Not interested in any of these DAC’s, as I am happy with mine, but really admire and appreciate your obviously many hours of hard work (and fun?) in comparing these units @mitch2 .
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
@mitch2 Thanks for sharing the link to that power supply. That is the first time I have seen a picture. That is definitely not the base level power supply. I know the base level external power supply doesn't come with chokes. The nice thing about the external power supplies is that they can be easily upgraded just by having another sent. Same goes with the future models of the Mojo Audio DAC's. I think that is definitely the way to go. |
I didn't include the Weiss DAC204 on my list below because of the low'ish price and because I haven't heard that much about it. I do however like the simplicity, and that you have a choice of 88.2 or 176.4 kHz sample rates, which are multiples of 44.1, instead of the more typical 48kHz and 96kHz. I did look up Michael Lavorgna's review at Twittering Machines and thought his comment below regarding the Weiss DAC204 compared to his totaldac d1 unity was a good description of one of the main differences I often (but not always) hear when comparing moderately priced gear with much more expensive gear, and also answers a question that often arises on this forum being, what do you get for more money? As he implies, even little differences can affect the level of listening enjoyment. He wrote:
|
@mitch2 You stated in your Post " and my relationship with them goes back around 20 years, first as a tire-kicker, then as a client, and finally as a friend, which says a lot about how they work with all of their clients. "
@brbrock You stated in your Post " You can get a custom amp, preamp or DAC made and it is a very fun and unique experience. You are a part of the build by choosing exactly how it will be built out. The quality of the build and equipment surpasses the price by far. " Both of these statements are closely related to my own experiences had to produce the system in use today. 845 Power Amps are commission built by an EE almost 25 Years ago, who prior to this during the 90's the same EE, had built for me a Stereo Power Amp', a Pre-Amp' and Phonostage. Today the same EE who is a friend, in the sense they get an annual bottle of their favourite Tipple sent as a gift at the New Year, is converting the 845's to be a Balanced Input. One owned Phon' and DAC in use today, both use Valves and are both Commission Built, where I was involved with the Phon' from conception through to finalising the design. The other Phon' in use, is produced as a working model for myself by the designer of this Phon'. The TT and Tonearm are both quite different from their original designs, where the modifications are undertaken by a individual recognised in the UK for their acquired skills for such delicate treatments. The individual who has undertaken this work is today a friend and is visited on occasions during the year, with plenty of phone calls shared as well. The Speakers are fully overhauled and modernised, by a UK leading Service for Quad ESL 57's. Moving away from the mainstream supply of Audio Equipment has helped myself, become acquainted with individuals who are willing to assist with educating a inquisitive mind, additionally to this, a system is now produced that is uniquely Bespoke, and has proved to be a system that is very much enjoyed for the discernible qualities it presents, by myself and others who get to spend time listening to it. At present the system is limited to being a CDT > DAC source only. |
@bgross - Here is a list to get you started on currently popular $4K’ish DACs you could compare. One is over the range and one below, but the others are pretty close to $4K.
