Well had some time to catch up on some of the old videos with the M6 speakers and the large number of amps WC had over M6 window. Still not through all of them but here's how I rank the amps so far, by tier group. Within each tier group, I'll call them a tie for me - to further delineate would have taken much more time than I had. Still have a couple other amps yet to place that I didn't get to (Essence monos, some other Pass Labs monos, maybe one other).
Tier 1: Gryphon Antilleon Evo and Constellation Centour monos
Tier 2: Audio Research Ref 160M monos
Tier 3: Gryphon Essence stereo and Soulution 530
Tier 4: Pass Labs X350.8 and XA60.8
Tier 1 pretty well separated from the other tiers. Tiers 2, 3, 4 closer together but still enough separation for me to group this way.
All with Magico M6 speaker, obviously. |
|
|
Again demo # 2 was the best.
# 1 was a little to analytical, # 2 more natural.
I think that DCS is = # 1, MSB = # 2.
|
Since the Evo Antileon seems to be ruled out by Jay due to it’s warmth, once the dust settles in the next few weeks I will have to prepare a petition for a return of the #1 Mephisto and a DAC battle rematch.
Hopefully Jay has a change of heart with the Antileon so we can have an MBS v dCS Trilogy. |
@ron17
I am voting for the best DAC. Not what sounds best with this system. I am looking at all performance parameters and voting for the DAC I think is doing the best job of da conversion. |
Jay,
The new microphone sound good.
How does the recording sound to you?
Is it faithfully recreating what you are hearing in your room? |
@chazzzy007
"I am voting for the best DAC. Not what sounds best with this system. I am looking at all performance parameters and voting for the DAC I think is doing the best job of da conversion."
Not sure how you can say one DAC is better than the other. DAC #2 might sound best in Jay's room at this time (with current associated equipment) but with the M6's it might be DAC #1 that sounds best....It's all about system matching, not what people think is the best all around. IMO
|
Read my thoughts on both DACs again. I’m looking at a number of different performance areas. To my ears DAC #1’s overall performance is superior.
Having said that we all have different preferences and hear differently. 🙂
|
I agree with Jay
"yep - the entire shootout is simply to let people hear how both dacs sound with the rest of the supporting cast. Of course, if i had different speakers or cabling then maybe things would be different."
And ron17
"Not sure how you can say one DAC is better than the other. DAC #2 might sound best in Jay's room at this time (with current associated equipment) but with the M6's it might be DAC #1 that sounds best....It's all about system matching, not what people think is the best all around. IMO"
Not sure chazzzy007 gets it.
|
Alright so here's what I'll do:
Once we get through this shootout, I'll record 2 songs per DAC with the new mic, new room treatments and constellation Audio monos. This will add another reference point for you all. |
That's cool. Those are nice amps. |
@rbach
I get it.
Jay does his best to be politically correct and on the best terms when it comes to manufacturers. He constantly moves equipment and wants to be on best terms, especially as his brand and thread here continue to grow. That’s a legitimate and intelligent position.
I on the other hand don’t have to worry about that. To my ears and in my system, DAC #1 outperforms DAC #2 in very critical areas. DAC #2 gives up performance in separation, detail, air, and harmonic nuance in exchange for vivid presentaion and tonal density or what Johnny Darko calls "chunkiness". Lolz 😄
DAC #1 outperforms DAC #2 in what I would require a SOTA DAC to do. I can match it with any components I want to make for richer tonal qualities. That’s easy. For instance a BAT Rex tube amp or a Gryphon Mephisto for a bit richer presentation. Or I can keep the Essense and substitute Valhalla 2 XLR’s and or Valhalla speaker cables for the Synergistics. (Jay the Synergistics are a bit cooler than the Valhalla 2’s yes?) Or I could put back in the Shunyata conditioner which Jay says adds warmth and "benefits one DAC and not the other" remember?
So yeah, I get it. 😉 |
Jay quote:
'Alright so here's what I'll do:
Once we get through this shootout, I'll record 2 songs per DAC with the new mic, new room treatments and constellation Audio monos. This will add another reference point for you all."
