How good is Benchmark DAC1 comparing to......

Hi all,
I've been away. I need to apologize to those who have been waiting for the "improvement" info for the Benchmark dac-1.

As it turned out the effects were astonishing... but not universally so. We basically ran the IC's from the headphone amp with some internal changes but mostly the effects were due to the 0...zero output impedance of the HP amp and unless that was an issue with a given system the effects were slight. Several people who had the issue who we shared this info with were shocked by the improvement.
So basically what we discovered is not something worth marketing a product around but that would fall more in the category of significant info for those who are load (impedance) challenged in regard to the benchmark.

Sorry again for the gross delay.

...the two DACs that seem to go head to head in the value for the money sweepstages are the dAck and Benchmark. You can read about both of them right here on Audiogon.

P.S. ...though I have 4 possible DACs to listen to, I have not yet heard the Benchmark DAC. Very envious of the sound a loaner dAck 2.0 production unit I got to borrow for a day.

Happy tunes,

Thanks a lot Rx8man for your effort.

I said I was reluctant to dip my toe in this thread - but dip I did...

Uva_hifi: As I believe I mention in the linked thread, the formal testing did tend to confirm my casual listening evaluations, which were similar to your own. But to my mind, that fact in no way invalidates the worth of the test method, partiuclarly in light of how many listeners and reviewers subjectively rated the Link DACs highly.

The test gives more than a subjective impression - it gives an aurally qualifiable and quanitifiable demonstration of exactly how much and in what ways any DAC deviates (or doesn't deviate) from the signal fed it, without requiring technical measurement gear and expertise (which still don't tell us much about how something like a DAC actually sounds). I don't hold that my test is in all ways "superior", if what we're after is mainly sound that's personally enjoyable. But I do think the method is valuable and enlightening, and would like to see it used by reviewers as an adjunct to strictly subjective auditioning. (I feel the same way about interconnects and preamplifiers, both of which are relatively easy to run bypass comparison tests on, though reviewers virtually never do this.)

I invite you to try my test, providing you're set up to do it, and then tell me if the experience was a waste of time. If I'd found it so, I wouldn't have bothered writing an article about running it. I even had fun doing it. (But then, maybe I'm simply more curious than some other audiophiles, and/or less afraid to rigorously examine my own opinions of what I think I hear.) Thanks for making the effort to read it and sharing your take though.

Zaikesman, you took 3 pages and probably a week of manipulation of your setup to hear what I heard under normal listening and a/b conditions, and we came to essentially the same results. What makes your method superior if folks can come to the same conclusion without all the added complexity? KISS, right?

I'm reluctant to dip my toe in this thread considering some of the monkey business that's gone on above IMO, but Uva_hifi's astute last post tipped me over the edge - in a good way (something I couldn't have said about some of his earlier posts here, to be frank).

I just want to invite anybody interested to this archived thread of mine, since nobody on this one posted to that one. It's about an A/B auditioning methodology I devised for fairly objective evaluation of outboard DAC's (either comparing multiple DAC's and/or various settings available on a single unit). My hope was to encourage others to run the test I describe and comment on their results, but so far none have, despite the thread receiving well over 2,000 viewings. But who knows, maybe someone coming from this thread will take the plunge...

Thf and Abrahavt,
I did a little searching and found this website:
www.houston-hifi.com/eng/index.html

I had the MSB Nelson w/PB and upsampling many moons agoand it's not nearly as good as the Benchmark Dac1. The nelson had a lot of bass, more then is on the recording, and was rich sounding, yet think and slow and synthetically full bodied. It's a dated design, IMNSHO, and for the same or less money a Musical Fidelity A3 24, Perpetual Tech or Benchmark dac will put it away...

How about a Benchmark DAC1 vs a fully moddified Museatex Bitstream?

Has any one do a A/B testing of these two units ?
MSB Link III 96kHz sampling/P1000 power supply Vs Benchmark DAC1 ?

