Any better DAC then dCS Scarlatti?

Rainer - Does GTE have distributorship in the US?

Also you are presuming the Scarlatti as the standard...

Can you place the Esoteric D1 vs the GTE?

Murataltuev,

I'm considering this DAC as it uses 16 multibit DACs per channel and must be something really different from all other DACs on the market!

The APL NWO-4.0SE has 20 DACs per channel.

Hi again,

concerning the Esoteric vs the Trinity:

I have not heard this mono DAC, but for sure their statement concerning the first mono DAC is not true.
Furthermore it seems that it uses just 8 PCM1704 in true paralell configuration (The APL might use 20).
All converters make the same (or nearly the same)at the same time.

But what happens? You reduce noise by the sqr(N).

In contrast the Trinity is total different:
Each single DAC is delayed by one 16th of the sample clock rate. So you have 16 small steps (where the others have just one). This is analog oversampling, a very clever design where Trinity holds the patent worldwide.
An additional benefit is that you avoid the ringing of oversample und filtering in the digital (discrete) domain.

High res files with 176,4 or 192 kHz can be played without any digital filtering at all. Trust me this makes a stunning difference.

I ahve to admit that the Trinity DAC contributes a lot to our best sound of the show at RMAF 2009 (see stereotimes for example)

Best regards

Rainer Weber

Rainer - appreciate the update on the Trinity, but alas no indication of whether they will/may/do come Stateside....
At somewhere between $40 and $68k - best pricing indications I've found online for the Trinity - they should be defining the pinnacle....that's ~twice to thrice the Scarlatti DAC. As the asymptote runs...

Shifting gears...I've had the Esoteric D3 and Playback Designs MPS5 on audition this weekend. First off, there is a clear, substantive positive difference between these two and my current dCS Delius - in MY SYSTEM AND ROOM (YMMV). The gains in imaging, placement, depth of soundstage are apparent and to my surprise non trivial. Player seating positions both forward/aft and side to side are decidedly more defined. This was particularly apparent on Carla Lother's "Far Away" [100 Lovers, Chesky records 24/96, foobar, lynx AES16, CARDAS HD26 to AES-EBU Dual Wire]. As for which is better or worse between the Playback and Esoteric, ahh neither. I now appreciate what Classic was referring to when he said "orthogonal". These DAC's accentuate different attributes in replay. For me, and again somewhat unexpectedly, I preferred the Esoteric. This reflects the premium I place on holography, an area I perceive the D3 shading the MPS5 as a DAC.

I did take the chance to spin a few SACD's on the MPS5 - a no cost option with the Playback Designs, if you will ;-) - and it rather underscores the strong relative value this player represents. Such an option with Esoteric is another $17k (the P3)... Suffice that if you were looking for a single box solution with DAC/SACD/CD capability, the PD makes a very strong case for itself. Remarkable.

For anyone about to plunge into a multi-box ultimate digital front end, my advice is to strongly consider a single-box solution.

Now, let me qualify my statement. Whether 3 or 4 or 5 boxes, you are really opening a can of worms. For instance, I have spent more to set-up my 4 boxes than the cost of the original 4 boxes. Digital is INCREDIBLY sensitive to vibration and power. I think a truly optimized single box can be more satisfying than 4 unoptimized boxes. Consider yourself warned.

Now, let me say that it was totaly worth it for me. It was not easy, but now that the money pit is almost filled, I can look forward with immense satisfaction. Everything required proper attention to detail and system matching to create something truly special. My DAC continues to amaze me day after day, and it keeps getting better with time.