What's the best Tube DAC you have heard?

If you have the opportunity to hear one, the new Acoustic Plan DAC is the best tube DAC I have heard. Actually it is the best DAC of any kind I have heard.

Hi James1969,

i still own my Zanden DAC, having listen carefully to DCS Scarlatti full stack, Emm Labs CDSA, DCS Elgar Plus stack, Wadia 7, ARC CD3,5,7,8, Krell 505 and Meridian 808.2.

I do not disagree the DCS Scarlatti generates a level of clean signal like i have not heard before...remarkable. The Wadia 7 is excellent. 808.2 is suprising but perhaps it felt a little less 'punchy' dynamic to me...not sure why though Dealer agreed.

In the end, despite Zanden showing its age relative to DCS in terms of quiet noise floor, detail...i still have nothing that makes me set it and forget and listen to music. i am keeping it. now, i am just waiting for the second hand transport to get to a level where i can trade some of my other equipment for it!!!

Then i will sit on this for 5 years and enjoy my cds and wait til hi-res has matured a bit more. dont wish to rush in given that there is still very little stock of hi-res available compared to 16/44.1

oh and upgrading tubes inside to Amperex 7308 (and power supply tubes to mullards) was a huge improvement.

Hi Gerald,

Dev's 6-6-11 suggestion merits consideration. I've only owned a sole DAC...Audio Note 4.1X Balanced -- it's NOS, i.e., non-oversampling.

Best,
Sam

One more point I have to make, once in a while a high end expensive component hits the market and raises the bar for the competition, the Zanden DAC was one of them IMHO. There are other tube DACs out there for sure, some of them probably very very good, I have not heard them all, but the Zanden is truly a special piece to experience. If you got the $$$, it's a joy to listen too and own.

That was the first component that pushed me into the upper range of audio.

Be wary of those kinds of components, they will cost you more than the price of admission, because then you find weaker links in your system, and you will want to keep going. :)

I've seen them come and go on here, the pre-Signature models (mark 1,2,3,4) I think go for under 5k, and the Signature model seems to go anywhere above 7k (i think).

As for a HiRez DAC, I'm not sure, I have an RME (Pro Audio) Firewire DAC that sounds good for now. It seems the high end world is trying to catch up to the HiRez formats. Not sure exactly what's out there.

I often think maybe going back to a Zanden, they really are that good. The gentleman who purchased my old Zanden was talking about all these other DACs he had been comparing, and then when he received the Zanden, he was floored as well.

With the Zanden, you get it all with no compromise, only you are limited to Redbook CD format - 16 bits. Does not sound digital AT ALL. Period. At the time, SACD never crossed my mind.

Maybe one day there will be a HiRez contender, just waiting patiently.

How much are Zandens on the used market these days?

And which hi rez DACs today might be candidates to dethrone the Zanden?

If you want to take a Zanden to the next level, try a digital clock, that will improve the sound considerably making it sound more coherent.

Some users report no difference in sound when trying a digital clock, I suspect the DAC in question has some type of clocking improvement, but the Apogee BigBen had a significant impact on the Zanden.

The nice feature about the BigBen is you could use it as an input switch between various digital devices - DVD player, Redbook transport, PC, cable box.

hi jax2:

here is another choice which will drive you crazy.....snip

I'll try to control myself.

It isn't your choices at all that drive me crazy. I have loved the Quad 57 in a friend's system, and probably would enjoy the Zanden and the CJ. I just would not express it quite the same way, and get tired of reading those sort of boring, glorified statements being elevated and hyped to be anything more or less than what they are...simply one person's opinion, just like all the rest. Spare me the rhetoric, please. You stated it far better in the brief statement in your second post, which was straight to the point:

i have yet to hear sytem that resembles the "classic" tube sound to the degree i heard when a zanden dac was part of a stereo system.

Enough said...nothing need be added or subtracted.

As far as your extraordinary abilities of discernment, and remarkable aural memory...whatever works for you. Good for you. You are a god among audiophiles.

hi jax2:

here is another choice which will drive you crazy. my favorite amp is the cj mv 125. i have not heard it my own system, but in many other systems. each time i hear a system with that amp, the system sounds rich. that's good enough for me.

in fact i would propose a wager.

you can provide any number of amps and i will blindfold myself. i will bet i will prefer the sound of the sound of a stereo system with the cj in it compared to the how the system sounds with the other amps in it.

o know, another unscientific proposition.

but i am so confident, i am willing to put money on my intuitive conjecture.

one more thing, when i purchased my speakers, i did not audition it in my house nor compare it to other speakers at a dealer's showroom. it is still my favorite speaker--the original quad (57).

the point is i am able to render judgments about components i like without having to hear them in my own system or compare them to other like-components. i could create a stereo system in such a manner and be very happy with its performance. it certainly is an unconventional and iconoclastic approach that violates accepted procedures for evaluating equipment., but it works for me.

When I got a Zanden DAC, I stopped thinking about it.

Before owning the Zanden, I had a 47 labs Flatfish/Progression with various tweaks. Before owning the 47 Labs, I owned a Audio Research CD-3.