Charles

Seems I need to clarify my posts. I bought the Lavry for the stereo in my lounge. But I still liked the idea of the Benchmark and so bought one and use it when I travel. I live in New Zealand but right now I am in a hotel in London. I have with me a 200GB drive attached to my laptop, a Wavelength outboard audio card, the Benchmark and some headphones. It means I can travel and still have great sound. When I am at home the DAC1 stays in the box. It has come out two or three times for a week or so at a time to joust with the Lavry but the Lavry always wins in my system. Hope this explains my posts. I continue to believe the Benchmark is great value for money and am not trying to damn it with faint praise. I just prefer my Lavry and suggest anyone looking at a Benchmark try a few others at the same time.

Dgclark, Hang on to your suspicious attitude. It will do you well in the long run. In this specific case, I think you're on the wrong track. There are people here who are able and willing to do things I wouldn't consider -- like buy a piece just because they're curious and want to stay informed. I have a hard enough time doing that with a CD. That's what gives this site so much "headroom", in terms of depth of information, for people like me.

These people may be crazy ;-> but often they are less biased in their opinions. Okay--it's hard to say "less biased" with a straight face in a conversation about audiophiles. Anyway, it is the opinions of true believers and those that want affirmation for a very precious investment they've just made (that better _not_ have been the wrong choice) that are more suspect to me. In any case, Red has a lot of posts on record, and he seems more than Alright.

This is a fun site. If you can dig the opinions without developing the compulsions, noone will get hurt!

Abrahavt,
Yes, I bought it from the given address and they will mod it for you upon request. You can choose what you want to upgrade. If you want a full upgrade, it should cost around US$2000. You can also request them to do a 110V unit. They are the manufacturer themself and they can do any modifications upon request, very flexible.
Sorry, I don't have their website or email address. You can call them or fax them a message.

Thf:
Where did you buy the unit from? Did you buy it from the address above? Do they have a website or email address? Where did you get it modded? Is yours a 220V unit?
Thanks

Dgclark0007

I bought the Benchmark DAC1 on 30 day eval and returned it. I liked it, but did not think it was the giant killer that many are professing it to be. I thought it was fairly clear, and uncolored but a tad thin and unnatural sounding in the midrange. It did not seem to be particularly dynamic. Detail retrieval was very good but not great. I thought it was a very competent and clean DAC, but not special. I compared it to my EVS Millennium II DAC and thought that the Mill was superior. It was fuller, more acuurate and handled the dynamics of music better. I also did not think it really improved on the stock 3910 I have. The 3910 is kind of dark, and pinched off sounding but it has a good soundstage, a balanced sound and good dynamics. It can get a little shrill in the uper registers. Even with those issues though, it still feels a little more natural and musical than the DAC1. I can easily see why there is so much success with 3910 mods. The DAC1 on the other hand is very digital sounding but without the digital edge and hardness. If data accuracy is the ultimate end for you, maybe it is the right DAC. For my ear I am primarily interested in the timbre of the sound and having it sound more like real life, which in my view is actually much darker and less detailed and planar in the soundstage than we want to admit. Go to a symphony and think of it in terms of a home audio setup and you will see what I mean. Don't know if this helps any but those are my thoughts.

I began reading this thread because I wanted to learn about the Benchmark DAC-1. At first it sounded very impressive. Then I quickly began having some doubts based on the comments of people who own the product and who pointed out its short-comings compared to other DACs. In particular, on 01-25-05 Redkiwi stated:

"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.. . . I prefer my USD1200 Lavry Blue over my DAC1."

Well there you have it, and from someone who actually owns a Benchmark. The Benchmark spends most of its time in a box. Despite the comments of some of the posters, he has no axe to grind; He bought the product and is simply giving me and all others his honest unbiased opinion.

