DAC Shootout Starts This Weekend


Okay...in another thread I promised to do a side-by-side evaluation of the Audiobyte HydraVox/Zap vs the Rockna Wavelight. Due to the astonishing incompetence of DHL this has been delayed. At the moment, I have a plethora of DACs here and am going to do a broader comparison.

I am going to do a compare of the Rockna Wavelight, Rockna Wavedream Signature, Audiobyte HydraVox/Zap, Chord Hugo 2, Chord Hugo TT2, Bricasti M3, Bricasti M1 Special Edition, Weiss 501 and the internal DAC card for an AVM A 5.2 Integrated amp as a baseline.

For sake of consistency, I am going to use that same AVM integrated amp driving Vivid Kaya 45s. I may branch out and do some listening on other speakers (Verdant Nightshade of Blackthorn and/or Wilson Benesch Vertexes) but want to use the Vivids for every compare as they are the fullest range speakers I have here. For sake of consistency I will use a Chord 2Go/2Yu connected via an Audioquest Diamond USB as a renderer. The only exception is the Hugo 2 which has a 2Go directly attached to it. I will use a Roon Nucleus+ as a server in all cases.

My plan is to use the same five songs on every DAC; In a Sentimental Mood from Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, Be Still My Beating Heart from Sting, Liberty from Anette Askvik, Duende from Bozzio Levin Stevens and Part 1 of Mozart String Quartet No 14 in G Major from the Alban Berg Quartet. The intent is to touch on different music types without going crazy.

I will take extensive notes on each listening session and write up a POV on the strengths of each unit. I am going to start this this Friday/Saturday and will be writing things up over the next month or so. If you have thoughts, comments or requests, I will be happy to try and accommodate. The one thing I am not going to do is make the list of songs longer as that has an exponential impact on this and make everything much harder. If and when other DACs come in on trade I may add to the list through time.
128x128verdantaudio

I’m curious how you attribute an aspect like soundstage depth to a DAC, in context of the uniqueness of various systems, the rooms these systems are in, the listener positions, and the use / lack of use of room treatment (for the purchasing party)?

I’m not challenging...just trying to understand and learn.

@david_ten

am sure scott will answer, but my 2 cents, my own process:

- have my system set up ideally in my room (see my system page for pics)

- have my standard ’reference’ dac in place, know how music i know well sounds, how the soundstage is presented, in terms of size (width, height, depth) and separation / layering / relative distance of voices/instruments etc

- swap in new dac being evaluated, adjust for correct (same) volume level, listen and perceive how the sonic ’image’ is presented differently, if at all (don’t change anything else, even cabling)

- btw - having a well selected playlist of familiar music helps alot in this...

hope that helps

@david_ten I have been lucky to have heard dozens of these premium DACs with a variety of speakers in my home and in many friends and customers homes.  I am lucky.  

On a relative basis, certain brands/DACs exhibit certain properties.  In any system, I would expect a Rockna DAC to sound wider and flatter than Chord DAC which would be narrower but much deeper.  There are many ways to compensate but if everything is held equal, I would expect this relatively to be true.  
 

you are right though.  A combination of room treatments or different speakers and system components could achieve different results.  If depth of soundstage is a concern, MBL or Raidho speakers would have a bigger impact than a Bricasti DAC.  But, that necessitates rethinking amplification and a variety of things.  And it is true that a Rockna DAC in a system with Raidho speakers would probably sound deeper than a Chord or Bricasti DAC in a system with Magico speakers.  but that isn’t the exercise in this case.  The only variable proposed was DAC.

this does raise  an important point and something everyone should be reminded of.  The particular results in this thread are from a system that is intentionally held constant to provide relative characteristics.  And I think that is the key here, results are relative.  When you change a variable (speaker, amp, etc…), you do need to think through the implications.  


 

@verdantaudio  Your answer is very helpful and furthers my understanding of where you are coming from. Thanks for that!

+1 to the extremely pertinent point(s) you shared above....especially this one >>>

this does raise  an important point and something everyone should be reminded of.  The particular results in this thread are from a system that is intentionally held constant to provide relative characteristics.  And I think that is the key here, results are relative.  When you change a variable (speaker, amp, etc…), you do need to think through the implications.  

@jjss49  Thanks for sharing your approach. It's one I have used in the past but am cautious with now.

Why the caution? The conundrum(s) posed by optimization... and the resulting false negatives.

With an optimized reference system:

- if the exchanged component (like a DAC in the above posts) outperforms your "reference" DAC...the approach works.

however,

- if the exchanged component (like a DAC in the above posts) under-performs your "reference" DAC...the approach may yield a true negative OR a false negative.

For example, had you optimized your reference system around that "rejected" DAC...could you be certain of the outcome in that now optimized system with your current reference DAC. Maybe yes, maybe no.

@david_ten

your points are well taken and valid

please note that the process i set forth is meant to understand differences (as did scott’s), and not to immediately make value judgements on whether a piece of gear is good or bad in said reference set up (i purposely did not mention establishing superiority or inferiority in my a/b process description)

one needs to understand the differences first, then, based on that understanding, think about how best to integrate a new piece into the system, or decide not to, given what may be needed as next steps

sometimes upon comparison, overall quality differences are obvious, but when one reaches a certain level of gear, it’s more about differences and nuances in presentation than straight ’a is better than b’... such as your query about soundstage differences among dacs

happy holidays to you!