|
@brbrock - SMc Audio uses chokes in their outboard “Power Station” for the VRE preamplifier, which is the same power supply they used for my TLC-1 SE. You can see a picture on page 4 of this review. |
@mitch2 That was a great write up. Patrick at SMC Audio is great to work with. You can get a custom amp, preamp or DAC made and it is a very fun and unique experience. You are a part of the build by choosing exactly how it will be built out. The quality of the build and equipment surpsasses the price by far. Mojo Audio and SMC seem to take the same approach with their builds. The internals seem to be pretty simple but the parts are very high quality. I would love to see if Patrick could use another DAC chip that would allow streaming from TIDAL etc. without downsampling. I would also be curious if they could add an external power supply to the DAC like they do their amps and preamps. I know they can also add chokes in the power supplies as an upgrade to the external power supplies. |
SMc AUDIO DAC-2 GT-24 SMc Audio DAC-2 GT-24 Reviews 6moons – SMc Audio – McCormack UltraDac, by Francis Baumli Conrad Johnson Owners – McCormack DAC-1, by eagle6014, 2015 Audio Asylum – McCormack DAC-1 by Ecruz, 2004 SMc Audio DAC-2 GT-24 SMc Audio is Steve McCormack and his associate Patrick Jeter, and my relationship with them goes back around 20 years, first as a tire-kicker, then as a client, and finally as a friend, which says a lot about how they work with all of their clients. I will call their customers “clients” because SMc Audio doesn’t simply sell stuff to people, but rather they work together with audio enthusiasts to understand their systems, sonic and musical preferences, and goals, and only then do they discuss which product or upgrade, and what level of upgrade, would fit best to meet the client’s goals and budget. Through this process, and especially if you go through it two or three times with them, it is hard not to call them friends since it is not only a pleasure to work with them on specific projects, but also a pleasure to simply talk with them and learn from their wealth of audio knowledge, hear about new upgrade paths, and share ideas. My first McCormack product was an old DNA-2 amplifier. A behemoth designed by Dave Reich of Theta fame. The balanced input didn’t work and even though I purchased it used, when I called SMc, Steve took the time to talk me through troubleshooting options and was upfront about what was probably wrong with the balanced inputs – a known issue. It turned out the solution was to simply use the single-ended inputs. Later, after selling that DNA-2, I became intrigued by the many positive testimonials from people who had their original McCormack Audio gear upgraded by SMc Audio. It seems the original McCormack Audio equipment mostly utilized thoughtful, functional, and effective design choices and, at least the amplification gear, was mostly limited in performance only by cost choices necessary to achieve desired price points. My first upgrade performed by SMc Audio was about 12 years ago when I sent them a McCormack TLC-1 (Transparent Line Control) preamp that Steve and Patrick then turned into something very special, and very close sounding to Steve’s extremely well-regarded (basically world-class) VRE-1 (Virtual Reality Engine) preamp, which is now in its VRE-1C iteration. The VRE-1 was introduced around 2008, not long before I had my preamp upgrade preformed, so Steve was able to use the knowledge and design choices resulting from years of perfecting his preamp vision, in crafting the upgrades that he used in my TLC-1 Signature Edition preamp. The upgraded TLC-1 sounds fantastic and, speaking of value, it has been in my system for the past 12 years with nothing I have tried even coming close to making me want to replace it. Steve and his original McCormack Audio company are best known for amplification products, so I next had them upgrade a DNA-2 amplifier and following that they built me a pair of monoblocks based on the McCormack DNA-1 amplifier platform. Pictures of those mono amps, along with a picture of my preamp, are shown on the SMc Audio website homepage. All I can say is that I happily replaced the amplifiers I owned at the time, and that sold for $17K (Clayton M300) and currently sell for $34K retail (Lamm M1.2 Reference), with those SMc Ultra G monoblocks, and I haven’t once regretted the decision. To my ears, all of the SMc Audio gear I have heard has an organic musicality that would cost stupid money to equal. The SMc AUDIO DAC-2 GT-24 began life as a McCormack DAC-1, which was first introduced in the heyday of McCormack Audio, sometime in the mid-1990s. There is not a single review of the SMc Audio DAC-1 GT-24, so I have posted a few reviews and write-ups of the original (non-upgraded) McCormack DAC-1, as well as a 6moons review of the very first upgraded DAC-1, called the SMc Audio UltraDac. If you read the reviews, the original DAC-1 was quite