I don't know what warm sound is unless you want 2nd order distortion versus odd order distortion which sounds brighter. As to a neutral but very full sounding DAC, I can recommend the COS Engineering D1. Their H-1 is more open but much less full sounding. I own the D-2 which is in-between, quite full sounding but not quite as open. The price differences are significant with the D1 at $10K and the D2 at $5k, H-1 at $2.5K(?). I'm coming from an EAR Acute, my former "warm" sounding tube CD player. The greatly improved micro details, more open soundstage made the D-2 my choice over my 15 year old CD player. All three models are not too far forward or too far back from the speaker sounding, just right in the middle, permitting the recording soundstage to reproduce more accurately.
142 responses Add your response
So, this group has given me quite the education, and for that I thank you all! I most certainly regret using "warm" to get this post started...My vocabulary has grown to, musical, organic, analog like, musical...I HAVE learned that I am not alone. There seems to be a contingent of folks who just want to enjoy what they have and have no need to make the transition to streaming...About half of my listening time is analog, so I just don't have the resources to get into the latest digital equipment... After all of your responses, I am drawn towards the MGDT Orchid, Tubadour 3, Boarder Patrol and a PS Audio PW DAC to mate with my PS Audio, PW Transport...Cheers! Let the over obsessing continue! |
neko d-100-2 is very nice too... output transformer coupled, warm nature very easy to listen to, picked one up recently, quite impressed as for units mentioned above: rme adi2 is a really great dac but it is NOT warm... it is very good akm implementation - clean crisp tight focus revealing... not lean and strident but not warm same for chord dacs - i have qutest, 2qute, mojo, soon to be adding an m scaler to qutest -- they are also not warm. the sound has body and foundation but there is startling clarity and detail... not warm side of neutral imo |
I'm amazed at the amount of different DAC's are out there for under $1500 that can be bought either new or used. Makes the buying decision more difficult though. Almost all mentioned get good reviews. I think my route would be to first look at one's that offer a free trial period or if I can get a good deal used, buy it and if it ain't for me I'll resell it. |
It's possible to change the tonality of any component by changing the IEC inlet and power cord plugs. The effects of these components can be more pronounced than rolling tubes. I have experimented with amps, DACs, a power conditioner, and power cords. Just as you would expect: the more gold, the more warmth and ease of listening and the more rhodium/silver, the more detail and neutrality. |
I can offer a recommendation based on my personal experience. I too like digital that is reproduced with the analog “warmth” “lush-ness” “musical” pr however else or ears tell us to describe it. I found it with The Aesthetix DAC in my Romulus model. The DAC only is the Pandora. Maybe preowned would fit your budget. As a starting point, you could then roll tubes to suit your taste. I went to telefunken and amperex and am very happy. Also With this gear, you could have the caps resistors etc upgraded by Aesthetix to really impact SQ. My point is a hi-quality tube DAC will provide even more opportunity to achieve your goal. Good luck. |
A warm DAC? People often think that tubes make the sound warmer. Before you describe your preference you need to understand what sound is and how it is founded. But Trial&error made most people forget that audio is all about sound and music. I started to read about human emotion at the beginning of 2016. I started to work in audio in 1998. Now I can say this; "It would have been easier for me when I would have started to read about the way our emotion works regarding music when I started to work in audio. But when I talk with other people who also work in audio for a long time, even they do know almost nothing about the way our emotion works regarding music. All the different aspects that sound contains can independently influence our emotions during listening to music. When you judge and compare the importance of all the different aspects of sound, diversity (layering) in sound is the most important one of them all. This is based on the fact that it can influence our emotions more than all the other aspects of sound. When you listen to many DACS and amps who use tubes they often have a pleasant and engaging sound. But.......this does not give you access to more layers and a better view of the harmonics of a recording. Often a tube colors a rather big frequency range, so you loose layering in sound. When you aks people who are listening to a system where tubes are used but still miss layering in sound how they experience it? They will say: "I like the pleasant sound, but I miss the excitement and becoming one with the music" What do you need to feel the highest level of emotion when you are listening to music? When you would like to answer this question, you first need to understand sound and music. A tube or audio system can not create emotion. The emotion is being created by the details and different aspects of the music. Which you will find on the music you play. This is why you need a system and also a digital source that can give you access to all these details and different aspects of sound. And here you will find the biggest challenge and problem in audio. Because most audio products can not give you access to all the details and different aspects of sound. And you know why? Because they do not own them. And what is missing can never be added afterward. We modify many different audio products, but we know that we can only improve those aspects a product already owns. Missing aspects you can never add, unfortunately. In audio there are many assumptions. Of which many people