Did you compare the LTA to the Benchmark or Merason DACs?
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.
332 responses Add your response
@soix - Absolutely. I had all six DACs here at once over the past month and the LTA Aero is the only one that had to be returned. I own the others. I had five of them powered up and on my stand and three or four of them connected through the DDC at any one time. At first, the only one out of the mix was the Mojo Mystique X SE NCZ. I listened to all of them off and on for a couple of weeks and then began focusing on whichever DAC that I was preparing a write-up for. The three you asked about offer three quite different presentations, IMO, so at least for me an apples to apples comparison would be difficult. They all bring their strengths to the table, but not the same strengths. That is why it is important for buyers to think about which sonic attributes they value most, since no one DAC is likely to fully cover every base. I am trying to write about the strengths and limitations of each unit, as I hear them, and then at the end I will consider preparing a short summary comparison of all six. However, I cannot tell a prospective buyer which unit would work out best for them. As we read many times in these threads, you really do need to hear stuff for yourself. |
Really appreciate all your time and effort here. Thank you @mitch2 |
@mitch2 - Thanks for the thoughtful review. You’ve been doing an admirable job of communicating your impressions while maintaining a nuanced and objective perspective. I’m sitting here listening to my LTA Microzotl preamp. It’s a wonderful component. Just superb. Based on your description, I’m convinced I’d be happy with their DAC too. Looking forward to the rest of the reviews! |
BENCHMARK DAC3 HGC Benchmark DAC3 HGC Reviews
Benchmark DAC3 HGC Benchmark Media Systems, Inc. is essentially a manufacturer of professional audio equipment that has crossed over into the home audio realm. They offer a full line of audio electronics including DACs, ADCs, preamplifiers, headphone amplifiers, power amplifiers, and cables. Their products are known for being rugged, no-frills, good-sounding, long-lasting, and to provide excellent measured performance. Consistent with their pro audio background, Benchmark products are balanced designs and offer balanced connections. The Benchmark DAC3 HGC is Benchmark’s top-of-the-line DAC and, in addition to DAC duties, the DAC3 HGC offers an analog preamp, a special digital/analog hybrid volume control, and a headphone amplifier. I purchased a DAC3 HGC to perform as a DAC/preamp combo for my outdoor system and, when I tried it in my main home system, I was a bit surprised at how good it sounded. In these DAC comparisons, I am using the DAC3 HGC as a DAC only, and not as a headphone amplifier or preamp. I listened from the balanced outputs only. The DAC3 HGC costs $2,399 making it by far the least expensive DAC out of the six I am currently comparing. Since I am using it as a DAC only, I could have used the DAC3 B for $1,899 since that unit is a DAC only, sans headphone amplifier and preamp, with the exact same DAC sections and input/output connections as the DAC3 HGC. If you want the DAC and the preamp but not the headphone amplifier, the DAC3 L provides that combination for $2099. The linked reviews provide just about every bit of information you could possibly want about the DAC3 HGC including measurements, that are included with the Stereophile, Audio Science Review, and GoldenSound reviews, so please read the reviews for more information about the design, construction, aesthetics, and performance measurements. The Head Fi Forum review by T Bone is very positive and surprisingly comprehensive, from an end-user standpoint, and the Stereophile measurements are concluded by John Atkinson, who wrote, “Benchmark’s DAC3 HGC offers state-of-the-art measured performance. All I can say is ’Wow!’” Amirm, at the (dreaded by some) Audio Science Review measured the DAC3 HGC (see linked review) and said, “The Benchmark DAC3 HGC …has substantially lower noise than all the other DACs I have tested.” Amirm concluded, “Measurements are exceptional with no faults found anywhere. OK, there is a setback in linearity for unbalanced output but otherwise, this is as good it gets guys.” Most of the reviewers praised the DAC3 HGC not only for its reliable operation and performance measurements, but also for how good it sounds. Reviewers called out the DAC3 HGC’s bass response and power, low-level information, drive and dynamics, expansive soundstage, stability of pitch, and tonal balance. Some of the reviewers allude to an opinion that certain (usually more expensive) DACs provide a little more of some sonic attribute than what they heard from the DAC3, but they mostly agree that this is a good-sounding DAC that faithfully converts and reproduces the digital signal that is fed into it. In his 2023 Stereophile follow-up review of the DAC3 B, John Atkinson says about the sound, “Perhaps there wasn’t quite the sense of ease I had become used to with the ($18,680 N31 CD player/DAC) MBL processor, but the fatigue-free