@stuartk FYI, I'm still working with this site to fix my messaging issues. I haven't forgotten about you 
Sorry for the interruption... Now back to your regular programming,
Best wishes,
Don
Six DAC Comparison
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.
331 responses Add your response
What gives, given that you’re a drummer? I dunno! I should clarify that while PRaT doesn’t trump tonality for me, it is crucial to my enjoyment. However, PRaT was never on my radar until I bought my Hegel H390. Reviewers had described how it "pushes the music along" (maybe not in those exact words, but something to that effect). I was intrigued but having never experienced this phenomenon, it remained purely conceptual. . . until I began listening with the Hegel in the system. I noticed I could not listen without drumming along on the arms of the big ol’ Mission rocker that serves as my listening chair. And that hasn’t stopped being the case. I don’t know whether PRaT enhances emotional engagement. It certainly enhances PHYSICAL engagement and I suppose it could be argued that if the body and emotions are simultaneously engaged, it makes for a more "global" sense of engagement. . . IF you are "wired" accordingly. Sounds like you are not, despite your chosen instrument. I guess this goes to show how different we can be and still be equally addicted to music. . . which is pretty cool. A common way to think about music as a universal language is its capacity to cross cultural boundaries. Another way to think about it might be its capacity to engage listeners who prioritize differing aspects. Finally, it strikes me as somewhat ironic that genres that lean very much on the rhythmic aspect, such Rap and Funk, don’t appeal to me. My only explanation is that it’s due to the relative absence of melodic and harmonic content. Yet, I’ve always loved Blues. Classical music, with its abundance of melodic and harmonic content, tends to bore me, due to the fact that its rhythms simply don’t bring my body on board. So, what do I make of these apparent contradictions? I don’t understand them any more than I understand why PRaT doesn’t factor as a high priority for you. I could say I find Jazz very appealing because it marries a strong and complex rhythmic aspect to sophisticated melodic and harmonic content. For me, it’s the best of both worlds. But I wouldn’t be content only listening to Jazz! Perhaps someday, there will be research into what makes any given individual respond more enthusiastically to one genre (or one aspect of sonics) than another. Until then, it appears to be fairly mysterious.
|
I doubt that many folks go for PRaT only. Over my time pursuing the high end I ran into PRaT only systems, and was shockingly moved… but kept going because while they were incredibly emotionally involving… but they had wacko tonal balance and and or the absence of detail. But I also found details and slam are about the easiest thing to get in a system… then tonal balance and imaging. But if you get these without PRaT… you end up with a great sounding system without soul… one that will not emotional involve the listener. If I were to do it over again… I would follow PRaT as an absolute requirement and midrange bloom with good tonal balance and then look for better detail and more slam. I think I would have had more enjoyable systems along the way. But I had to learn and evolve and honestly PRaT was the last parameter I learned to hear / identify. Then it all fell into place. Now I have it all great PRaT, tonal balance, detail, imaging and nuanced bass. I am sure I would have got here one way or another… I guess I am just happy I did.
One of my friends that I helped assemble a great system over the last few years sent me a message last week. It said that he is not an outwardly emotional guy (I agree). But he was brought to tears several times listening to a song. That had never happened to him before. I am really happy to hear this, because it was the great PRaT in his system that did it. |
@mitch2 , Thank you for your thorough and informative efforts. I also compared 6 dacs, but it was 5 years ago. The Benchmark DAC3 was a contender but I ended up choosing the Mojo Mystique v.3. I later traded it in for my current dac, the Mojo EVO B4B. I have been very pleased with the B4B, but your thread has given me a roadmap should I ever feel the urge to upgrade. Your description of the Benchmark DAC3 and the house sound of the Mojo dacs are similar to what I have experienced. Having owned 2 dacs that John Atkinson owns, and which he rates as class A+, and having also owned 2 Mojo dacs, all I can say is that my listening tastes are very different than his. It pays to listen for yourself to discover the type of sound you like best. |
@stuartk +1 I know some people who are big into PRaT and I confess I just don’t get it. Give me tonality and a good 3D soundstage and I’m a happy camper, so this toe-tapping PRaT thing is just totally lost on me if someone here can actually explain it. And here’s the thing — I’m a drummer so if anyone should be sensitive to PRaT I’d think it’d be me so I think it’s just something else maybe I’m just not sensitive to that others perceive. What gives??? |
I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, there's a lot more to satisfying sonics than PRaT. For example, I've found DACs can vary significantly in terms of tonality, which is a very high priority in my case.
|
Some of these comparison posts catch my eye and peak my interest enough to read a few of the posts. My take away in the end is all that is accomplished a lot of the time is a bleeding corpse lying on the operating room with no definitive cause of death… In my case I find myself using the ole adage “if you find yourself tapping your foot and bobbing your head to the tune,” your ahead of the game and chances are your DAC is performing well enough to make you happy. Toe tapping provided by, Denafrips Pontus II with most recent upgraded board and RME ADI-2-Pro. A side note, my newly acquired Sound Artist LS3’s (desktop setup) are pretty damn impressive, glad I took the risk.. |
I added a eithernet to optical to eithernet to my streamer a year or two ago, but the last couple of meters is still Cat8 cable. I have upgraded most of my system since I put the optical gap in. After I’m done A/B ing a couple of USB cables ( a Silversonic Mirage USB with a Clarus Crimson USB.). I’ll pull the optical out and see if I can hear anything different. |
@mitch2 "Interesting that you were able to change the sound of the Aero with different tubes.I believe Michael Lavorgna at Twittering Machines was planning to post a Part 2 to his Aero review after trying some tube rolling."
