I am in the middle of comparing the sound of six different DACs in my system. I own them all (I know weird) but one of them is still within a trial/return timeframe.
Not to share specific comparisons today, but a couple of observations so far are that first, they all definitely sound different from each other. On one hand, they all sound pretty good and play what is fed to them without significant flaws but on the other hand there are definite sonic differences that make it easy to understand how a person might like the sound of some of them while not liking others.
Second, raises the observation that most of them must be doing something to shape the sound in the manner the designer intended since one of the DACs, a Benchmark DAC3 HGA, was described by John Atkinson of Stereophile as providing "state-of-the-art measured performance." In the review, JA closed the measurements section by writing, "All I can say is "Wow!" I have also owned the Tambaqui (not in my current comparison), which also measured well ("The Mola Mola Tambaqui offers state-of-the-digital-art measured performance." - JA). The Benchmark reminds me sonically of the Tambaqui, both of which are excellent sounding DACs.
My point is that if the Benchmark is providing "state-of-the-art measured performance," then one could reasonably presume that the other five DACs, which sound different from the Benchmark, do not share similar ’state-of-the-art" measurements and are doing something to subtly or not so subtly alter the sound. Whether a person likes what they hear is a different issue.
A few words about the Benchmark DAC3 HGC. The Benchmark is like an elusive concept for me. How can a DAC that provides "state-of-the-art measured performance" not sound perfect and, why doesn’t it sound like every other DAC that provides "state-of-the-art measured performance"?
"As with its predecessor, the DAC2 HGC, which Erick Lichte reviewed for Stereophile in February 2014, Benchmark’s DAC3 HGC offers state-of-the-art measured performance. All I can say is "Wow!""—John Atkinson
I am currently playing Benjamin’s Mystique Y AM in my system and I have been comparing it to my Mystique X SE NCZ. For personal calibration purposes I pulled the Benchmark out the other day, let it warm up, and then listened. I was amazed at how comparatively flat and sort-of lifeless it sounded. Sure, it played music, the bass was low, the highs were all there, it didn’t distort the sound, and it wasn’t noisy. However, sort of like fabric on a chair after too much time in a sunny spot, it simply didn’t "pop". Compared to Mojo Audio’s DACs, the Benchmark wasn’t as much fun because it didn’t express the same sense of body, fullness, depth, and tonal color. Does this mean the Mojo Audio DACs are distorting the truth to the benefit of listening enjoyment? Benjamin would probably say not, but, maybe. Hey, so what, they sound better!
The other thought I had was about the Tambaqui, which is another DAC that supposedly provides "state-of-the-art measured performance".
"The Mola Mola Tambaqui offers state-of-the-digital-art measured performance. I am not surprised HR liked its sound."—John Atkinson
Why then, is my recollection of the Tambaqui’s sound so different than what I hear from the Benchmark, when they both provide "state-of-the-art measured performance"? I remember a greater level of purity, refinement, and musical involvement from the Tambaqui than I hear from the Benchmark. At the time I owned it, I felt the Tambaqui was arguably "perfect sounding." I wouldn’t say that about the Benchmark, which doesn’t really do anything wrong, but just isn’t that exciting or fulfilling for me. Ultimately, I sold the Tambaqui when I decided that its version of "perfect sounding" wasn’t really doing it for me - you know, the old Jack Nicholson thing about handling the truth. I like the extra meat on the bones, tonal color, and physicality of the Mojo Audio DACs. I typically tell folks "buy what you like", and so I did.
The state of the art measuring DACs are great if you have a balanced room and a balanced system...most of us don't have that.
Less precise DACs give us a softer sound...rounder edges...they are more forgiving and can add meat to the bone. Similar to but much more subtle to what a First Watt amp does...these DACs are art and can add beauty to a recording.
I have always considered a "perfect measuring" DAC like the Benchmark as something a mastering engineer would use. Providing a baseline of clarity and evenness so the engineer can add the "flavors".
In some regards, I would think an audiophile would want similar in their own system. The owner THEN can add their "own" flavor thru tone controls, warm/bright components, etc.
However, most audiophiles have an existing system and need a digital source that fits in with their existing system where a "perfect measuring" Dac may overcompensate for some sound characteristics (warm/bright/lean, etc)
Plus, with all that, we have the listener's room and their own personal Hearing abilities. The same with all of the reviewers out in youtube, internet or audio publication land. If we saw professional hearing test readouts with every reviewer, we may look at their opinions quite differently.
