Midrange and mid-bass a bit thin? I don't think so, nor has that ever been mentioned in any of the multitide of other reviews and posts on this dac.
As far as changing op-amps or other mods, I have yet to see any posts on this. The chief engineer at Benchmark specifically cautioned against changing op-amps.
The original question was a comparison against the top name dacs:
In S'phile (5/04), John Atkinson compared it against the $17,500 ML 30.6, which weighs in at 80 lbs. He said that at first he found it "surprisingly difficult to hear any difference." Later he said he felt the ML was a bit better. He also compared it favorably with the Musical Fidelity TriVista player ($6000). In giving the B. the 2004 Stereophile Editor's Choice Award, JA said he was "floored" by the B. and compared it favorably with the ML 30.6, Theta Gen VIII and Wadia 27ix, saying only that the DAC1 didn't sound "quite" as "expansive" or "smooth", but that its measured performance was "as least as good as, if not better than, the best..."
A few days ago on Audioasylum, John Marks of S'phile mentioned it as essentially equivalent to dacs costing $5,000 and $10,000 (except in the price, of course, which is what makes the DAC! so unusual).
The many pro and audiophile reviews and posts overwhelmingly support the above. I have posted this information since, as an owner for 4 months, I am constantly amazed at the DAC1. I never thought I would have world class digital equivalent to ML, etc. in my system in my lifetime, but now I do! I feel I owe Benchmark a vote of thanks. |
Are we going around in circles here? No one is claiming that the Benchmark DAC1 is the world's greatest reference dac in absolute terms. Let's get this in perspective. What a multitude of people are saying, from pro reviewers and mags, to pro users, to respected audiophile reviewers and publications, to users like me, is that the DAC1 provides, at its relatively modest price, superb performance on an approximate par with much more expensive dacs, e.g., in the $5-$10,000 range.
We have been through this before. IMO, the posts above certainly acknowledge the positives of the DAC1 but always seem to offset these somehow with negative comments that, on balance, leave one with an overall negative impression.
Nealhood finds it a bit short in (only) certain areas in comparison with his $15,000-$32,000 dCS. To me that's really another strong endorsement for the DAC1, that it is good enough to be held in such comparison. With regard to the Jolida, very nice, but to my ears not in the same league.
Audioengr states positives then comments about the shortcomings and that there is room for improvement with mods. As a professional modder, of course his orientation will be for mods. Notwithstanding the audiocircle crew, there is still no consensus that I can find about the mods. Are they really improvements or just providing a different sound? I haven't heard the mods so I can't comment but there needs to be more input on this.
I have lived with and heard a fair amount of players and dacs in the past and now have had the DAC1 for awhile. I agree with the many who think it offers superb sound, e.g., equivalent to $5-10,000 units, at a low price. |
After-hours, that's very very interesting. Please do let us know what you found that helped the Benchmark to sound its best. Thanks. |
Sensible Sound also has, for years, maintained that there is no difference between amplifiers, among other strange opinions. Nonsensical Sound.
If they can't hear a difference, then then there is something wrong somewhere and it ain't with the Benchmark. |
Redkiwi, the Benchmark DAC1 is equivalent to the $8,500 Lavry DA2002 (not the much less expensive $1,250 Lavry Blue that you like so much), according to John Atkinson in his review of the $8,500 Lavry DA2002 in the 8/04 issue of S'Phile. This would seem to imply that the Benchmark would be superior to the cheaper Lavry Blue. I own the Benchmark but haven't heard either Lavry so I can't personally comment but I'm very glad you like your Lavry Blue.
According to JA in the article (regarding the $8,500 Lavry): "the Benchmark offers superb sound and suberb quality...", "in the low frequencies there was basically no difference between the ($8,500) Lavry and the Benchmark", "the Lavry's lower midrange had more bloom than the Benchmark...which wasn't always a benefit... robbing the bass guitar of some of its leading-edge energy".
In another comparison, he said that the $8,500 Lavry was "not outclassed" by the $12,000 Nagra DAC. So, if Benchmark DAC1=$8,500 Lavry DA2002, and Lavry DA2002=Nagra DAC, then it follows that Benchmark DAC1=$12,000 Nagra DAC.
To conclude: $975 Benchmark DAC1=$8,500 Lavry DA2002=$12,000 Nagra DAC. QED. |
That is part of it but there is some more.
I can certainly understand all the interest. But, I have to say that I didn't discover all this and so I really can't comment further -- the other party will have to do so. I don't know all the facts here and I have nothing more to add so please don't address any more questions to me on this subject. Sorry.
Hopefully all will be divulged soon. |
In response to some of the comments above, let me first say that some of them are understandable since the posters are apparently unaware that this thread is simply a continuation of a prior thread started on 11/1/04.
