External DAC recommendations please

[bigburner]

I’m considering buying an outboard DAC to help me achieve audio nirvana. A search of this forum reveals that the Benchmark DAC1 is by far the most frequently mentioned device. The two comments I remember most are “huge improvement” and “didn’t notice much difference”.

I would therefore welcome more feedback from members on their experience with external DACs in general and the Benchmark DAC1 in particular.

Did you experience:

• A big improvement?

• A small improvement?

• No improvement?

Also, does anyone think that you can get a better external DAC than the Benchmark DAC1 for the same money?

Thank you.

Nigel.

[gd]

Depends what you're comparing it to.

What is your current disc player?... or receiver DAC, if applicable.

No Benchmark experience, but I've bought older DACs to augment mid-fi players (Rotel, Pioneer, Pioneer Elite)... currently I have an EAD DSP7000-III – purchased used – and it has made a significant improvement on all players, except for a Pioneer Elite laserdisc player, which happens to be a better-than-average CD player, I guess... night and day difference? – no, but discernible.

With little input or few reviews available for DACs, you have to simply jump in and try them... assessing sound quality is subjective, anyway, and only you can make the call by auditioning in your own system.

You might consider going my route – buying used – but only if you have older or lesser disc players... if your players are more current or upscale, you'll likely have to buy more than a Benchmark to yield an improvement.

[whoaru99]

IMO, it's way too subjective to ask for opinions about the level of improvement.

Here in the U.S. I merely ordered the Benchmark and tried it for 30 days. You may be disadvantaged inasmuch as it may not be practical to order and return if you don't like.

My exprience? It essentially ranged everything you said. Just depended on what the basis of comparison was.

I ended up returning the DAC-1 because it didn't seem to be (for me) enough of an all-around improvement for $1,000 - especially when I preferred the sound of a (particular) $400-$500 CDP player. For me, $1K would be much better spent on room treatments that benefit pretty much every situation.

While it seems to have less visibility than the Benchmark DAC, Lavry Engineering has one (Lavry Black / DA-10??) at the same pricepoint with it's own loyal following. From what I've read, people who claim to have tried both tend to say the Lavry has a somewhat "warmer" sound than the Benchmark DAC.

[aud19]

If you've already got a quality $500+ CD player you'll likely notice little to no improvement (though, as stated, that's still very subjective). Where you'll likely notice more of an improvement is when using a cheaper CDP, a DVD player, a PC etc. It will also depend a lot on the level of the rest of your gear to take advantage of the additional information and clarity and ofcourse, your ears

EDIT:
FYI, I (sadly) don't own one...these opinions are based on what I've heard in shops etc and also are general rules for auditioning any audio gear in my experience.

[ThomasW]

I have 4 audio systems in the house. They range from a BIG quad-amped hybrid ESL/magnetic planar array, to a Sony ES receiver powering DIY 2-ways in the bedroom. In any system where I've installed the DAC1, it's improved the SQ.

The DAC1 has improved the SQ of every player in the house from the Redbook out of my $3800 SACD player, to a lowly LiteOn DVD player

At this point I going to buy a second one. Now I'm trying to decide if I should find a used one and save a few bucks, or pop for a pretty new silver one.... :T

[whoaru99]

Regardless of any opinions received, it's still really a matter of whether or not you (bigburner) perceive any differences and whether or not the perceived differences are worth $1000 to you.

Problem is, there is ONLY one way to know and that's to listen for yourself comparing them in your setup.

[kurtholz]

I have a Benchmark, i think it is a very nice improvement, i currently use an Arcam dv29 ( $3500) transport coupled to a Krell showcase processor, both have highly regarded dacs, the benchmark is worth it to me

Kurt

[whoaru99]

It just strikes me as odd to have a $3000 - $4000 player that needs any improvment. Or, perhaps more precisely, that could be improved upon...

We're just operating at a different level, I guess.

Perhaps it would help bigburner to decide whether or not to pursue it further if there were some descriptions of what improvements you guys perceived.

[bigburner]

Depends what you're comparing it to.