Bravo! 👏👏👏 |
Nope, don't think you do. |
Funny, chazzzy is being accused of the same things as I. Chazzzy and I get it. As musicians, Chazzzy and I value clarity above everything else. Musicians are trained to strive for the best clarity that our physical abilities will allow. If demo 1 has greater clarity with more accurate DA conversion than demo 2 on A speakers and B amplifiers, it will have the same greater clarity and accurate DA conversion on C speakers and D amplifiers. However, the people who want some ill-defined synergy will say that they may LIKE demo 1 on A speaker and C amp, but LIKE demo 2 on B speaker and D amp. This may happen with the XLF, which some people hate for its hot tweeter. They prefer to ease the XLF pain with the more rounded and less revealing demo 2. They are not prioritizing clarity, but are seeking the lesser "evil" of the XLF with demo 2. With Magico M6, they might choose the clarity of demo 1.
Still, it will be fun to repeat the A/B with the different mike and Connie amp. I applaud this exercise, and I will likely come to the same conclusions. So far, demo 1 for me. However, if it changes to demo 2, one possibility is that since 1 and 2 are very close so far, random variations, or other unknown factors like sudden change in power quality may skew the results.
|
If i do the Constellation demonstration, i will not be disclosing what dac is playing. It will be stricly blindfolded and i will dress up both dacs with my best Powercords. I will "strap on twin turbos" on both and let the cards fall where they may. |
Song # 2 video #2
DAC #1’s elegantly nuanced and layered presentation beats DAC #2’s vividness and tonal richness. DAC #2’s palette of sound is too one dimensional for me. Where everything for Dac #2 seems to be vibrant primary colors, DAC #1 paints in all the primary colors, many hues and pastels plus delicate shades of grey.
Coming into this I was expecting these amps to be similar in most regards with some difference in presentation. However to my ears comparing one directly against the other they actually perform markedly different.
Scoreboard
DAC #1 2 points - DAC #2 0 points |
Viber,
TBH I was very surprised thay you and I were listening for the same sonic subtleties and in many instances going to similar parts of the music. But yes to me music either sounds alive or it doesn’t. Now granted we all hear a bit different so we might value one thing over another, but harmonics, natural sounding overtones, decay and spatial queues are part of what I listen for and am immediately drawn to. Above those how is separation? Is the soundstage deep and can I close my eyes and see each instrument in space? As I built my headphone system these last few months I especially paid attention to these areas including tonality which is the one area where to my ears DAC #2 has the advantage. It’s presentation is beautifully rich and quite vivid.
Other things also come into play. Things like dynamics, speed, soundstage width/height etc...but you get the gist of what I’m saying. |
@golfnutz
I did listen to that song but nothing really stood out as being extraordinary. it seemed a little muddy Maybe but yeah it was some pretty decent bass but nothing like some of those songs I presented that had the real deep Bass and real heavy bass slam.
|
Jay did your MSB Reference DAC come with the pre-amp output module? |
My reference DAC has everything that you can possibly order for it including the extra power base which adds 12k to the Msrp. |
@grey9hound
This isn't synthesized bass like Black Eyed Peas, this is real bass guitar that you can feel through the entire song (with exception of the drum solo). The YT video doesn't come close to the CD version. I think anyone who has the 7 minute version of this song knows what I'm referring to. |
“which adds $12k”
Yep, he’ll be keeping the dcs
my guess is move back to Vivaldi at some point relatively soon
WC, you should still do the reveal after the third video, per original plan. Then go ahead and do the Consternation video however you want and keep that one be blind. Interesting to see at that point if people can tell.
But the 3part current shootout has been so well set up and stands alone that you really should reveal as planned. I suspect the only reason you wouldn’t is if you aren’t happy with way people are voting and want to tip the scales back toward the losing dac |
I'm planning on keeping both dacs because i am sure there will be more speakers in the future. I will not be buying the DCs Vivaldi because pretty soon those will be sitting at all pawn shops across the united States. The new Vivaldi mk2 should be releasing in a few months |
|
Jay,
Yes, to keep us all honest and open minded, it would be great when you do the Connie video to label the dac's as demo A and demo B. Right now, the people who think they know the characteristics of demo 1 and 2 will be biased going into the Connie video. That includes me, and I want to have an open mind. |
You all also forget a few important facts about the Vivaldi:
1. It has multiple chassis which means? MORE POWER CORDS
2. It needs top end digital cables to connect all chassis together
The msb reference needs 2 powercords (if you have dual power bases) or just one powercord if you bought it with only one power base, but it does not need any sort of expensive AES cable to connect each chassis.
