You'll find no better DAC than Chord. I just bought my second one, after selling the one I had for 12+ years. Before I got the new one, listened to many others at way higher prices, and, I came back to Chord.
Cheers,
Jonathan |
This thread started off with many many under $10k dacs. I initially was looking in the $4k-$12k range. I spent a lot of time wih a lot of dacs. It's quite a few pages, but a good read. |
Yes. PS Audio direct stream came and went a long time ago. I have not tried it since then and it has gone through many many upgrades in software.
My ODSE is about the same price and in a different class altogether. For the money (well under $10k) the ODSE is an absolute juggernaut! Nothing can touch it's capabilities for anything close. |
Matt,
Did you ever compare PS Audio Direct Stream Dac to these other nice and very expensive dacs? I am curious how dacs that do not cost the earth to have compare. My experience dictates that there are a ton of really good dacs that run head to head and may even be better depending on the listener's system and taste. |
Matt, considering you have stupid crazy good system, stupid cable is indeed in the works to be coming your way, btw,get the best cable's you can find to be on hand,I want you to report back to all your honest findings after you listen to the cable's that's coming . |
Oh. Forgot to mention I also have an Electrocompaniet EMC1mk3 sacd player inbound. Always respected those 1up CD players. Didn't want to spend a fortune on a good sacd player. Mission accomplished. |
Berkeley Reference DAC fed spdif direct from Aurender N10 (about 160 hours on the Berk Ref and about 330 hours on the N10):
Physically, the Berkeley is absolutely stunning. A solid piece of beautifully honed metal with tolerances that NASA would be proud of. Ultimately simple in setup and simpler still in control. A few buttons that offer as few options as possible and make it practically impossible for this DAC to do anything but make music from incoming zeros and ones… Pick the input, set the output volume (54.0 is you are using it Unity Gain) and listen. The remote is very nice and well laid out; and completely useless if you aren't using it for volume control. If you are, then its great and very comfortable in the hand; I really liked.
I have not yet run it direct to amps. I have done so time and again and always found I liked it running through the pre-amp better. But I will continue to try to be fair.
Digital inputs on back give the typical Berkeley offerings with the typical Berkeley lack of USB, relying on their external USB to SPDIF converter, which my neighbor happened to order (what a swell guy!). It locked instantly onto any signal and stayed locked with different resolution files. The MSB DAC V, interestingly, lost link every time files changed resolution; requiring me to shut down the software on my Mac and reopen it.
I literally just today read Robert Harley's review of the Aurender W20 in Absolute Sound, i mean Rave review. Of course Baetis also had a Rave/pruchase of their Reference Media Server by Andrew Quint in the same issue. You would think they would have lent their servers to each other to compare. Because, well, that would have been freakin useful to any of us interested in buying them since they are practically the same price and both supposedly top tier servers…. At least Harley did comment on the lower price N100 which is equivalent, essentially, to the N10 and does define differences after listening. I will admit that was very useful. But the Aurender, Baetis and YFS are my three top runners to replace my Mac Mini if such a time should come. and a direct comparison would have helped… oh well.
Sorry for the rant. My primary reason for mentioning it was that Robert said something surprising and I didn't quite understand it. Because Robert used the very same DAC, the Berk Ref, for his review and he said that the USB out to Berk converter to spdif in on the Ref DAC was the W20's best output. And later he said that he would assume it would be ever better if he could have run it direct without the Berk converter. Huh? The W20 has: USB, Coax/
& BNC SPDIF outputs, dual wire AES/EBU (R&L) and Optical. I dont understand why he didn't run SPDIF BNC straight into the Berk Ref… Thats what I did with the N10. Robert, if your reading this can you please clarify? Its actually an important point.
I did not yet compare the USB output of the N10 running through the Berk converter into SPDIF in the Berk to SPDIF direct, but I promise I will. Its something I have been longing to do since i started this thread way back when.