I am working on a write-up to post here but been a bit busy lately with regular life stuff. I will try to finish and post something this weekend. As a preview, no real surprises. Benjamin has been a straight shooter about both how good it sounds and the comparative differences between the Y and the X SE.
@mitch2Hey Mitch how does the new DAC sound? I know it is suppose to be a tad more lively. Does the Mystique Y still beat the other DAC's you spoke about in the thread?
I did want to mention a few things about our Mystique Y.
First of all, Mitch has the middle-priced Mystique Y AM with amorphous core chokes. If he had our Mystique Y NC with nano crystal core chokes the sound quality would have been even closer to his Mystique X NC Z.
The reason is that aside from the single USB input and the AD1865 vs AD1862 DAC chips, the two DACs are nearly identical: identical USB input...identical power supplies...identical direct-coupled class A output stage...identical component parts quality...nearly identical chassis.
MSRP on the Mystique Y AM that Mitch has is $5,499 whereas retail on the Mystique X NC Z he has was $12,499. So the Mystique Y AM is less than 45% the price. Our entry-level Mystique Y Fe with ferrous core chokes is only $3,999 which would be less than 1/3 the price of Mitch's Mystique X NC Z.
Quite an exceptional value if like most of our customers all you use is the USB input.
@brbrock- Mojo Audio Mystique Y AM ($4,999) is in the house and playing music. I don't know if I will go into the depth in writing about it that I did with the others but, it sounds pretty darn good right out of the gate. I basically transitioned directly from my (twice as expensive +) Mystique X SE NCZ DAC to the Mystique Y using the exact same system set-up, and my initial impression is that I didn't really give up much in the transition.
I have been playing with quite a few different IC and speaker cables here lately and having this DAC will be an interesting test of how I can optimize the sound of the Mystique Y AM DAC by changing a cable or two.
@cdc- I liked the Metrum DACs, and I liked the sound of the Pavane better than the Adagio (I compared them side by side for a while). They use DAC chips that Cees designed and had manufactured. His earlier DACs used industrial chips. The Metrum DACs definitely sound like R2R DACs but they don't share quite the same organic texture as the Mojo Audio DACs, IMO. The Metrum DACs are quite clean sounding for R2R and moving up their line adds body and drive, IME. I still have their Jade serving as DAC and VC in my outdoor system. You should try and hear one.
@brbrock- As far as I know I am still supposed to be getting a Mystique Y. I thought it would be here by now so I should check in with Benjamin to find out what's up.
@mitch2First let me thank you for taking the time to put this out there.
After living with R-2R DACs from Metrum Acoustics and Mojo Audio over the past 5 years,
I was considering the Metrum. Can you describe as you move up to these more expensive DAC’s, what they offer over the cheaper NOS stuff? Nos still sounds like NOS but better in some way? Or is it more just a change in sound quality but not an improvement in absolute terms over the Metrum?
Would like to hear your review of the HOLO if you ever get one.
You have done an Outstanding job with this Dac thread and So many have benefited from your Dac comparison. Wishing you a Happy and prosperous New Year!
@wig- I agree, the Merason DAC1 MkII was a hard one to give up. I would have liked to keep it but just had too many DACs here. The Mojo EVO Pro was also hard to give up and the buyer received a very nice DAC with the Z-chips. Benjamin checked it out and adjusted it as-needed to as-new tolerances and then shipped it directly to the buyer.
I remain happy with the Mojo X SE NCZ in my main system and the SMc DAC-2 GT-24 in a back-up role when I want to hear a Delta Sigma type DAC. Since I am done comparing different DACs, I have removed the Singxer SU-6 from the signal chain and now directly feed the X SE by USB directly through the USB output of my Sig Rendu SE Deluxe. I recently compared the S/PDIF outputs of the DDC and the Sonore ultraDigital converter. The sonic performance from using all of these input methods into the X SE is close, but if I had to rate them I would probably put the direct streamer to DAC USB connection at the top, followed by S/PDIF out of the Sonore ultraDigital converter, and then S/PDIF from the DDC. However, I would not bet on being able to reliably discern a difference if I were listening blind. I also have a clocked USB filter coming here in the next week or so that I will try.
