W4S DAC1 & STP-SE vs. W4S DAC2 as digital frontend

Came on this thread (obviously) late but thought I'd chime in... I called W4S right when the Dac2 came out with the same question... Spoke to one of their techs and he shared that as long as it was (obviously) a digital signal, There should be NO difference, it's why they designed it... Shares common components and design.

IMHO, a better question with which to begin this thread would have been: "What is the best digital front end for the dollar for the EP CS 2.3's?" And, to my initial surprise, the most satisfying answer I have found so far doesn't involve W4S gear (although it still involves W4S amps). Note that the CS 2.3's are designed to be bi-amped, and ideally can be tri-amped to take the passive mid/tweet crossover out of the equation.

The speakers come with the Behringer DCX2496 AD/DA processor for room correction in the digital domain. The Behringer, however, is inserted into the signal path after a stand alone DAC like the W4S DAC1 or DAC2. The Behringer, limited to 24/96 resolution, has been the subject of some legitimate criticism for the sonic artifacts that it generates.

Rather than use the Behringer (which designer Clayton Shaw says he assumed from the start would soon be superceded by a more elegant solution), Its possible to do room correction in the digital domain before the DAC. I understand that that's what the Spatial Computer software that Clayton designed does; it will reside on a computer music player like my Mach2 Mini, and makes its digital rom corrections before the digital music files reach my DAC.

Since I'm going to tri-amp the speakers (for now, using the W4S Mini MC-7 as an affordable interim solution - kudos to Walter Liederman for urging the 3 amp solution in conjunction with the best firewire pre-pro DAC I can afford), I'll need at least 3 channels out of the DAC. That leaves out the W4S DAC1 or DAC2. The pro audio Apogee Ensemble fits the bill: dead quiet and purportedly a great sonic match for the speakers, according to Walter and Clayton.

I still get to fantasize about new gear, because when I can afford it I want to have a W4S ST-1000 or 2 SX-1000 monos on the bass drivers, a W4S ST-500 or ST-250 on the midrange (Walter says the speakers were designed for those amps), and something more exotic on top.

So anyway, that's what I should have said, although it was more fun to say it the way I did.

i agree with face, but feel it is also somewhat conditional. yes, there will be a difference, most notably with low end detail. BUT, this is somewhat dependent on the amount of gain present in your system. if you can run the DAC2 at around -15 to -20 db, the differences will be far less pronounced than if you have to attenuate the signal severely.

The DAC-1/STP-SE combo will be superior to using the DAC-2 as a DAC/Pre. Not a night and day difference, but it is noticeable. Most notably in bass, dimensionality, and dynamics.

What a mysterious answer that was.

In the short time since I typed-in the run-on inquiry above, I have done gone and got religion. Did what I should have done before typing my question and searched the hoary threads on this site about whether to preamp vel non. Searched for threads about the care and feeding of my speakers. Lo, and behold, I found the answer. Alright, not THE answer, but my answer. First off, I was asking the wrong question, or asking the question backwards-like. And, second, well, there's no second. So, what I re-discovered is something that Walter Liederman mentioned to me in passing before I evened formed a question: Spatial Computers and Clayton Shaw. Good thing I didn't actually but anything else yet. It's not too late for this boy. Thank you for your indulgence, and that's all folks.