I did compare the N10 SPDIF/BNC out into Berk Ref DAC to N10 USB out into my Mac Mini a few days ago. But break in has made such dramatic improvements that I don't consider that comparison worth reporting. I will just say they sounded REMARKABLY SIMILAR at the time.
I have read several times and heard more times that there is synergy between the Berk Ref DAC and the Aurender products, and I 100% agree! especially after they burn in. The Aurender N10 has begun to show its true abilities, and I am starting to get impressed. Jury is still out until the server has over 500 hours on it, but its getting better and better. The Berk Ref DAC is still young and needs more time to mature, but its showing me signs of majesty.
As I briefly said, the Berk Ref initially sounded remarkably similar to my ODSE, out of the gate. similar voicing, similar nature, soundstage, imaging, texture, layers… Wow, its like they were made by the same person with the same goals (Sorry Steve, I don't know if thats a complement or an insult). But there was, even at first, more nuance and complexity but not a lot more. With just a touch over 100 hours I can start to see Mozart growing up from his first symphonies as a child protégé to a seasoned composer. The only way I can describe it goes along with that same analogy, CONFIDENCE. the Berk Ref is more confident, more composed, more in charge. As it gets better its turning into an ODSE on steroids. I would bet Steve's soon to debut ODSX will give the Berk Ref a run for its money. But for now, the Berk Ref is taking the lead and, I think, will continue to mature and improve with more time. I get to hold onto it for another 2 weeks. So I'll keep reporting until it has about 470 hours on it +/-.
Is the Berk Ref better then the Emm? Not better, different. My neighbor also ordered a DA2 with me, so he will have both in house to compare. Once the Berk Ref is fully burned in with over 1000 hours on it and my incoming DA2 also has over 1000 hours I will compare them again. stay tuned. The MSB was not to my taste as the filters warmed things up too much. Vince from MSB has a new filter he wants me to hear and he is working on putting that together for me. Can't wait to hear it!!!
The Aurender is getting better as well, but I haven't compared it again to the Mac Mini and won't until it has over 500 hours on it.
Sorry for the short opinions, but I don't want to make any definitive statements until everything is properly cooked.
I will add that the High Fidelity Reference Helix AC power cord is gracing my presence but I have yet to put it into the system since Im desperately trying to keep my variables limited during the reports stage. I will admit that I upgraded my speaker cable to the top line Analysis Plus Big Oval Silver with silver spades and my stage, imaging and pretty much everything else made a huge improvement over the Audience AU24SE shotgun run. And they are brand new. I got them for under a grand and I figured it was worth the money until I go stupid cable, or get someone to send me stupid cable. I had the Jorgen and a few other $10K plus speaker wire and it all makes a difference. My neighbor has the top tier Wireworld Platinum 7 speaker cable coming so I will be able to try that as well…
Its fun to have access to this stuff, but its hard to stay honest and keep the variables limited so my opinions and reports are reliable and consistent.
Oh. I also secured a deal on a Zanden 1200mk3 phono stage which should be arriving in a few weeks. I figured that if I was going to introduce tubes into my system, the phono stage should be where they go. I will also start working on plans to upgrade my table/arm/cartridge to match the quality of the incoming phono stage. Ill post a few thoughts on table considerations in an upcoming post. this one has a TON of info all ready.
questions? |
What can I say CalvinJ... DIe Muzik is my uber-cup of audible ambrosia.. But I recognize that what I find so immersive that it makes me forget that the outside world even exists, might leave someone else bored to the marrow.
Saluti, G. |
Guidocorona. One a few could stop de musik it's a wonderful pleasing speaker.oh so musical. Vienna acoustics rich and textured |
Hi CalvinJ, after a few years of happy ownership, I am still very much in love with my Vienna Die Muzik... Totally effortless, with fantastic stage and extension, and all those fine things that I like to call rich complexity, and bass to die for -- provided your room is large enough to avoid bass over-exhuberance. Can Die Muzik be bested?
Yes of course, by Matt for example, who has discovered an uber Die Muzik in his Dynaudios.
And of course by anyone who prefers a different sound signature instead.