Before purchasing the CD-3, I had listened to the Mark Levinson CDP, Cary 303 and others (can't think of them all).

The Zanden was in a league of it's own compared to all the ones I listed, not even a close race.

I have since sold the Zanden and I'm looking for a hi rez capable DAC.

if you listen to say 100 stereo syetms, each containing a particular component, one may induce, if one observes a consistent sonic characteristic, that the compoent may have a certain quality. such a conclusion is based upon induction.

let's consider an example of a person, whom you observe in many different situations. suppose that person, a stranger, exhaibits a consistent characteristic. one could say, granted, with some probability, that the person has a a particular personality trait.

so to, my comment about the zanden, is a probabilistic statement.

Mr. Tennis - Thank you for clarifying your parameters for judgment.

There are so many variables present in listening to 100 different stereo systems, not the least of which are synergy and the profound effects of the listening rooms they're in, not to mention time between listening and dubious aural memory, that I cannot begin to fathom your confidence in making such a judgment based upon probability. I'm glad you can sort out exactly and consistently which characteristics are being rendered by which component, in each and every case, and keep track of all of it, throughout so much vast experience and exposure. Alas, I am confident that I am not at all capable of such discernment.

i don't have to hear a direct comparison to form an opinion about a product.

If you state, "...it smokes them all," I would certainly expect that you'd made direct comparisons to make such a bold statement, which is quite obviously your opinion (that goes without saying). I think that's not an unreasonable expectation, but I suppose others have become more numb to such rhetoric here.

Thank you all for your contributions here. Definitely gave me something to investigate and that minimax is a interesting piece.

I appreciate everyone's!

Gerald

hi jax2:

i forgot to respond to your question regarding the context of the phrase "regardless of sound".

what i meant implies that audiophiles have favorite components which sound different. the criteria that audiophiles use to judge the merits of components can vary among audiophiles. its use probably was superfluous and did not add anything useful in my previous post. thus, i apologize for stating that which is redundant or irrelevant.

if you listen to say 100 stereo syetms, each containing a particular component, one may induce, if one observes a consistent sonic characteristic, that the compoent may have a certain quality. such a conclusion is based upon induction.

let's consider an example of a person, whom you observe in many different situations. suppose that person, a stranger, exhaibits a consistent characteristic. one could say, granted, with some probability, that the person has a a particular personality trait.

so to, my comment about the zanden, is a probabilistic statement.

i certain;y have a reason to consider the zanden dac as my favorite dac, even though i have not compared it to other dacs or heard it in my own syst3em.

i would go so far as to bet that in a blind test or other type of comparison with another dac, that i would prefer the zanden over another dac. i am confident of my preference for the original zanden dac, in absence of direct comparisons, because of my vast experience of listening to thousands of stereo systems.

since all answers to the posted question are opinions, i am answering honestly, based upon the information available to me.

i don't have to hear a direct comparison to form an opinion about a product.

There is also some great info. in the thread above titled

"Reference DACS: An overall perspective"

with regard to the zanden, while i have not executed a direct comparision with other dacs, i have yet to hear sytem that resembles the "classic" tube sound to the degree i heard when a zanden dac was part of a stereo system. so while not a truly scientific statement, it is based upon my audition of 1000's of stereo systems, including my own.

the allusion to "smokes" them all is an obvious figure of speech and not meant to be taken literally.

No, that comparison doesn't sound remotely scientific, or even qualifiable. It sounds like a pretty blatant exaggeration based upon acoustic/aural memory of systems that don't necessarily bear any resemblance to the system/room/music you might have heard the Zanden with. Feel free to correct me here. I suppose your vast experience with so many systems can filter all that information and all of those variables, and render a sound judgment (pun intended) that's as good as a direct comparison? Your simple statement above regarding the DAC having a classic tube sound would have been more to the point and less misleading, IMHO. The "allusion" you mention may be a figure of speech but it does directly imply direct comparisons in order to come up with such a conclusion. Comparisons that are not direct, as I'm now understanding yours to be (as you've disclosed), are.... well, I won't even pass that judgment I'll just leave that one to others to judge for themselves, lets just say I think you should have disclosed that from the start rather than using the metaphor, or allusion that you chose, whether or not a figure of speech (and a highly overused one in these forums I might add). Your original post strikes me as so many posts to these forums do, as a rather grandiose exaggeration of hierarchy based upon little or no direct comparison. Again, perhaps I am missing something about that first statement in your first post(?). What did you mean by "regardless of sound"?

with regard to the zanden, while i have not executed a direct comparision with other dacs, i have yet to hear sytem that resembles the "classic" tube sound to the degree i heard when a zanden dac was part of a stereo system. so while not a truly scientific statement, it is based upon my audition of 1000's of stereo systems, including my own.

the allusion to "smokes" them all is an obvious figure of speech and not meant to be taken literally.

Here is where I got the OPA2604. These are a standard DIP8 and drop right in:

http://www.newark.com/texas-instruments/opa2604ap/ic-op-amp-dual-fet-ip-2604-dip8/dp/97K6814

Here is where I got the AD797B. These require the adapter.

http://cimarrontechnology.com/so8to8-pindipadapterpn970601-3.aspx

Here is the article that Doug did for Dagogo. It also has all of the info you will need:

http://dagogo.com/View-Article.asp?hArticle=864

Again, a BIG THANKS to Douglas Schroeder for taking all of this on!