Next up, Benjamin is supposed to send me a Mystique Y to hear but otherwise I am done with DACs for now unless I find something interesting. It seems the next significant upgrade/change from Mojo Audio will probably be in 2026, with a Mystique Z DAC based on the BB PCM58 chips.
@wigI finally got to spend some time with the Merason MkII DAC, and have to say that it is, as @mitch2 reports, a real winner. While I didn’t do a side-by-side with my Mojo Mystique X ’24, and the associated gear in our shop (Alma Music + Audio in Sterling, VA) was a good bit higher end than what I’ve got at home -- we’re running it through Stenheim’s excellent Alumine 5 speakers and a Vitus Audio Signature Series Integrated -- the delivery, depth, texture, speed, and detail were all just insanely good.
I believe what you have on your hands is a real keeper. I’m still delighted with my Mojo purchase, and it’s sounding better and better as it continues to burn in (140+ hours now and counting), but I think you’re just fine with what you’ve got. Both of these manufacturers are to be commended for designing & building truly superlative products at a premium, but still reasonably affordable, price.
@dantaudio - Thanks for the kind words, and welcome back to audio.
If you are looking for information, there is a lot of knowledge here on this site and you can get meaningful responses from the members on just about any topic. The forum archives are also extensive and cover just about any audio topic. Since you have just "returned to audio after a significant break", you might enjoy spending some time looking at the virtual systems since many members have constructed unique listening spaces and very effective audio reproduction systems at a wide range of price points.
This is my first post on Audiogon. Been lurking for a while as I have returned to audio after a significant break (career, kid, family, other priority hobbies/sports, etc). I just wanted to say THANK YOU! for all your efforts on this review. It is greatly appreciated and impressive to say the least. Fantastic to be able to get a POV across so many products and the few that I have heard align with your assessment so it is a valuable reference point for me. Thank you so much!
Got around to listing the EVO Pro and Merason DACs since I have too much stuff here.
Since I am no longer (currently) comparing multiple DACs, I bypassed the Singxer SU-6 DDC and instead directly connected the USB output of my Signature Rendu SE Deluxe Optical to the Mystique X SE NCZ using a Network Acoustics muon USB cable. My initial impression is that this is an improvement over using the DAC’s S/PDIF or AES/EBU inputs through the Singxer DDC. I may be imagining things, but there seems to be an improved purity that sounds right. Listening now and Jerry Garcia’s guitar is so smooth and nuanced on Dark Star.
I am apparently in the queue to receive a Mystique Y AM DAC that I will listen to and comment on in this thread. Price-wise, that will be in the ballpark of the LTA Aero and sort of the Benchmark DAC3 HGC. There are rumors of another DAC heading this way too so may need to relabel this thread as the Six+ DAC Comparison
I wouldn’t mind adding a Holo May KTE and/or Denafrips Terminator 15TH to the list, but I don't plan to buy these just to add them. The one that I would most like to add is a Totaldac.
@mitch2Thanks so much for the DM. As expected, your advice/perspective was 100% on the money. Will post once I make the next move (if there is a next move)
@mitch2Although I am very pleased with my new Mojo Mystique X-24AM (which is a product that I was completely unaware of until you did this fantastic writeup of the 6-dac comparison) I’ll look forward to reading your write-ups on the upcoming dac’s.
I’m not one to hop from one piece of gear to the next. I do my research, audition, and then select the piece that gives me the emotional connection to the music. When I get it right, I tend to keep that piece for decades. The X-24AM will be that piece for me.
However, I still enjoy reading about what else is out there and hearing the passion that people have in their gear and the music that touches their souls.
@wig- Thank you for the feedback. It has been satisfying to hear that several folks have used the information from this thread to successfully help with their DAC purchasing decisions. I really enjoyed my time with the Merason DAC1 MkII and I am not surprised to hear that it is an end-game DAC for some.
I just found out that I may be getting the opportunity to try out a couple of additional DACs, which I will report on. I can’t say much yet except that one will be at the $10K +/- price point and the other at the sub-$4k price point.
Thanks again for the time taken to accomplish such a comprehensive Dac comparison! I am also relieved that my Merason Dac MKII overall sound signature is similar to the excellent Mojo Audio Dac 😁
By the way, being a curious person I decided to purchase Okto Dac some years ago, believe it held record at ASR for SNR at the time, one of the lowest jitter as well. And I owned Musetec 005 at the same time, relative poor measuring dac over there, Okto goes, Musetec stays, so much for ASR dac evaluations credibility, bye bye ASR.