well-regarded, with reviewer John Johnson stating in 1995: “The SST-1, DAC-1, and Wonder Link cable, when used as a package, resulted in some of the most breathtaking CD sound we have ever heard. The upper registers were crisp, but without harshness of any kind. Steel string guitars are a good test for this, and the McCormack blazed through unscathed. Our planar-magnetic speakers just sang. The deep end was - well - as deep and tight as any we have heard, and better than most.” Audio Asylum poster Ecruz posted this in 2004 about a used DAC-1 he purchased: “when I threw the DAC 1 in to the mix, HOLY SMOKES! I don’t have to skill to describe in words how much better it sounded. It sounded like I bought a new cd player. Everything improved. The soundstage got bigger. The upper frequencies more extended AND less harsh. The low end more extended AND tighter. A much warmer, richer and more realistic sound. Dare I say, tubelike.” I included the Conrad Johnson Owner’s forum post because the thread includes a few nice pictures of the original McCormack DAC-1, including a shot of the insides. CJO forum poster eagle6014 said this in 2015: “As far as comparing this to other dac’s I’ve had, it sounds great. No complaints here, classic dac sound for my huge 80’s collection.” The 2009 review written by Francis Baumli about the SMc Audio UltraDac, and posted on 6moons, was incredibly positive about the sound of the upgraded DAC-1 and, along with my positive experiences with SMc Audio, was the reason I wanted to try their upgraded DAC. The pictures in the 6moons article indicated changes from the original DAC-1 in the power supply and output, but not too much with the conversion board. Baumli enthused over how good the UltraDac upgrade sounded to him, concluding the review with, “the SMc Audio Ultra DAC-1 is…better than any of the current competition.” In the words of Ned Pepper to Rooster Cogburn, “bold talk”. A year or two ago, I was able to pick up an old McCormack DAC-1 for cheap and had it shipped directly to SMc Audio. I certainly didn’t need another DAC and told them I was in no hurry for the upgrade but I was curious so I told them to “go ahead with the project when you have the time.” I was actually surprised when earlier this year I received a call from Patrick who said, “your DAC-2 GT-24 is finished.” He added, “I know it has been a while so if you no longer want it, we have other customers who would.” I told Patrick that I absolutely wanted it so “send it on over,” and I am glad that I did. The first thing I noticed is, wow, this thing weighs a ton! I was surprised to find they had used the gravity base that they used on my monoblocks, which is essentially a thick brass bottom plate that covers the entire bottom of the chassis and directly attaches to key components. The gravity base seems to give the sound “gravity” – just kidding, sort of. I suspect, but of course cannot prove, that anchoring and mechanically grounding key components and boards to the heavy brass base imparts additional solidity and possibly the desirable acoustic attributes of brass. The second thing I noticed was the nice-looking appearance of the DAC-2 GT-24. Like all of the gear SMc Audio has upgraded for me, I asked for an upgraded faceplate with the SMc logo and I was not disappointed with the result. Finally, the name DAC-2 GT-24 is not the same as the “UltraDac” from the 6moons review, so I figured something must be different. When I looked at the pictures that Patrick sent to me of the insides of my DAC-2 GT-24, that are available to look at on my virtual system page, there seemed to be a whole lot more going on than what I expected from the pictures that were included in the 6moons review of the UltraDac. That is sort of par for the course when working with SMc Audio over the years. They continue to innovate and incorporate the new improvements they discover as they upgrade their client’s gear. In the pictures of my new DAC, I saw some cool stuff like a magnetic breaker on/off switch, a new white circuit board for the power supply, Jupiter copper foil capacitors, a large oil capacitor, Lundahl output transformers, a clean-looking layout, and nice-looking soldering work. The DAC-2 uses the same Crystal Semiconductor CS8412 "E" Version receiver and CS4328 DAC chip from the original DAC-1. Operationally, the DAC-2 inputs through either S/PDIF coax or Toslink optical. No USB or AES/EBU. I have tried both inputs and based on my listening, the coax input is sonically superior but the Toslink input still sounds good. Both single-ended and balanced outputs are provided and the connectors are first rate from Furutech. The DAC chip only supports 18 bits and sampling rates up to 48kHz so adjustments were needed in Roon to avoid glitches with tracks having higher sampling rates. When I first listened to the DAC-2 GT-24 I had the impression that music played through it sounded “alive”. I also perceived a natural, organic tonal