Somewhat disappointed, I read a few more of the threads concerning the Benchmark, but it appeared to be a no go for me. Then much to my surprise, I found an earlier post from Redkiwi on 12-21-04
which stated:

"The Benchmark is very very good but is not perfect. I came very close to buying one, but when I found that
the pros generally had a higher regard for the Lavry Blue I tried that and found it had all of the performance I enjoyed in the Benchmark but with a more
natural presentation, one that I think (but do not claim) most audiophiles would prefer."

I am puzzled. Apparently sometime between December 21, 2004 and January 25, 2005, the poster decided to purchase a Benchmark DAC-1 that he had already decided he liked less than the Lavry Blue he already owned.

Credibility is a serious problem on these forums. I must confess that I am often suspecious of the "informed evaluations" offered here. Where have so many found access to so much equipment that they are able to offer informed opinions? I realize that audio stores will lend equipment, but I do not think this explains what we are reading. If I want to read fiction I will check out a book from the library in the fiction section. It is my understanding that Audiogon has the power to suspend members for specific reasons. I do not know what infractions can lead to this remedy, but I do think that if posters are caught posting "fiction" this might be a good reason.

Abrahavt, I finally got you Audio Space's contact details.
Top International Electric Hong Kong Ltd
1/F, 151-153 Apliu Street,
Sham Shui Po, Kowloon
Hong Kong
Tel: 852-2729 7271
Fax: 852-2307 9476

I just bought one unit (the model is called DAC-1US) and upgraded several items like capacitors (to blackgates), wiring (to pure silver), tubes (to telefunken), RTX REL Caps and the resistors. And the result? MAGIC. I have not heard the EMM Labs but the older Wadias and Levinsons are no match for the upgraded Audio Space. Try to listen to one if you happen to be in Hong Kong.
By the way, the upgraded unit costs only US$1800.
Have fun.

Does this mean that it wont benefit those of us using a preamp?

Thanks for that. It makes a bit more sense now. Suitably configured, I don't find the Benchmark lacks liveliness, and it is already pretty smooth, but do agree that midrange palpability would be welcome, and more firmness to dynamics from the lower mids down would be very valuable. Depending how effective the improvements are that would leave its only flaw (to my ears and in my two systems) as low level inner detail/nuance. Although one hastens to add that I refer to a flaw only in the context of tough and more expensive competition.

For what it is worth, in playing around with configurations I found one seemingly paradoxical outcome. I tended to prefer the interior gain set to -30dB, and highish output calibration, whereas I had expected to find the 0dB gain and low output calibration to sound better. However I did not spend a lot of time with these permutations because I was really just trying to see if I could get it to outperform my Lavry, as opposed to spend lots of time optimising the Benchmark.

These days I just use the Benchmark as part of a portable high end system comprised of laptop, Wavelength, Benchmark, Sennheiser. Great travel to with.

Redkiwi,

There is no great commercial motive here.
We are putting the finishing touches on something that improves further the benefits of the reconfig., but anyone can enjoy the sonic improvements with a small purchase from an electronics store.
The change doesn't turn the DAC-1 into the best dac ever
-or anything ridiculous like that- but it is a 'significant!' improvment to an already noteworthy d/a. The change does make it more alive, smooth, dynamic, dimensional, and makes the mid more a bit more palpable.

I hadn't intended to make much of a stir but before I let-on the change that anyone can do. I wanted to encourage those who ownwed a Benchmarks.

So I'll let-on soon. Also, anyone using a passive pre with their Benchmark or using the volume control is in for a real treat!

Thanks for being patience.

To put it frankly, I think the interest is generated from the mystery that appears to have been orchestrated about this, and that it is beginning to smell a bit wiffy. If there is something to say, why not say it?

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.

Dne, am I right in assuming that the 'adjustment' is one of the permutations of the settings discussed in the user manual, as opposed to involving an adjustment not discussed in the user manual? That is, the 'adjustment' is some combination of front toggle, back toggle, rear volume calibration, internal gain setting, internal bypass of input select, etc?