I've seen Golden Sound's measurements, also ASR, another instance of measurements not telling you the true story. According to ASR $1k dacs are right up there with state of art, and dacs don't benefit from ddc. Sound quality is the final arbiter for my audio purchases and the equipment that comes and goes.
"Gaia superior to Singxer in usb isolation on input and implementation of OXCO clock on I2S. Singxer SU6 as good as it is, simply doesn't play in same universe, build quality, design, parts quality in Gaia all far superior. Meaningful improvement in sound quality reflects this superiority,"
I never owned the Gaia, but I did own the Hermes and had problems with it requiring me to send it back to Denafrips, although that may have been a fluke. I do see the potential advantage of the Gaia DDC when using Denafrips' Terminator DAC since it offers the ability for clock syncing.
I am not here to argue about sound quality between DDCs, and I am not promoting the Singxer SU-6 so I don't really have a dog in the fight, but I can say that inserting the Singxer did nothing to degrade the sound of my system and that it has worked reliably the entire time I have used it. Here are links to review measurements of both the Singxer SU-6 and the Denafrips Gaia by the same reviewer. The SU-6 was reviewed a couple of months prior to the Gaia and below are some conclusions by the reviewer,
"Overall, the Gaia is an excellently performing DDC.
It falls ever so slightly behind some other choices like the DI20HE and SU6 in performance, but the added features, and matching aesthetics with Denafrips dacs may be more important to many."
and,
"Those wanting the absolute best performance should still look to the Singxer SU6, but for the added flexibility of non-USB inputs, 768khz support, dual AES output, and a matching aesthetic for Denafrips DACs, the Gaia is a great choice."
@brbrockFor what it’s worth, some of DACs I owned, PS Audio Direcstream, Denafrips Terminator, Mytek Brooklyn, Mivera Purestream, Matrix Audio Element X (excellent measuring DAC), 4 Lampizator models (Amber 3, Baltic 3, Baltic 4, Atlantic TRP), Aqua La Scala, Musetec 005 and now the X SE.
My plan going forward is to upgrade the X SE to NC and then also get the 006 (I am very much fascinated by the choice of parts and design).
@debjit_g You mentioned the Musetec and Mojo DAC's are different. Can you explain how they are different. Can you mention some of the DAC's you have had in the past?
@brbrockas I was mentioning earlier I can’t justify a real comparison between the two as I did a bunch of mods to my amps/pre, music server, etc right after I received the X SE. They were already in the pipeline, so I couldn’t avoid it. As with burn-in/break-in, it’s a roller coaster ride, especially when it involves Furutech NCF components. I will get to a meaningful comparison when my system settles in but these two DACs have different flavor - I will not say more but at a high level, Mojo is more of denser, Musetec is more airy. However, take these with a grain of salt and my opinion might changes later.
@debjit_g You mentioned the Musetec and Mojo DAC's are different. Can you explain how they are different. Can you mention some of the DAC's you have had in the past?
@mitch2I previously owned Singxer SU6, this with Musetec 005, preferred usb over my OpticalRendu vs I2S with the Singxer. Now have Denafrips Gaia with Tubulus Ximius .5M cable, prefer I2S vs usb for both Laiv Harmony and Musetec 006. This with a much improved usb board in 006 vs the Amamero in 005, Harmony usb nothing special.
Gaia superior to Singxer in usb isolation on input and implementation of OXCO clock on I2S. Singxer SU6 as good as it is, simply doesn't play in same universe, build quality, design, parts quality in Gaia all far superior. Meaningful improvement in sound quality reflects this superiority, and the Tubulus cable I'm using provides another substantial and meaningful improvement. A lesser optimization of I2S than this may change equation of which interface superior.
@no_regretsagreed on all fronts :-) I am very familiar with chokes and how the quality matters or not. I have employed them in several diy power supplies powering digital things like servers, switches, JCAT USB card, Clocks etc - started with off the self Hammond, then moved to custom order Mundrof and then again to another custom order from the boutique manufacturer in EU and every time it has added more to the music. In almost all cases, a better chokes helps, weather the resulting flavor is to your taste is a different matter. As a proponent of better chokes, I am mostly sure that at some point, I would like to try the NC version (assuming Benjamin can ship me a pair).
