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 5 responses by germanboxers

Branimir, why do you suppose there is a significant difference between the UX-3 and X-03? You rated the X-03 at 65-70% and the UX-3 at 60% of the P-01/D-01/G-0s combo.

They appear to be completely identical (parts and execution) through the digital and analog sections with the exception that the UX-3 offers video and DVD-A capabilities. I believe the UX-3 also shuts down all video circuitry when playing non-video discs. Do you have an opinion why they sound different? Thanks,

Jordan
Banimir, thank you for the info and also the link...it was a good read, though extraordinarly long-winded. The jitter specs mentioned regarding the XO-3 and UX-3 may contribute to the perceived sense of the XO-3 being slightly better? I wish he would have explained why the UX-3 had higher jitter...I wonder how the video electronics could contribute to higher jitter, everything else the same? Nevertheless, it's still good info.

I did enjoy the addition of Jeff Kalt's thoughts on "upsampling" vs. "oversampling" and his preference for synchronous over/upsampling vs. asynchronous. Thanks for the link!!

Jordan
Branimir, thank you for sharing your experiences...this has been very helpful!!! You are certainly the Esoteric man!! What is the cost of the G25?

Guidocorona, I was speaking of the UX-3 versus XO-3 comparison. These two units use the same transport and it appears identical digital and analog sections. The only difference is the video on the UX-3. The XO-1 uses 4 BB PCM1704 DACS/channel versus 2 BB PCM1704 DACS/channel in the UX-1, UX-3, and XO-3. I'm pretty sure I'm right on this?
Guidocorona, you are correct, the UX-3 and XO-3 have a "lesser brother" transport of the UX-1 and XO-1. That's why I was a little confused with the relative ranking of the UX-3 / XO-3. I have never compared them, but I assumed they would be very similar in sound since the UX-3 and XO-3 are identical in transport, DAC, and (I think?) analog output stage, the only difference being that the UX-3 has 6 video DACs for DVD and supports DVD-A.

The UX-1 / XO1 comparison is more interesting because both use the top shelf VRDS transport, but the UX-1 uses only 2 BB PCM1704 DACS / channel (same as UX-3 and XO-3) and the XO-1 uses 4 BB PCM7104 DACS / channel. I think the XO-1 Ltd also uses better internal wiring and has a few other upgrades, but I think fundamentally (transport, DAC configuration, Analog design) are the same. I'm not sure of this though?
Branimir, I eagerly await your conclusions on the G-25U/UX-3 combo. Let's see if Mr. Ebaen's assumption that a 10 to 1 ppm clock precision improvement is significant to quality of sound or if it is, at best, very subtle like Mr. Ebaen concluded with the 3 to 1ppm clock precision improvement in XO-3?

This really has been a wonderful thread...great content, minimal to no chest thumping, and great attitude and spirit toward understanding the differences in current digital SOTA. Thanks to Teajay for starting the thread and to Branimir, Teajay, and many others for keeping it going with high quality content!!

Jordan