Sounds like it was a fun get-together. For clarity, can the three other DACs use the Off Ramp? Was that tried?
That wasn't tried.
The Phasure is USB only.
The PD had its own external USB and the Minerva was firewire only.
Thanks
Bill |
Glad to hear Glory likes the Phasure so much, and having heard it on quite a few occasions now it's a great DAC - no question - easily accounting for a number of DAC's like the MSB, PDX and Playback Designs.
But yesterday I was privy to a 4 way comparison:
1. A Killer DAC driven by an Off-Ramp
2. A Phasure
3. A Playback Designs MPD5
4. A Wiess Minerva
My ordering was the Killer, a tie with the Wiess and Phasure, then the PD.
The Killer was harmonically rich and real sounding. The Wiess was surprisingly like the Killer but not quite as harmonically rich, the Phasure was, just like every other time I heard it, extremely clear, clean and pure, but lacking in realism and life to my ears, the PD was far too polite, recessed and relaxed for my taste.
Strangely, the person who held the event to help him decide on his DAC upgrade liked the PD best - precisely for the reason I didn't like it. This is really a funny hobby isn't it.
Thanks
Bill |
Ok - a few clarifications seems to be needed.
The Killer is a hand built DAC made in minuscule quantities to a customers requirements and in fact 'tuned' to their system. The price varies depending on options but mine cost $5.5k.
It's built around the legendary Phillips Double Crown chips, but the single crowns are also used if they are deemed better than the double crowns available - mine is a single crown.
Mine accepts I2S only and so can only be used with a I2S source like the Off-Ramp or an I2S Transport. Normally the Off-Ramp clobbers any transport but I have heard a very highly upgraded battery powered transport that sounded better - to my ears anyway - but it was the only one and the difference wasn't enough to entice me away from the Off-Ramp - in fact in some areas like bass extension and detail retrieval it was better anyway - where the transport was better was in harmonic richness and layering.
Everyone wants to compare it to the Lampi. If someone wants to send one over to our group on the Gold Coast feel free, but comparisons I have heard of with the Lampi doesn't want to make me go out and get one - eg in one comparison I read an AMR was considered better, so for me the AMR comparison is a bit more interesting and that will happen at a blind GTG on the 15th March along with the Phasure, Killer, and new PDX.
The Phasure at the GTG I posted about was not set up optimally (it used a Mac Mini with Audirvana and not their preferred XXHighend) as I have been totally blasted for over on Computer Audiophile, as well as using crap speakers, being deaf, and all sorts of other rubbish for simply having the temerity of, horror of horrors, suggesting to everyone's ears in some systems the Phasure may not be the god of all gods.
Amazing. I know some gear engenders a very loyal following, and I have been caught up in that sort of thing before and have learnt to tone it down a bit, but some Phasure guys do seem a bit over the top.
Thanks
Bill |
'Bill, what was asked for was a comparo to a Lampi LEVEL 7. It uses DHTs and is a very different beast to the other Lampis.'
The answer is again the same. I personally find nothing about it enticing enough to fork out my own dosh and get one. If you, or anyone else, wants to send one over - feel free. Or if you, or anyone else, is tight enough with the Lampi people get them to send one for comparison.
Thanks
Bill |
'Several AMR owners converted to Lampis (L4s) in the US, so your information is incomplete. From what I have been TOLD, the L7 could dance with any of the chosen participants. I know there are a few Aussie Lampis floating about.'
That's not what everyone found. But the answer is still the same - have one sent over.
'If that's true, the shootout was worthless. The XXX is an essential part of the Phasure equation.'
It wasnt a shootout - simply a GTG with a guy who wanted to hear some DAC's to help his choice in an upgrade. A person was supposed to bring his optimally set up computer with XXHighend but wasn't able to make it.
A gathering much more along the lines of a shootout will happen on the 15th of March and that will have the Phasure fed optimally.
Again if people don't like the GTG's I write about, for whatever reason, feel free to organize your own and write about it. Then you might get an idea of what it feels like to go to this trouble and have people nit pick it that it didn't include this or that DAC they would like to know about, or some DAC wasn't used optimally.
Thanks
Bill |
'If that's true, the shootout was worthless. The XXX is an essential part of the Phasure equation.'
Can I ask if that's from actually hearing it?
