Wyred 4 Sound - DAC2 DSD SE - Excellent upgrade


Wondering if anyone else has gone from the original DAC2 to the SE?

My experience has been entirely positive. Dramatically so.

I'm happy to elaborate - let me know.

Cheers, Rob
bezimienny
Thanks for the encouragement...

I had the original DAC2 for a few years. It was purchased on the strength of my experience with Wyred amps, owning both the ST1000 (in the music orientated system) and a STi500 (in a 2.1 home theatre set-up). Initially it replaced the onboard DAC in an Audio Research CD1 - and once I had transferred a mass of CDs onto hard drive, it was fed by a Mac Mini with Pure Music software. The only other DAC I had on hand was that in an Oppo BDP83SE. The Audio Research, despite its age, trumped the Oppo for CD playback - but both were clearly inferior to the DAC2.

The original DAC2 added detail and smoothness to the delivery. Poor recordings became bearable, while good recordings started to come alive. Smoothness is something I especially value; any grain or glare bothers me to the point where I will turn the volume down, or even seek an alternate performance. Smoothness can, however, come at a price: with the original DAC2 the price was a slight lack of excitement. Other reviewers also praised the liquid delivery, but when they went on to tentatively confess that the DAC2 did not "grab" them, I sympathised. Well, sympathised up to a point - usually the reviewer would then spend thousands of dollars more on another DAC, or add an Off-Ramp, or Audiophilleo, or a mix of the above - for the outlay, I thought the DAC2 did a fantastic job. And, to be honest, when it came to "excitement" issues, I thought the culprits were likely to be other components in my system.

When the DSD SE arrived, my expectations were modest: a little more detail; perhaps a bit more punch in the upper bass; basically a bit more of the same. Man, I was in for a surprise. So my system could sound this good? Was this believable? My speakers are Usher Be718s with the GR research crossovers, and the bolt on RWS-708 stands, and a REL Stampede sub - nice, but I was always a little skeptical of their stellar reputation: now I could truly hear what the reviewers had loved - it was as if I had just thrown 10 or 20K at a Wilson/Sonus Faber/Magico standmount (if you don't like these, then insert your own poison here). Suddenly recordings gained an immediacy and a sense of a natural acoustic. The reality factor went up not just a notch, the system was providing "spooky" moments aplenty. Old jazz vocal recordings were uncanny - I love Ella' & Louis's collaborations, and these gained another level of presence: it became easier than ever to picture them in the studio, addressing the microphone, having a great time while singing their magic. Solo classical piano recording went from recreating the experience of sitting in an auditorium, quite a way from the stage, to feeling that the piano was close by - and with a real feeling for the acoustic of the recording environment. String quartets benefitted in a similar way, and in addition the individual instruments became more precise in their placement laterally across the soundstage. By now you can probably tell, this was one of those upgrades that see you putting on old favourite recordings in the anticipation of hearings things anew.

Were there any shortcomings? Well, the bass gained some definition, but it still wasn't the strong suit of the system. But I'll come back to this in a minute...

Others have also noticed the quantum shift. My wife spontaneously remarked that things were sounding fabulous; and a friend of twenty years, who had heard my system many times previously, found it suddenly "special" and "like a live performance" - in fact, we all sat and listened to the entirety of Shostakovich's 15th string quartet, having heard a live performance of the same a week prior. Not quite like the real thing, but close.

I was so taken, and so surprised, by the improvement in the sound that I decided to set one my prejudices aside and experiment....I'm a cable skeptic. OK, got that off my chest. For 18 years I've had Audioquest Type 4 speaker cables, and these seemed plenty expensive enough to me; when I needed XLR cables for the Wyred components, EJ at Wyred suggested Oasis 6 interconnects from Wireworld - who was I to argue?...so, fresh from the DSD SE high, and in the spirit of experimentation, I purchased some Wireworld Eclipse 6 speaker cables and an Equinox 6 IC. The result = a definite improvement and, more specifically, a real transformation of the problematic bass. All the benefits heard in the higher frequencies, now were audible in the bass. Jazz recordings in particular gained in that all-important foot-tapping factor - it's harder than ever to prevent foot movement of some kind with Ron Carter in the room.

I still own the original DAC2 - it's going into the room with the 2.1 home theatre - so I swapped it back into the main system. This confirmed my feelings as stated above. If you want to be really cruel to the original DAC2 you could call it a little grey, a little veiled, emotionally a tad disconnected. Objectively, hey, it's great - but the DSD SE is just that much better, that much more real.

All the best.
Rob.
Stringreen - Sorry, I haven't heard the Ayre. In fact, I haven't heard any other DACs in my system. At a dealer, I listened to the Berkeley - the comparison was with the onboard DAC in an Electrocompaniet CDP - yes, the Berkeley was way better...but in Australia it costs $7000, so I didn't bother investigating a home demo. As mentioned, I purchased the W4S solely on my experience with their amps.
Cheers, Rob.
Me too, but I'm wondering about the differences if you are not hooked into usb but are using Dac 2 with a Squeezebox touch as we are? Will the differences be as noticeable and worthwhile - anyone set up like this?