I'd find it interesting if Michael doesn't have different takes on the Aero based upon various tubes given they generally all sound different to one extent or another. I have a Modwright Elysee DAC and tube changes are apparent in it and no different than in my tube preamp or 3 tube integrated amps. |
@no_regrets - Yes, I wrote:
That comment is part summation and part paraphrasing from notes I took and emails I traded with Benjamin regarding my impressions from last year of my EVO Pro vs. the X SE that I originally owned, and I believe it is accurate. I did not have the original X SE here at the time of my recent six DAC comparison, but I do still have my listening notes and emails with Benjamin. I was pretty honest with him at that time. Benjamin calls the EVO Pro "warmer" than the X SE. We may be saying similar things while using different words. Here is an exact quote that I wrote to Benjamin when I decided to sell that original X SE:
What I can say now is that the X SE NCZ that I currently own seems to be a closer call against the EVO Pro than both my recollection and notes/emails would indicate from my initial comparison between my EVO Pro and the non-NCZ Mystique X SE DAC. That may be because the Mystique X SE NCZ is a little smoother and richer sounding than the oringinal X SE DAC I owned, it may be that there was an issue of some sort with the original X SE DAC, it could be that my listening preferences have changed a little, or it could be a combination of those things. I still really like the sound of the Mystique EVO Pro that I have here and I find it to be everything I wrote in my write-up in this thread. I believe Benjamin is right and that the X SE is probably objectively a better DAC from the standpoints of resolution, drive, and low noise, but I am still drawn to the engagement I perceive from my EVO Pro that has AD1862NZ chips. Sorry, but I just don’t have a more definitive answer. I like them both, they are both similar and both sound good, and it is just about a draw wrt which I like better. Regarding your power question, I am fortunate to live in a neighborhood with all in-ground electrical lines, although there are above-ground transmission lines feeding the neighborhood. It is not an old house so I have a 200 or 225 amp service, and run 3, 20-amp dedicated lines to my music room using 10 awg Romex. The amps get a line, the preamp and volume control get a line, and the streamer, DDC, and DACs get a line that first feeds an Isoclean 60A power conditioner. PCs to the digital stuff are all shielded. The network gear also has its own dedicated 20A line (a fourth line). Since we are not in what I would call a "city environment" and are not close to commercial/industrial entities, I doubt we have the fluctuations you speak of, and I haven’t noticed anything leading to different types of sound at different times of the day. Internet seems adequate also, and is consistently somewhere between 300-400 Mbps. |
Thank you so much for the immense undertaking that you endured with this Six Dac comparison. I think you did an amazing job, better than many professional reviewers, imho. I truly appreciate all of the time, energy and resources you put into this endeavor. I have two questions for you... 1. In you post on 10/05/2024 you had said "...I recall a slightly dryer presentation from the non-NCZ version, that I do not perceive with the X SE NCZ or with the EVO Pro." Would you be willing to share a little more as to what you mean by a slightly dryer presentation ? 2. Also, another question if you don't mind. I have found that some audio equipment "sounds" better when played later in the evening when there isn't typically more demand on our power grids that ends up polluting the AC signal coming out of the wall socket. Have you ever experienced that? Do you feel the Mojo dacs are sensitive to the quality of the AC power coming out of the wall? Do the Mojo's sound any different when playing during the day vs later in the evening? Thanks again Mitch for your valuable contributions to this forum! Best wishes, Don
|
@mitch2 Wow that is an amazing streaming set up…can only dream. I found adding optical, a quality switch and network streamer really made a difference. I can’t justify top notch but I still came away with a nice set up at a modest price. I have thought about switching out my streamer for an Optical Redu Deluxe but not sure what improvement if any would be gained🤔. Set up: Mesh Router-FMC-Optical-FMC-EtherRegen w/clock-Stack SmoothLan-Bricasti M5-Mojo DAC. Also use a Sonic Transporter i5 as roon core in separate room and LPS’s on all. The Mojo DAC really made it! |