quality similar to the Mojo Audio DACs, and smoothness similar to the Merason. This is an 8x oversampling Delta-Sigma DAC so, while operationally it is one of the more common DAC designs, it is different from the other DACs in my current comparisons. The Delta-Sigma DAC chip is probably closest to the Merason that uses a Delta-Sigma hybrid BB PCM1794A chip, and the Benchmark with its ESS Sabre ES9028PRO chip. The other three in the comparison are R-2R type DACs using chips by Analog Devices, an AD1865 in the LTA Aero and dual AD1862N chips in the Mojo DACs. To quote Benjamin Zwickel of Mojo Audio, “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.” As I read up on the old Crystal Semiconductor CS4328 chip used in the DAC-2, I learned it was considered a pretty good chip for its time and capable of converting digital into a good-sounding analog output. The specifications list the chip as having 18-bit resolution and a maximum 48 KHz sampling rate. It performs 8x oversampling digital interpolation followed by 64x oversampling, one-bit, delta-sigma modulation. It really is a vintage piece, but does that really matter? CDs are standardized at 16bit resolution and 44.1kHz sampling rate and most of what we listen to is essentially CD quality. As I ran through my test tracks, I kept thinking that I could happily live with the SMc DAC-2 GT-24. The tonal qualities were clear and natural sounding, reminiscent of what I remember from really good CD players. The sound was smooth in that there were no shrillness, roughness, or other undesirable digital sounding artifacts. At the same time, the DAC-2 was granular enough to capture the distinct texture of different vocalists, including breathiness, grittiness and raspiness as those qualities are present. Examples that were easily distinguishable through the DAC-2 included the intimate breathy quality of Dominique Fils-Amie’s vocals on Birds, Susan Tedeschi’s trademark rasp on Angel from Montgomery, and Warren Haynes signature growl on Gov’t Mule’s Thorazine Shuffle. Bass is solid through the DAC-2 and underpins the upper frequencies without getting in the way. The mids and high frequencies are appropriately proportioned and the entire presentation seems even-handed. If pressed, I would say the DAC-2 leans just a smidge to the sharper side of the curve and is perhaps just a touch lighter on its feet than I am used to with the Mojo Audio EVO Pro, or certainly with the Merason DAC1 MkII that has a sort of creamy lower midrange/upper bass warmth. However, I do not consider the result to be irritatingly detailed, or too focused on attack/leading edge, as I have heard with some equipment. I suspect this presentation from the SMc DAC-2 GT-24 I have described would likely hit the sweet spot for many audiophiles. Sound staging is similarly even-handed, with enough dimension to portray a realistic image of the positioning of singers and instrumentalists, but not so much as to seem overblown. Considering this is a DAC that most of you will never hear (I understand there are only 12 of them currently), I will stop the descriptions here, and conclude by saying that what Steve and Patrick have crafted is amazing considering their starting point with the older conversion technology. However, they are so good with power supplies, amplification, and output stages I am not really surprised that they were able to make this DAC sound great. The tonal qualities, texture, and natural sound from the SMc DAC-2 GT-24 make it certainly one of the more enjoyable DACs in this comparison, and one that I could happily live with in my main system. As a last thought, it has been my privilege to work with Steve and Patrick over the years. My trust in them to create great sounding audio gear that has brought me joy has been justified by their great work. Their many satisfied clients have benefitted from their passion for audio, commitment to continuing innovation and improvement, attention to detail, and unwavering concern for client satisfaction. Thank you, Steve and Patrick. |
I love the Reuss and at this time I am not considering a change. The sound is very addicting and I just want to keep listening. I have compared it in my system to an Yggdrasil MIB and the original Merason DAC1. I liked it much better than the Yggy, and my previous DAC was a Gungnir, and in comparison to the DAC1 Mk I, I and a friend of mine who did the same test in his system, found the Reuss to be more refined. That’s the term we both agreed was the best description of the difference. As for upgrading to the DAC1 MkII, my thoughts are that it would offer a similar sound, but again, more refined than the Reuss. I have had two people that have heard both say that the DAC1 MkII, might be overly refined and I might like the Reuss better. Not sure what too much refinement would mean, just one of those things that I would have to try and see if I like it. For my tastes, at this time, the Reuss is wonderful DAC.