wealth of recorded detail was a consistent factor in my auditioning of the DAC3 B.” One interesting review of the DAC3 HGC was posted at GoldenSound Audio and written by an unnamed author, who gave the DAC3 faint praise by calling the sound “good-ish”. The reviewer stated, “I couldn’t point out any particular problems or specific issues in the sound. There were no troubles with sibilance, no lack of impact on energetic tracks, it could stage decently, and detail retrieval was good.” However, the reviewer found the “spatial presentation” to be lacking compared to other similarly priced DACs from Gustard, SML, and Holo, and vocals to sound a bit “dry”. In the reviewer’s opinion, “The DAC3 provides something of a ‘wall of sound’ as opposed to a fully separated and distinct rendition of each element.” The reviewer also stated, “Soundstage is another element that was remarkably ‘just ok’ on the DAC3,” and “vocals are just slightly too dry, without the required body and warmth that his (i.e., Jon Batiste, St. Augustine High School Marching 100) voice portrays on various other chains.” The review was accompanied by measurements of the DAC3 HGC and followed by a few posted comments by readers, including comments by John Siau, VP, Benchmark Media Systems, Inc. Siau discussed how Benchmark’s ultraclock PLL provides an 85dB jitter reduction and that jitter would be essentially inaudible at anything below about 145dB SPL, a sound level you would never achieve from your home system. Most interesting to me was how the GoldenSound reviewer made the effort to describe specific aspects of the DAC3 HGC that they presumed are affecting the overall listener satisfaction of music played through that DAC. The other reviewers didn’t go that far and mostly pointed out the many positive aspects of the DAC3 HGC, with some of them adding an “except for”. A common theme seems to highlight the contrast of the DAC3 HGC’s transparency vs. the apparent greater musicality of some competitors. Is it possible the issues related to spatial presentation, soundstage, and timbre that were discussed by the GoldenSound reviewer transcend the importance of measurements alone in defining what sounds good? How else do you explain how a DAC that does nothing overtly “wrong,” displays technical measurements that seem to be close to exemplary yet, for some, falls a little short in a few key areas that are critical for listening enjoyment? Score one for the “not everything can be measured” crowd. The audio forums seem split on the issue, with some posters believing the DAC3 HGC sounds great while others seem to respect the measured and technical performance of the DAC3 HGC yet find something critical to their listening enjoyment to be missing. In my system, the DAC3 HGC sounded pretty good (I know, here we go with the faint praise), and particularly at the price-point. It is amazing to me how this (comparatively) very small box can perform at a level that at least approaches what I hear from units many times larger, many times heaver, and many times more expensive. I consider the DAC3 HGC as sort of a “Benchmark” (sorry, couldn’t resist) in that it seems to reproduce the sound as recorded, without sonic embellishment. The DAC3 HGC doesn’t seem to add a sound signature of its own, good or bad. I would describe it as being “even-handed.” It is better than competent, and IMO can be trusted to reproduce your digital files and streams with clarity, drive, and a realistic tone. The positive attributes I heard included full, hard-hitting bass, accurate tonality, and a clarity through the midrange that is effective in the reproduction of vocals. To my ears, the DAC3 HGC is surprisingly more musical than the audio forum chatter would have you believe. However, in comparison to the other DACs in my room it did not seem quite as dimensional as the Mojo Audio DACs (spatial presentation?), was less refined than the Merason, and was less exciting and perceptively “flatter” sounding than the LTA Aero. As to my music selections, the harder rockers were handled effectively and convincingly, and the DAC3 HGC was able to play loud without distorting or breaking up. All of the selections were played convincingly with the bass on the opening of Birds, by Dominique Fils-Aime’, being plump and full, and her vocals displaying a beautiful tone and life-like texture. The quiet background was effective on Steely Dan’s Babylon Sisters lending to the convincing play between Donald Fagen and the back-up singers with instrumentals filling in as intended. Alison Krauss’ vocals on Come and Go Blues were initially delicate and eventually building in emotion throughout the choruses, as intended. The keyboards sounded real and the sound of the strings matched the intent, from delicate to lively. Hall ambiance and crowd noise on live tunes like Gov’t Mule’s Thorazine Shuffle were well proportioned and properly positioned, and the solid bass from the DAC3 HGC added to the enjoyment of Allen Woody’s underpinning of Warren Haynes’ powerful vocals. Sort of like what I heard from the Tambaqui, there doesn’t seem to be much to complain about with the DAC3 