What is your current disc player?... or receiver DAC, if applicable.

Rotel RCD-855 CD and OPPO OPDV971H DVD (as specified in my public profile).

[bigburner]

Here in the U.S. I merely ordered the Benchmark and tried it for 30 days. You may be disadvantaged inasmuch as it may not be practical to order and return if you don't like.

Yes, that's the issue, hence my enquiry on this forum.

[bigburner]

I have 4 audio systems in the house. They range from a BIG quad-amped hybrid ESL/magnetic planar array, to a Sony ES receiver powering DIY 2-ways in the bedroom. In any system where I've installed the DAC1, it's improved the SQ.

The DAC1 has improved the SQ of every player in the house from the Redbook out of my $3800 SACD player, to a lowly LiteOn DVD player

At this point I going to buy a second one. Now I'm trying to decide if I should find a used one and save a few bucks, or pop for a pretty new silver one.... :T

I get the impression that you quite like the DAC1 Thomas! Thank you.

Nigel.

[bigburner]

I have a Benchmark, i think it is a very nice improvement, i currently use an Arcam dv29 ( $3500) transport coupled to a Krell showcase processor, both have highly regarded dacs, the benchmark is worth it to me

Kurt

That's very interesting Kurt. If I understand your reply correctly you think that the SQ of the DAC1 is an improvement on the SQ of your Arcam dv29 and your Krell Showcase processor. Is that correct? If so I'm impressed.

Nigel.

[alebonau]

its something you really need to try in your system to determine whether the change or improvemnt is worth the expense.

keeping in mind if the rest of your system is not revealign enough you might not detect any improvement at all.

if you cant borrow the dac1 to try try borrowing some similar priced dacs from a sympathetic dealer, musical fidelity and belcanto as brands come to mind.

I'd also demo some similar priced cd players. you might be suprised with the improvement you get from some of these.

[bigburner]

musical fidelity and belcanto as brands come to mind.

I'd also demo some similar priced cd players. you might be suprised with the improvement you get from some of these.

Yes, the Bel Canto DAC2 attracts a lot of positive comments too.

I would want to use the external DAC with my Oppo DVD player as well as my Rotel CDP, so buying a quality CDP is not really an option. If the Oppo combination worked out well I might even ditch the Rotel and use the Oppo for CD's too. I'd also like to try out the external DAC with the music on my laptop.

The Benchmark DAC1 seems to cover most bases. If only I could try before I buy! Then again the world wouldn't end if I didn't achieve musical nirvana.

[whoaru99]

FWIW, my opinion on the "sound" of the Benchmark is a very clean and detailed sound - analytical/cool/clinical are the terms that come to mind if you need some words in a way I could describe them.

So, if you are looking for a bit of that "tube" sound, probably not the Benchmark for you, IMO.

[kurtholz]

Hi Bigburner

Yes, it is an improvement, completely to my dismay, not a huge glaring wow factor, but enough to justify itself, it's main improvements were a slight lifting of the veil so to speak, and more detail in voice, also a slight improvement in sounstage, the one advantage i have is the Krell will provide a 7.1 surround mode from a 2 channel source, so i can still get that full room feel, or just enjoy 2 channel,

my two cents

Kurt

[ThomasW]

If you want a DAC to use with lower end sources such as PCs then the Benchmark is your DAC. It's jitter reduction circuity is just the ticket for higher jitter sources like PC soundcards, low buck DVD players etc.

Being a simple direct thought process kind of fellow; I've never really understood the use of abstract descriptors like 'dry', 'clinical', analytical', 'warm', enveloping', or whatever. To my ears something either sounds like live music or it doesn't. The Benchmark makes the system sound more like live music than any other DAC I've owned or auditioned.

I don't know how the retail world works in NZ. In the US we can audition the Benchmark for 30 days and get a refund it not pleased with it's performance.

[aud19]

I don't know how the retail world works in NZ. In the US we can audition the Benchmark for 30 days and get a refund it not pleased with it's performance.

BB, perhaps a quick email to Benchmark to see their policies with shipping/return to/from NZ would be helpful...?

