Wyred DACS

Johsti... Yes, it seems all Wyred products go for a 6moons glowing review, so whatever that means. There's a good handfull of Agon members that I would rather have review it, as well as listen to it myself. Specs make for interesting reading but have very little sound.
Paul

When it first came out the scuttlebutt was it was scary close to the best out there at any price. My testing and comparison showed it was probably the best in its price range, with the possible exception of the Tranquility, but it was simply close to the best out there - not scary close. I am still happy, even with the balance issue and am glad I got the DAC.

Thanks
Bill

Hi Paul,

I know what you mean. What other dac are you considering? Will you be using the usb input?

Thanks,
No Regrets

Pkubica, I took a chance an ordered one (DAC2) a few weeks back, and as previously mentioned it shipped Friday.

I as you had high hopes, unfortunately, now I'm a bit worried, especially considering the W4S restocking fee policy.

I hear what you're saying Paul, but if you are referring to the 6moons review, it hasn't come out yet. They have a preview that mentions the features, but a full review has not been published yet. I'm looking forward to reading it.

I've been following this thread and others for the last 3-4 months and was really hoping for great things from the Wyred DACs. I've been a big fan of the Wyred amps for several years.

However, my feeling is that it just isn't happening... at least for now. I saw one pro review and it was a list of all the nifty parts but couldn't seem to review the sound. All in all this has been a very frustrating piece of audio gear to make a determination on. Also, without a way to hear one before buying adds to the frustration.

I have been ready to call and order one on several occasions and give Wyred the benefit of the doubt, but in the end I'm going to pass and go with a more proven, musical sounding DAC.

Thanks to all who have provided their comments!
Paul

I just noticed the note on the W4S web site about this.
My DAC 2 was shipped from W4S on Friday, hopefully it has the fix.

Hi Guys

Been playing around with the DAC and have noticed the right side is louder than the left. I don't know why we didn't notice it before - all I can think of is when we were testing it the balance was adjusted to compensate or maybe it only happens on the USB input.

However this seems to a known issue:
http://www.wyred4sound.com/

Anyway I have contacted EJ at WFS and put in a service request to get a new top cover assembly. I suspect simply adjusting the balance will resolve the issue in the interim so will continue checking it out until the fix arrives.

Thanks
Bill

Now I got the 192/24 bit up-sampling working and have been listening for a few hours- WOW - the detail this thing retrieves is quite simply breathtaking. For example did you know there was a bit of tape hiss in parts of Christina Aguilera Back to Basics - neither did I - but I heard it very clearly. Not only that but the slight glare and sibilance my system had has now been reduced to the point you have to concentrate a bit to hear it most of the time. I think while Mikes DAC is better hearing it this way (ie via up-sampling and asynchronous USB) may level the playing field a bit. There even less doubt in my mind now computer audio is the future.

Thanks
Bill

Hi Again All

Had a chance to put the WFS into my system and ho-rah ho-rah actually got it to work by using the Kernel Streaming mode of J River as recommended by EJ at WFS. Even got the 192/24 bit up-sampling working. Already I can say it is a few notches above the Audio GD Compass I was using before - but I already knew that from the comparisons we had done. Interestingly it may have toned down a bit of metallic glare and sibilance control that I put down to the little tripath amp I was previously using. Will report further as my listening progresses.

Thanks
Bill

Hi All

I thought I posted my review from last Saturday but it still doesn't seem to be there. Rather than post it again and have two posts if it does eventually appear I will give a link to audio circles where I also posted it:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=83276.20

Bottom line from me is - yes it is very good but more expensive DAC's can beat it - and it was not scary close to the one that did beat it. And from my perspective that USB issue is very maddening. I will contact EJ about it and try to get it sorted out - but I am not looking forward to it. I am sure it will eventually get rectified one way of another but bug hunting and rectification is not my idea of fun. I worked as a programmer for 30 years with 20 year as a senior programmer/team leader. I grew to hate it then and now I am retired thought my days of doing it were over - I was wrong.