@brbrockyes, that's correct. I have been using the 005 for sometime now and as many here, I have gone through a fair share of DACs along the way but 005 has stayed the longest. When time comes, I will try to write sometime up though I am not an expert in the ways other writes here but right now my system had several mods which takes a while to settle down. What I can tell you right now is both are very good dacs in their own ways.
Yes, you are correct. The X-SE is identical to the X-24AM.
I wouldn't go so far as to say that the NC chokes are a better quality choke. They are simply made with different materials and cost more. Due to the different materials being used, they offer a different sonic flavor. Which one is better between the AM and the NC will depend on the rest of one's system/room acoustics, etc.
Mitch is also correct. The last time that I had spoken with Benjamin regarding the Z-Chips... he was out of stock, so "upgrading" your existing dac is not an option.
It seems that there may be a lot of Mystery behind the "Z-chips" I believe that both chips are basically the same chip, but that the "Z-chip" might have tighter tolerances. Whether those tighter tolerances of the Z-Chip alone can be heard in a reliable and consistently blind test method - I have no idea.
I think hearing a sonic difference between the AM and NC chokes would be much more easily heard. Whether those sonic differences are a plus or a minus would depend on the rest of your system - the whole system synergy idea.
I agree with Mitch that the X-SE; X- 24AM (both of which are the same), and the X-NCZ would all be excellent dacs. It's just a matter of getting the correct flavor of sound to gel with your system/room.
NCZ refers to the Lundahl nano-crystalline chokes (NC) and AD-1862N-Z DAC chips, which were a special version of the AD-1862 chip used in higher end Denon CD players. I don’t believe the Z chips are available any longer. The NC chokes sound nice but IMO so did the amorphous (AM) chokes. The X-24 AM should be a very nice sounding DAC.
@debjit_gIf I understood your post you have a Musetec005 and a Mojo Audio X SE. If so I am excited to hear what you have to say about the comparison of those DAC's.
@no_regretsgood to hear you are loving the X-24AM. If I am not mistaken, X-24AM and X SE are exactly the same DAC ? I agree with you that NCZ, though have a better quality choke, need not sound better in one's system. It's a matter of finding the right balance that suits one's taste I guess. However, I am not sure at this time if I would buy a new NCZ or have the X SE upgraded if that's possible. I would get in touch with Ben at some point to see if he could ship me a pair of NCZ chokes for me to upgrade if that's simple enough.
I just recently bought the Mystique X-24AM and am absolutely loving how it sounds in my system. I can't imagine it sounding any better... different with the NCZ yes, but better - I have no idea.
I'd be interested in your thoughts on how they differ in sound, if you ever have the opportunity to compare them side by side.
@mitch2yes, Lampizator switched from Amanero to JLSounds a while back. I have owned couple of Lampi models pre (Amanero) and post move to JLSounds and the JL indeed sounded cleaner and more natural as far as I remember. However, I have Musetec 005 which uses Amanero and like how musical the DAC sounds through the USB. Admittedly, we don't know how the Musetec will sound with JLSounds but how a DAC will sound through USB is not only based USB board it uses but the whole package - power supply, clocks, analog stage, the chip or R2R, etc. I have a X SE in house now and I am not ready yet to compare with others (as I have a bunch of other diy stuff burning in my system) but I like what I am hearing :-) At some point I have to wonder how the NCZ version will sound once things settle down.
FYI, Aries Cerat, LampizatOr, and some other pretty good DACs use a JL Sounds USB interface, so the Mojo Audio DACs are in good company.
In the process of trying different DACs, I found the Singxer SU-6 DDC helpful in allowing me to use multiple types of inputs into the different DACs I tried. Now that I have zeroed in on one DAC for my main system, I will compare the USB out of my Signature Rendu SE Deluxe Optical streamer directly into the USB input of the Mystique X SE NCZ with using the AES/EBU and S/PDIF inputs into the X SE NCZ coming out of the Singxer DDC. Should be interesting.
Agree with debjit_g, implementation is key. No doubt some optimized usb can be superior to less than optimized I2S. I've tried a wide variety of usb optimizations over the years, some better than others, same with dac implementation of usb. I'd suggest people look at the sophistication of usb implementation in my latest dac, Musetec MH-DA006, this not some cheapo chifi usb implementation, prior Musetec 005 used lesser Amamero implementation, Italians, 006 improves on this.