[jim777]

If reviews are honest, I would get a Lavry da10 before a Benchmark DAC1. Some Lavry dealers have a trial period for their dacs too.

[theMaximus]

Up until a month ago, I was using Cambridge Audio Azur 540C (about $350 MSRP) with Musical Fidelity X-DAC $1000 MSRP). Since then I've upgraded my CD player to Marantz SA-15 (about $2000 MSRP). When I added the external DAC to the budget Cambridge Audio, I noticed a big difference. Background was much quieter and I could hear far more details. As far as the comparison between my previous set up with X-DAC and Marantz, I do not notice any significant difference, proving that X-DAC was doing about the same job as a $2000 CD player. I kind of suspected this before my upgrade, but I just wanted to simplify my set up as much as possible. That is why I got a CD player that also plays SACDs and got Krell KAV-400Xi integrated amp instead of a separate preamp and power amp. That was just my preference. I'm planning to put my X-DAC on eBay as soon as I get some free time to do it.

In my opinion, if you already have a CD player that you can use as a transport, you may be able to upgrade your sound by getting a external DAC such as Benchmark-1 or X-DAC, especially if you can find one used at a good price. If you don't currently have a CD player, it may be better to just get a high end CD player.

Not that magazine reviews matter much, but Stereophile claimed that pretty much no CD player under $2000 would match the performance of X-DAC. I think Stereophiles' statement is too general, but I can testify that adding an external DAC did improve the sound from a budget CD player by a significant margin.

[Spearmint]

I’ve owned several DAC’s and I found the Benchmark to do a great job in my system. Since then I’ve upgraded to a local brand Elektra, although I could detect very little if any changes between the Benchmark & Elektra DAC’s. Recently I upgraded my transport to a Marantz SA-15 the same as themaximus, and also I cannot detect any difference between the Marantz internal DAC’s and the Elektra as an external DAC.

[alebonau]

Up until a month ago, I was using Cambridge Audio Azur 540C (about $350 MSRP) with Musical Fidelity X-DAC $1000 MSRP). Since then I've upgraded my CD player to Marantz SA-15 (about $2000 MSRP). When I added the external DAC to the budget Cambridge Audio, I noticed a big difference. Background was much quieter and I could hear far more details. As far as the comparison between my previous set up with X-DAC and Marantz, I do not notice any significant difference, proving that X-DAC was doing about the same job as a $2000 CD player. I kind of suspected this before my upgrade, but I just wanted to simplify my set up as much as possible. That is why I got a CD player that also plays SACDs and got Krell KAV-400Xi integrated amp instead of a separate preamp and power amp. That was just my preference. I'm planning to put my X-DAC on eBay as soon as I get some free time to do it.

In my opinion, if you already have a CD player that you can use as a transport, you may be able to upgrade your sound by getting a external DAC such as Benchmark-1 or X-DAC, especially if you can find one used at a good price. If you don't currently have a CD player, it may be better to just get a high end CD player.

Not that magazine reviews matter much, but Stereophile claimed that pretty much no CD player under $2000 would match the performance of X-DAC. I think Stereophiles' statement is too general, but I can testify that adding an external DAC did improve the sound from a budget CD player by a significant margin.

certainly the marantz sa-15 is a nice player as both maximus and spearmint say. Point to note in maximus' post he updated to a quality 2ch integrated in the krell kav400xi. no doubt this is guaranteeing him a pre and pwr amp thats up to prioviding the benefits. Also worth noting that rather than adding a dac to an existing player a good quality player is certainyl a very good option to consider in the first place.

[JDH]

I own a Benchmark DAC 1, and use a Slim Devices Squeezebox 3 (SB3), Yahaha HD1300 CD and Yamaha DVD s1500 as transports, generally I use the SB3 as my main transport simply for convience.

With my sources, I've found the sound via the Benchmark DAC 1 is more to my liking than the sources internal DAC's or my Rotel RSP-1066 internal DACs. I also use a Musical Fidelity X-10D inconjunction with the external DAC.