@curiousjim - Sonore have been doing this for awhile now, an optical cable directly feeds the streamer, which is called their Signature Rendu SE Deluxe (optical). SGC is a good place to buy one or, directly from Sonore. I started using optical cable for my 45-foot run from my network room to my system room for a couple of years now (by using converter boxes) but I have been using the Sig Rendu SE optical for just under a year. This new one is fully updated to their latest version (more than just a firmware upgrade). The sound is clear and smooth, but also full, natural, and with good body - light years from mechanical. The Sig Rendu SE Deluxe is their flagship one box PS plus streamer board but the real bargain is virtually the same streamer board w/o onboard PS (ultra Rendu) for only $1K, or $1,600 for the optical version. Many are perfectly happy using that smaller version to stream, or as a streamer following a dedicated server. I can’t say how much better the one box SE Deluxe is for between 3x-4x the price, but I wouldn’t go back in my main system, because that streamer plus my SGC sonicTransporter i9 (Gen 4) gives me as good a digital signal as I have heard in my system. SGC and/or Sonore also sell a high quality optical converter and a switch with both Ethernet and one optical connection to help people switch over to using optical signal transmission. |
BTW all, I am still curious to hear a Holo Audio May KTE, and also a totaldac unity and would add write-ups on those DACs if I had the chance. If any Holo May KTE or totaldac owners out there are interested hearing a Mojo Audio DAC and would be willing to loan/swap DACs for a month (one of my Mojo DACs for a May or totaldac) with no cost except each of us pays shipping/insurance each time we ship, let me know. |
Thank you @curiousjim! I am listening to a new/upgraded Sonore Signature Rendu SE Deluxe Optical today - long name but great product and great people to work with for customer satisfaction. |
@trentgordon - Thanks for the update. It sounds like either choice is a win. Interesting that you were able to change the sound of the Aero with different tubes. I believe Michael Lavorgna at Twittering Machines was planning to post a Part 2 to his Aero review after trying some tube rolling. It seems that many are interested in DAC comparisons at that $4K price point. |
I've been demoing the LTA Aero and Mojo Mystique Y in my system this last week and thought I'd share my early impressions. System is Roon Nuc - Ifi Zen Stream w/ elite LPS - DAC - Luxman l509x - Spendor D9.2. I previously had a Lumin T2. I don't think it synergized well with the spendor Ds and luxman. It was too detailed and analytical for me for speakers which already lean a touch that direction for my tastes. On some advice on another thread, I decided to try a couple r2r DACs. Both of these DACs completely changed the system for me. Albums I previously thought were poor recordings revealed by my revealing system are now enjoyable. There is more weight, organic richness, tone and life to the music. I could happily live with either one. Its going to be difficult to decide. I swapped tubes in the Aero to the Ray Tubes Reserve 6sn7. That changed the character of the Aero and made me realize how tube rolling can influence the sound. The 6sn7 toned down some of the incisive zippy nature of the Aero and gave more tonal richness, lifelike insight into the music. I've also been trying a Cary SLP-05 tube preamp into the separates input on the luxman which is pure magic. The Aero with stock tubes straight into the Luxman gave perhaps 30% of the tube magic vs including the Cary in the chain. The Ray Tubes Reserve 6sn7 gets me 70% of the tube magic while retaining more of the drive and solidity of the Luxman preamp. The aero with the 6sn7s into the luxman I would describe as spacious, detailed, insightful, organic, rich, airy and alive. The band sounds in my room vs listening to a great recording. Acoustic and jazz shines. The Mojo also sounds fantastic and swapping back and forth between the Aero and also including the Cary preamp it's difficult to nail down a clear winner. The Mojo is smooth, dense, very composed and clear. The soundstage is a touch narrower but more dense. It is even handed. It also has similar giddieup to the Aero with the 6sn7 tubes (although not as much as the stock tubes which want to boogie). I seemed to like the Mojo best relative in comparison to the Aero with more produced music like Abbey Road or an Eryka Badu album. At this point I'm leaning towards the Aero with the upgraded tubes and sticking with the Luxman vs going tube pre / ss power amp. It gives me some of the tube magic while keeping the setup simpler and it sounds fantastic. Its a tough call though, the Mojo also is a lovely DAC. I have more listening to do. Thanks to all the folks on this forum sharing their experience. Really happy with how things are sounding over here.
|
OP… “but something that requires the reader to be more sensitive to the words written and sometimes “read between the lines” to identify both negative as well as positive aspects of the equipment being reviewed.”.