It is true external I2S clocking is not theoretical best, clock is best closest to I2S pathway within dac. Still, external clock superiority could be such that downsides of clock distance are overcome. In any case max I2S cable length should be .5M, less would be better. I agree implementation of any clocking scheme is important, therefore, not all OXCO clocks or any clocks are equal. If going I2S route one should investigate quality of clock in dac vs clock in ddc or streamer.
By the way, there are some streamer manufacturers coming out with I2S outputs.
As to what output/input scheme is superior, I'll maintain I2S has some inherent advantages. Therefore, how can it be an advantage for the dac to have to extract data from clock, the same with conversion from usb or whatever to I2S native path.
Bottom line, all is conjecture until one has actually implemented these optimized streaming chains into their system. My present I2S setup was a great improvement over my optimized over many years usb setup, this with three dacs, many others report the same. A prior less than optimal I2S setup I had many years ago was NOT an improvement over usb.
There are a small group of Chi-Fi manufactures who started promoting I2S and the audio-fools bought into it hook-line-and-sinker.
I don’t completely agree with this. I2S is not a Chi-Fi branding but I would agree that most of Chi-Fi DACs supports them today. PS Audio was a very early adopter of I2S (and they had two of them) and having owned their DS DAC when it was first released, their I2S input did sound a bit better than the USB. Admittedly, my USB source was not as sophisticated back then as it is today. IMO, I2S vs USB is a game of a combination of how good or bad your USB source in conjunction with the DAC’s usb implementation.
If I2S was actually better they would be using it in recording studios and they most certainly do not [...] a small group of Chi-Fi manufactures started promoting I2S and the audio-fools bought into it hook-line-and-sinker.
@fuzzbutt17Thank you for the detailed USB and I2S explanation. Very helpful in that there is quite a bit of chatter using a DDC to covert USB to I2S, coax, AES… I never understood or had the need and have used USB on all my DAC’s. I am currently really enjoying your Mojo Mystique EVO B4B 21 happily using USB. Keep the Mojo rolling!
I hadn't read this thread in a while so I'm playing catch up a bit.
I've been seeing things about USB input issue, I2S, and clocking, that I thought I should address.
First of all, we've never had any problems with customers connecting to our JL Sounds USB input module who were using any form of Windows, Apple OS X, or Linux.
The Rose 150B streamer uses an odd-ball Android OS which is the problem.
Most of the modern streamer manufactures us Linux which we find to not only be 100% compatible without any need to download a driver, but we also find to be the best sounding. There's a reason why nearly all the major streamer manufacturers have switched to Linux in recent years.
As for clocking, to say that OCXO is better than femto clocking is like saying that all-wheel-drive is better than front-wheel-drive or rear-wheel-drive. The applications of each can vary considerably and each has its advantages and disadvantages in certain situations. Do they use all-wheel-drive in NASCAR, F1, or Drag Racing?
We've compared every popular and many less well-known USB input modules on the market and have consistently found the JL Sounds modules sounded the best.
And I'm not talking about sounding better by a small factor.
We did blind A/B tests of several different brands of USB input modules. We build a DAC that we could plug in and out different USB input modules like you could roll tubes. We did extensive listening tests with a number of local audiophiles playing through their own systems. The results were quite consistent: 100% of them picked the JL Sounds module as #1 and the M2-Tech module as #2. All commented on how close those two sounded to each other. There were a number of different responses as to which was #3, #4, and #5, but 100% of the people who made the comparison selected the same as two USB input modules as #1 and #2.
One of the most unexpected things we experienced and heard comments about was how blown away these audiophiles were as to how much of a difference in sound quality the USB input module actually made. One person even commented that if he didn't know better he would have thought that we had switched speakers.
So clocking is certainly important, but it is one of many factors to consider.
As for I2S...
I'm sorry to burst some of your bubbles, but I2S is one of the stupidest things to come to digital audio in as long as I can remember.
First of all, the technical specification for I2S is "less than 4" from the DAC chip" which means it was engineered as a protocol to only be used inside of a DAC.
All component-to-component digital music transmission protocols are data embedded with clocking: USB...S/PDIF...AES...optical...Ethernet...all of them.
The flawed logic the promoters of I2S give is "the clocking gets corrupted" which is why in I2S they have three channels: data with embedded clocking, bit clock, and word clock.
OK...see if this makes any sense to you: if clocking gets corrupted with a single channel traveling on one wire then how would it make any sense to attempt to coordinate three separate clocks on three separate wires?