For me the additional cost and flexability (ie. can use the DAC on multiple cheap transports) of the Benchmark DAC 1 was worth it to me. If I had a high end source I probably wouldn't use one though. It also had other benefits including a decent headphone amp and can be used as a basic pre-amp in a simple setup.

I wouldn't say the improvement was massive but still noticable, if you have already upgraded your speakers amp and pre-amp to a reasonable level the DAC upgrade might be a viable option.

I will also be adding a NuForce P8 2ch pre-amp too.

I’m considering buying an outboard DAC to help me achieve audio nirvana. A search of this forum reveals that the Benchmark DAC1 is by far the most frequently mentioned device. The two comments I remember most are “huge improvement” and “didn’t notice much difference”.

I would therefore welcome more feedback from members on their experience with external DACs in general and the Benchmark DAC1 in particular.

Did you experience:

• A big improvement?

• A small improvement?

• No improvement?

Also, does anyone think that you can get a better external DAC than the Benchmark DAC1 for the same money?

Thank you.

Nigel.

[Karma]

HI big,
I'm not really up to date on the current market offerings so I can't comment on all these suggestions. However, I use tube DAC's in both my main music system and my HT system. I would only suggest that you check out a tube DAC. I like what they do to what can be a somewhat harsh DC sound.

I'm not saying that tubes are the only way to go. But I think they are a good option that has not been mentioned in this thread.

Do not be concerned with tube maintenance. Tube DAC's typically use very long lasting and inexpensive tubes that are commonly available. I've never replaced one in over 12 years in my main system. My HT system DAC is much newer so it doesn't have a track record yet. But I expect equally good service.

Sparky

[alebonau]

HI big,
I'm not really up to date on the current market offerings so I can't comment on all these suggestions. However, I use tube DAC's in both my main music system and my HT system. I would only suggest that you check out a tube DAC. I like what they do to what can be a somewhat harsh DC sound.

I'm not saying that tubes are the only way to go. But I think they are a good option that has not been mentioned in this thread.

Do not be concerned with tube maintenance. Tube DAC's typically use very long lasting and inexpensive tubes that are commonly available. I've never replaced one in over 12 years in my main system. My HT system DAC is much newer so it doesn't have a track record yet. But I expect equally good service.

Sparky

certainly like a bit of tubes myself. Always had tubes somewhere in the chain of my system. I too have a 10+year old musical fidelity dac thats still going strong. Now Have the musical fidelity A5 cd player which has a couple of tubes in the output stage and soudns really nice. And theres quite a few nice CD players aroudn with tubes on the end.

if on a budget...

the shanling CD80 has a very smooth airy sound

http://www.aslanacoustics.com.au/shancd.html

and consonance R2.2 tube ?

http://www.osbornloudspeakers.com.au/

both around and about the rrp of the benchmark dac.

alternatively you can add a tube stage like jdh is doing to any dac or cd player, say wiht either the x-10d if you can find s/h or a brand new mf x-10v3. again somethign you'd need to try out to see the benfit.

[jim777]

1- Is an external DAC worth it for digital TV (scientific atlanta) and DVD (oppo) only? My CD player sounds great on it's own. I sometimes listen to music shows on my dvd though. I guess it's not worth it for digital TV since it's all compressed audio anyway..

2- Is there a tube buffer on the market that goes between the pre-amp and amp? I don't want to get a tube pre for now (because it would be the ~3k$ C220)

[theMaximus]

2- Is there a tube buffer on the market that goes between the pre-amp and amp? I don't want to get a tube pre for now (because it would be the ~3k$ C220)

Musical Fidelity claims you can use the X-10 V3 tube buffer stage between your preamp and power amp as well as between CD player and preamp. However, I tried my X-10 V3 in both places, and I must say between the source and preamp is the ideal place for tube buffer stage both theoratically and realistically. X-10 V3 made a significant difference in sound when placed in between CDP and preamp, but didn't seem to do much when placed in between preamp and power amp.