Saluti, G. |
Thankyou cerrot for post. |
Matt, "analog" means different things for different people... For me it is only an engineering term without any positive correlation to what I seek to hear... Far too many times I have been in "analog" suites at RMAF filled with ecstatic gents listening to sound that ranged from turgid, to grating, to soporific, and yes on occasion... to mesmerizing... Just the same as in suites where the source was a digital one.
Hence, I do not call analog a sound that I inherently enjoy a priori... I call my goal sound harmonically complex, linear, and mesmerizing... But "analog" per se is not for me associated with dopamine or oxytocin rush flow.
Hi Norm, I have no doubts that digital technology continues to make strides in a variety of different and equally valid directions, and so most likely does analog reproduction.
G.
|
Guidocorona, I have been involved with a pro guy in Canada for some years now and have had success with a heavily modified Mac Mini using JRiver MC 21 for a digital sound that easily surpasses what I ever heard on a cd player. I was playing double DSD files from SACDs and many cds ripped to my hard drives. Initially, he had made the Mac Mini think it was just iTunes playing but then Apple made the Mac Mini into a device that could run Windows 8. The later version moved to running the Mac running Widow 7.
Now he is seeking to reduce the latency of the computer, which entails abandoning much of the conveniency of iTunes or typical JRiver MCs organization. I have or had a new music server and managed to hear one cut before losing control of it. That cut was so outstanding and only rivaled by a quad DSD recording I heard at the RMAF that I am hoping to get the server back soon with some conveniences added. Both the one cut that I heard on this server and what I heard in the German Physics room quad DSD cut, were different than analog sources, but clearly their equal. Transient attacks were quite striking and bass control, realism, and extension were awesome.
I think that quad DSD is the wave of the future and that 44.1 and cds will be gone soon be gone. I really hope that my friend can get me a low latency music server with some ease of use. I'm also hoping that SONY makes their quad DSDs available in that format. |
I agree. But Mike L. was very specific to use the term analogue as a descriptor. I guess we all have our own interpretation of what that implies. But you are 100% correct Guido. Same as tube vs. solid state. As they get better they become more and more like each other. |
+1 Guidocorona thoughts regarding digital and analog. |
Hi Mat, at the cost of being deemed uncooth and a country bumpkin, analog is what I abandoned in 1984... And never felt the need to look back since.
As for "analog sound" done well, I have a hard time distinguishing it from "digital sound" done well... I have heard fab analog sound and fab digital sound... as much as Crappy digital sound and equally crappy analog rigs.
Yes, I have been equally enchanted/mesmerized down to my soul by complexity, and textured richness of analog front ends as much as by the same in digital front ends. "The Analog vs digital" discussion is covering in my opinion a false problem. Or at least, it is a matter that has more to do with the social sciences than engineering.
G |
Sometimes I wonder how we would each enjoy our systems if we never spoke with each other and never read any reviews. Is our capacity to enjoy different and are our happy buttons different then they would have otherwise been? I believe "yes" Matt, and thanks for the reminder that what we hear, and the level of enjoyment that brings to us, is what really counts and not bragging rights, audio reviews or internet consensus. Many years ago, when I put my first system together, before the internet, and before I had ever read a single audio magazine, I went to a couple of different shops and in both cases the salespeople simply let me listen to gear in my price range and make my own choices. I ended up with a NAD 3040, Thorens TD166 MkII and ADS L810s. 35 years later, the NAD still powers my outdoor system. After owning and listening to them for over 20 years, selling the L810s and Thorens were two of my earliest audio transactions and two of my biggest mistakes. I believe the longevity of that first gear was because it represented equipment that sounded good to me, without outside influences. |
Cerrott- well said. At the end of the day the music is analyzed similarly in all of our brains but perceived and appreciated very differently. As it passes our conscious processing and enters our subconscious happy place it pushes different buttons for each of us. At the end of the day that's what it's all about. Sometimes I wonder how we would each enjoy our systems if we never spoke wih each other and never read any reviews. Is our capacity to enjoy different and are our happy buttons different then they would have otherwise been? I would hazard a yes. Of course experience, age and maturity always play a role as well.
