dCS Rossini vs. Berkeley Reference dac 2


Has anyone compared the two?  I have heard the Rossini side-by-side with the Berkeley Ref. dac 1.  Long story short, the Rossini justified its higher price.  I'm now wondering if Berkeley's second try has narrowed the gap? Meanwhile, kudos to both dCS and Berkeley for striving to provide upgradeable products.
aldenberry
Imgoodwithtools I have heard the Berkeley Rv2 and still feel the dCS Rossini is preferable. The Rossini is so good and got so close the Vivaldi 1.0 that they needed to release the Vivaldi 2.0 update way early to mollify that siituation. 
The Berkeley is sweet, polite, pleasant and eminently listenable. But somewhat homogenized to my ears. It is airy and diaphanous but also somewhat amorphous. To my ears it only worked well with high end transports. Data files and streaming were subpar. 
The dCS is a chameleon. Fire breathing dragon or  2 day old lab puppies depending on the file. 
Texture, front to back sound stage, precision of instrumental placement, lack of upper midrange glare, precise articulate bass, noise floor, body and density of the instruments/voices were superior with the dCS. 
The Berkeley's interfaces make it instantly obsolete IMHO.
I think people will like delta sigma DACs or r2r DACs ultimately.
dCS makes the best delta sigma DACs and I'm still deciding if MSB  or Lampizator makes the best r2r. And boy do they sound spectacular. What a golden age for digital.  

I'm also interested in the comparison of the Berkley DAC Ref 2 vs. Rossini.  I know the Rossini provides for an external clock connection, how about the Berkley DAC Ref 2?  Most of the Rossini reviews state that the SQ improvement when the dCS Rossini clock is used is not subtle.  

I realize that the dCS Rossini clock is an additional $7k, but at least the Rossini provides this option.  Besides there may be less expensive external clock options such as the PERF10 from Stanford Research Systems.