best "upsampler". Of course with the Wadia combo you get a great transport included. I own the Wadia 850, and use an active preamp (Pass X1). I like the dynamics provided the preamp, but admit that without a preamp you get even more transparency. However, I don't like the idea of "losing bits" by using a digital volume; I'm not sure if the Delius uses analog or digital gain control (do you know?). I've heard the dCS, but not yet in my system for a direct comparison to Wadia. I will say that my Wadia (modified by Great Northern Sound and thus supposedly near the 27ix sonically) produces very realistic timbre/tone/harmonics of musical instruments. Yet my experience with dCS and other good "upsamplers" is that music images have an exceptional "3-dimensionality" that I don't always get with Wadia. I'd be interested to know if others have noticed these characteristics. Well, if you choose dCS, you might want to check out a used Wadia transport. So, as usual in high-end audio, you'll need to audition Wadia v. dCS in the same system with your own ears. Have fun!
The dCS DACs are also ovesamplers, running at 2.822MS/s for 44.1kS/s based inputs (i.e. 44.1, 88.2 & 176.4kS/s and also DSD) and 3.072MS/s for 48kS/s based inputs(48, 96 & 192kS/s). The vast majority of DACs now made are oversamplers.

Robert Kelly
dCs Ltd, Cambridge, UK
I have compared the Wadia 27/270 to the dCS 972/Elgar combo (which I own). I drive my customized Melos Monoblocks directly with the Elgar. I use a Sigtech room DSP and Dunlavy SC-V's. I have a shunt to ground volume control in each monblock so for serious listening the volume on the Elgar is betwwen 0 and -10 db. The dCS combo is better than the Wadia. On complex orchestral music the ability to hear and place each instrument wth its correct overtones is superb. On string quartetts the ability to hear the nuances of the bowing is, in my opinion unbeatable. In order to decide if this is important to you, you'll have to listen.
I've heard both...and own the Delius/Purcell. I've been VERY impressed with dCS gear. I listen to primarily classical and 60's jazz, and have been happy with the ability of Delius/Purcell to unravel complex passages of music with minimal coloration. I prefer upsampling to 176k over 192k.
Hbrandt: That's an interesting comment about liking 176K over 192K on dCS gear. Could you give more detail about what you hear on your system between these two sampling rates? Especially in the context of classical music. Thanks.
although i am no mathemtician it seems clear that the DCS gear has a better time multiplying the cd sampling rate by an even 4 times (172khz) as opposed to the additional computations involved in 192khz. probably cleaner data. maybe a sharper knife than me can shed more light on this issue. i haven't compared the sound of these 2 sampling rates but the why looked obvious.
Frankly, I'm not sure why it should be so....but to my ear...and I listen almost exclusively to Classical (symphonic, chamber, etc.), and 60's jazz....172k sounds more musical and refined that 192k. It may just be in my head. Who knows?? I must say that the absolute most dramatics is between 44.1 and 96k. That is by far the greatest improvement. From 96 to 132 to 176 to 192...there is NOT much incremental improvement...although I think 176 is the best. Not to complicate matters, but now we dCS users will have to decide whether to upgrade to DSD. The big question will be whether DSD is superior enough to 172 or 196 to warrant spending megabucks!!!
Hbrandt, Which filter setting are you using on the Delius? Most of the time mine is set to one. - Dan

I find filter 1 to be the most pleasing for most material - particularly jazz and classical. Sometimes I listen to 3 as well.