Thanks
Bill

Juanito,

"just another very good DAC for his price, as the weiss dac 2" sounds like if the wyred was a commodity product...which I don't think is what people are conveying here. The Weiss DAC2 ($3k), Bel Canto DAC3 ($2.5k), Bryston DBA1 ($2.3k) and PS Audio ($3k) are considered some of the very best DACs in this price category and people here argue the Wyred competes or betters these at $1.5k for the DAC2 and $1k for the DAC1. Not bad in my book!

FWIW I have not heard any of these. I'm just tracking these threads as I want to make a move into a good DAC soon.

Horacio

so , in the end the W4S dac is just another very good dac for his price , as the weiss dac 2 or tranquility dac, and audio-gd dacs. not really the giant-killer as it was anounced at first?

That's just his view. I tend to give good weight to what he says because of his experience reviewing stuff - he is a reviewer for an audiophile magazine and has done tons of them. My view, as I mentioned in my initial post, is the bass has greater slam, strength and detail, not bloated or one note at all - but hey it was virtually straight out of the box. A much better test will happen Saturday.

Thanks
Bill

Bill, that is not my experience at all, with either the DAC-1 or DAC-2.

I've heard both models in 3 different rigs and they had the tighter bass than any of the players/DACs they replaced.

That's interesting because thats similar to what the experienced reviewer acquaintance of mine said about the WFS - the bass was bloated and one note. Personally I am not expecting that much of the Havana in comparison - after all at least here in Aus it half the price. Occasionally you find giant killers that surprise but that is not the norm. But you never know. Of course I will be giving my impressions and hopefully the owner of the Havana can chime in as well.

Thanks
Bill

I heard them both in the same rig. The low end on the Havana sounded loose/sloppy in comparison.

Rja, have you compared the two?

Faces last statement is virtually meaningless, a rather terse "analysis" with absolutely no context.
Pretty much a waste of the minimal effort it took to post it.

"The Havana sounds bloated in comparison."

What do you mean by that exactly? Could you expand on this a little?

Thank you.

The Havana sounds bloated in comparison.

>>Will be doing a comparison of the WFS with the Havana on Saturday.<<

Please let us know your impressions when you do the comparison. Thanks.

That sounds great Bill. Please report back to us what you hear.

Thank you.

Will be doing a comparison of the WFS with the Havana on Saturday.

Thanks
Bill

I'm looking forward to hearing about the comparison with the Tranquility Dac.

Also, I'm wondering if anyone has compared either of these with the Havana?

Sure will let you know at 200 plus hours. The listening this Saturday may not have quite that time on it (but it should be close since Mike has been burning it in since about Wednesday last week) and although I will post what I find out here and elsewhere the exact amount of break-in will be made clear so no confusion can result.

And some time down the track I will be doing a direct comparison to the tranquility DAC, the other DAC people rave about since direct comparison to this DAC have not appeared. I almost certainly will not get this DAC for various reasons not related to sound (it only accepts USB input for instance and does not have a digital volume control for direct connection to an amp) but none the less this is one comparison I am looking forward to.

Thanks
Bill

Nglazer, let us know what you think at 200+ :-)

Hi Guys

No hidden agenda.

Yes I have posted this on a number of forums before posting here. Thats because I only just discovered this thread and thought guys that frequent here would like to know what I found out.

As to their value I think provided I make it clear what is going on people can make up their own mind. I believe it is of value knowing some people had problems during break-in. I believe it is of value some people didn't like the DAC and they are people that prefer DAC's like the PCM 1704 (sorry guys I accidentally called it a 1701 instead of a 1704 in my last post). I believe there is value in others pointing out the limitations of my comments. This is all part of getting the information out there for those interested in this DAC. After all this what forums like this are all about. I still have what happened with the Link DAC in my mind - basically about $1000.00 wasted - well not wasted really - I learnt a valuable lesson.

And yes in hindsight I guess I was a bit thin skinned about the lame comment. I dont get anything for posting - I have no hidden agenda - only the desire to help others and participate in some enjoyable debate about a hobby that since I retired is now taking up more of my time. Calling this 'lame' touched a bit of a raw nerve.

Can we proceed with me posting my observations and others pointing out issues and making their own observations? I will attempt to be as constructive as possible and hopefully others will do the same.