This journey has taught me SO much. |
Not necessarilly, audiolabyrinth. Heres my take. I truly believe that when you put the proper system together, there are no words to describe what you hear (or, what you experience), just the emotion it makes you feel. My very neutral stseym portrays rich recordings richly and warm recordsings warmly...but I don't hear warmth or richness but its the way my mind and body respond to what I hear. |
Guido - in your wonderfully eloquent way, please provide us with your definition of "analog" sound. So many equate warm and analog and in my opinion they are very different. |
What are opinions on the new DCS line? Rossini? Looks like a DAC, transport, renderer and up converter in one box. Only leaves the external clock as a separate component.... A simplified Vivaldi. |
And that, Agear, is why we shut him down......
Because a one horse pony show gets boring very quickly. Especially when only Palomino's are allowed to compete. |
10-31-15: Mattnshilp
George's techno babble was great, I enjoyed that actually. But his incessant ranting about there only being ONE and ONLY ONE way to convert digital to analog Seeing you bought my name into it AGAIN, there is only one best way to convert your thread title the BEST WAY, and that with a R2R Multibit dac conversion, properly implemented. "Absolute top tier DAC for standard res Redbook CD" Not with Delta Sigma based dacs which are good for doing DSD One day when you voodooist get some proper knowledge and understand the "techno babble" you will realize this, one can only live in hope. The reason this thread has so many hits it because of the title, hitters want to know about the best Redbook replay. Not as Agear pointed out, the voodoo junk you guys go on about. No Cheer George |
Guidocorona, I am a fan of the Vienna acoustics. The have a rich textured and neutral sound. I heard that The Music speaker also has the bass and wider soundstage that the others miss. I put my resonessence mirus dac on the Beethoven baby grand se and I liked the sound. Guitars and violins were excellent |
George's techno babble was great, I enjoyed that actually. But his incessant ranting about there only being ONE and ONLY ONE way to convert digital to analog quickly became counter productive and was killing the thread.
As far as that definition goes, I resemble that remark!!!
Sorry all for the delayed review. I have been getting practically killed at work and it's been relentless. I may get a chance to listen again Monday. But I feel that everything is so new and not yet burned in that I'm just giving lots of first impressions. I'll do my best. But take my impressions with a grain of salt. Early impressions don't necessarily imply accurate impressions. |
Hmmm Agear, you mean to imply that there might be more excitement than mere gain of encyclopedic knowledge gained by interfacing a Babel-fish with an ear canal?
G. |
Warm - what my room feels like after about 2 hours of listening.
Rich - what I have made the dealers I bought all my gear from.... |
What a ship of fools...and to think you shot down George and his technobabble for this? Is this not a dac thread after all....? I found a good new definition for "audiophile" on Urban dictionary: audiophile
One who enjoys sex acts involving the ear.
After they stopped kissing, Jenny felt something touch her ear. She sighed. Why did she always end up with the audiophiles?
by Darcy_Tucker June 19, 2008 Please note that the definition was submitted by a woman. One could take the definition a little further into the land of autoerotica, but I don't want to be crude. It would however be more accurate since our hobby is a closed loop phenomena.... |
Thankyou everyone, I have been reading these new descriptions of sound and really didn't know what rich sound meant, although I knew what warm sound was, interesting, let's see what others may say? |
This DAC looks VERY interesting to me....
http://aries-cerat.eu/products/digital-processor/kassandra-series |
Thank you Mitch and Al.... I concur completely with your tightening up of my original definition....
Yes Audiolabyrinth, my pref is for neutral+rich.... I often call this kind of sound "complex", which is what I usually seek... Although, I freely admit that on occasion I do fall for the seductiveness of just trace amounts of comfie pillowing in the lower mid bass... Provided the integrity of the rest of the frequency band is unaffected... Vienna Acoustics DIe Muzik anyone *Grins!*
G.
