2. digital
  3. 1126769860

Reference DACS: An overall perspective

There has been many threads the last few months regarding the sonic signature of some of the highest regarded reference DACS (Dcs,Meitner,Ensemble,Audio Note,Zanden,Reimyo,Accustic Arts) here on the GON. I have been very fortunate to audtion many of these wonderful pieces in my home or friend's systems. I wanted to share, in a systematic way, my impressions/opinions with you GON members for a two reasons: 1)That my experiences might be helpful to fellow members interested in audtioning these DACS. 2)Starting an interesting discussion regarding the different "sonic flavors" of these reference digital front ends. I totally agree with the statement, "if you have not heard it you don't have an opinion". Therefore, I have no comments regarding DACS from Weiss,Goldmund,Audio Aero and Burmester because I have never had the pleasure of audtioning them. I would love to hear from members who have and share their experiences with us. My overall impression is that these DACS(Dcs,Meitner,Ensemble,Audio Note,Zanden,Reimyo,Accustic Arts) can be grouped into two molar categories regarding their overall sonic signature. By the way, all of them can throw a large/deep soundstage with excellent layering in the acoustic space with "air" around individual players on that stage. However, than they start to part company into two major categories. Category #1) These DACS "flavors" revolve around pristine clarity, fine sharp details,speed,very extended top/bottom frequencies,and great PRAT. These DACS never sound "etched" or "in your face" but are more "upfront" then "layed back" in their presentation. The DACS, to my ear's, that go into this bracket are Dcs,Ensemble,Meitner. My personnal favorite in this group is the Ensemble, which I owned for two years. These DACS remind me of the sonic signature of speakers such as Wilson,Thiel,Dynaudio, Focal/JM Labs. Category #2) These DACS "flavors" revolve around a "musical/organic" sense, natural timbres,and an easy flowing liquidity. Their "less forward" presentation my give the impression of less detail, but I think in this case its an illusion fostered by their more relaxed/organic manner. The DACS, to my ear's, that go into this bracket are Audio Note,Zanden,Reimyo,Accustic Arts. I did find that the tube DACS did not have the top/bottom frequency extenstion and PRAT of the SS DACS in this bracket. For me, the Accustic Arts DAC1-MK3 gave me the best of both categories, therefore it is now the resident DAC in my system. These DACS remind me of the sonic signature of speakers such as Magnepan,Von Schweikert,Sonus Faber. Well, it's all just my opinion regarding these digital pieces, but I hope this post was at least informative/somewhat interesting and would lend itself to other GON members sharing their impressions, not about what DAC is the "BEST" in the world, but your personnal taste and synergy with your system.
teajay

Showing 7 responses by fcrowder

fcrowder
191 posts
 
Over the weekend, our local audio group compared the following: Audiomat Reference DAC/CEC Transport ($9k/$2k), the Esoteric UX-01, the Exemplar modified Denon 3910, the Ayre 5 (?) and the Bel Canto Reference Player ($7500). (Prices are quoted strictly for identification purposes when I was unsure of the model.) The results were clearly along the lines suggested in this thread with the Audiomat, Bel Canto and Denon falling into the more liquid/emotional camp and the Esoteric and Ayre falling into the hyper detailed camp. All were sited on a Finite Element Pagode Reference stand and on Cerabases. A number of different power cords were tried. some units preferring one over the other. All units benefitted from the Cerabases, some more so than others. Of the hyper detailed group the Esoteric was significantly better than the Ayre which in comparison was bright, forward, grainy and generally hard to listen to for long periods. The Esoteric seemed much more natural tonally with excellent imaging and detail but was the slightest bit bright. Of the second group, the Denon was the clear winner offering substantial detail while retaining musicality. In comparison to the Esoteric the Denon was not quite as extended at the frequency extremes sounding just the slightest bit dark. The Bel canto was also good but not as neutral as the Denon. Given my particular priorities, I would probably choose the Denon over the Esoteric as it is an unit that you can listen to for extended periods without getting fatigued. I would like to hear the Esoteric with a Shunyada Anaconda power cord which is supposedly an idael match.
fcrowder
191 posts
 
