I can understand the seductiveness of being able to believe that something I have purchased is the best there is. What a comfortable and anxiety free place to be. I have no doubt I indulge in self-delusion as much as or more than anyone else. I just don't see why I should have to support another's self delusion, or why DNE or anyone else should require me to do so. It suggests I am either really selfish or am self sufficient in my own self delusion and intolerant of DNE's lack of self sufficiency. |
Dne's juvenile defensiveness over the DAC1 reminds me a lot of Natalie and his/her treasured Coincidence CSTs. |
But that is not what I hear or what many others hear. You are entitled to John Atkinson's opinion DNE. I suggest you get your own opinion one day. Get a Lavry Gold and try it in your system then tell me it is equivalent to the DAC1. I would expect you to more likely find how laughable the 'equivalent' suggestion really is. The DAC1 is a great value DAC. That is why I could not resist buying one. But give us your opinion of its relative merits based on what you have actually listened to.
I am telling you that I own the DAC1 and the Lavry Blue and prefer the Lavry Blue in my system, and have found other similarly priced DACs that perform at a similar level. You have told me what you have read. Thanks - I can read too. I also read opinions from pro audio guys who almost without exception agree the Lavry Blue is superior to the DAC1. I also read opinions that the Lavry Gold and the DAC1 are not in the same ballpark. What I have done about it is heard each of them in my system, bought the two I could afford, and posted my findings here. Your response is that John Atkinson's words can be read as saying that the DAC1 is superior to the Lavry Blue, based on your selective editing of his various comments, and claim a QED?
By all means, accept John Atkinson's opinion over mine. I am here to share opinions and findings, not win some contest to prove who is right. Just don't tell me John Atkinson's opinion invalidates mine and proves me wrong. We could all just skip coming here and read Stereophile instead. With your reasoning John could select our purchases for us - he seems to have selected yours.
With your case irrefutably proven, I should now say to you 'DNE, I must be wrong after all. I say I prefer the Lavry Blue but there must be something wrong with my hearing. Because the selected words of John Atkinson do not lie. You have indeed bought a perfect DAC and I was wrong to ever cast any doubt on that based on my inadequate opinion. I will now box up my Lavry Blue and unbox my DAC1 and never listen to another DAC again - unless of course John Atkinson tells me to.' Sorry to disappoint, but I like my music too much. And find your QED to prove only one thing - and its got nothing to do with DACs. |
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. |
As I have stated in other Audiogon forums, the DAC1 is great value for money, so much so that I could not resist buying one even though it spends most of the time in its box. BUT is not unique in being great DAC value for money.
I own both the Lavry Blue and the DAC1 and like them both. Neither sound like a good tube DAC, but if tube DACs are not your cup of tea then the Blue and DAC1 come close to the best DACs around in a medium cost system. In a top class system however the difference between them and the best DACs is indeed significant. I prefer my USD1200 Lavry Blue over my DAC1. The Blue costs more and it has only XLR connectors, and no switching or volume control. But the sonic improvements are significant.
I agree with the comments that the DAC1 sounds relatively thin through the mids and upper bass, but it does so without introducing anything objectionable to the sound - and that is its trick. The result is a degree of clarity that is very engaging. It is not what I hear live, but it is very musical and sounds lively even when the recording is a bit flat. In that respect the DAC1 is coloured, but it does not offend one's musical sensibilities in any way. But switching to the Lavry the naturalness of the sound improves, images are more palpable, subtle details are more apparent, textures are more like live sounds, soundstage is larger, bass is fuller, dynamics are better, etc.
My main point is simply that the DAC1 is not unique in being great value for around a grand. Look at the Lavry Blue, the Stello, even the Mytek, perhaps the Audio Space. I am not telling you, don't get a DAC1, get a Lavry Blue - just that there are some other great value DACs you should listen to as well.