Thanks
Bill

I am at about 30 hours of burn-in now, and the DAC 2 has far far exceeded my expectations. One of the acid tests for a DAC is solo piano, and listening to a good recording I heard the decay and reverb of the recording site and each note crystal clear. This is a keeper.

Something definitely doesn't appear to be Kosher here, maybe a hidden agenda?

I guess i found it weird that you posted the "trusted acquaintance" follow up a day later as if it was new information, when both of the posts are copy and pasted from days earlier on audiocircle. Especially when the follow up is oddly worded like a warning for everyone to wait until you've sorted it out.

I'm sure you're just trying to share useful information, but the vague ominous follow up doesn't really qualify as useful (maybe it did fit in the context of the audiocircle thread). Not trying to steer the conversation away from the DAC, but I just found the post confusing, too.

Bill I wasn't really trying to slap you, at least not as much as it may have sounded. I guess my gripe is folks that take a piece of gear to someone house hook it up and then make judgments on it's sound. That whole scenario frankly does not work. Why, well for numerous reasons. First off as an example I have a Plinius amp. If it gets turned off it takes damn near a week of being powered back on to sound right I don't know why it just does and the bloody thing is almost 5 years old and is as 100% completely broken in as could be. If I was to take that amp to a friends house to compare to something it would be an utter waste of time and any conclusions drawn would be worthless, unless I left it there a week hooked it up with the power cords and plc that I've found works best etc. I had a PS Audio DLIII Cullen modded before the current W4S dac if I unplugged the PS it would take a good 12-18 hours to get back to normal. I've pictures of "shoot outs" at peoples houses where stuff being listen to is sitting on the floor, or perched on books...Some guy takes his whatever piece of gear to a audiophile session hooks it up everyone sits around for 3-4 hours and draws conclusions that are based on erroneous information since the gear very well maybe performing sub optimally.

Anyway what you had posted were the sonic impressions of a unbroken in W4S on unbroken in speakers; why bother and more so of what possible value can those irrelevant impressions be to anyone considering the purchase of a W4S dac since the sound of the units will undoubtedly change significantly over the course of 200+ hours. I'm not trying to be a dick, it just torques me up when I read things that don't seem to be of any real help, because until that unit has broken in yours or anyones opinions of it's sound quality are basically worthless. Sorry.

First it was not me that had problems with the unit - it was an aquantance. On Saturday I will be able to report on what I think once it has broken in a bit.

Second I clearly indicated the amount of break in it had - virtually none. It had a slight bit more break-in when my friend listened to it - maybe and extra 20-30 hours.

Thirdly I clearly pointed out it was different to the other DAC's we listened to. I thought its strengths of better bass, dynamics and detail (which in my experience are the strengths of delta sigmas DAC's) bought it up to the level of the 1701 DAC's we were also listening to. Two others did not think so - in their view the the 1701 DAC's were clearly better. Although they freely admitted this was the best delta sigma they had ever heard they did not like it. Basically they don't like the delta sigma signature - quite possibly because the DAC's they listen to all the time are 1701's.

Now as to why it actually went backwards the jury is still out. Mike thought it was because the unbroken in ML1 speakers we tried the DAC on has weaknesses the strengths of the delta sigma DAC compensated for. They are slightly bass shy and recessed in the treble - but they loosen up. The speakers my acquaintance who has done a lot reviews listened to them on were well broken in ML3's. On that system the bass, to him, sounded over bloated and one note. It may simply be he does not like the delta sigma signature either. However he did not think the speakers were the issue - simply units sometimes do funny things during break in.

I must also say anyone who expects a view based on personal preferences to be definitive in any way is mistaken. It should form the basis of what you should seek out and actually hear rather than making purchasing decisions. In the end it may divide listeners - those that like and those that don't. Some famous DAC's are like that eg the MSB Link of quite a few years ago did that - some loved it - some hated it:
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/equipment/0200/anmeetsmsb.htm

Were those that said it was great lame? Were those that said it was hopeless lame? Of course not - they were simply expressing a personal preference. To expect anything else is pretty lame IMHO. I must also add I actually got an MSB Link many years ago and did not like the bass - it was overpowering and one note in my system. It loosened up over time but was never quite there for me. I preferred my less expensive DAC Magic 1. I may be out of luck with this DAC as well. Hopefully not since I did not find the bass bloated and one note - but as Mike said that may because the ML1's were not broken in. If so - tough luck for me. But hopefully not for you since you are alerted to the issue and can hear it first.