Just in case this isn’t obvious to anyone… this very true and critical to understand reviews. If you are sensitive to this then professional reviews are very very valuable. I have been reading The Absolute Sound and Stereophile since they began… and they are great sources of information. Damned by faint praise is a big reality. I don’t hold it against reviewer for not being really direct… but most are very obvious about shortcomings. High end audio is about subtitles, and it starts with reading. |
As the owner of a recently purchased Mojo-Audio X SE I agree with comments regarding it's sound signature. I don't have the Z chips or the nano-crystalline (NC) chokes but even so the sound is full and engaging. I don't agree with difference being incremental though. My previous DAC was the PSAudio MK1 and the MHDT Orchid before that and each provided a significant upgrade to the sound from the previous. That said I was happy with each one of them until I heard the upgraded component. |
Thanks for your reply. I have the original Benchmark DAC 1. Reviews said the DAC 2 was warmer and more "musical" than the 1, and the DAC 3 was getting back to the DAC 1 tonal balance. Actually, don't laugh, I prefer my old Sony CD player alone compared to the Sony digital out going to the Bench 1. The latter is smoother, warmer compared to the Sony alone. So the Sony is actually more raw and brighter than when used with the Bench. Both the Sony and Bench 1 are old products, but the Sony is even older. I have to admit that the raw quality of the Sony is a detriment, but the sound is tighter and leaner. I suspect that the additional interconnect cable (the old Illuminati from Chris Sommerwerk) and added analog gain stage electronics in the Bench 1 probably is adding some veil. Many people have claimed that the ultimate performance is from a complete CD player vs transport + DAC, although my limited experience is insufficient to evaluate this. As a performing violinist in orchestra and chamber music, what excites me is close up detail and HF extension. By comparison any audience seat reveals much less detail and overall clarity. I know your preferences are far different from mine, but I have learned much from your careful comparisons. That makes you a skillful observer and writer. Your integration of published reviews (which are usually biased) with your honest personal observations is a model of great reporting. Most media in audio and other matters cannot be trusted. |
@viber6 - The Tambaqui is a very good sounding DAC and based on my time with it, more refined sounding and enjoyable to listen to than the Benchmark, which is still a bargain at it's price. However, just because they both measure well, doesn't mean they sound the same. I could live with the Tambaqui in my main system but I prefer the more organic, textural, presentation of the Mojo DACs as well as the richer, fuller, and more relaxed sounding presentation from the Merason. The one I would still like to hear is the HoloAudio May DAC that John Atkinson reviewed, measured, and described as follows. "In almost every way, the HoloAudio May (Level 3) is the best-measuring D/A processor I have encountered, rivaled only by the Weiss DAC502 and MBL N31." Regarding the sound, he said, "The HoloAudio May (Level 3) is one of the best-sounding D/A processors I have tried." If it is really that good, it should be an absolute bargain at it $5,600 price, for the KTE version. I simply have not heard it and therefore cannot say one way or the other. |
@mitch2 Your results correlate with previous reviews I've seen for most of these dacs. Really appreciate the greater detail and comparative nature of your review vs previous I've seen. Of these dacs, the Mojo's have long been on my list of 'want to hear' dacs, your more thorough reviews of these dacs have increased my interest.
One thing I'd take issue is“Delta-Sigma DACs, which comprise over 95% of the DAC chips sold today, do not actually “decode” the bit stream but rather "interpolate" it. They take in the digital bit stream faster than the music is playing, analyze it, noise shape it, error correct it, interpolate what they think the musical signal was supposed to look like, and then output a flawless waveform. Not quite the waveform which was quantized, but a very smooth and very even waveform. That is why Delta-Sigma DACs sound so smooth and refined. This is also why Delta-Sigma DACs have an advantage when playing mediocre sources such as music streamed from the internet.”,
Don't have issue with the technical aspect of explanation, issue is with the generalization of delta sigma dacs as smooth. Based on my ownership of numerous delta sigma dacs, and extensive number of reviews of these dacs delta sigma dacs most often described as incisive, extremely detailed, the complete opposite of smooth. R2R dacs are most often described as quite the opposite of delta sigma, these described as most natural, easy going, relaxed. And this is what I hear with my Laiv Harmony vs Musetec's and previous delta sigma. And I don't mean to suggest delta sigma can't be refined, its simply the characterization of being smooth. IME delta sigma dacs get their bad reputation from masses of cheap Chinese dacs that measure well and sound cold and clinical.
|
Six DAC Comparison - The Wrap Ok, time to pick a winner - just kidding, but it is time to stick a fork in this. Something I learned during this DAC comparison is that good sounding equipment can be achieved in many forms, through many different design choices. Also, not everybody is going to like the same thing. Look at the Tambaqui as an example. Many would rank it in the upper echelons of available DACs. It was essentially perfect but I found the presentation to be a little too pristine, too clean, with a little too much upper frequency detail for my tastes. No right or wrong, it just depends on the sound you like to hear, not unlike the six DACs I compared, which would each have their fans. Hats off to the designers and manufacturers that gave us their vision of good sound through these DACs. Each of the DACs in this comparison was a “flagship” for the manufacturer, five of them are current models, and all of them sounded good. After living with R-2R DACs from Metrum Acoustics and Mojo Audio over the past 5 years, I still found myself drawn to the Merason DAC1 MkII with its hybrid BB PCM1792A chip. To my ears, it is so very close to the Mojo Audio DACs, in the areas of rich tonality, solid bass, and harmonic weight (i.e., full-bodied and powerful). It is also smoother sounding than any of the other five DACs, followed closely by the SMc DAC. However, even though it sounds really good, I consider it just shy of pushing either of the two Mojo Audio DACs aside as my favorites. My best effort to describe the differences would be to say the Mojo Audio DACs provide more organic texture and granularity compared to the