HGC, yet still, my listening perceptions lead me to believe there are intangibles that cause some listeners, including myself, to achieve greater enjoyment with other DACs. What is an intangible? Crap, I don’t know but it may have something to do with the factors discussed in the GoldenSound review. I seem to hear more “pop” and excitement from the LTA Aero and somehow a more realistic impression of instruments through the Mojo Audio and SMc Audio DACs. The Merason seems to play music in a more refined manner. Several of these other DACs seem to do a better job of transporting me to the live venue, or to the recording studio, where real musicians are playing and singing. How can a DAC that almost perfectly reproduces a digital signal not sound better than other DACs, that are not quite so perfect? This hobby of home audio is subjective with most of us seeking enjoyment over perfection. That explains why so many manufacturers producing different sounding gear can be successful and why there is never a clear “winner” or “one to rule them,” no matter how hard some who frequent audio forums try to find one. This is another reason to consider these comparisons as nothing more than subjective observations based on my own experiences and preferences. In summary, while I could happily live with the DAC3 HGC, in my main system, I prefer to listen to most of the other DACs here, which range from around 2x to 5x the price of the DAC3 HGC. However, I certainly appreciate what Benchmark has accomplished for what, in the world of high’ish end audio, is a very accessible price. It is accurate, dynamic, unflappable, and IMO more musical than many give it credit for. If I didn’t already have a fairly mature system, I would certainly consider upgrading my amplification chain prior to spending more on a DAC. I would also not argue with those who find the DAC3 HGC to be their end-game DAC.
|
@mitch2 You may already know the answer to the question I am asking. Benjamin from Mojo Audio has said that his DAC's are great at time and timbre especially during dynamic changes from the use of chokes. I understand what he is saying but I have never heard his DAC's. Will you speak specifically of the MojoAudio DACs to the others and let us know if you notice a difference. Plenty of DACs use several transformers and lots of Capacitors but none have chokes. I am curious just how much this plays into the sound. |
@brbrock - Check out my write-up on the Mojo Audio Mystique EVO Pro Z that I posted on 9-14-24 @ 1:12pm |
As with all dacs your perception may be a bit different then mine . Personally I feel the T+A200 dac at $7400:the best value in a high end dac I Sell the Very good. Denafrips New Generation -15 dacs ,not just an upgrade line of Dacs, these will meet and or exceed anything in their price class ,.Holo springs makes a good product , for Tube dacs Lampizators upper end is very good which I have owned , Aqua also make a solid product ,.
|
@mitch2 All I can say is wow: terrific undertaking and execution. Thank you! I will be receiving the LTA Aero soon to compare to my PS Audio DSD v2. I am familiar with the 12sn7 tubes and the kind of energized presentation they are capable of. Might need taming a bit for my sensibilities. I am looking forward to tube rolling it. |
@markmuse - Michael Lavorgna at Twittering Machines is planning to post a follow-up review (Part 2) of his LTA Aero based on his tube rolling and what he hears when trying different tubes. Had I been in the market for a DAC in the price range of the Aero, I definitely would have had at least one extra set of tubes ready to try. It is certainly possible that a different set of tubes could improve on what is already a good-sounding DAC. Keep in mind it also uses 6SN7s FWIW. |
@mitch2 Yes, I am aware of that coming review. Wish it was available now. I do have some RCA 12sn7 GTA's and I am looking for some 6 volts now. It also occurred to me that I might try 12au7's with adapters - I have gone the other way with 12sn7's with adapters in my Backert Labs Rhythm, but prefer the slightly more laid back presentation of the 12au7's in it. |
Just to add my 2 cents....I've had the Aero DAC for a few weeks now. I found the unit to be quite musical and enjoyable with the stock tubes. When I tube-rolled a pair of Ken Rad Black Glass WW2 6SN7/231s, the result went to another level. Richer and denser with real slam! Of course this is my preferable listening bias. Cardas Golden Cross cables with a Puritan Ultimate power cord add to this presentation. I only do Red Book via SimAudio 260D transport in this setup. |
@markmuse I'll be receiving the Aero soon as well, and am looking forward to hearing how it compares to the DSD Mk2. |
@stuartk Brent Jessie has some. Not inexpensive though. |
@classicrockfan "Must include the SMSL SUX and Gustard A26... these $1000 Chinese made DACs totally outperform 10X more expensive DACs made in USA or UK" 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? |
@stuartk There's also some on e-bay....you need a matched pair to avoid potential gain imbalances. And yes, they have become quite expensive. |