Despite my preference for the Blue over the DAC1, I hasten to add that I really like my DAC1. If I owned a DAC1 and then heard the Blue, I wonder if I would be bothered to make the change if it required me to take a loss on the DAC1 (unless the thinness of the DAC1 was creating a problem in my system, which it doesn't), simply because the DAC1 is so much fun to listen to.
I would also like to provide some balance to the reference to great reviews from audio engineers above. I follow pro audio and in everything I could find on the internet, whenever a pro audio guy compared the DAC1 with a Lavry Blue the Blue was preferred. Be careful of just accepting Benchmark's edited highlights of comments from the pro world. Benchmark is doing nothing unusual or shonky in its quotes, but do a little of your own research too. |
Abrahavt, I'm not sure if you can find it in the US. You may have to contact them in Hong Kong. Unfortunately, I don't have their contact details. I will ask my friend to see if he has their contact number and I will revert to you as soon as I can. |
Is it available in the US? Where can you find it? |
I have some interesting news. There is a little company called Audio Space (AS) from Hong Kong and they make amplifiers as well as digital stuff. A friend of mine swore by the AS dac (also called DAC1), claiming it to be the best he's heard. He replaced his Mark Levinson 360s with it. His cousin replaced his Wadia 27 with it. So, I thought I might want to AB this dac with the Benchmark.
Know what? No contest. The AS wins hands down. I returned the Benchmark the next day to the dealer. The stock AS only cost $1500 and you can upgrade it for another $350. This is a tube dac (I have nothing to do with this company). You guys may want to check this out. |
"No one is claiming that the Benchmark DAC1 is the world's greatest reference dac in absolute terms...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."
for $975 IMHO, the DAC-1 is a GREAT sounding DAC - WAY better than it has a right to sound. all the other DACs i compared it to were alot more money w/ the exception of the MW LII P-tech P-3/A which is $1200 still 23% more than the DAC-1. in comparison to the MWLII p-3/a, the DAC had more openness and transparency across the highs. the midrange was a bit harder sounding and the bass lacked a bit of articulation. the magnitude of these differences was so small that it took repeated a/b comparisons to determine. then i conducted a single blind test on a friend who did not know which DAC was being played and my friend came away with the same opinions of the 2 DACs that I had. |
i had the Benchmark DAC-1 in my system and it is an excellent DAC for the money. it has great highs, but it is thin in the midrange and bass regions when compared to all the DACs i've had an opportunity to hear in my system. those include the MW lev2 modded P-Tech P-3/A, the EA modded P-Tech P-3/A, the Dodson DA-263, the Dodson DA-217MkII, and the Dodson DA-218. |
"Be sure to catch this issue if you are interested in one of the more objective reviews"
What is the deal with these people that have nothing better to do than try to discredit a product that has more objective reveiws than any other dac in history from the toughest critics in the world, i.e. Studio engineers. The sensible Sound is pushing a philosophy that nothing matters and its all personal bias. Is that objective? Why do they exist?
Nealhood,
Do you own a Benchmark? Do you know anything about its different set-up configurations. What do you have to do with this discussion? Knuckleheads like those S.S. subjective reveiwers just throw it in a system and spew away to affirm their philosophy which is self-serving unscientific/nonexhaustive.
This thread is lame.
I'm moving on to create a new thread where those who have a Benchmark and a clue can discuss and get the most from their extremely intellegent purchase...adios
Dna, I have not yet shared with you the one major configuration change that has elevated the performance of the benchmark to truely worldclass status.
Let's blow this popsicle stand.
|
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. |
For those that put more trust in reviewer's ears, there is a review in the newest issue of Sensible Sound that many should find interesting. Interesting in that they decided employ the double-blind listening approach in the interest of objectivity.
In a nutshell, the reviewers simply could not tell the difference between the Benchmark and a discontinued Sony XA20 machine.