|
@mitch2 maybe I'll be that guy? As soon as I spend some REAL time with the Canor I'll toss up some comments. It's funny, I went & listened to it, spoke with the guys at the shop who by the way couldn't have been more chill, and I left with one, lol. The 2.10 was incredible in their listening area but the real test was at home in my own system. It was outstanding right out of the box but my weakness, a NOS tube fixation, got the best of me and I leaned hard into a vintage 6922 upgrade. The reviews are spot on by the way which is what drove me to want experience it |
@wig -Thanks for the cable list. I have never tried Grover Huffman cables of any type but I know many like them and believe they offer a good performance to price ratio. I have not gone too far down the road of digital cables but I have tried a few USB cables including Curious, Triode Wire Labs, Totaldac, and Network Acoustics Muon. Of those, the Totaldac seems more organic sounding while the NA Muon seems more incisive and detailed sounding but without any shrillness or fatiguing qualities. I am using TWL's AES/EBU cable and that seems to work/sound fine. Sonore wants me to try their USB cable but I have made more traction upgrading components rather than cables so I sort of stay middle of the road wrt digital cable choices. @cdc - I wouldn't say "last 2 or 5% in sound quality" as I believe these DACs have a larger sonic impact than that, and much more than the difference in servers. I have had several pretty good servers and none of them made a discernable sonic difference, although I did hear a big improvement in moving to the Sonore Signature Rendu SE streamer. That discussion gets messy because when you say "server" many believe you are talking about a server/streamer combination. The thing about DACs is they do sound quite different from each other and while one may not generally be significantly "better" than another, they definitely sound significantly different from each other. Most people seem to have a type of sound they like, and will choose a DAC that matches that type of sound and avoid DACs that provide a different type of sound. @bgross - There seems to be a small jam pile of DACs at around $4K. I had not heard of the Canor from Slovakia, which uses dual ESS Sabre chips and four tubes, but it has received several very positive reviews for how it sounds. Maybe somebody else with access should do a comparison of all the $4K DACs on the market. |
Thank you for your thorough and comprehensive evaluations on those Dacs; I’m sure it will be a big help for those looking at those price points. Wig Merason Dac1 MKII/ Pro Ject RS2T CD Transport user 😊 Top 3 digital cables that I have heard and some nearly $2K but the ones listed below are at $500 and below: 1. DIY Furutech das 4.1 with Furutech AES/EBU NCF 2. Grover Huffman Pharaoh Copper 3. Grover Huffman Pharaoh + Silver |
@mitch2 boy, you are super thorough with your reporting. Thank you for spending so much time on this. In my instance, I listened to a couple of the listed DACs when upgrading from my Line Magnetic and I didn't really feel there was a significant enough upgrade (especially for what some of these cost) to the LMs presentation until I demoed the Canor 2.10. I mentioned before that I have rare exotic tubes in the LM, which is really great, and also recently purchased Amperex Gold Pin 6922s to go in the Canor's output stage and although I haven't had a lot of time to listen to the new tubes and or run through all its filters, I am more than happy with this Canor component. Just rounded all the bases for me and at $4K is a pretty solid value. Just my experience. |
Sort of. The Mojo DACs and Aero are all R-2R DACs while the Merason is a hybrid Delta-Sigma, so there are fundamental differences in the conversion that are not surprisingly audible, IMO. The differences in the sound between the Mojos and Aero may be more related to power supply differences and output stage implementation. Yes, I do like the sound of the 3x more expensive Mojos better than the Aero - no shame there. |
@soix - Not planning a big reveal at the end, but maybe a couple of comparison comments. I will mostly let the write-ups stand on their own. Regarding the Merason and LTA Aero, they are both DACs but otherwise somewhat apples and oranges. The Aero’s strengths are about drive and leading edge excitement while the Merason seems to be more about dense tone and fluidity. They both do a good job of playing music, and neither leaves anything out, but I would envision buyers would have quite different sonic priorities which would result in their selecting only one of those two DACs, but not both. Sonically, my preferences fall sort of in between the two but closer to the Merason than to the Aero. |
@mitch2 - Another great review, Mitch. Thank you. I own the Merason Dac1 Mkii but am curious about the universe of dacs out there. The share the sentiment that the Merason Dac, at least in my system, has almost an ephemeral quality. I’m not sure how much the other components in my systems play into that, but music is consistently smooth. At moments, I would like a little more “bite”, but I’m not complaining! |
MERASON DAC1 MKII Merason DAC1 MkII Reviews