Thanks, guys. I can’t see buying a dac if I need to procure expensive/hard-to-find tubes in order to be satisfied with its sonics. And no; I can’t say for certain I wouldn’t like the Aero with stock tubes but given my tastes and what I’ve read here so far, I’m not tempted. You ask such uncomfortable questions! ;o)
|
@stuartk I wouldn’t rule it out based upon that. It’s something I enjoy fussing with. Read the reviews. They are based on the stock tubes. And it is unlikely you will ever have to replace the tubes. |
@markmuse - I wouldn’t rule out the Aero based on my impressions, which were mostly positive. Also, remember there is a 14-day trial period. I will try and get my hands on a Mystique Y, which would help provide a bit of contrast at the $4K price point. The other ones I would like to hear and haven’t are the Holo May KTE and Terminator 15th, but I am not buying more DACs. BTW, starting with the Merason comparisons, I have been using the Decibel X app to match SPLs the best I can. I realized these DACs all have different output voltages and different presentation styles so getting the SPLs close for comparisons will be helpful. |
@mitch2 It would be greatly informative and appreciated if you could somehow procure a Musetec MH-DA006 for comparative review. I know you're aware of it and admiring of the technology. Problem is so many unaware of it. I recently purchased and compared to my previous reference, Musetec 005, also recently purchased Laiv Harmony. So, in my comparisons of these three dacs I found 006 simply plays on a different level, a level of resolution/transparency the others can't compete with. In my mind this plays at a level of Mola Mola Tambaqui which I will procure in due time.
In any case, would be informative as how this much technology at this relatively ridiculous low price would compare to dacs you have on hand. I'd suggest with a fairly high degree of certainty the 006 would do quite well. Now, I would add, perhaps this exact presentation may not be everyone's cup of tea, being I own the Harmony and very much appreciate the unique R2R NOS presentation. |
That is really the thing. In the old days, before PETA and SPCA (with which I volunteer), we used to say, "there is more than one way to skin a cat". The point is, none of these DACs presents the same sound, at least in my room. However they will each have their proponents and detractors. I have moved my comparison listening on to the Merason DAC1 MkII and, as sort of a preview, I had really hoped it was going to be something special. When I first hooked it up my impression was, "really, this is the DAC that is winning awards?" However, after completing my time with the LTA Aero and Benchmark DAC3 and removing those from my system, I have really spent some time listening to the Merason and I also reinstalled the Mystique X NCZ so I could compare them. There is a reason some manufacturers say a product needs to burn in, and it may have less to do with the components "burning in" and more to do with the listener becoming acclimated with something new. A shorter way to say this is that the Merason is a really nice sounding DAC, but it does sound a bit different from the other DACs here. I suspect what I am hearing may be the difference between really good R-2R DACs and a DAC with a really good delta-sigma type sound. However, I haven't had a delta-sigma DAC here since the Ayre QB-9 DSD years ago, and the Merason sounds way better than my recollection of the Ayre. Also, I am not sure it is correct to call the Merason a (fully) delta-sigma DAC since, the PCM1794A chip is considered a hybrid. I have been looking into what this means and found this:
|
@sns - Regarding the Musetec MH-DA006, I like the appearance and there are design aspects of that DAC that look very interesting. Also, I could input I2S out of the Singxer DDC. I do keep hearing how the $4K'ish price range is getting jam-packed with good sounding digital. Adding a Musetec MH-DA006 would certainly be interesting at the $4K price point since I believe I plan to add a Mojo Audio Mystique Y to the comparisons, which is also $4K (although Benjamin at Mojo Audio sold one of his demos and needs to fill orders before I can get one). However, I am not going to buy any more DACs for awhile, and I probably wouldn't buy a DAC at the $4K price point, but if there were another way to get my hands on a Musetec for an audition (somewhere between two weeks and a month), I would certainly consider it. |
@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 |
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? |
"""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. |
| Post removed |
@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 |
@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. |
@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 - Another great review, Mitch. Looking forward to your comparative thoughts on the Merason DAC1 Mkii next. |
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.. |
@devinplombier the post by @classicrockfan. RIF. |
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. |
@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. |