Thanks
Bill

This a pretty lame post. Earlier you wax poetic about an unbroken in unit then the next day it sounds like poop and you say to hold off buying one until it's all sorted out? Was the unit switched off, cables changed, how many actual hours are on it. I own one mine has about 400 hours on it. It sure doesn't sound like you described it
Maybe you and your buddy Mike should
give it the 200 hours of break in that the manufacturer recommends before commenting on it sounds.

Hi All

A trusted acquaintance popped around to Mike's last Monday to hear the WFS. He thought it sounded awful and Mike thought it was a lot worse than when he heard it previously. Something funny going on here - it probably needs some serious break-in time - but I would hold off getting one until this is sorted out. I will be leaving it at Mikes to get that break-in and report on how it sounds as the break in proceeds.

Next Saturday me and an acquaintance will be popping around to Mike's and comparing it to a Havana as well as Mikes tweaked 1704.

Thanks
Bill

Using my PC and outputting 192k/24 via digital coax, the differences are minimal when comparing the DAC-1 to DAC-2. The biggest difference is that the DAC-2 has a slightly tighter bottom end.

Got a DAC 2 about 2 weeks ago. Here is a review of in about one week old with virtually no break in. The review was conducted at Mike Lenehans, the maker of Lenehan ML1's, on the Gold Coast in Australia

OK. First off when we arrived Mike (he is the owner of Lenehan Audio) said he had been listening to it and thought it was very good. In fact he thought it was as good as his much more expensive and highly tweaked pcm 1704 DAC - with maybe, just maybe his DAC being a bit better - but not by much. However they were very different. First when we went into the listening area he had the WFS DAC running and a smile immediately came over my face because it was exactly the sound I like - detailed, analytical and dark. Although its not something I particularly look for it had great bass as well - but that may have been part of the great detail. If you have heard delta sigma DAC's before then this was delta sigma in overdrive. Everyone thought it was the best delta sigma they had heard.

We were going to try the DAC Magic but Mike said - don't bother - this is way out of its league so we didn't give it a listen to. Mike was shocked a DAC this affordable could be this good. We then hooked up Mike's DAC. It was entirely different - much more relaxed and well musical - but the detail had gone and the bass was not as good. In quality terms I thought they were both equal - just different. Evidently because Mike was so shocked at how good it was he had been extensively comparing it to his DAC and thought in the end his DAC may have had a slight edge - but it was scary close - not in terms of the type of sound - they were very different - but in terms of how good they were. I had no where near the experience Mike has with his DAC, and of course I have a bias because I purchased the WFS DAC, but to me it was more than scary close - they were equal - again in terms of quality - not in type of sound.

We tried the WFS sound direct into the amp and the digital volume control, and as you would expect, it was utterly transparent - no pre amp required here. We tried both optical and USB - I thought the USB may have been slightly better, but others were not so sure, so it may have been my imagination. One issue though - the USB drivers crashed a few times which is not good. That was on a mac so hopefully the windows version is more stable. Of course that is not good, and is something WFS needs to look into pretty quick.

Next up was the Audio GD which is also a 1704 implementation. It was actually scary close to Mike's DAC - Mike's DAC was better, but really there was not much in it. And at $1300 it is very good value. It had the same relaxed musical presentation as Mike's DAC. However it did not include a digital volume control, but if you are feeding it from a computer then that is not an issue since you can use your computers volume control. But it is not as flexible as the WFS in that sense.

Now to the bottom line. Since all the DAC's were close in quality terms it comes down to a personal preference thing. If you like detail and good bass go for the WFS. If you like a more relaxed musical presentation go for Mike's or the Audio GD DAC (you will need to contact Mike about his DAC- but its a good deal more expensive than either the WFS or the Audio GD). I personally like the extra detail so for me it's the WFS DAC. But the two other guys (Hugh and Terry) liked the 1704 DACs. The WFS is about $1900 compared to the $1300.00 for the Audio GD. To my ears the WFS was sightly better in quality terms - but there was hardly anything in it. Was it $600.00 difference - in the way I judge these things probably not - maybe $100.00 or $200.00. Also this is the middle quality Audio GD - the higher quality DAC would probably more than make up this difference and may even pip the WFS - but we can't be sure because we didn't try it. It so then it would be up to Mike's DAC and have the same relaxed musical presentation.