Regards, G. |
I was thinking of my response and then read what Guido wrote and realized I would say the same thing. Al articulated further and I agree with what he added and with his summary that warmth is frequency related.
The lower midrange emphasis is most commonly associated with warmth but it can also come with slightly suppressed high frequencies and bass that is either, or both, rolled off at the very low end and perhaps a bit "fat" or somewhat less than detailed/defined. IMO a rich sound is all about tone and harmonic structure and is always a good thing. I also find the terms "dark" and "bright" interesting but different in that I would characterize them as describing a frequency shift either lower (dark) or higher (bright) that can be independent, or in conjunction with, being warm or rich.
All of these are preferences and Guido makes a good point that a system can sound both neutral and rich, which I find a very good combination, but would add just a touch of warmth and darkness to achieve the sound I enjoy. |
I basically agree with Guido, but I would modify his statement as follows (changes are in brackets): ... a warm sound is a tone that has a [lower] midrange preference, and perhaps a touch of pillowiness in the mid and mid lower bass. A rich sound for me has significant exposure of harmonics throughout the range, [particularly lower order even harmonics], from low bass to higher treble, without distortions. Of course, usage of these terms among different audiophiles varies widely, and sometimes they are used interchangeably. But strictly speaking, IMO, "warmth" relates to frequency response, and "rich" relates to harmonic balance. Regards, -- Al |
So often I hear a ringing in the mid bass lower midrange. I always call those speakers bright. I can never warm up to systems that have that ringing. |
Hi cerrot, so you are saying that a rich sound has a front to back better sound stage to the presentation? |
To me, its all internal. A warm sound makes me feel, well, warm. Cozy, comfortable, back to all the good things that I may have ever known. A rich sounds is, to me, more adventurouse. A tad more involving. Maybe a little more dynamic, but not meaning a warm sound necessarilly lacks dynamics, just brings other aspects of the presentation to the forefront more profoundly. |
Hi Guidocorona, that is a big difference between warm and rich sound, which do you prefer? , going by your description, I would prefer the rich sound, nothing wrong with a little warmth though. |
In my interpretation, a warm sound is a tone that has a midrange preference, and perhaps a touch of pillowiness in the mid and mid lower bass. A rich sound for me has significant exposure of harmonics throughout the range, from low bass to higher treble, without distortions.
Can a sound be warm and rich at the same time? Sure, why not?!
Can sound be neutral and rich? Again, why not?!
G.
G. |
Hi, I talked to Matt today, and we concluded that we like to ask everyone here, since this is a a high view thread, we want to ask all, what is the difference between a warm sound and a rich sound? |
Matt,
I actually read your review of both the Antipodes vs Aurender, I must have just forgot.
Looking forward to the next match: Aurender vs Berk ref. |
Ah crap! I hate DEADlines!!!!! |
Gentlemen, be aware that this Saturday a very large asteroid is projected to pass us by at a distance not much greater than the distance of the moon, at a speed of about 78,000 miles per hour. If the calculations are wrong for some reason there may be a good deal less time left for Matt to complete his evaluations than we think.
-- Al :-)
|
Matt, you are a real pessimist... You do not take into account the repulsive effect of the Dark Force on the standard gravitational interaction of our Galaxy and M31. We will have some exciting times some 2 billions years from now, when we are finally able to tell if we crash into our neighbor or not.
So please.... Do squeeze in a new Orander review during the next 2 bils or so... Before everyone gets all hot and bothered making bets on the big event and forgets about servers and stuff.
G.
|
I've decided to give up the life of audiophilio-Insanitoriim. From now on, I'm only listening to music through cassette tape on my 1984 Sony Walkman and Koss headphones. And with that, it will ONLY be Flock of Seagulls - Space Age Love Song. Good bye cruel world!!!
What's the point anyway, in 2.7 billion years our precious Galaxy will collide head on with Andromeda galaxy and be ripped apart, sending the Earth and my entire tape collection to the nether regions of the ever expanding Universe.