Be sure to catch this issue if you are interested in one of the more objective reviews of the Benchmark floating around the audiophile press. |
In my experience the key to making the DAC-1 sound its best, without dropping $500.-$1k + for a modders interpretation of what he thinks sounds right, is to get a great inexpensive transport like a (an unmodded) S7700 and replace the plastic junk rca digital output jack w/ a high quality Cardas component BNC for the digital out, use a pair of 24 gauge or smaller silver wire as an impedence matching transmission line covered with a cotton jacket w/ BNC's as your cable. I know where you can get one back east at a fraction of what these guys are charging for digital cables. I guarantee it'll sound better. Putting a BNC on the S7700 was a snap. We used silver wire for the signal and it only needed to be a 1/4" long to reach the board and the ground tab attached right to the board...PERFECT. I'm not of the 'modder to the rescue/ gimme your money' persuasion. I love this hobby and livelihood.
In fact!
If any S7700/Benchmark owners desired to have this done I'd do it for next to nothing because It's easy for us to do and I've enjoyed meeting other benchmark owners. They're generally value minded and more sensible than to throw another 7 or 8 bills or more to have someone reinterpret its balance of sound.
Doing this swap and getting rid of the BNC-RCA adapter or the RCA/BNC terminated dig cable and replacing it with a SMALL gauge pure silver transmission line will improve the sound of your DAC-1 considerably. We build tube amps here for a major manufacturer and design x-overs and know how to handle audio gear.
I must add a comment in regard to the "Epirical" modder whos ONLY apparent aim in adding to ANY discussion is how he can benefit financially.
His arrogance is staggering.
He says:
"I'm happy for you that you like it (the dac-1) so much... however I compare it and all other DAC's to my reference DAC".
I've heard this "reference" dac a couple of times now. At T.H.E. show last week we went into his room and sat for a few moments listening to the same uninvolving "digital" sound I heard from his "reference" dac a year ago in my home.
Back to the excellent Benchmark!
I have more to share on getting the best performance from the dac-1 without major surgery (which is not easily reversible) which voids the warranty.
...But soon, must work now. |
Rainchild,
Actually the highs and upper mid are not dry at all. But rather are about as pure and vibrant as I've heard. The mid I wouldn't label sweet. That doesn't begin to convey the natural textures and uneditorialized presence that this dac is capable of. I distributed Linkdacs in the late nineties and the bass doesn't come close to the power, speed, agility and naturalness of the benchmark.
One thing I can add in comparing the Lector is... I might have left you thinking that the Lector was bigger and fuller but slower. It was way slower but the fuller impression came from noticably muted highs, somewhat small midrange presentation and exagerated mid-bass. Listening to the opening track of "the Poet" the voice was bigger and more life-like going through the benchmark with the sense of REAL "space" around it. On the same track using the Lector the voice sounded pinched, smaller and "cheaper" to quote a friend that was there.
Also, I did submit my response of helpful hints but the AG editors must be holding it. I made some "observations" in regard to the 'modder' so I may need to resubmit it. |
Alex - Too bad we could not do the shootout. Guess we will never know now.. Unless you will be at the Denver show in Oct.??? I plan to be there. BTW - your buddy David C. spent some time listening in our suite - he wanted to hear the shootout too.
Rainchild - As for the Benchmark - the highs are not dry or dark, and the mids and bass are improved with mods. See this review (last post):
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/viewtopic.php?t=15010&start=10 |
I think I can roughly guess what kind of sound is the DAC1. Should be quite a safe bet. Or a win win bet rather. If I'm not wrong it's sonic characters should be toward the ML side. Highs is detail but toward the dry side, Mids is organic with a little bit of sweetness and Lows is like MSB Link III, play with conviction.