Merason DAC, which sounds smoother and more relaxed. My level of enjoyment from the two Mojo Audio DACs and the Merason DAC is very similar, and I tend to enjoy whichever of the three I am listening to at the time. The differentiator in my preferences is possibly described by a long-time forum poster under user name georgehifi, who commented on Herb Reichert’s Stereophile review of the Mojo Audio Mystique X SE. Reichert concluded his review by stating: "The Mystique X SE produced a unique, sophisticated listening experience that presented digital recordings as beautiful, probing, and engaging." Georgehifi followed up by posting: “Same happens to me every time I listen to a "good R2R dac", ya just can’t beat em, even if "some" of JA’s measurements are disappointing, as is the cost, there is something that is just fundamentally "right" with R2R Ladder doing PCM conversion, that Delta Sigma misses out on.” However, it is my understanding the two hybrid BB PCM1792A chips in the Merason DAC1 MkII do not provide a straight Delta-Sigma conversion. Benjamin Zwickel at Mojo Audio explained it like this: “The BB PCM1792A chips are what is called a "segmented R-2R"…To me segmented DAC chips sound halfway between R-2R and single-bit Delta-Sigma DAC chips…sort of smoothed over by the algorithms.” So, digital conversion in the Merason is somewhere between R-2R and Delta-Sigma. That seems to correspond with what I am hearing. IOW, I shouldn’t be surprised that I would both enjoy how it sounds and also perceive an additional smoothness compared to the R-2R DACs. I plan to continue acclimating to the sound of the Merason and occasionally reevaluate how it stacks up against the other DACs. With respect to the remaining three DACs in the comparison, my next favorite for sure is the SMc Audio DAC-2 GT-24, which has great tonal qualities and is pretty good at everything else. I view it as just a touch behind the Mojos and the Merason. The differences are nuances, such as a little additional energy in the high frequencies from the SMc DAC-2, while I perceive the Mojo and Merason DACs to have just a little more flesh and body. While these differences are small, they are noticeable to me in a direct comparison. Regardless, I could be perfectly happy living with the SMc DAC-2 in my main system, and I wouldn’t have noticed those subtle areas for improvement except in direct comparison with the other DACs. The Linear Tube Audio Aero DAC is no longer here so it is a bit harder to recap. The Aero, as I remember it, was all about energy, with good tone and body. It was a great sounding DAC at its price point, and above, but its sonic presentation simply did not match my tastes to the level of the other DACs, for the reasons discussed in my write-up. Finally, I appreciate the accomplishment that is the Benchmark DAC3 HGC. Those exceptional measurements, and good sound, at such a low price, opens up the world of high-end audio DACs to buyers operating with a smaller budget. However, the DAC3 is sort of a conundrum in that I cannot point to anything specifically wrong with how it sounds yet it simply doesn’t engage me to the same level as the other DACs in this comparison. I plan to keep it around and use it in my outdoor system where having a DAC with a volume control will simplify things. Thank you readers for your patience throughout this process and especially to those who shared encouragement and kind words. |
@curiousjim - No, interesting thought but this will not be a regular thing. |
@ltmandella Were you using the Benchmark DAC as only a DAC or as a DAC and volume control? Thanks. |
Thoughts on Audio Equipment Reviews While researching information about each of the DACs I compared, I came to appreciate the reviewers who authored the reviews that I linked with my write-ups. No different from my comments in this thread, none of them are a “final authority” on audio subjects or the particular objects of their reviews, and readers should be careful not to mistake a review for fact. Reviews are more like editorials, which are basically opinions, and inherently slanted toward the proclivity, or bias, of the reviewer. One commonality to most reviews seems to be a reluctance by the reviewer to overstate weaknesses in the gear under review. IMO, this is not a failing of the review, but something that requires the reader to be more sensitive to the words written and sometimes “read between the lines” to identify both negative as well as positive aspects of the equipment being reviewed. It is almost impossible for someone, such as a reviewer, to pick winners and losers for somebody else, any more than I can tell you what type of coffee you like. In other words, just because a reviewer says something sounds “great” doesn’t necessarily mean you will agree when you hear it in your system. On the other side of that coin, just because the reviewer finds some aspect of the subject equipment to sound off, not to their liking, or deficient in some way, doesn’t mean everyone will view it the same. I believe most reviewers are sensitive to the potential impact their words have on consumer purchases and the resulting tangible financial impact that can have on manufacturers. Therefore, most are at least careful not to overplay possible negatives that may be reflective of their personal preferences as to how something should sound. In short, take any review with a grain of salt, whether professionally published or simply posted in a forum. There are so many things that can affect a reviewer’s impression of a specific product, such as partnering equipment, the room, the music they listen to, and the bias of the reviewer to a certain type of sound. Therefore, read reviews for informational purposes but whenever possible listen to the gear (preferably in your own system) and decide for yourself what you like or don’t like. |
@mitch2 Many, many and many thanks for your incredibly detailed reviews of all these DACs! Truly a gift to us all as mentioned above. I was very interested and leaning towards upgrading to the LTA Aero but after reading your reviews I pulled the trigger on buying a used Mojo Mystique Evo. Wow what a nice sounding DAC just as you reviewed. Very happy with my choice and extremely appreciative of you spending your time and expertise to help us understand the performance of these DACs. Threads like these are so helpful to less seasoned audio addicts and the reason I follow Audiogon. Cheers! |
Based on my research the Mojo dacs have the technology to be top tier, chokes in power supply, nude Vishay resistors, I use both choked linear power supply for some of my streaming components and nude Vishay in my present 300B amps, have used them in my previous Art Audio 845 amp and a totally modded dac. Both provide an easily heard upgrade over commonplace cap based PS and resistors. Totaldacs should also be top tier, very impressive technology there as well.
