Reference DACS: An overall perspective


There has been many threads the last few months regarding the sonic signature of some of the highest regarded reference DACS (Dcs,Meitner,Ensemble,Audio Note,Zanden,Reimyo,Accustic Arts) here on the GON. I have been very fortunate to audtion many of these wonderful pieces in my home or friend's systems. I wanted to share, in a systematic way, my impressions/opinions with you GON members for a two reasons: 1)That my experiences might be helpful to fellow members interested in audtioning these DACS. 2)Starting an interesting discussion regarding the different "sonic flavors" of these reference digital front ends. I totally agree with the statement, "if you have not heard it you don't have an opinion". Therefore, I have no comments regarding DACS from Weiss,Goldmund,Audio Aero and Burmester because I have never had the pleasure of audtioning them. I would love to hear from members who have and share their experiences with us. My overall impression is that these DACS(Dcs,Meitner,Ensemble,Audio Note,Zanden,Reimyo,Accustic Arts) can be grouped into two molar categories regarding their overall sonic signature. By the way, all of them can throw a large/deep soundstage with excellent layering in the acoustic space with "air" around individual players on that stage. However, than they start to part company into two major categories. Category #1) These DACS "flavors" revolve around pristine clarity, fine sharp details,speed,very extended top/bottom frequencies,and great PRAT. These DACS never sound "etched" or "in your face" but are more "upfront" then "layed back" in their presentation. The DACS, to my ear's, that go into this bracket are Dcs,Ensemble,Meitner. My personnal favorite in this group is the Ensemble, which I owned for two years. These DACS remind me of the sonic signature of speakers such as Wilson,Thiel,Dynaudio, Focal/JM Labs. Category #2) These DACS "flavors" revolve around a "musical/organic" sense, natural timbres,and an easy flowing liquidity. Their "less forward" presentation my give the impression of less detail, but I think in this case its an illusion fostered by their more relaxed/organic manner. The DACS, to my ear's, that go into this bracket are Audio Note,Zanden,Reimyo,Accustic Arts. I did find that the tube DACS did not have the top/bottom frequency extenstion and PRAT of the SS DACS in this bracket. For me, the Accustic Arts DAC1-MK3 gave me the best of both categories, therefore it is now the resident DAC in my system. These DACS remind me of the sonic signature of speakers such as Magnepan,Von Schweikert,Sonus Faber. Well, it's all just my opinion regarding these digital pieces, but I hope this post was at least informative/somewhat interesting and would lend itself to other GON members sharing their impressions, not about what DAC is the "BEST" in the world, but your personnal taste and synergy with your system.
teajay
Teejay and everyone else, great work on this thread. I’ve read though it all and narrowed my choices down to the Acoustic Arts tube dac, Acoustic Arts DAC I MK4 and the Playback Designs DAC
My system consists of a Sonus Faber Amanti Homage speakers, Pass Labs x600 amplification, a Cullen modified sonos ZP90 zone player (clock stabilization and 192k output) and a Tact mini room processor. I’m currently using the Tact as a DAC and while the sonic benefits of the room correction make my system sound better than ever I still feel like I’m missing some (maybe a lot) of purity/clarity in upper mid and hi frequency ranges. My guess is the Dac in the Tact is average as best and so I’m looking for something to use at the end of the chain.
Zp90->Tact mini->New Dac
I think my ears prefer Category #2 as outlined by Tejay in the original post which appears to be backed up by my current selection of equipment.
My thinking so far without hearing any of them is as follows:

Acoustic Arts tube dac
PROS: Very interested in adding back some of the warmth I used to get from an audio research setup I had in the past and was hoping the Tube in this Dac might help add it back in.
CONS: Appears to only supports low sample rates and I guess I would have to get the Tact to sample rate convert its output back down from 192k to 44.1. No way of automatically controlling the standby/tubeon switch which would be somewhat painful as my electronics are in a separate room

Acoustic Arts DAC I MK4
PROS: High sample rate, No need for standby
CONS: no tube?

Playback Designs DAC
PROS: Andreas Koch designed it. I know some of the professional equipment developed by Andreas in the past and it’s always been fantastic.
CONS: trying to find one to listen too.

As this point I’m trying to arrange to get all three in my system for a side by side test but would be interested in people’s thoughts, suggestions and comments on anything I’ve missed.
Thanks in advance
Karl
Karl and Teajay, I do wonder about this issue of warmth, which I suspect is somewhat attenuated or enhanced by system context, I wonder if a tube dac in an all tube pre/amp combo is too much of "something" versus an SS based system. I've always thought of "warmth" as a pleasant deviation from neutral, with somehow less resolution and detail -- I think that for me, with two tube-based pre/amp combos, that neutrality at the source proabably serves me best, whereas if I were using SS, yes, even Pass gear, something on the warm/organic side might match better. Which as Teajay says, system matching and context is an important part of assessing a piece of gear; change the context and your conclusions may vary.
Hi Pubul57 and Karl, you both have had me thinking about the issues of what Pubul57 refers to as "warmth" vs less resolution/detail. I totally agree with what Pubul57 says about system matching/context, I have heard very good pieces of gear not shine in different systems.