My goal in that thread and this one has been to promote discussion and provide a balanced viewpoint of the Benchmark DAC1, as an offset to a persistent negativity by certain individuals, e.g. Redkiwi, Nealhood and others. I wanted to do this so that readers looking to buy a dac can have unbiased information to make an informed purchase. (I have in fact received 5 emails from potential buyers asking quesions.) And to have fun. My intent has never been to start a flame or to provoke the strangely self-righteous or even self-serving statements reflected by the above individuals. However, the unwarranted nature of their comments unfortunately requires a reply, at a time when I am already bored with this thread.
I stated in a post above that "No one is claiming that the Benchmark DAC1 is the world's greatest reference dac in absolute terms. What a multitude of people are saying...including users like me...is that the DAC1 provides, at its relatively modest price, superb performance on an approximate par with much more expensive dacs, e.g., in the $5,000-$10,000 range."
So much for the pseudo physological verbiage about wanting to purchase "the best there is", to "reduce anxiety", and indulging in "self-delusions", etc. Where does that nonsense come from? I could care less whether the ML, Lavry or any other is ultimately held in higher regard by anyone. I don't have an agenda.
However, by contrast, in the prior thread I and others commented upon Redkiwi's, Nealhood's, and some other individuals' perplexing negativity, posted in multiple threads. And there may well be an agenda there, unwittingly or not. Others posters said "What is the deal with these people...trying to discredit a product..." As mfgrs. and/or dealers who apparently know one another, do they have an agenda?
Redkiwi seems to acknowledge this when he says in the prior thread: "As one of the "negative guys"..."I acknowledge a backlash (against the DAC1)..." And some other similar comments too.
Redkiwi's unfortunate and defensive response to my comments indicates that he is guilty of the very things he accuses me of. Is there an attempt here to stifle discussion? Am I not entitled to offer criticism without being attacked? Can't he take the heat of the forum without lashing out, couched in eloquent but defensive language? He would be well served to heed his own advice.
As for Nealhood, when will the comparison with the $32,000 dCS end?
Regarding the quote from John Atkinson, it is absurd to misinterpret this and say I was taking JA's written opinion instead of listening and forming my own opinion. I own a DAC1 and an Apogee -- do you? I was simply stating that Redkiwi is a less credible source than JA. They are both just "writers" who have listened and provide their opinion. Is there any debate about credibility-- JA v. Redkiwi? (Redkiwi who?) We all compare reviews, reviewers and their mags all the time. So what else is new? That doesn't imply we don't listen or have our own opinion.
Re: "QED": anyone have a sense of humor here? I guess not.
So, to conclude, I am most surprised at the defensive, sharp and unwarranted reactions by the above individuals to some legitimate criticism, put forth by me and others as well. I hope those individuals can in the future tolerate some opinions that differ from their own.
Lastly, to quote another individual from the prior post, in response to the same comments that I am responding to now: "This post is lame. I'm moving on to a new thread where those who have a Benchmark and a clue..." And I too am moving on, and won't even get to enjoy the inevitable self-righteous comments that will follow here. See you in the next thread. |
Redkiwi, PERSONAL NAME-CALLING ATTACKS HAVE NO PLACE HERE. You owe an APOLOGY to Uva-hifi and me. We will see if you post one.
You just called Uva-hifi a "small-minded twerp" and made certain sexual allusions. And, as I said earlier, about me you put forth some psycho-babble about my alleged "self-delusions" and "need to reduce anxiety", in an exagerrated and overly-defensive response to a post submitted by me in good faith.
Redkiwi, here's the way it works: In this forum, if you want to take issue with a post, you can do so objectively and in a civil manner. You don't get personal here--get it?
If you objected to my methodology in citing a reviewer (sin of sins!), you could have, and should have, said something like: "Dne, I disagree with your methodology in citing a reviewer. I think it is flawed because..."
Instead, you chose to start flinging around personal recriminations and resort to calling names. As I said in my post above, this is unwarranted and overly-defensive. Why are you so defensive? You try to give the impression of a high-minded expert but instead you get down in the gutter. One would not expect this from an apparent industy person, nor from your cosy coterie of associates who post with you.
I thought I was through here but I cannot stand idly by when I see comments like these.
I look forward to reading your posts (only) when they are objective and focus on the product and not on the poster personally. That's what I try to do.
Now I, and presumably, Uva, are ready to accept your apology. |
I personally am tired of this, personal recriminations have no place here, a half-way apology is better than none at all, we agree on many points, let's move on. Life's too short. |
Lastly, and the good news on the Benchmark DAC1 is that there is an improvement coming along that will, wonder of wonders, make this whole post obsolete, thank god.
Because it improves the DAC1 so much that the DAC1 bypasses most of the other dacs discussed and, as a poster said in the prior thread, makes the DAC1 really "world class", i.e., truly equal to the ML, etc. and, yes, maybe up to the dCS!!
It's really an "adjustment" and was alluded to in the prior post. It will be announced in not too long. I already have it and I can tell you (from listening and comparing) that it is the real thing. More to come... |
The "adjustment" is aftermarket and even then its not much. |
No, don't wait to purchase a DAC1 because of the forthcoming "adjustment". The "adjustment" does not in any way change the DAC1 itself. |