I have heard it both ways, admittedly not side by side, and that would not be my assessment. It has this super clear, clean and pure sound both ways to my ears. I know Peter says he cant even listen to it via Audirvana but I didn't find it like that.
If its simply from what you have read then I have found that is not always the most reliable way to form hard and fast opinions regarding the sound of audio gear.
In due course I will probably be able to hear such a side by side comparison between Audirvana and XXHighend into the Phasure and see what the go is. So far however I wouldn't say it chalk and cheese at all - still one never knows.
Thanks
Bill |
'I take it from your answer that it was felt that the Phasure was "benefiting" from the Preamp. And that without the Preamp the Phasure would be rated lower'
No.
All DAC's benefited from the pre effect.
We would have liked to check all DAC's without the pre, but, since all experienced the effect what I think the most likely outcome would have been they all have maintained their relative position, but simply didn't sound as good.
Of course the Phasure may have been the best, or the Killer was a lot better than the Phasure instead of it being a personal preference, or the order may have been reversed, all sorts of things are possible. There is no way of knowing.
Also there is the issue of personal preference. There is obviously some kind of euphonics going on with the pre. To me its subtle and I couldn't get a grip on it, but some may simply not like it.
Thanks
Bill |
'I know there are a few Aussie Lampis floating about.'
And precisely how does that equate with me being able to get a hold of one easily? Getting a hold of stuff often involves me forking out my own dosh. Even professional reviewers out here like John Darko have to do that. He has posted that's the case but evidently still gets heaps of requests - compare this to this etc etc as if the fact he is a professional reviewer means he has any gear you can think of on hand.
This is the annoying thing I find about peoples suggestions, I should do this, compare this, bla bla bla - exactly why they think I, or others who also post about comparisons, have access to all this gear is beyond me.
The reason they are posting it is probably they aren't able to do it, so want someone else to. That's fine - but assuming others are able to is the bit that has me scratching my head.
Over on Computer Audiophile they also have a Phasure discussion. A person went to a lot of trouble to post a comparison - but what was one persons comment:
'do a blinded shootout of the Exasound, Phasure, MA-1 (and possibly Lampizator?). That would be interesting'
Amazing.
Even more amazing is the requests for blind tests. They have probably read that blind tests show all gear sounds the same etc etc and want to see tests done blind. My answer is no one should ever ask someone to do a blind test until they have done one and posted about it - that way they will appreciate how hard they are to do. That's the reason there is a dearth of them - not that people are scared etc etc. They are simply so damn hard to do properly.
Thanks
Bill |
Hi Guys
Was at a comparison yesterday between:
1. The Phasure
2. The Killer
3. Playback Designs MPD 5
It was with Adam Tensor active speakers fed by an Audio Research Reference 5 SE pre.
Different outcome than I expected. It should have been the AR pre triumphant comparison.
It was amazing. All the DAC's sounded great through this pre. People have been telling me about it for ages - the soundstage widens and envelops you - voices just sound great. But its not dripping in honey etc - its undoubtedly some kind of valve euphonics, but what its doing is subtle - the effects aren't - but what it's doing to achieve it aren't clear to me - not clear at all. I am going to have to eat crow - I originally thought it was just hype about this pre - it isn't. Still at nearly $20k here in Aus I wont be getting one any time soon - but its good to know you are actually getting something special for that type of dosh.
Anyway I liked all DAC's in this system, but my ordering (worst to best) was the Playback Designs, then Phasure, then Killer - but I would have to say I could see that my liking the Killer over the Phasure was purely the harmonic richness - it didn't sound uninteresting at all - it's just I found the Killer a bit more interesting. But in compensation it had greater detail - which is better - can't say - I liked the richer sound - but that's just me. The PD still sounded too polite for my tastes, but one guy thought that was because it presented stuff in proper perspective - other DACs may have been emphasizing things.
Just to see what the pre was doing we fed the Killer directly into the active speakers. Its the most harmonically rich of all the DAC's and it was thought it was experiencing the lift of the pre the least. It simply dropped away - dull and uninteresting in comparison.
I guess a lesson here is, if you have a top notch tube pre, then if your DAC is tube or not isn't that important.
Thanks
Bill |
'Did you try the Phasure direct to Amp also and if so what were the impressions?'
We ran out of time.
But there is zero doubt it was experiencing' the pre-amp effect and would have dropped away. Exactly how much - don't know.
Thanks
Bill |