I can't quite see the mystery and reason for the secrecy, which in one email I have received on this implies a commercial motive behind the secrecy. Can you please clarify?

No, don't wait to purchase a DAC1 because of the forthcoming "adjustment". The "adjustment" does not in any way change the DAC1 itself.

I'm with Zenguy. Should we wait?

The "adjustment" is aftermarket and even then its not much.

What is the adjustment?

I have been considering buying a DAC1 - is the adjustment an aftermarked modification, or should I wait to buy until the 'adjustment' has been implemented?

I will leave your post to speak for itself Uva.

That is very interesting Dne. I look forward to trying the adjustment with my DAC1. Rest assured that if it does what you say it will oust my Lavry, and I will be happy to report on that.

I tried a lot of permutations with the DAC1, including various combinations of internal and calibrated gain, and removing both switching and the volume control from the equation, and some certainly sounded better than others. So I am intrigued to hear about the one you are advocating.

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...

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.

Man, this is too easy, but here it goes anyways, as it’s a lazy sunday and I’m ripping hundreds of CD’s to my hard drives:

You say first "The behaviour of both yourself and Uva in attacking my posts" (ie., in merely disagreeing with YOU) is unacceptable, yet you later go on to preach,

"If you cannot tolerate opinions about a product that are different from your opinions without attacking, then it is you who is posting inappropriately here"

is the biggest load of crap I've read in a while! I'm shaking my head in a stupor, here. Usually folks have the presence of mind to put these statements in different topics, or at least different posts! Give us a break. Anyone with good conscience and logic could have attacked ridiculous posts like these. Dne and myself apparently where then only two people bored enough to do take on this epic "challenge."

You then go on with your Benchmark ridiculing; with whatever agenda you are pushing, in calling those here that enjoy the product in reference, among those reviewers are recording engineers, musicians, and highly experience owners and listeners of the highest quality digital, part of "the Benchmark Evangelist Church." Everyone sees through your petty pseudo-praise of the Benchmark dac. You're putting up a false front as a 'good-guy' fellow owner only to deflect some of the deserved criticism of your approach to relaying your OPINION as the true or superior one, which I'm feeling fewer and fewer are holding in much esteem based on your behaviour in your last few posts. Get over yourself and your precious obscure dacs and let others have their own opinions without it making your throw a hissy fit, is my advice to your mental and physical health. You like other dacs better, that’s super. Do you really need to let everyone know everytime the DAC1 is mentioned that YOU found something that suites YOUR TASTES better? Me thinks not.

And here's the kicker:

"My apology is to Audiogon for once again falling for being baited by unwarranted attackes from DNE and Uva. If anyone was upset by my derogatory references to DNE and Uva, then I do apologise."

!!!! WOW, what to say to that!....So, you look like a REALLY big man, now. You really touch a lot of hearts with that bit of conceited dribble. Grow up, take responsibility for your ignorant and inappropriate posts that are plain for all to see for what they are, apologize to those deserving an apology (I could care less if a child insults me, personally), and learn how to behave yourself in a public forum and, by that, I'm hoping you'll live another 10 years. Oh, and have a great day....

I have been following this thread for a while but staying out of it. I have to come down on the side of Redkiwi. All he did was state that in his system he preferred The Lavry Blue to the Benchmark and he was attacked for saying that. This forum is for people to express their opinions and experiences. You may or may not agree with any one person's opinion. Doesnt mean you have to attack them for it. Any decision that a person makes is based on many opinions not that of one individual. If you do not agree you can state as much in a nice way and describe your own experience. There is no need to take these things personaly. I think everyone should desist from name calling and return to a civilized exchange of ideas and experiences. There is no life and death issue involved here.

"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."

Dne, you really need to take your own advice. Your initial post set the entire negative tone of this thread...

"Midrange and mid-bass a bit thin? I don't think so".

Where's there room for discussion here? This statement eliminated any and all friendly and objective sharing of experiences.