Alas..... Alak........Anon...... |
Asindc, in New Jersey where Matt lives, it is now the noon hour. There are still a full 12 hours to his Friday... I am confident that Matt will post more findings whenever he has time. Even a few more days of wait are little compared to the life of the Universe... 13.7 billion years and counting *grins!*
G.
G. |
Mattnshilp,
Any update on the Aurender N10-Mac Mini comparison? I'm considering the N10 to replace my current Mac Mini setup. |
Hi Matt,
Another lurker here who has been following this thread with interest - after going the EMM Labs route, I settled on the Stahl Tek Vekian Opus for a DAC, but as an audiophile, am of course interested in seeing what else is out there. However, I wanted to pick up on your comments / requests for posts on power treatment.
I (like probably many of us here) have been through a number of power treatment options over the years, from the old API 116, to the Chang Lightspeed, Monster (the Richard Marsh designed products), MIT, Shunyata Hydra, Marigo Apparition, RGPC, PS Audio (P300 to PPP), Audience, Accuphase, etc.
Generally, in my experience, by far the most bang for the buck I have gotten (far more than any conditioner) is upgrading closer to the source, i.e., up to the meter (and further than that, if your power company lets you). I think most audiophiles, even the non-tweaky, are on board with the idea of dedicated AC lines, and a dedicated panel with solid copper bus bars for your audio equipment. (It sounds like you are going in this direction. The EP-2050 is also a nice addition).
Ideally, you would want to get a meter that allows you to run two main panels, and power your audio system on a separate panel from the rest of your house. Also, a huge difference comes from the grounding arrangement. I currently am using an isolated ground with a chemical grounding rod (a 10' copper rod buried underground) surrounded with ~0.5 tons of bentonite clay - nothing I have ever used in terms of power treatments has remotely made as much difference in reducing the noise floor, and at a much lower price to boot.
I also think you have it right by powering your amps straight from the wall - I have yet to find a conditioner that definitively improves such high current equipment. Pretty much all of them, in my experience, decrease dynamics (probably on account of reduced instantaneous current draw). The only exception I have found (other than parallel conditioners such as the MIT Z-Stabilizer and Marigo Apparition, which are not in line with the amps) are really massive isolation transformers (preferably 10 kVA or greater), although they come with their own issues (i.e., several folks have noted isolation transformers have their own sound, adding a bit of sweetness for lack of a better term).
I have enjoyed some success with regeneration systems, and unlike much "magic pixie dust" out there, they generally measure better with them in system than without. However, I would only use them with front end equipment (with the caveat that I have not tried the really massive PP3000, which I understand may address this issue).
I am not a fan of balanced power, not necessarily for performance reasons, but code violation and insurance issues (I have a hard time imagining that my house would qualify as a "commercial or industrial occupanc[y]" under NEC Article 647.3, and can guarantee my insurance company would deny any claim based on my system lighting up if I had balanced power in there. With that said, we all take our chances with audiophile PCs, which generally are not UL listed).
The one product category I am interested in getting more information on are the newer "grounding blocks", such as the Entreq and the Tripoint Troy - not sure I buy the explanation behind their particular application, but at least the theory of star grounding is something I understand. |
Erndog- go back and read..... I did. Reviews on both the Antipodes and Aurender are in pages gone by. Short answer - Aurender N10 way better to my ears, in my system. But my Mod'd Mac Mini still sounds better then both of them. The Antipodes was very well burned in. The Aurender was fresh. I'm going to listen Friday to both the Aurender and the Berk Ref. Stay tuned. |
I'm rooting for the Aurender to deliver the goods! I've never heard one but everything I've read about is nothing but good.
I'm still waiting for someone to compare that with the Antipodes server. |
Matt, the Berkley guys love the Aurender I believe. It will be interesting. How old is the Berkley? I heard one in Boston that had under 200 hours and it didn't sound great. I think I mentioned that last year. I just wasn't blown away. Then more recently I heard one that was already burned in. It sounded like a totally different DAC. Just saying, lol. |