Merason DAC1 MkII I expected great things from the Merason DAC1 MkII based on the positive published reviews I read, which all commended the thoughtful design choices, fanatical attention to detail, and excellent sound quality based on the DAC1’s tone, bass, drive, and refinement. So, I was a little surprised when I first connected it and heard…nothing special. It was a good thing that I kept listening. It has not been very often that my first impression about audio gear is so off-base. Not that the Merason did anything wrong when I first heard it, because it didn’t, but rather what I was hearing didn’t seem to engage me to the same level after listening to my Mojo Audio DACs and the LTA Aero. However, after the Merason DAC had been powered up for a week or so, and after I moved it to a location in my rack where I could connect a better digital coax input cable (Oyaide 5N silver DB510 vs. Canare L-4.5CHD by BJC), it sounded much better than what I first remembered. The final touch was when I replaced the Totaldac filtered USB cable I was using between my Sonore Signature Rendu SE Optical and my Singxer SU-6 DDC with a Network Acoustics Muon USB cable, which seemed to increase incisiveness. The design and construction of the Merason DAC1 MkII is explained in more detail in the reviews linked above, as well as on Merason’s website, which describe the galvanic isolation, dual DAC converter modules, Class A buffering technology, fully balanced circuitry, and special attention to the 12 power supplies used in the DAC1. These features and more demonstrate the fastidious Swiss engineering that has gone into the Merason DAC1 MkII. The Merason DAC1 MkII uses two Burr-Brown PCM1794A chips, which are hybrid DAC chips in that they use both R-2R and Delta-Sigma conversion topologies. I found the following quote about the PCM1794A chip, "Segmented PCM1794 is described as having 'true' multibit DAC for the most significant bits, while a multi-level delta sigma modulator for lower bits.” So, how did all of this Swiss engineering translate to music? On my test tracks, and on other selections from Tidal’s and Qobuz’s streaming libraries, the Merason DAC1 MkII has been incredibly engaging to listen to. Clarity is very good as is the tonal quality. Bass is full, plump, deep, and powerful. Detail is also good but the strong suit of the Merason seems to be the wonderful tonal qualities and presence of the middle frequencies down into the bass. Both female and male vocals were handled in a manner that placed them as a main feature, underpinned by warm, full, deep bass lines and augmented by whatever other instruments were playing. However, unlike some equipment that seems to thrust the mids/vocals forward in the soundstage, the Merason kept everything in its place, and provided the effect of enveloping the listener in sound. As other reviewers have discussed in their own words, I also perceived high frequencies to typically play a bit of a supporting role as opposed to being part of the main attraction. This may account for what some have discussed as the “refined” sound of the Merason DAC1 MkII. Attack seems to be harmonically a bit lower in priority than decay, sustain, and release. As a result, the Merason is easy to listen to and never fatiguing although one trade-off may be a slight touch of smoothing-out of some rough edges, and not quite as “raw” a sound on music or vocals that are intended to sound “gritty”. To my ears, the effects described above are subtle and are not a detraction, especially given all of the other positive attributes the Merason exhibits. Some may simply say the Merason sounds “smoother.” Interestingly, when listening to the Merason, I do not perceive any loss of high frequencies or details but, as others have mentioned, the result is subtle and might be described as a sound we more commonly associate with vinyl records than digital sources. I was ok with this since the opposite usually leads to listening fatigue. I suggest reading the High Fidelity review, which I thought was well-written and accurate as to the salient features and sound of the Merason DAC1 MkII. The reviewer, Wojciech Pacula, described the DAC 1 as having, “perfectly balanced proportions, with an internally complex, refined sound. The latter is slightly lowered, with strong support in the mid-bass and in the breakthrough with the midrange. The treble, on the other hand, is selective, resolving, but also dense and more ‘loose’ than ‘biting.’" He goes on to conclude, “It's a dynamic, energetic presentation with a clear sonic signature in which richness and density are the most important features.” I agree that richness and (tonal) density are stand-out features of the Merason DAC1 MkII. Those are desirable attributes in my sonic world, which may be why I found the Merason DAC1 MkII engaging to listen to, although some listeners may wish for a more incisive type presentation. Not every DAC is going to engage every listener on every parameter to the same degree. On track after track, the Merason DAC1 MkII captured the organic beauty of vocal presentations and provided a rich, engaging delivery through my system. From Chris Cornell on “Songbook,” to James Taylor on “Steamroller Blues,” to Dominique Fils-Aime’ on “Birds,” to Sara Bareilles on “Gravity,” and more, the vocals were tonally dense and musical. Even the rock selections were presented with force, weight, and believability. The Merason