If you get the opportunity, audition the Einstein preamp from Germany. It incorporates a number of innovations and is to my ear by far the best preamp which I have heard in my system. Based on my experience, I have sold my Blowtorch and ordered the Einstein.
fcrowder
191 posts
 
As I said above, the effect is subtle, at least ubtil you remove it from the chain. For me the difference is audible and with the X0-1 LE seems to move the unit a step closer to analogue without sacrificing any of the unit's strengths. Whether or not the improvement is worth the very high asking price is another question. I have not made the decision yet whether to buy the unit but am leaning in that direction. YMMV.
fcrowder
191 posts
 
Last night I was able to audition the G(0) clock with an X0-1 Limited Edition. Hard to put into words what the clock does. The effect is clearly audible but does not jump out at you. It is initially subtle but the longer that you listen, the harder it is to disconnect the clock. If anything it makes the unit more musically natural. The transparency does not increase noticeably, it stages a little better but mostly it becomes easier to listen for extended periods, for want of a better description, more analogue. I can only imagine that with a separate transport/DAC, the effects might be even more pronounced. Has anyone compared the G(0) with Esoteric's less expensive clocks?
fcrowder
191 posts
 
I suspect that this will be somewhat off point but I had the opportunity to listen to an Esoteric P-01 in a system with which I am very familiar, Martin Logan Summits and subs, Parasound JC1's, Tact 2.2x, Levinsin ML 30.1 transport, good quality cabling and power cords. This system had never really been one that I would have wanted to own. It did some things well but was tonally a bit thin with a touch of brightness, lack of image density, little depth and an image that had a tendency to wander. I blamed the Tact room correction, but really had no basis for that assumption. The owner substituted the Esoteric P-01 about two weeks ago. Initially the sound was unremarkable and a bit bright. By last Sunday the system had undergone a major transformation with all the weaknesses corrected, phenomenal bass, rock solid images, layered depth, wall to wall soundstage, excellent dynamics, lower noise floor, greater ability to hear into the music, greater transparency, and correct tonality. We listened primarily to Schubert symphonies. I was speechless. I just wanted to listen to the music not disect it. I am not sure what the moral of this story is, but I do know that I was very much impressed that the change out of the transport could make this kind of difference. I have not heard the P-03 so have no thoughts on how it compares, but I find myself trying to figure out how to afford the P-01/D-01/G0 combination and this is from someone who already owns a Rockport TT. Go figure.
fcrowder
191 posts
 
I have a X-01 D2 on order and am hoping to have it in late December.
fcrowder
191 posts
 
I had a chance to hear a comparison of the new Esoteric K-01, an EMM Labs XDS1 and an Esoteric P03/D03/G0 over the weekend at a dealer's home. The K01 had been played about 360 hours, so still had a ways to go with respect to break in. I would note that the availability of a large number of filter choices is both a curse and a boon. I was somewhat unsure what value some of the choices offerred such as the native 44.1 Redbook which was clearly inferior to other combinations. While I would caution that comparing three different CD playing devices over a three hour period is not ideal and that I hope to do further listening as the K01 has more hours on it, my initial impression is that the K01 is quite good on Redbook, better in some ways than either the otyher Esoteric gear or the EMM Labs; however, the EMM Labs is at this point clearly superior on SACD, but not night and day. The K01 seems to retain much of the best from earlier Esoteric players, low noise, low distortion, great detail and excellent dynamics but to have a richer tonal palette. Again, these are just first thoughts, but I highly suggest auditioning a fully broken in K01. Note that straight from the box, its sound is less than optimal. IT ALSO NEEDS TO NE WARMED UP AND IS SENSITIVE TO POWER CORDS.
More to discover