When is yr next response coming Afthrs. |
After-hours, that's very very interesting. Please do let us know what you found that helped the Benchmark to sound its best. Thanks. |
Rainchild, ...Another comparison:
A few of us audio industry guys got together today in SB to listen to a few items that came out of the G****** Technology rooms at CES. One item was actually a Gorgeous pair ... (oh behave) of high gloss black tubed mono blocks, but this is not the thread to discuss those. The main item of interest was the very beautiful $3950.00 Lector CDP-7T cd player with outboard PS. I'm going to cut to the chase... I had a chance to evaluate a Lector integrated amp a few weeks ago and it had a similar sound. Rich in immediate presentation but unnaturally balanced to the warm. The Lector's bass was far less natural sounding than the DAC-1. It sounded a bit like a poorly executed tube amp in comparison. With a slightly exaggerated lateral spread, little natural depth, and dynamically slow and undefined when compared to the Benchmark. What's interesting is that a major manufacturer chose this as his personal player and by many accounts this unit sounds pretty involving etc. But compared to the Benchmark dac-1 (properly set up!) everyone agreed it was the more involving, alive, nuanced, dynamic, rythmic, and needless to say, accurate and honest of the two. You could just walk into the soundstage of the dac-1 instead of "being impressed" with the "sound" of the Lector. What's really impressive though is what Harry Pearson (The Absolute Sound) said recently in his review of the Lector CDP-7T.
"The Lector CDP-7T plays music nearly on par with the over-60-grand top-of-the-line Burmester CD drive and DAC. At the very fair price, this piece is a solid steal.
If the four grand Lector is a steal what would you call the benchmark? a give away? Pretty close.
I'll add some thoughts on what has helped my dac-1 to sound its best in my next "response". |
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. |
Audioengr, will have to agree with you. The Benchmark is a GREAT DAC at its price point, but compared to some references is quite inferior - thin, metallic (mids and highs). Soundstaging suffers too.
Sorry I could not make it on Monday. They had to tear the room apart late on Sunday so we all left.
Regards,
Alex |
Though I don't always agree with "Audioengr", I will have to say that, after owning the Benchmark, his comments are pretty much on the money. I found this dac to be relatively clear and dynamic with a simplicity of sound that was hard to dislike . These were it's stong points. The weak points, in my opinion, were a slight leading edge haziness, or thinness to musical notes and voice. Music seemed to emanate from a plane with limited depth. You might say, a 4'X8'X2' plane instead of the 8'X10'X6' plane which was the type sound field provided by the dcs Elgar/Purcell rig that sat next to it. The manner in which music starts, evolves and decays in free space from the dcs rig is in a different class than the Benchmark, as well as many other dacs and/or players that I have heard.
Another player on hand was a Jolida JD-100 and, yes, I owned this too. I preferred it to the Benchmard simply becuase it seemed to impart a certain "heart and soul" that seemed to elude the Benchmark. The Benchmark was a bit strident or steril by comparison. However, this is not meant to reduce the Benchmark. It was still a superb dac for the money and, just may be what many are looking for. My comments are only my opinion, based on my specific system and preferences.
The Benchmark stikes me as a reviewer's tool being starkly clean and dynamic. If your preferences lie with modern digital sound venue, it just could be your final cup of tea. Remember, although I favor the dcs sound very much, there are many who don't find the specific sound to their liking. It is really a preference thing so, listening yourself is the best way to judge it, not what some reviewer says. After all, it is your ears that must do the listening. |
Dne - I'm happy for you that you like it so much. It is better than the majority of DAC's available, however I compare it and all other DAC's to my reference DAC. Here is a post on some mods to the Benchmark:
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/viewtopic.php?t=15010&start=10
So you see, improvements are possible. All of these consumer products are designed to a price point. There is nothing that is designed "cost-no-object". |
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. |
The stock Benchmark DAC-1 has the most pristine and clear highs of any of these DAC's. However, the op-amps used cause the midrange and mid-bass to be a bit thin. This can be improved by changing op-amps or other mods, but the highs will not be quite as good. The DAC's that sound best stock IMO are: Birdland, Electrocompaniet, dAck! and Benchmark.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio
Manufacturer |
Hi,
I hope somebody will reply because i'm thinking about bying one myzelf.
please help me out
|