I'd heard great things about this DAC so I popped in here to hopefully gain some insight, information and an idea of what type of sonic character the Benchmark imparted.

Instead what I read was infantile knee jerk reactions to anyone who disagreed with you and your daddy John.

Hey kid, we all have different ears, different equipment and different tastes. Why is it so important that anyone who doesn't see things the way you do has to come around to your view?

You've got good feedback here, so it seems you're an honorable person. So why do you find it necessary to post a rebuttal to anyone with a different opinion and list everyone from Abe Lincoln to Bette Midler who agree with you? As some of the posters here have mentioned, that has very little relevance. Audiogon members are interested in "sharing" experiences and discussing why certain differences might exist. Associated equipment? Room acoustics? Cabling? Different priorities?

I had read the other thread a week ago you referred to, and I thought Redkiwi was quite complimentary of the Benchmark. IN FACT, HE'S ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS I EVEN CONSIDERED GETTING THE DAMN THING!

Redkiwi, Benchmark Evangelist Church is right. Or maybe more like Sunday school.

DNE, our posts crossed.

The behaviour of both yourself and Uva in attacking my posts, where I did none of the things Uva accused me of, and where your post in reply on 26 January was about the most mindless set of arguments I have ever seen posted, in pursuit of proving the unprovable caused me to think you guys were a bunch of ...(expletive deleted)... Read my post of 25 January again and see if you can quote me in reasonable context to have done anything other than report my honest opinion based on what I have heard.

Yes I have slapped you two around for your inappropriate posts. You claim your post of 26 January was merely quoting a reviewer. Go read it again DNE - it was a ridiculous argument directed at me, whereupon I believed the best cause of action was to point out how ridiculous it was. That does not strike me as inappropriate.

What then ensued, was merely an escalation. My apology is to Audiogon for once again falling for being baited by unwarranted attackes from DNE and Uva. If anyone was upset by my derogatory references to DNE and Uva, then I do apologise.

As for DNE and Uva. Go read these posts again and tell me you believe I started this. I can't see that at all. If you cannot tolerate opinions about a product that are different from your opinions without attacking, then it is you who is posting inappropriately here. If you still cannot see how you started this, then lets just be grown ups and let it go.

Indeed! Well said Jayboard.

Let's get back to discussing what each of us hear, without petulant reprisals for failing to toe the party line. I was beginning to wonder if this was Audiogon or the Benchmark Evangelist Church.

One last time - I really really like the Benchmark. AND, I have heard DACs that I prefer to it, all of which cost more money. That is what I hear, and I do not claim it to mean anything more than that. If that is unacceptable here, then I will happily go elsewhere.

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.

The saving grace of these debates is that while the thread rages on, most of us privately and quietly make up our minds concerning whose opinions are actually useful (whether we agree with them or not). Some members have, over a long period of time, demonstrated that they not only listen to lots of gear but can describe what they hear
1) with precision (not "A blows B away" or even--sorry--"A was much more musical than B"),
2) comparatively across competing products, so we readers have a better chance of actually having a reference point based on our own listening, and
3) in reference to their own tastes, so we have a better chance of factoring in/out some of the copious amount of subjectivity that goes into such opinions.

These criteria are not easy to meet, and they add up to a degree of authenticity of opinion that makes the opinion useful.

Opinions that rely heavily on appeals to outside, "expert" opinions simply don't have this authenticity. Stereophile only costs $10/year and has lots of slick pictures to boot. I don't have to come here to read S'phile's opinions.

Fortunately, in the end it doesn't matter who shouts loudest or gets the last word or invokes the most "experts", except to those for whom that's what the hobby is mostly about.

Sheesh.

