"There are SO many variables that finally, how a DAC measures is academic. It's how it SOUNDS that matters, in the CONTEXT of the system's synergy. A Dac's ''flaws'' (or lack of ''measurement'') may actually contribute to the overall musical experience this way."
I agree with you Sonicbeauty. I always used to rely on measurements in the early years, I still think they are valuable and along with good design it is an important factor when choosing gear. However as important as measurements may be if the piece of equipment measures off the charts so far as new levels of low distortion, frequency response, noise, dynamic range etc. it still has to have a musicality, draw you into the music as opposed to the initial "WOW" and then the subsequent focus on sound over music. There is something inherently flawed about a component that does this and it is consistently noted by listeners. This is why it is VERY important to read between the lines of listening impressions by a cross section of different listeners. What is my system doing that I like and don't like, what is missing? There is no universal product for all systems and while a very forgiving system may benefit from a DAC perceived as accurate from measurements, a balanced, highly resolving system can expose its flaws more easily as it can any weak link, IMHO. I base the above on having listened to many more mediocre digital devices than REALLY good ones over the years and until recently the REALLY good ones cost. This is no dis on the Benchmark DAC 1, I haven't heard it but I am getting a pretty good picture from many comments over the years concerning this DAC. It is not the "be all end all" for all systems, neither is the Havana I'm sure.