never faltered, distorted, or became congested regardless of the material or the volume I played it at. Of course, there are trade-offs. To my ears, the Merason DAC1 MkII sounds a touch smoother and less “organic/natural” than what I hear when I play music through my Mojo Audio R-2R DACs. Going back and forth between the Merason and Mojo’s Mystique EVO Pro, I hear more granularity and front/back dimension through the Mojo Audio DAC, resulting in a sound that is slightly more incisive and could maybe be described as more “exciting,” while the Merason is perhaps slightly smoother and more focused on tonal density. What I hear may simply be the difference between listening to a DAC using (hybrid) Delta-Sigma conversion processes vs. DACs using R-2R conversion. Delta-Sigma conversion involves interpolation, noise shaping, and error correction to approximate the waveform, and is a process that can result in a smoother, idealized sound. In the end, these differences I have described do not make listening through the Merason any less engaging, just a bit different from what I am used to. This is a good example of how there is no one path to achieving a sonically gratifying result. The design choices Merason made have resulted in a DAC that is very enjoyable to listen to, even if it sounds a bit different from my other DACs. I am sitting here with Gov’t Mule’s version of Cortez the Killer blasting out of the speakers and it makes no difference to me that the Merason and Mojo Audio DACs sound a bit different from each other, all I can think of is how much I like listening to Warren Haynes and Gov’t Mule.
|
@brbrock - This review of the Mystique EVO shows a good image of the insides of the full-sized chassis that was used through the EVO Pro model and changed to the narrower but longer extruded chassis first used for the Mystique X. You should be able to gauge the size of the chokes from the image showing five of them in the full-sized chassis. |
@rja -Take a look at this review of the Mystique Y DAC, where Ken Redmond asks the same question you just asked, and received this answer:
|
@fuzzbutt17 @mitch2 How large is the power transformer and chokes on the Mystique DAC's. I can't tell from the pics. On other DAC's they may have several transformers but usually look smaller. |
@sns - Widely variable from as little as about 20 minutes to maybe 3 hours, with most being like a half-hour to 2 hours, sometimes listening intently and taking notes, other times reading or working on my computer. For these comparisons, I have kept a small notebook handy to record impressions as they occur. |
@mitch2 How long are your listening sessions with any one particular dac? Sometimes certain aspects of sound quality don't become clear to me with only short listening sessions. Longer sessions may expose very subtle anomalies of all kinds leading to a more analytical response and/or listener fatigue. |
This has been interesting in realizing how important it is to match SPLs (sound pressure levels) when comparing audio equipment. It is fine to listen and evaluate a unit on its own merits at various volume levels, but when directly comparing two or more units I have realized it is important to match the volume levels, or SPLs for the most meaningful comparison. Fortunately, my system has a buffer/preamp set-up with a numerical display of volume level so that once I use the Decibel X app to determine/estimate which VC settings produce the same SPL for the units being compared, I can easily switch between the units and select the appropriate volume level. This has been a bit eye-opening, not only because of how different the settings are for different equipment to achieve the same SPL, but more about how the sonic differences sometimes become less when SPLs are matched. Finally, it is also interesting to hear how different equipment may have a different optimal SPL for music playback in that some equipment seems to handle low-level listening better than other equipment and some equipment does better at the higher SPLs. |
@devinplombier the post by @classicrockfan. RIF. |
What’s the problem with naming the USA DAC that presumably was in your system and cost 10 times the cost and underperformed the SMSL?/// Because I know the person who owns the company and don't want to hurt his business. ///Also, you made the general statement that they outperform 10x more expensive USA and UK DACS, so what are all of those other DACs that you presumably compared the SMSL and Gustard directly to? /// Tried a stupidly expensive UK made DAC in my system found it very disappointed. that was owned by one of my associates. ///specifically how did they sound/perform better? /// Clarity, huge sound stage, deep tight bass, bluetooth convenience, etc.. |
@mitch2 - Another great review, Mitch. Looking forward to your comparative thoughts on the Merason DAC1 Mkii next. |
@no_regrets I thought of that at time I made post. Problem is I'm still in process of evaluating 006, burning in dac along with adjusting my perspectives and perceptions will take some time. Also, I'd expect @mitch2 has his hands full with dacs already on hand, I could never attempt that large a task, two dacs is a handful for me. However, a loan could be a consideration somewhere down the road if I feel the need to provide 006 with more exposure.