The Mullard is a sweet, warm, vocal driven tube. Very open and throws a huge, wide and deep soundstage. My favorite brand of tube and I've tried them all.

Actually, one more question for you, how does that Mullard sound? Is it real sweet and warm or what. Thanks again.

Hey mofimadness, where did you get your op amps? Those are the same ones I am going to get. I've also noticed that many times there is an extra letter designation following the numbers you give for the op amps...do you know what those numbers/letters indicate? Thanks.

Doug,

I owe my op-amp combo to you and your hard work in rolling for the article in Dagogo! I'm a Mullard man, so that's my tube of choice.

I have a CEC TL-2 transport and Grover Huffman digital cable and analog cable.

Mofimadness, I can understand why you would be enjoying it; you have a lovely combo of opamps and tube with the Minimax.

Out of curiosity which transport and cabling are you using?

Not all of my list has tubes but here are my favs....Museatex Bidat, Audiomeca Enkianthus (1st gen and X model), Camelot Uther Mk 4, Kora Hermes (if modded), Audio Aero Capitole (has digital in, so can be used as a DAC), Check out the TADAC..a real sleeper and very flexible with tube rolling. EAD 9000 Mk 3 (whatever was the last version). The Berkeley is quite good.

I have been using a VAC DAC 2 Mk 2 for many years----done a lot of A/B with other digital gear---the VAC remains-----I also own an Audio Logic 34 which is very close to the VAC (same person designed both, Jerry Ozment)

since nobody has specified what "best" means, the implicit connotation is one's favorite dac, regardless of its sound.

in that case, the first zanden dac smokes them all.

Regardless of its sound? What else would it be a favorite on the basis of? Its looks, perhaps...construction? I kind of lost you there.

It is reasonable to assume the OP is asking for a personal favorite based upon experience. What qualifies as "best" obviously will differ from person to person depending upon their priorities. In this respect, the best one could hope to come away with is a general idea of what some people prefer, and use that as a point of departure. If one wanted to reference this further one might go back and look at the posting history and or ask questions of the person rendering the opinion, to further discover where their preferences might be similar or disimilar to their own. Your statement, "...the zanden smokes them all," implies that you've heard "them all" in direct comparison to the Zanden. In what respect does it "smoke them all"? And what "all" have you done direct comparisons with, having both DAC's in the same system in the same room, at the same time?

since nobody has specified what "best" means, the implicit connotation is one's favorite dac, regardless of its sound.

in that case, the first zanden dac smokes them all.

I loved the Modwright Transporter. With the tubes optimized, it is difficult to imagine it could be bettered without dropping a whole lot more cash. It directly serves your computer-based library as well. If you can find an Audio-GD reference 7 or 8 (no longer available) - They don't have a tube output, but are an outstanding implementation of the PCM1704UK chip, rumored to be discontinued by TI, and one of the last great R2R chips - both DAC's I'm currently using utilize these DAC chips and render a very natural sound. There are other great players and DAC's that utilized this chip as well. If you are looking at tubes for the reasons I assume you are, I'd also consider this direction, in which case you would not really need a tube buffer to cure hyper-detailed digititis because it won't be there if that R2R chip is well implemented. Not that there aren't great delta-sigma options (the Transporter actually uses an AKM delta-sigma chip).

Cwlondon,

If you are asking about the Mininmax DAC, it only has (1) tube, so cost is very inexpensive. Not sure yet on lifespan, but I don't think they run the tube very high.

As far as a second place DAC goes, the Kora, EAD and Counterpoint have remained through many DAC shoot outs.

I missed a couple of recent DACs from my above post, add:

Cambridge DACMagic
MHDT Havana and Paradisea
Wyred DAC 1

Just remember that all of these were in my system, my room and my tastes in sound. YMMV

Mofimadness

Can you comment on tube costs and lifespan when rolling?

And what would be your second place contenders?

Regards,

I have had or still have:

ARC DAC-3 MKII
ARC DAC-2
ARC DAC-5
Kora Hermes (excellent)
EAD DSP7000III
Counterpoint DA-10
PS Audio DLIII
Benchmark Dac
Bel Canto 1 & 2
Theta DS PRO GEN III, IV and V
CAL Audio Sigma and Alpha
Meridian Several different ones

and many more.

Mofimadness,

Can you share more about the other dac's you've tried out that you feel the Minimax Dac beat out in your experience; thanks.

Gerald

The Eastern Electric Minimax DAC with some op-amp rolling is INCREDIBLE! I finally bought one to try and it's frickin' amazing.

OPA2604 in the U1 & U2 positions and the AD797B in the U6 & U7 positions for op-amps with a Mullard CV4003 tube...WOW!!!

Probably the best digital I have ever heard and I've owned a lot of DACs.

Used ARC DAC-3 MKII or Audio Note zero oversampling units are hard to beat for the price.