What planet are you on Uva? Where have I belittled the DAC1? By saying I prefer the Lavry Blue? When did I ever call the Lavry Blue the best? I can think of at least three DACs I have heard in my system that are better than the Lavry Blue. When have I said the Blue would be a better DAC for anyone else? You are simply making up stories. When I say the DAC1 is a great DAC, is that belittling it? When I say I bought one, is that belittling it? All I have done Uva is report what I have heard from these DACs in my system. I have not criticised what anyone has posted here about their experiences. Yet that is how small minded little twerps like you and DNE have reacted to my straightforward reporting of my experiences. From what I can tell, you guys are finding it unacceptable that I have pointed out that there are other DACs at around the same price that compete with the DAC1. What is it about such a suggestion that upsets you? Why do you feel so insulted when someone like me praises the DAC1 yet says he prefers a slightly more expensive DAC? I thought DNE a bit over the top - you have managed to top even him.

Abrahavt, sorry I can't get hold of the Audio Space contact details. If I do get them, I'll let you know.

Redkiwi, your only posts to this forum lately have been to belittle this product and tout what YOU own as the best piece for EVERYONE. You declare it a set in stone fact that the piece you own is superior to this product, and everyone must agree with YOU and YOUR TASTES! So, who is the narrow minded one here, really. Also, do you really think that you are making Dne look immature by your last post? Give us all a break from your rhetoric and inability to answer questions in an adult, let alone logical and methodical fashion and keep your opinions as what they are, just your opinion....

My mistake was clearly to think you actually wanted a balanced discussion. Instead you obviously wanted a collective little 'w-word' without interruption. Most adolescents lock the door and do it in private. Otherwise they just look ridiculous.

To rectify my mistake I shall just tiptoe from the room and leave you boys to it. Enjoy!

What negativity DNE? I have stated over and over what a great DAC the DAC1 is, and fantastic value for money, and have even bought one. What you don't seem to be able to cope with at all is anything that implies the DAC1 is bettered by any other DAC in someone's system, or that the DAC1 is not the equivalent or better than any other DAC on the planet. Read my posts again and your last post becomes a 'doth protest too much, me thinks'. If you really wanted a balanced discussion about the DAC1, how come you are incapable of allowing posts where someone provides balance, without a childish response defending the perfection of your DAC? At least, from Uva hifi, we discover that your narrow-mindedness about others' honestly expressed opinions has company.

Bravo, DNE! You wrote what a lot of us where thinking....

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.

Very interesting thread! Especially considering that with the purchase of a new vinyl rig, "going back to the future" has been a blast, and those little silver discs, and my Wadia 861 are gathering dust. BTW, the return to vinyl was a long time coming – after an over 2-decade long attempt at chasing the “perfect” digital grail. Sure am glad that I kept the 100’s of big black discs I collected over the years!

With that said, I would like to divest myself of the Wadia -- step down in cost -- use the proceeds to purchase more LP’s -- and obtain a very good, but not necessarily “great” digital front end.

From what I’ve read, the Benchmark may fit the bill; and may for the money, even be a lateral, rather than a sonically descending move.

The other DAC that sounds interesting is the dAck – especially the new version 2.0.

In any case, it would be interesting to hear of any comparisons between my Wadia and the Benchmark, and between the dAck and Benchmark.

I’ve not had a lot of digital audition experience, but I have heard a Resolution Audio Opus 21 , Levinson 39, and a CEC/Wavelength DAC combo in my system. So from my prespective, comparisons between them and the dAck, and Benchmark would be relevant.

Sorry Eastein I was less than clear. My best way of defining it is this. In general terms of 'audiophile' quality I would but the DAC1 a step above the Apogee and the Lavry Blue a half step above the DAC1. However added to this the DAC1 diverges from how the live event sounds more than the other two. The way it does that is truthful to the music, and is not objectionable, but has a distinctive editorial factor to it that you may just love, or you may find not quite acceptable. When we say it is slightly thin we do not mean it is hard or edgy or grainy. In fact there is probably no surer bet in audio than saying you will not regret paying a grand for the DAC1 if you just go and do it. With all the hype it has got you will probably also find it easy to sell if you change your mind. I have yet to find someone that says they just plain don't like it. However there are some who have said they prefer the Apogee Mini, and it is usually because it is fuller and more natural. Which of them you would prefer is hard to tell. For me the choice at this price level is between the Lavry Blue and the DAC1. The Lavry Blue sounds very similar to the Apogee in terms of character, but is just plain better in all respects - at a higher price. The choice between the Lavry and the DAC1, or between the Apogee and the DAC1 will be also driven by the difference in character.