Issue is Musetec really misses the boat on marketing their products. Look at what Laiv does with their Harmony dac, multiple youtube videos and professional reviews within months of release which leads to relatively large number of sales. Denafrips another brand that understands how to market to the west. |
@mitch2 Absolutely agree with the notion that we need some time to adjust our perceptions when evaluating new equipment coming into system. I've often been incorrect in initial perspectives or judgements in this regard, longer term evaluation has long been my gold standard for decisions on which equipment stays.
I've long thought having multiple reference audio systems would be nirvana, each would present a unique presentation for whatever mood you were in. No doubt I'd be implementing delta sigma, R2R and FPGA dacs in these systems. |
@classicrockfan What’s the problem with naming the USA DAC that presumably was in your system and cost 10 times the cost and underperformed the SMSL? Also, you made the general statement that they outperform 10x more expensive USA and UK DACS, so what are all of those other DACs that you presumably compared the SMSL and Gustard directly to and specifically how did they sound/perform better? If you want people to seriously consider your recommendation provide specifics to support the contention |
| Post removed |
"""Curious do you have the SMSL and/or Gustard in your system? Also, which specific 10X more expensive DACs have you had in your system; and in what respects the 2 aforementioned outperformed each of the 10X more expensive ones?""" Yes I had the both performed almost identical but sold the Gustard and kept the SMSL for a couple of practical reasons. And yes I had an expensive DAC made in USA and sold it because it was totally outperformed by the much cheaper Chinese DAC in terms of sound quality and convenience but don't want to disclose the company name/brand. |
Hi @facten I’m not @classicrockfan but I have a similar experience. I had in my system Chord Qutest for many years. This May I bought an SMSL DO300EX built on the AKM 4499 chip. This DAC looks like a toy relatively to Hi End DAC but it sounds better in every way than Chord Qutest that cost 3 times more.SMSL noticeably more resolving, play sophisticated music, less congestion and sounds much less clinical and "digital". It also has 6 DSP filter modes. One of them "super slow" is actually NOS (not oversampling) mode like in some 2R2 DACs. The "super slow" mode is my favorite in this DAC. It sounds most analogue and natural without digital glare. Look at this: https://www.power-and-beyond.com/pcb-manufacturing-these-are-the-biggest-players-a-c38499760ae9053b34d796adf3d0746f/ Where is most PCB manufacturing today? SMSL is a mass market producer. It uses the latest PCB and switching power supply technologies that China has today. The same technologies used for high speed communication. Western audiophile garage companies can’t compete with SMSL in PCB design. OK, they can use better quality capacitors and other parts, heavy aluminium chassis. But all this increases the final cost of the product and in result you pay in number times more. Why western DAC built on the same AKM4499 chip with solid state output buffer have an order of magnitude worse distortions? Do these distortions make sound better? |
@sns Just a thought…. Seeing as how you would really like to have his opinion on how it sounds directly compared with the others in his collection of dacs, maybe you would consider sending your to him so that he could conduct the review for you 👍 Just a thought. Best wishes, Don |