One thing I find curious is Linear Tube Audio rather agnostic take on digital inputs. I've always been of a mind that I2S should provide best sound quality with ladder dacs. Still, gets very nice reviews. I've yet to try I2S with my Laiv Harmony so I'm just surmising at this point (only usb at this point). |
@mitch2 When I read comments about the Holo Audio May and the Terminator II DAC's they seem to be bested by the Mojo Audio DAC's and the AYRE QX-5 twenty DAC. Now I'm not sure which level of May DAC they are comparing but most seem to have the KTE. With the May DAC you get two DAC's in one. Several talk about running the may with HQ player. With the Ayre it comes with a streamer and volume control. You can also upgrade your Ayre QX-5 twenty as technology improves. I have talked to Ayre and they have said sound improves slightly when adding a good preamp. They also have an AC conditioner that they build that improves the sound. When I read the comparisons of other DAC I am not sure if they are streaming to the network bridge or if they have a separate streamer. |
@mitch2 - Thanks for your work on these reviews. I sound myself eagerly waiting the next review like a favorite installment of a radio or tv program. I’m intrigued by the Mojo dacs now! |
@stuartk Amen Brother! This is precisely why I’ve called out TAS reviews (and most Euro rags) as being lazy and bogus as they rarely bother to compare a review component to anything. Not only does this make the review less helpful/informative, it also insulates the reviewer from any accountability for their observations and conclusions. Easier/faster for the reviewer and the magazine gets to crank out more reviews faster, but the benefits for the reader are greatly diminished. Big pet peeve, and what’s worse, many times they don’t even mention the equipment in the reviewer’s system so we’re left just guessing all around. Argh! Ok, end of rant. |
HA! You’ll undoubtedly get myriad questions, but I for one will just accept your insightful and honest thoughts/insights for what they are and in the helpful context in which they’re given. And comparing how all the DACs compare to each other is truly a Herculean task that goes above and beyond in terms of effort and adds immeasurably to its ultimate applicability and usefulness here. Most of us — at least the better informed/experienced I think — will be able to read between the lines and glean much from all the good work, time, and effort you’ve put forth here, and I thank you from the bottom of my audiophile heart for all that you’ve done to make all of us DAC-curious types all that much smarter. Your thread here is a true gift to all of us IMO. |
@brbrock - at $3,959 the Musetec DA 006 should be a direct competitor for market share with Mojo’s Mystique Y that “starts” at $4K. In the next day or two, I will post a short “wrap” on how the six DACs ultimately compare with each other, at least in my world, and then I will be done unless I get questions. The DACs I would have added if I had access were the Denafrips Terminator (latest version) and Holo May KTE. I haven’t heard either. The DAC that I would like to hear to satisfy my own curiosity is the Totaldac, probably the version Lavorgna has. If it is as good as some say, I would sell the others and buy one. In the meantime, there are a couple here that sound good enough for me. |
MOJO AUDIO MYSTIQUE X SE NCZ Mojo Audio Mystique X SE Reviews: Stereophile – by Herb Reichert, April 2023 Stereophile – follow up by John Atkinson, May 2023 The Audio Beatnik – by Ken Redmond, November 2022 Enjoy the Music – by Dr. Matthew Clott, December 2022 Audiophilia – by Karl Sigman, September 2022 Audiokey Reviews – by Oliver Masciarotte, May 2023 The Sound Advocate – (Mystique X) by Howard Milstein, October 2022 Steve Hoffman Forums – by Mfisher 702 (and other posters), March 2024 Steve Hoffman Forums – by Steve Hoffman (and other posters), May 2024
Mojo Audio Mystique X SE NCZ The Mojo Audio Mystique X SE NCZ, is their flagship X SE DAC that has been upgraded with nanocrystalline (NC) chokes, and “Z” designated DAC chips. I believe this is the best DAC Mojo Audio offers at this time. The current top DAC is called the Mystique X ’24, which I believe is the same DAC available with either ferrous (FE), amorphous (AM), or nanocrystalline (NC) choke choices. The main difference between the X ’24 and the DAC I have here is that the AD1862NZ chips are no longer available. If you have read my write-up on the Mojo Audio Mystique EVO Pro DAC earlier in this thread (9-14-24 @ 1:12pm), then you know how much I have enjoyed listening to the five different Mojo Audio DACs I have owned. The Mojo Audio Mystique EVO Pro DAC has been my reference in my main system for a couple of years now, and I even chose to keep that DAC over Mojo Audio’s Mystique X SE DAC, when I originally owned both of them. Creation of the Mojo Audio Mystique X line was a necessity brought on by the events of 2020/21 that resulted in supply chain disruptions, and shortages of parts and materials. Prior to that, Mojo Audio’s Mystique EVO Pro was their former flagship DAC, and the highest version of their Mystique EVO line of DACs. Mojo Audio originally had plans to further upgrade the EVO line, and possibly offer an even higher-level version of the EVO using BB PCM63 DAC chips. Difficulties procuring key parts, including the specially coated aluminum chassis used on the EVO series, caused Mojo Audio to cease production of the EVO line (although it is fully supported) and travel