I will say this is not the result I expected - but was what we found. I am very happy with my DAC since it has the type of sound I like - but it may not be your cup of tea. My suggestion is to try and listen to both types of DAC's - a WFS and a 1704. If you like the WFS sound get that. If you like the 1704 get an Audio GD. Mike is so impressed with the WFS sound he wants it there for longer so he can get to the bottom of its sound - he is still shocked a DAC this cheap can be this good.

I had heard this DAC was scary close to the best out there with the difference in price possibly not worth it - this is what I found. What I did not expect was that is true in quality terms - not in the type of sound you get.

Because of this I am reminded of the Tranquility DAC which is the other DAC people are raving about. It is supposed to combine the best of both DACs - to have the relaxed musicality of the 1704's but the detail of delta sigma DAC's. I was not attracted to this DAC because you need a pre amp - a good one which costs more than the WFS DAC itself. However after hearing both DAC's I can see how a combination of the two would be killer. Pre amp or no pre amp I may just have to bite the bullet and check this DAC out. It may be a fizzer but if true it would really be something. I will give very careful consideration to getting one of these imported.

Me and another guy thought we could easily live with any of the DAC's. It is only via a direct comparison you appreciate the differences. But for some others (Hugh and Terry) the 1704 was their clear preference. Mike had to leave a bit early so I was not able to get his final verdict - but I suspect it was for his 1704.

Thanks
Bill

Not as far as I'm concerned. It surpasses my PWD in terms of microdynamics and soundstage and it's not yet fully broken in.

No_regrets, I'm a little surprised too and wonder the same thing. I contacted W4S and asked if there were any reviews other than 6Moons. EJ said demand was so strong he couldn't loan any units to other reviewers. The verdict will shake out eventually. We just have to be patient.

"06-29-10: Face
I have about 20 hours on my DAC-2, waiting until I get some more hours on it before writing a review on the unit. I will also have access to a DAC-1 to compare it to."

So Face, did you have a chance to compare yours to the DAC-1 yet? How do you like the DAC-2 so far?

I'm surprised that with as much hype that this DAC-2 product has received, that we haven't heard much in the way of accolades in how it sounds. People keep talking about its features, but not much yet about the actual sound. People must be buying them if they are continuously on back order, but yet we only read a couple brief comments about the sound. Is it possible that it isn't living up to people's expectations? Just wondering.

I stand corrected, Pkubica. I checked the sites for Stealth and Nordost and they do supply digital cables with a BNC termination. I just have not seen many BNC terminated digicables on the used market, which is where many of us buy our digicables. I do have an inexpensive Chris Sommogio (ph.) cable from a few years ago that has a SPDIF adaptor over a bnc termination for greater versatility. I tried both when I had my prior DAC and could not hear any difference.

Neal

Even a $29.00 digital cable from Signal Cable comes with a choice of BNC or RCA for the same cost. Just did an RCA on one end and BNC on the other, seemed like no big problem.

One of the problems with BNC is that very few top digital cables come with BNC terminations.

Neal

The message that I keep hearing about BNC vs. RCA is that BNC is a legitimate 75 ohm connector, whereas the dimensions of RCA prevent it from reaching a true 75 ohms. Because of this, BNC is the preferred connector if your gear allows it.

BNC input, that's a very helpful info. I always read that BNC is better than RCA. But aren't they both 75ohm, with the same type of signal? How are they differ? The BNC to RCA is just a tip changer, even the most highend ones.

Just a note; I contacted them about a bnc input and they said no problem. Just let them know that you want a bnc in place of one of the RCAs. Something to consider.
I personally prefer bnc to RCA for SPDIF.

Just placed my order too. 3 week backorder time.
Now need to decide as to whether to go with a AES/EBU cable or a SPIDF (RCA digital cable). Any suggestions? It will be mated to a Bryston BCD-1.

