So how does this DAC compare to the Terminator? |
@solo8008
Thanks for that recommendation. I will have to do some reading. As much as I read good things about the Terminator, it is always said that it is voiced towards the lusher side of things, even though it sounds great. I'm looking for more transparency than lush, so this may be interesting. |
The Lab 21 sounds like a great dac. I wish it were balanced, as my system is all balanced. |
There are not many stories of new stock tubes sounding better than their nos counterparts. Yes, it does happen, but it is more the exception than the rule.
The same can be said, in my experience, for many stock parts in general. Unless you're talking about the upper echelon stuff (MSB Select Dac, TotalDac 12, Aries Ceral Kassandra, etc...). And even then, you can make them sound better with better/different parts.
Most of the time, things are built to a price. Better parts usually mean better sound. Not always, but often enough to almost say always. |
The 5670 is close enough to the 6922 that you can use an adapter and use a 6922 in the DAC instead of the 5670. That's what I do currently.
The Reflektor '75 6N23P SWGP Silver Shields doesn't sound like a tube is in the DAC to me. With the other tubes I used, the sound erred in one direction, or there was something letting me know I had something in the signal path. But with these tubes, they just seen to get out of the way, and the music seems to come through. They're very clear and relatively transparent sounding.
|
@teajay
I currently use a MHDT Labs Balanced Pagoda DAC that typically uses 5670 tubes. I had read though, that someone used a converter and used 6922 tubes and was loving it. So I got a converter and then started reading about the "best sounding" 6922, or one that sounded like it would work for the type of sound I wanted, and I came across the Reflektor '75 6N23P SWGP Silver Shields.
Not sure if you've tried that tube in your dac, but in mine, it sounds much better than any other tube I've tried. It doesn't sound like a tube at all. I would recommend trying one and seeing what you think. It really works perfectly in my DAC. I'd also recommend trying a MHDT Labs Pagoda and seeing what you think.
I also wish there was a company that was making high quality audiophile converters for these tubes. |
My problem with the Benchmark DACs, is all of the extra things in them. I don't need a preamp or headphone amplifier, I just want a purist's DAC that is transparent, neutral, and information rich. I also wish they had an i2s input, as I'm dying to take advantage of that output of my Jay's transport. |
The DAC3 B has no AES/EBU input. And while I'm sure the coax is great, I would much rather be using the best output of my transport (which is the i2s, but I'm more ok with the balanced out than I am the coax out).
I'm afraid that measurements don't tell us if something is uncolored or not. Measurements aren't really the entire picture. There's no way to no if a component colors the sound, without knowing exactly what the source sounds like, and then having a completely uncolored playback system as well, in an uncolored room.
I'm not i2s has no advantage over other connections. I'd much rather be able to communicate with the DAC without having to go through an extra step of conversion, if I don't have to. I prefer as little on the signal path as necessary. It also makes sense to take advantage of the source as untouched as possible.
When you have empirical proof of the transparency if the Pagoda, or any DAC, versus another DAC, I'm all for it. Again, I want transparency, not "good sound". |
I don't understand statements like this: "I am 98% certain the Pagoda is not more accurate than the Benchmark. If you have proof otherwise (as the company selling it sure doesn’t state anything meaningful), I would like to see it. I have proof that the <$300 DACs mentioned are pretty much audibly transparent."
If you are this certain, you should be the one with the proof. YOU'RE the one that made the claim of one thing being more accurate or better sounding than the other, yet you think it makes sense to then ask for proof of a claim that you made.
I would love to see this proof of any DAC being audibly transparent. I imagine you must have recordings you've made, along with a transport, cables, line stage, amplifiers, speakers, and a room that are also audibly transparent.
It would seem to impossible without these things to say that one piece of equipment is audibly transparent. But maybe I'm incorrect. I would very much like a way to know if a component is truly transparent, as that is what I'm looking for.
And I'm 98% certain that you have to no idea exactly how transparent the Pagoda is, if you have no experience with it. Not that there was a claim made of it being transparent. |
Measurements cannot accurately tell you what a piece of equipment will sound like. Good lord. |
It's good to know we don't have to listen to anything before we purchase it, as we only need to look at measurements. Not even who measured it, under what conditions those measurements were taken, or what equipment was used to take those measurements...... just look at the measurements.
I'm relieved. |
I do agree that, in general, most people are looking for the types of colorations they like most. Which is fine. It's why I don't really want a DAC that's described as being warm or lush, but don't necessarily run from DACs that are described as being sterile. My amps (Benchmark AHB2) have been described as such, and I couldn't disagree more.
However, I also don't want a DAC that makes everything sound or threadbare.
Tubes be damned, I do believe the Pagoda is relatively neutral. Not completely, but it isn't warm and it isn't sterile, and I do believe that I can get more information out of a DAC that's built to extract as much information as possible.
I really don't understand why anyone would say inputs don't matter, as though they're all equal. Outputs are definitely not equal, and if you're looking for transparency, you'd want the most transparent output to begin with. Which is going to be the i2s, in general. |
Preferring a better measuring device, is in no way the same as saying that you know what a device will sound like based on the measurements. Preferring a device doesn't mean it is transparent. Most people prefer more colored audio components, in my experience. |
This is like saying two cars from different manufacturers, will deliver the exact same driving experience, as long as they have the same specs, and that we can surmise exactly how a car will drive, based on those specs.
I don’t care what anyone says, measurements and specs will not tell you how a piece of audio equipment sounds. They can tell you what to expect, and then expectation bias creeps in. However, I do not believe, and have seen no evidence to suggest, that measurements dictate sound. |