Karl, your concern regarding having to switch the standby/tubeon, I leave my DAC on all the time. The type of tubes, 12AX7's, and how this DAC uses them means that they should last about 3 to 4 years before you have to retube.

Since, I have had the AA tube DAC, and recently hearing/auditioning some of the most highly regarded CDPs and DACs, I still struggle to put in words the difference between the AA tube DAC and what I hear when listening to the other digital front ends. I believe that it has much resolution and details as anything out there on redbook CD, however, it also offers an "ease" and "fluidity" that is not euphonically tube-like in its sonic signature. So, I don't know if it would be to much of a good thing in an all tube system or better matched in a SS system. I also still find that it offers the most natural/beautful timbres of all the DACs I have listened to.

Pubul57, I see that you replaced your AA combo with the EMM Labs CDSA SE player. I'm quite interested in what you heard in your system that lead you to make the move. Please share some details regarding the sonic differences between them. I do know that when a friend auditioned a totally broken in EMM Labs SE in my system in comparsion with the AA Tube DAC, he returned the EMM to the dealer and then purchased the AA Tube DAC. In my system the AA DAC was much more musical/natural, all on redbook CDs, and that's way my friend chose to purchase the AA Tube DAC. I realize your AA DAC was not the Tube reference, however, it is a terrific sounding piece, so what did you hear that lead to making the move?

Hi Teajay. Of course I did not ever hear the TubeDac, so I have no idea if I would have liked it better than the DAC IV or how it might compare to the EMM CDSA SE (current version with upgraded transport and feet). Like the AA gear, I bought it essentially without an audition, but did hear it for a while in a similar system to my own with Merlin speakers. I liked what I heard and was of a mind to move from seperates back to an integrated CD player (the SACD was just added value, though I as of yet don't own a single SACD, but for the demo SACD provided with the EMM).

First I will say that just about any of the DACs and digital gear mentioned in this thread would undoubtedly sound good to me; this is afterall all good/great gear. My reason for going integrated is that I own two preamps and I could not get them both on my equipment rack with the transport/dac combo; so the change was ergonomic and not for thinking I was going to improve the sound much, I was very satisfied with the AA combo, no doubt. I'll say this for the CDSA SE, it in no way makes me feel like I have taken a step backwards and in a few specific regards it betters the AA to my ears and in the context of an all tube preamp/amp combo (Joule, Atmasphere, Music Reference). I listen to a lot of jazz and the sound of a trumpet and saxaphone is what I usually fixate on; when I come from a live concert, it is usually the fall of in the timbre of these two instruments that makes me really feel the difference between live and recorded (and dynamics); the EMM gear seems to handle these two instruments in a way I prefer over the AA combo. The simplest way I can say it is that it is much easier to hear that these instruments are metallic, and I can more easily hear the blattiness (I think that was HPs word for what I am referring to) of the trumpet and the bite of the saxaphone come across in a more realistic manner to my ears. I also notice that the cymbals, and percussive instruments seems to have a more incisive portrayl of their dynamics, with fast and detailed transients, making them sound more like real instruments.

That is all I have been able to focus on so far listening to Mingus, Tijuana Moods and Blakey's Moanin'. That being said, there was nothing wrong with the AA at all, but I think one can safely purchase the CDSA as an alternative to the combos and feel they have first-rate digital production. Let's put it this way, it is more than good enough that I'm not worrying about it. I'm afraid to actually start buying SACDs as this is suppose to be the EMM gears raison d'etre and I can see myself buying all my favorite jazz cds all over again. Ugghhh.

Anyway, this is a thread on DACs so that's all I'll say on this player. It does beg the issue in my mind whether the advantage of seperate DACs is mostly flexibilty and the "advantage" of separate power supplies between transport and DAC, versus the thorny issue of jitter connecting them. Anyway, I'm happy (for now).
Hi Teajay, great to read that you are still enjoying the AA Tube Dac as I am. Have you made any further tube changes, if so what and your thoughts. I'm really enjoying my latest being the MBL 1621A but still feel the the Oracle 2000 I had surpassed it in musicality slightly, not a lot but ever so slight. In every other area the MBL's improvements are most welcome and obvious. You should check out the thread titled What is the best DAC ever made? I tried putting some info. here but for what ever reason again they would not allow it and didn't post the thread.

There are some interesting responses specifically one which has left me scratching my head, still trying to get some more info. but in the end just feel it's a different flavour thing which is okay.