That said, both dacs are extremely protected on the used market and often times are sold very quickly once listed. Most of the current MSB dacs are rarely online because most MSB owners just dont have a reason to move to another brand. What i do hear is that you typically see DCS owners move to a MSB DAC but rarely the other way around. |
Yeah the only msb dac I ever see listed is the old analog, which is an interesting name for a dac.
Well that is fantastic news if you follow through and keep both dacs |
chazzzy,
I agree, and do listen to what you listen for, but believe that soundstage is a secondary criterion. The thing that gives away whether something is live or not is the sudden perception of "aliveness" or snap. I don't care WHERE the sound is coming from, as long as I am excited by that snap. Have you ever been scared by the sudden crack of thunder/lightning, or hearing a gunshot during a theater performance? Who cares WHERE it comes from? In fact, for maximum clarity, my speakers are extremely close together, so instead of a 60 degree equilateral triangle, they are about 15 degrees. I can still tell approximately where the instruments are coming from, but the increased clarity with narrow separation outweighs the sacrifice of R/L separation. I have found that more R/L separation bloats image size, interfering with focus and clarity. The immersion that some people like with more R/L separation is not for me.
Also, clarity encompasses and enables perception of speed, lifelike tonal nuances, resolution of decays, spatial cues. My only sacrifice is R/L width. |
|
Ok - The shootout has been completed. Please vote on the 3rd poll i have posted today. I plan to do a ONE VIDEO shootout of 2 songs with the Constellation monos, new microphone and with the new acoustic panels that are finally placed in my room. I hope to do this at some point this week. |
My picks
video 1 #2 =DCS
video 2# 1 =DCS
video 3 #1= DCS
|
Video 3. "Temptation" 15:00 and 7:16 for demo 1 and 2, resp. Demo 1 shows more brilliance on the voice, with more sibilance on her HF consonants, more nuance in the midrange of her voice. I understand how some people would say that demo 2 is more natural, due to the XLF's hot tweeter which exaggerates the sibilants in this recording. The opening percussion has more snap on demo 1, and even the lower freq upright string bass shows a bit more snap on the plucking of the strings, although this is harder to hear. As usual, I can distinguish items better if I concentrate on upper midrange/HF.
Despite the fact that this recording on the XLF is hyped up in HF which is revealed more by demo 1, I vote for demo 1. Here is an example where I admit that HF emphasis sometimes creates unnatural effects, but I accept it for the overall aliveness of demo 1 vs demo 2. |
WC, Viber keeps saying that XLF has a "hot" tweeter. He’s said it at least 3-4 times now.
Is Viber correct about that? Or is Viber wrong about that?
I seriously have to question Viber’s hearing (or listening skills) if he thinks that XLF has a "hot" tweeter, coming most recently from Magico M6 (that’s not disparaging M6, but its beryllium tweeter is certainly much more forward than the soft dome of the XLF - guessing that very few serious audiophiles would dispute that statement).
A debate about which tweeter is more accurate or sounds better is fair game, but misusing (IMO) terms like "hot" isn't very helpful, I'd submit. That's why Viber should be corrected or rebuked if he is wrong in that contention. If he's correct in your opinion WC, then I'll be happy to stand corrected. |
Nope - soft dome tweeters are rarely "hot sounding". They are smooth sounding by nature, but if the rest of the system is tuned to have "high frequency extension" then it will sound more projected because that is what you are doing.
Dynaudio is also using soft dome tweeters and i never found it bright when i owned it, but again you can make anything sound bright if you choose to. On the other hand, "warming things up" by using transparent cables can be an option, but an expensive one since the OPUS speaker cables are crazy money and you have to send them in to get "tuned" each time you change electronics.
The XLF has a lot of clarity and its adjustability will do wonderful things for a lot of different room sizes, but it is still revealing of whatever you are doing with the supporting cast just like a lot of other speakers. However, the sheer size of the speaker WILL make it feel as if there is more energy because it does have 2 tweeters, 2 big midrange units. This was a speaker that Wilson Audio used in MASSIVE ballrooms at shows with 50-PLUS chairs in the room so it is capable of humongous dispersion. It won’t shy away from telling you with a big pronunciation what you have done to the sound. |
Kren,
Listen for yourself--what do you hear? The Temptation song, particularly with demo 1 makes the sibilants stand out. The XLF tweeter is actually of similar "hotness" to the GTA and my own speakers. But on more natural, well balanced recordings with different mikes located further away, I judge the XLF tweeter to be natural, revealing and excellent, as with GTA and my speakers.
