Benchmark dac - why such diverging opinions?


I'm puzzled.
Audiophile sites and magazines continue to rave about the benchmark dac (HDR, USB, pre,...). Perfect rendition, studio quality, unbeatable value,...

Yet criticism stacks up high on many blogs. Too harsh, not musical enough,...

Why such divergence? Does its popularity make it the one one loves to hate? Are magazines just biased in their reviews? Are audiophile bloggers not good judges of quality. Are those considering buying a dac at that price having sub-par components whose imperfections the benchmark dac amplifies, while those going higher end don't consider the dac adequate vs a berkeley or weiss? Where is the catch?

I ended up buying a w4s dac. I considered the benchmark yet never had the chance to audition it.
mizuno

Showing 1 response by cymbop

I was going to post about my experince with the Benchmark HDR, which I sent back and replaced with a W4S DAC-2. But Daverz wrote my post for me already, so I'll paste that:

I also auditioned a Benchmark HDR at home several months ago. Like a lot of people, I found it too lean in the mid-bass, and while the treble was impressivly extended, I found I didn't really like the sounds that were revealed "way up there" (I believe in a live situation that extreme treble frequencies never make it to the ears. I remember a cartoon showing two audiophiles walking out of a concert and agreeing, "Not enough treble!".) I did like the exceptionally clean and bell-like midrange. Also the sound was very immediate and "quick". I really wanted to like it more because it's such a cool piece of gear, but it's not really how I want to hear the music.

Maybe it's an issue of "you can't handle the truth!" Maybe all the other equipment I like is plump in the mid-bass and rolled off on top. Quite possible given that I gravitate towards tube gear.