I bit the bullet on this today. Was going to go for the DAC 1, but then decided I might as well be ready for the future and hi res.
I'm gonna move my Classe' cap 151 integrated into the sysetm as well and we'll see what the VAndersteen 1C's can do.
Can't wait for that DAC 2 to arrive!

I will give my brief comments on DAC2 after only 20 hrs of listening, well short of the recommended 100-200 hrs burn-in. I will preface my comments by stating I approached this audition with healthy skepticism an inexpensive DAC like this, so loaded with features, from a relatively new company could play with the big boys.

This DAC is so much better than it has any right to be for its price -- or even 3x its price -- I am wondering if mfr. misread the market. Even though it is still relatively raw, I am enjoying listening to it, my most important criterion for new equipment. It will replace my beloved Dodson 218 (unless I find something significantly better that is not several multiples of DAC2 price) and while in certain respects it does not (yet) equal the Dodson, I think in the end it may exceed it, and the added facilities like USB input (although no BNC) certainly make it a more contemporary option.

Note that so far, I am using only AES/EBU input set at fixed level, with transport a CEC TL-1X modded by RAM. DAC is playing through my Wyetech Opal pre, so cannot comment on how DAC2 operates as pre. Analog output IC's are Stealth Indras. Cannot comment yet on USB input sound.

Soundstage and dimensionality are excellent. Quite startling holographic sound. DAC also is so quiet I find myself noticing just how quiet it is; counterintuitive, I know, but true nonetheless. And the vocals are the most natural and realistic I have ever heard on my system. I was listening to Tift Merrit's new CD last night (excellent, BTW)and her virtual presence in the room sent chills up my spine. Highs are smooth but have not yet fully opened up; so far good enough. Same with bass, deep enough but still a bit loose. But nothing about the sound bothers me, and as I said, I enjoy it immensely. Have not yet played around with anti-resonance or vibration tweaks, or changed digicable or PC (Stealth Sextet and Nordost Valhalla), so cannot comment on whether that would improve sound.

My kids like its looks but I think it is engagingly unattractive, but very solidly built. One gripe I have is that the instruction manual is pretty weak (at least to me) on how to adjust the settings for the multiple inputs. I stumbled into the fixed setting for AES/EBU and coax and am not sure I could replicate it if I had to. They also do not provide an illustration of the rear inputs, but any experienced audiophile can figure it out . The remote is convenient and works well.

All in all, a very promising product that so far seems to be one of the greatest steals in audio history, and I have been at this mania for 40 years.

Will report further as DAC2 seasons.

N.B. I auditioned a SONY 5400 a few months ago. IMHO, it cannot be mentioned in same sentence as DAC2, the latter is so much better.

Neal

Erikminer,
The DAC is using a Shunyata Diamondback power cord, a Kimber USB cable, and a Blue Jeans optical cable. The Blue Jeans didn't cost a lot. So far it sounds good. Over time I'll keep A-B-ing it with the USB. Not sure I'm gonna put more money into cables right now. But thanks for the suggestion. When I'm listening to music, it'll mostly be through the USB.

Also, I have listened to some hi-res audio. The Raising Sand record sounds great in 24/96. I've compared 16/44 to 24/44 for some of the Beatles catalog. The 24 sounds superior. Not sure if they're mastered quite the same though.

I have been living with the Wyred 4 Sound DAC1 now for several months. My system consists of Magnepan 1.7s, Bada hybrid tube preamp and solid state amp, Netgear 9150 music and video server and Xindak cables. Total investment less than $6,000.

I recently visited a gentleman who has MBL 111E speakers ($30K) and top of the line MBL monoblocks along with analog front end. While it was very impressive, the Magnepan 1.7s powered by the Wyred 4 Sound DAC1 give his system a run for the money at 1/20 of the cost.

I recently tried some 96 khz/24 bit downloads and was blown away by the sound quality. Very 3 dimensional. I had replaced a Pacific Sounds Modified DAC with the Wyred 4 Sound DAC1 and, while the Pacific Sounds DAC was an over performer, it is bested by the Wyred 4 Sound DAC in detail, space around instruments and attack.

I am shocked at times how realistic the system sounds. And much of the credit goes to the Wyred 4 Sound DAC1 which is truly a musical DAC and well worth its price.