Scott Nixon outboard DAC's, any good?

Paul, does it mean that you prefer the ScottNixon better than your DAC2? If so, why? Thanks.
Adrian

Now that I think about it, I think the DAC-2.0 might have a name brand mark up. Scott dixon, selling via internet does not. I remember reading a posting, I think it might have been in AudioCircle that had a very indepth analysis of at least 3 DACs, one Bel Canto, another, a Linn CDP/DAC and the Scott Dixon. Scott Dixon, according to what I remember had some definite plusses and minuses, but considering the price=1/2 of the Bel Canto, you can eliminate the minusses. I sold my old Bel Canto DAC-1.0 and paid a good extra for the new DAC-2.0. For the best bang for the buck, the ScottDixon might trump many...some said it is a stripped down version of the 47 Labs Shigaraki DAC. Who knows?

I've the 47 Labs Shigaraki transport hooked to a Scott Nixon TUBEDAC+. This combo is sooooo smoooooth, with detail and rhythm. The Scott Nixon seems to allow dynamic nuances to really drip with emotion.

One audiocircle shootout:

http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/viewtopic.php?t=6727

As far as Scott Nixon's DAC being a "stripped-down version of the 47 Labs," it is just the opposite: the 47 Labs units are more stripped down than the Scott Nixon DAC. Both these units get the timing right and are very direct, but are non-linear, and show alot of triangle-wave distortion in upper frequencies. Neither unit has an adequate power supply, and one of them has a much better pcb layout than the other. Both have jitter levels that can be improved through a-synchronous re-clocking, and both do not have a fully-tuned PLL.
Given all that, I still have to admit that both these units sound better than 85% of the DACs on the market. Scott's KIT is fun to build, priced fair, and a nice learning experience. He is very helpful if you have problems along the way.