think and believe that they are true. But.....time and facts can show that many are not even true. Or the best choice they made. Most people think and believe that a separate DAC is always better. I even did, but when I sold my 20250 euro Meridian 800DAXv4 in 2012 I was (I thought) ready for streaming. My budget was about 10000-15000 euros at that time. I only listened to network players with a separate DAC. But man I was so disappointed. They all had one thing in common; "The all lacked layering in sound". I said at that time; "Even if you give me this for free, I don’t want it. At that time I had no real idea why it lacked layering. When I met a person on the internet who creates DAC’s and digital sources. It became clear why it lacked layering in sound. This person works for different brands and said to me: "They should never have chosen for USB as a new protocol". It is a computer protocol and not the best option for audio. The reason why you missed the layering in sound is due to the fact that you will lose layers in the whole freq. range. But he also made another remark; "A separate DAC made the way of the data longer what is never better. The first network player I loved in 2013 had no separate DAC. In 2013 I started to test many different network players and DAC’s. All tests we did with separate DAC’s showed a low level in the layering of sound. In 2015 and 2016 I did a lot of research regarding electro-smog, high-frequency noise, and magnetism. Now we use this for all our modifications. For digital audio, we use it a lot. It gives us access to a superior level in layering in sound. These days we modify Lumin network players, power supplies, and switches. It brought us to a level that we never could have dreamed of. Our clients describe their digital source as; "The most analog sounding source they ever owned. We made the biggest steps in layering in sound. This is what people describe as warm and analog sounding. We have clients who owned expensive turntables, but when we started to modify their Lumin players, they stopped using their turntable less and less. So I asked a client: what is the best record you own in quality? He said a 180 grams Patricia Barber. What he also owns on his modified Lumin L1 music server. I said to him: compare it and let me know what you prefer? So he called me back and said; "The Lumin is even superior in layering compared to my 9000 euro turntable". He liked it so much more. So he decided to sell his turntable. What I did for free and I sold it in parts to other people. Audio will always be about what is the best sounding source and system you can create. Emotion is the only key to success in audio. When you judge most DAC’s and network players that facts show by sound and stage that most lack different aspects of sound. And most are rather limited in layering in sound. This has 100% nothing to do with any kind of personal taste. Because it is all based on facts and the aspects of sound which are missing. And most of all the low level in layering what will never give you access to the emotion of your own music. Life will always be based on facts in the long term. Only for a period of time words can create a limitation in the end result. But the truth will always win in the end! |
Buy what you like but not at least hearing/auditioning the Meridian ultra Dac would be a big mistake. The inventor of MQA is not as dismissable a that. John Atkinson agreeing (the link to his review in my last answer) is also not the nothing you perhaps think it is. I can only suggest you acknowledge the above by hearing & then deciding - rather than the reverse or the second part only. Good non-Meridian cabling will intensify this beyond description. It comes up used from time to time as well. |
I'm late to the party here, but the Doge 7 tube DAC is a fantastic option for you. It has a fully balanced tube output stage, giving you the flexibility to roll NOS tubes and make it as warm as you want it. It sounds really analog for a DAC, it's an absolute giant-killer and I'm surprised it doesn't have more of a following. |
Just to jump on this. Does anyone have opinions on the Wavelength Proton (an older, supposedly "warm" sounding DAC) stacks against contemporary DACS? It is far more limited in decoding option, but at least a few years ago, some people still reported that it competed well with sub-$1000 dacs. Anyone got opinions on the current state of things? |
https://www.audiogon.com/listings/lisa27i5-meridian-ultra-dac-rack-mount-da-converters Ready to come down on price. |
James Tanner, big cheese at Bryston, is quoted on the Bryston AudioCircle forum that the BDA-2 and BDA-3 sound identical except for the additional connectivity options on the 3. Some owners said he was wrong. I will go with Tanners judgement on this. I just bought a used Bryston BHA-1 headphone amp and 2 channel preamp (after some factory mods). I was looking to get a BDA-2 to pair with it, but decided to use the 2 inputs on the preamp to connect a Tuner and SACD player. So the BDA-2 would not have an input to connect to. I had zero interest in the BDA3 after Tanners comments. I will get a used BDA-2 if on the off chance the Tuner and SACD player don't satisfy (doubtful) |
Mark Levinson No.36 or No.36S. Both are R2R DACs - if you can find one used. They also use Class A analogue output stages and are fully balanced. 1995 state of the art. Good resolution, definately not 'edgy', nice tight very good bass. So long you not looking for higher than 16(20)/41(48) DA convertion. https://www.stereophile.com/content/mark-levinson-no37-cd-transport-no36s-da-converter-page-2 Basically for CDs, and not for HI-RES streaming/files. Michélle 🇿🇦 |
Hi larseand, I run a PWT with an old ladder DAC, a Theta Pro Basic III. This is with either my Prima Luna Dialogue Premium or CJ 17LS2 as the preamp. It replaced a Hegel HD25 and slightly rounded off the occasional sharp edge from my Thiel CS5's. Tested a number of other DACs before I found the Theta. Thanks for listening, Dsper |