Jay probably has played this song on other speakers. My guess is that he found the Magico M6 to have less sibilance on this recording. Too bad Agon doesn't have a good search function for posts where the M6 may have played this recording. In fact, if Jay had done this shootout with the M6, I believe that more people would have voted for demo 1. As it is, I think the XLF has done an excellent job of revealing the differences, and I am glad Jay did it with the XLF. |
Kren,
Regardless of the tweeter material, Wilson designed the XLF to have HF emphasis. The tweeter is used down to 1000 Hz, much lower than the usual 2-3 kHz crossover. A second tweeter is rear and top firing. There are probably other trade secrets in the crossover or custom-modified tweeter, we don't know. But the HF brilliance of the XLF is due to the overall design, which is what Jay is implying. |
The difference with Alexandria XLF is that it has two tweeters, one front firing and one rear firing. I have to say I've never really been a fan of that sort of topology when used by the many other brands over the years that have tried it, but I've never heard Alexandria XLF in person, nor another truly high end speaker with rear firing tweeter that I can recall (I usually note the feature and probably sort of write it off out of hand, merely because I've never heard one that I liked).
So that is something I'd have to get comfortable with for sure if I'd consider a speaker like that. I couldn't just buy it blindly like WC did, lol, that's for sure |
I agree with viber and Jay that the perceived HF emphasis of the XLF's is by design. Magico with their beryllium tweeter rolls off the top end by design. I always thought the Focal Stella with its beryllium tweeter should be rolled off a little. Beautiful sounding speaker but a little fatiguing for me.
|
On first (somewhat distracted while working, lol) listen I’m gonna call video 3 a draw for me. Hopefully will have a chance to listen again and be able to give it more attention.
Video 1: strongly preferred #2
Video 2: slightly preferred #2
Video 3: draw pending another listen where I can devote more effort to distinguishing |
Vid 1 - #2, Vid 2 - #2, Vid 3 - #2
On all 3 videos, vocals sounded slightly to the right of center with DAC 1.
Makes me think you shot all 3 videos for DAC #1 in order, than swapped DAC's and did all 3 videos for DAC #2 in order. Maybe the Mic was slightly off center for DAC #1.
Listened to the new mic video as well. Good bass, but the HF seemed to be a bit over the top on my system. Hopefully, I won't hear this with your next shoot out. |
Kren,
Video 3 will be easier if you listen to Temptation at the beginning for about 1 min. My timings are from the END of the video. The Sara K "All my love" recording is not as brilliant as Temptation. You might like demo 2 for Temptation, and maybe demo 1 for Sara K, or possibly hate demo 1 for Temptation and mildly dislike demo 1 for Sara K. |
|
No i don't. My system isn't connected to YouTube |
Catching up....regarding the second video....
#2 for me. As I was listening to #1, especially the second song, I thought it seemed a little excessive in the upper frequencies, although it did sound very good. The first song on #1 started out really nice and sounded good. But, #2 seems to be clearer and more balanced in the presentation for me.
Dave |
Third video -
Definitely #2 for me - no question. Much better balance. Just the first minute of the first song - it seems obvious to me - the guitar notes sound clearer and more balanced.
Dave
|
First, second and third video is demo #2 for me. Timbre of voices is so natural compared to demo #1. Demo #1 lacks some midrange body and sounds a little too bright for my own taste.
|
The last video was easier for me, i choose Demo 1, nice black background.
Video 1; Demo 1
Video 2; Demo 2
Video 3; Demo 1 |
Video 3 song #1
I’m quite familiar with this song as I have it in a tuning demo CD and have listened to it many times. DAC #1 does a very nice job of capturing subtle nuances with the music and the singer’s vocals. It better conveys the subtle emotional and ethereal qualities of the music’s presentation. DAC #2 is a bit too forward. Win for DAC #1
Scoreboard
DAC #1 2.5 points DAC #2 0 points
|