Yep Eastein. I prefer the DAC1, but if one needed a warmer smoother presentation I might plump for the Apogee. This is because the Apogee has less resolution (but read on) than the DAC1, but does not have the thinness of the DAC1 and is warmer/smoother. I can imagine how in some systems it could sound more natural. To me the DAC1 is so good at giving the outlines of the sound that in complex music it can be wonderful. In less complex music you don't hear into the subtle micro detail so well. It is there but that emphasis on the outlines takes over. Neither the Apogee or the Lavry Blue do that, so that you can hear more of the many sounds that say a plucked upright acoustic bass makes. With the DAC1 the driving propulsive beat of say an electric bass will stand out better in a complex piece of music, but a solo instrument will sound less like the real thing and more like a facsimile of it. These distinctions are not large so differences between systems and musical tastes will easily cause others to have a different view on this than me.

When I first heard the DAC1 do this I was somewhat startled and wondered what I was listening to - was it better or worse than I was used to - it was certainly different. In my view it was a greater emphasis on macro dynamics than on microdynamics and a touch more emphasis on the leading edge of sounds rather than the body and decay. Yet nothing of this diminished its musicality.

My view is the DAC1 is the product of a very skilled designer using an enormous amount of insight into DAC design to produce a 'flavoured' but high performing DAC using very cheap basic components. My guess is that the cheap as chips 5534 output ICs are the reason for the distinctive sound of the DAC1 as I recognise some of their characteristics from the days when I designed/manufactured/marketed a range of preamps. But I never got one to have the smooth sound that the DAC1 achieves - it is a real testament to the progress of design and the quality of cheap mass produced chips.

Just on the other point, I agree Gunbei and Nealhood, and thanks for your comments. We need to present our opinions as how the experience occurred to us. If we wish to add credibility to it by presenting supporting comments or facts then all the better, but it is pointless to use this place to try to prove one person's observation is right and the other's is wrong. They are both right unless one is a deliberate lie. The fact that the observations are different means that the observer or what was being observed, or some other variable was not identical - and why should we expect that they were identical and so only one observation can be right?

As you say Nealhood. We trade our opinions and observations and make our own judgements on the credibility or otherwise of another's post - but we do not need a public debate about that credibility and we will never prove anything by doing that. We each decide how much to use the opinions of others as an addition to our own experiences so that we can decide what to sell/buy/try/next, and each of us does that differently.

I see these forums as a place to give freely information that might help others, and receive the same thing freely. There is no transaction here and therefore no obligation to each other than to be truthful and civil. The gift of that information is best accepted for what it is, not against what you might prefer it to be.

has anybody compared the DAC1 and Apogee mini?

thanks

Nice post "Redkiwi". I too fail to understand the philosophy behind judgemental type decisions based on someone else's ears and a bit of vodoo math. Geeshh....

A quality debate and/or dialog is beneficial to everyone - and fun. And, for the most part, with perhaps the exception of a few posts, this thread has been enlightening. I have pretty much learned from experience how to riffle through posts concentrating on those of merit while at the same time riffling through those that go off course merely for the purpose of cooking up some innuendo. Fact is, in most internet chat type threads there is always quality dialog and, unfortunately there is usually always a dose of inappositeness.

I think those of us involved in audiophilia are searching for our own sonic self-delusions. Our personal nirvana. The need to convince others that our way is the correct one, is pointless.