It makes no sense.
If I2S was actually better they would be using it in recording studios and they most certainly do not.
If I2S was actually better then nearly every company in the audiophile industry would be promoting it and they most certainly do not.
There are a small group of Chi-Fi manufactures who started promoting I2S and the audio-fools bought into it hook-line-and-sinker.
If I2S sounds better in a specific DAC it is only because the other digital inputs on that DAC are lacking, not because I2S is inherently better.
And I've lost count of the number of customers who owned and loved one of those Chi-Fi I2S DACs who upgraded to one of our Mystique DACs and are now back to using the USB input.
I think that says it all.
BTW, I never bought into all that MQA hype either.
After finishing my initial comparison of six DACs without coming to a final conclusion about which of the DACs I enjoyed most, I decided to devote the past month or so to listening more intently and forming a more definitive conclusion.
I struggled with the words to convey my final thoughts because any of my four favorites provided a very enjoyable sonic result in my system. It seems that maybe, after everything else in one’s system is dialed in, the specific DAC is important but not solely critical to achieving a successful result.
Another outcome of my past month of listening was a better understanding how critical it is to dial-in the every aspect of the subject component and the rest of one’s system in a manner that allows the component to perform at its best. Playing with inputs, cables, subwoofer settings, and more helped me determine that I had initially underestimated the performance levels of the Merason and the SMc DAC-2. Also, by more intently listening, I was able to better discern the differences between the two Mojo Audio DACs.
My final thoughts on the four top DACs are discussed below.
IMO, the Mojo Audio Mystique X SE NCZ is the most capable of the DACs in the comparison and my overall favorite of the six DACs. If I were to choose just one DAC for my main system, it would be the X SE NCZ. The X SE line shares the natural organic sound signature of Mojo Audio’s previous DACs, including the EVO Pro that I still have here, and also displays a level of resolution that extends beyond Mojo Audio’s previous DACs. This is most noticeable in the bass, which is deep, powerful, and defined, with subterranean impact that exceeds what I hear from most other DACs. Continuing through the midrange, the additional resolution is noticeable in the dimensionality and staging of musicians and singers, that are well-positioned in space and more dimensional than with the EVO Pro. The treble is sweet and extended.
The Mojo Audio Mystique EVO Pro has been a very enjoyable reference in my system for a couple of years. It is as discussed in my earlier write-up and is every bit as natural and organic sounding as the X SE line. I have no doubt that many would find it an improvement in musicality, compared to other DACs. Compared to the X SE NCZ, the EVO Pro includes still prodigious (yet fuller vs. more defined) bass, and a bit darker and warmer sonic signature. Sound staging seems more homogenous, sort of like you might hear from a live concert, compared to the X SE line, which seems to stage more precisely wrt the placement of musicians and singers. Some may find the presentation of the EVO Pro to be kinder to lesser quality recordings. It also retains the sweet, clear, and never fatiguing high frequencies of the X SE line.
The Merason DAC1 MkII, in comparison to the two Mojo Audio DACs, is more reserved yet a bit more refined in its presentation. Bass is solid and well proportioned but not quite as impactful. This is easily compensated by adjusting subwoofers. The mids are not quite as dimensional as with the Mojo Audio DACs, and the high frequencies are all present but displayed in more of a supporting role. Everything comes out wonderfully crystal clear in a presentation that is truly reminiscent of vinyl without the pops and hiss. I enjoyed all of my listening to whatever types of music I was playing, and I never wished for something more when the Merason was in my system. It is a wonderful DAC to listen to, and IMO offers a bit more refinement but a bit less excitement, when compared to the Mojo Audio DACs.
In revisiting the SMc Audio DAC-2 GTE-24, I found that even though the DAC-2 will usually process 96 kHz signals, sending it that higher sampling rate signal may be responsible the occasionally raggedy high frequencies I heard during my initial listening. By strictly limiting the sampling rate to 48 kHz, as recommended by SMc Audio, I achieved smooth, clear, high frequencies, good resolution, and nothing less than outstanding sound from the DAC-2 GTE-24. It displays a similar rich tonality as the Mojo Audio DACs, with some of the refinement of the Merason, but a level of excitement that is closer to the Mojo Audio DACs. Bass is solid but, like the Merason, is more proportional than with the Mojo Audio DACs, and can be fully compensated to the desired level of impact by adjusting my dual subs.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