a different path. The goal, in the words of Mojo Audio’s owner and designer, Benjamin Zwickel (Benjamin), was to create a “a lower cost alternative with similar performance” to the EVO line. This would be accomplished by using more readily available parts, different design choices, and less labor-intensive manufacturing processes. The new DAC design would be housed in an extruded chassis that requires less aluminum than the EVO chassis, utilize PCB mounted connectors, use a lower number of Belleson regulators, and ideally the product would have been robotically assembled instead of 100% hand built. Improvements incorporated into the X DAC line included the inclusion of a USB input cut-off switch, the use of better parts in key areas such as ultra-fast, ultra-low noise zero-recovery SiC (Silicon Carbide) Schottky rectification diodes, and new anti-resonant treatments. If you want specific details about the development of the X line of DACs, search the Audiogon forums for posts by Mojo Audio’s owner and designer, Benjamin Zwickel (aka. Fuzzbutt17 on Audiogon). The end result was that Mojo Audio released a new line of DACs in 2022 designated Mystique X (for extruded chassis). Somewhat surprisingly, the initial feedback by most listeners was that the new Mystique X line sounded better than the former top dog, Mystique EVO Pro. Benjamin shared the following observations about comparisons to the EVO Pro: “Even though the Mystique X uses the identical circuit and nearly identical parts to our Mystique EVO, due to the new chassis typology, shielding, and anti-resonance, the Mystique X has a notably lower noise floor than any DAC we’ve ever offered. As you lower noise floor you not only reveal low-level details which were formerly masked by noise, you expand dynamic range. The Mystique X has insane micro-dynamics.” And, “To my ear they [Mystique EVOs] sound a bit slower, softer, and a bit vague when compared to our Mystique X.” Benjamin’s post in this thread on 09-15-24 provides more detail. The Mystique X SE is the upscale version of the Mystique X. The DAC that is the subject of this write-up includes nano-crystalline (NC) chokes and special AD1862N-Z chips, which were reportedly produced back in the day for higher level Dennon CD players, but are unfortunately no longer to Mojo Audio. The Mystique X SE NCZ DAC had an original retail price of $12,499. The current Mystique X ‘24 is available with NC chokes (but not Z-chips) at a retail list price of $9,999. Ok, so how does it sound? There is something I like about the Mojo Audio DACs that I don’t quite hear from other DACs that I have owned or tried in my system which, including those listed here, include Metrum Acoustics’ Pavane and Adagio, Aqua Acoustic’s La Scala Mk II, and Ayre’s QB-9 DSD. Benjamin would probably say this is related to how Mojo Audio’s R-2R DACs display the true time, tune, tone, and timbre of the original musical performance. Without going too deep into detail, on song after song of my test tracks the Mystique X SE NCZ did indeed display something special in the way it reproduced dynamics and harmonics that give music energy. Both female and male vocals were rich, full, and resonant. The instruments playing sounded as intended, with no absence of body or detail. The relative amplitude of each instrument was consistent with the performance, which helps lock in the staging, and the ability to instantly go from soft to loud made music exciting to listen to regardless of the playback level. As I said of the LTA Aero, “that… [ability to sound exciting at any volume level] is not an easy trick to pull off but it does enhance the engagement level of listening to recorded music in your home”. I decided to play some of my test tracks at a relatively high volume, centered around 80dB +/- on my Decibel X app. On "Birds", by Dominique Fils-Aime’, the bass was subterranean, without any blurring of detail, and without affecting the mid or high frequencies. The Mystique X SE NCZ has the ability to enhance the dimensionality of players and singers, sort of like the LTA Aero did when it was here, but without sounding forced in any way, and with a greater level of refinement. This level of energy deviates a bit from the comparatively more relaxed sound I have become used to from the EVO Pro but doesn’t take away from the realistic sound of each instrument playing on "The Girl from Ipanema" and especially the dynamic sounds from Getz’ saxophone, which sounded so very real, and Astrud Gilberto’s innocent, breathy sounding vocals (amazingly, this was her first professional session in a studio – here is an interesting but sort of sad read). Susan Tedeschi has incredible vocal control and does an amazing job of using tone, pitch, and amplitude to display passion and emotion. Through the X SE NCZ her vocals on "Angel from Montgomery" were on full display, as well as Jason Crosby’s fiddle and the rest of her band that night in Austin, Texas. I neglected to adjust the volume control as the test tracks were playing and ended up listening to "Smells Like Teen Spirit" at 90+dB! No breakup, no fuzziness, scratchiness, or other nasties whatsoever. The X SE NCZ simply delivered what was on the recording with everything in its place, it was just louder. Same with Gov’t Mule’s Thorazine Shuffle. The Mystique X SE NCZ simply plays music, whatever genre you choose to play at whatever volume you choose to listen at. The last ground I will cover in this write-up is the most difficult - how does the Mystique X SE NCZ compare to my Mystique EVO Pro? When I first owned the Mystique X SE (non-NCZ) I enjoyed both that DAC and the EVO Pro but ultimately chose to keep the EVO Pro and sell the X SE. After purchasing the Mystique X SE NCZ earlier this year, I posted a mini-review and comparison between that and my EVO Pro on Audiogon (mitch2, June 29). After re-reading that post, I could not find anything significant that I would change. To summarize, IMO:
In summary, the reviewers universally love this DAC, and I suspect most audiophiles would find the Mystique X SE NCZ to be a good blend of drive, dimension, tone, smoothness and richness. I find the Mystique EVO Pro Z to deliver all of that while trading off a bit of drive, incisiveness, and pinpoint dimensioning for a richer tone and a bit sweeter, maybe more forgiving, presentation. These differences are not monumental and my observations above do not seem to be wholely inconsistent with Benjamin’s statement that the Mystique EVOs “sound a bit slower, softer, and a bit vague when compared to our Mystique X.” I appreciated the comparison by Dr. Matthew Clott who has also reviewed both the Mystique EVO Pro* and the Mystique X SE, for Enjoy the Music, and who said: “The Mojo Mystique Evo (Pro)* is not the most resolving, not the most dynamic, certainly not the most recognized, not the warmest, and not the most expensive. What it is, is one of the most musical, engaging, flexible, bulletproof DAC’s I’ve heard at any price....There’s virtually nothing to dislike, and a whole lot to fall in love with.” And, “The X evolution has improved upon the level of resolution, low-frequency harmonic coherency, reduced noise floor, and turned up the level of emotional involvement another notch.” * Dr. Clott originally wrote his Enjoy the Music review of the older Mystique EVO DAC believing it was the Mystique EVO B4B but later found out the DAC he reviewed was actually an EVO Pro. Karl Sigman also reviewed both the Mystique EVO Pro and Mystique X SE (non-NCZ) for Audiophilia, and said: “With a significantly smaller size and weight, and a significant increase in sound quality that reveals hidden gems even in 16/44.1 files, while retaining the unique and special sound quality of Mojo Audio’s Mystique DACS, the Mojo Audio Mystique X SE is a gem itself; it is addictive. A must-hear DAC.” So, which of the two do I like best? Based on my extended head-to-head comparison between my Mystique EVO Pro and Mystique X SE NCZ, I cannot deny the X SE NCZ is the more impactful sounding DAC. It displays all the positive traits of the EVO Pro, while also exhibiting a bit more of that realistic “you are there” impression. As I have said previously, they are both clearly cut from the same cloth, as you would expect with two DACs that use very similar design choices and parts, and they both sound great. I could easily live with either but if I had to choose only one DAC for my main system it would be the Mystique X SE NCZ. |
| Post removed |
Thanks for your further comments.
Yes; of course. I wasn't asking for buying advice, if that's how it seemed.
I can't disagree with any of this. For a variety of reasons, "good enough" is good enough for me!
|
I would not argue with that. IME, the relationship between cost vs. performance is more logarithmic than linear. As you move along the curve, it begins to take more money to achieve smaller gains. However, from my post yesterday, I quoted reviewer Michael Lavorgna, "While this difference wasn’t huge in ultimate terms, I find when I’m in the listening zone even minor differences can be important." I agree with his point that for some, it may be worth the extra money to achieve certain specific, small to moderate sonic improvements. The trick IMO is to figure out your personal, "good enough". Sometimes that limit where a system is "good enough" is defined solely by one’s wallet. Other times, it occurs when the entire system reaches an equilibrium where all the components and speakers are equitable from a price/performance relationship and the result sounds good enough to be enjoyable without further upgrading. When a system achieves that level of equilibrium, one further upgrade may set into motion the need for another whole round of upgrades until the equilibrium is achieved again. Finally however, some are never satisfied and continue to chase their personal vision of the "absolute sound."
Only you can make that decision for you. Of the DACs I have compared, I have no doubt many will be perfectly happy with the LTA Aero DAC and many others are already happy with the Benchmark DAC3. However, out of the group, and in my world, the top three are ahead of the rest. Although I could live with all of them, I prefer the two Mojo Audio DACs and the Merason, which has really continued to impress me. Of those three, I will not keep more than two. The SMc Audio DAC, which I will be keeping, is not far behind the three mentioned but will probably not make it into my main system except as an occasional visitor, simply because I enjoy the others just a little bit more. |
You describe the difference between the less costly and more costly dacs in terms of a "bit" of this, a "bit" of that. I’m wondering how good a system must be to reveal these small differences. We are talking about the law of diminishing returns here, no? Just to be clear. I’m not in any way denigrating or doubting what the more costly DACs offer. I’m merely wondering whether choosing a 4K DAC, I’d actually be aware something was "missing". There’s obviously only one way to find out.
|