larseand OP This "could" be your problem, HF transformer oscillation that rings like a bell. Starts at 10khz and shows in the square wave also. Especially with the Focals metal tweeters, it may excite them with hf sibilance etc.. https://www.stereophile.com/images/1214PLDPIfig01.jpg See how the Focals are very high some 18ohms in impedance in the highs, this is where the Prima Luna also rings it ’s worse with high impedance. You could "try" not too loud to load down the output of the Prima Luna just to see, with a 2ohm 10watt resistor this will then mimic the green trace which is flat. https://www.stereophile.com/images/archivesart/707FOCFIG1.jpg Cheers George |
| Post removed |
bo1972 Patricia Barber, Diana Krall recordings-YUK! I heard that Lumin makes very fine DAC streamers but if it were based on those recordings, I couldn't trust it. Try some 50's-60's jazz or classical (or even pop that was well recorded and mastered). Then I have a basis for comparison. When I bring great music to stereo shows, people stop and listen. Great sounding systems mesmerize listeners. |
Shouldn‘t the goal for any set-up be neutrality and transparency?In that case my vote goes to the Zodiac Platinum. I think that NOS Euphonics are ultimately a dead end and the Zodiac‘s upsampling actually allows for shifting filters away from the audible spectrum. The result is a very transparent and uncoloured presentation. BTW the best way to assess a DAC is solo piano because of its reach harmonic spectrum, overtone decay and Impulse. |
@antigrunge2 Some believe tuning a system akin to tuning a car's engine or suspension. For instance, to use a car analogy, which camp would you fall in? "I like my car to tell me exactly what the surface of the road is like. I want to feel every bump, crack, crevace and pothole but man, when we get to that smooth stretch of road, there is nothing better". |
Wouldn‘t that amount to fighting one coloration with another? My own experience throughout many years of improving my system has been that avoiding any deviation from neutrality and transparency is the only good way to achieve life-like sound reproduction. Usually this means reducing the number of analogue connections in a system to a minimum and fighting power related noise intrusion wherever possible, ideally with a dedicated spur to the mains. On digital, things are even more complicated: DACs can sound very different when fed via USB, SP/DIF or AES/EBU. I have from experience ruled out optical and am still experimenting with Ethernet. In my System SP/DIF is still the preferred route, USB is making progress but still prone to interference from the 5v line and poorly designed USB receiver chips. Here again, reducing mains and IR interference is paramount. So cleaning up rather than compensating is my preferred way to go. |
Who's version of "neutral or transparent"? Listen to a Steinway in the Village Vanguard or the exact piano in Carnegie hall. If it was recorded with identical equipment down to the cables? Of course not. We are listening to the space/musical interface. Please share with us what is neutral and transparent. |
My point is and has been that compensating for one component‘s forward or harsh sound by chosing another ‘warmer’ component down the chain amounts to adding colorations. I have no desire to define absolute transparency nor neutrality, when people though hear relative improvements along either dimension they tend in my experience to agree about it. Obviously intrenta, venues and recording equipment have impact on the reproduced sound, that however tends to not affect relative neutrality and transparency of individual components. |
Shouldn‘t the goal for any set-up be neutrality and transparency?In that case my vote goes to the Zodiac Platinum. I think that NOS Euphonics are ultimately a dead end and the Zodiac‘s upsampling actually allows for shifting filters away from the audible spectrum. The result is a very transparent and uncoloured presentation. BTW the best way to assess a DAC is solo piano because of its reach harmonic spectrum, overtone decay and Impulse.This viewpoint encapsulates what I call the "short view" vs. the "long view". The phrase "transparent to the source" is a myth. The real world does not allow for something going to our brain that is "transparent to the source". Reviewers use it indiscriminately. Often they use it as short-hand for something else. Digital reproduction of analogue sound is inherently flawed, as is vinyl, as is loudspeaker technology, as is recording technology. For many of us -quite likely even the majority of us-digital reproduction of sound waves is even more problematic than the others. If the sound from your digital rig does not allow you to RELAX, to feel good, to enjoy the music, than the fact that the DAC measures superbly is meaningless. The "long view" is this-do you find yourself watching TV or doing things at night other than listening to music? Why? Something must be amiss in your system! I firmly believe this happens to the majority of us and that often it is because equipment was purchased based on technology and measurements and short-sighted reviews. "Euphonic" is a loaded word, mostly disparaging and implying artifice. I don't mind the use of the word "euphonic" because I know I can get fantastic sound in my system and I know how to go about it. It can mean one thing to you and an entirely different thing to me. It is not that we are using the same word to describe the same thing. We evidently hear differently and strive for different recreations of the sound that was recorded. |
That's what great here ....Mr djones51 said if there are two dac one selling for $2,000 and another one for $80,000 that's sound exactly the same he would but the $80,000 because it's a status thing.....WOW Really $68,000 to burn just because you got it. On a Dac.Is your System on here ?I would like to see it.... |