[Victor]

Although my opinion has not been popular, still, as someone who used to build outboard DACs I would like chime in…

What is the reason for looking to buy an outboard DAC? One thing that comes to mind is a desire to improve the sound quality of the existing CD or DVD player. Can the DAC do that? Well, - it depends on a circuitry used in a CD/DVD player, doesn’t?

These days nearly every company that sells CD/DVD players use nearly identical output circuit with the AKM D/A converter as a centerpiece. AKM manufactures several versions of what appears to be the same basic circuit that sports 24 bit precision and uses Delta-Sigma conversion approach. Sony uses their own D/A chips which are quite good being pulse-current dacs and still other companies, such as Denon, may use Analog Devices or Texas Instruments chips. It really does not matter, because all those chips are very similar to each other and all sport 24 bit internal architecture.

The analog reconstruction filter that follows the converter is greatly responsible for the perceived sound. Here I have yet to see a CD/DVD manufacture that does an adequate job as far as this filter is concerned. If principles of the DSP to be any guide here, one would say that by the time the signal negotiates this filter, the S/N degrades to about 14-15 bits, with 16 bits being an absolute best possible. This applies nearly across the board. Sony ES PRO series CD players would do 16 bits along with some Denon products but Mark Levinson’s would not as far as I remember. There are some others.

So, if the outboard DAC does a better job, then there is a reason to use it. The Benchmark DAC certainly is 16-bit capable, which is rare. Here we also can forget about any fear of jitter, thanks to the use of ASRC with its digital PLL that works within 2 Hz window. In general most DACs do not do well with jitter suppression because the SPDI/F connection relies on the signal recovery principle and it uses a special circuit to lock-on on the incoming signal. This circuit depends on the local clock. The synchronization can never be 100% and so the jitter may result. Nothing can be done about it, unless this circuit is superb and works below 1 Hz at the very least. There are some products on the market that will do that, but they are not main stream. ASRC as used by Benchmark is the most elegant solution that works very well.

So, - where does it leave us? I would say that for the most part the modern CD/DVD players are made well enough and whatever the external DAC may bring is not worth it.

Finally, on a somewhat different note, - I completely fail to see what those tube buffers do for the sound quality improvement. Other then introduce a very audible distortion they bring noting else.

Regards,
Victor

[DrJRapp]

So, - where does it leave us? I would say that for the most part the modern CD/DVD players are made well enough and whatever the external DAC may bring is not worth it.

I can't really agree with that comment, based on my real world experience rather than hypothesis. When I first purchased my DAC1 I found it made a small improvement in the SQ of my the Denon 2900 universal player that I was using as a transport. I had expected more, and was curious why not, so I started to experiment. First, I changed my single point RCA connections between my Anthem D2 processor to some moderatly priced XLR connections and the sq improved somewhat. I followed that up with a change to Nordost Red Dawn XLRs and there was a "HUGE" improvement. That finding lead me to believe that the DAC1 was really much better than I thought, but was just being held back by other equipment. I started experimenting with various devices as source feeds to the DAC1. I went thru various CDPs, transports and DVD players and music servers as sources until finally landing on an older Theta Data basic transport that I purchased on eBay for under $400.00

The sq I have now rivals or exceeds almost everything I have ever heard including, The Esoterics, Wadia's, Mark Levinsons and Classe's. The only CDP that I would prefer to have over my current setup is the $14K Meridian 808.

[theMaximus]

So, - where does it leave us? I would say that for the most part the modern CD/DVD players are made well enough and whatever the external DAC may bring is not worth it.

Does that mean that even a budget CD player uses the same quality DAC as a highend CD player? Does that mean that the only things that separate budget CD players to highend CD players is the parts other than the DACs? As far as I know, DAC does not consist of a sigle chip, which means just because two DACs are using Burr-Brown chips doesn't mean they are identical. This may come into play. I think the point of high quality external DAC is that since the DAC is by far the most influential part of a digital source (more so than transport mechanism, etc...), you could possibly use a cheap DVD player and still get a extremely good CD play back that rivals dedicated CD players that cost far more than external DACs which usually goes for around $1000.

Finally, on a somewhat different note, - I completely fail to see what those tube buffers do for the sound quality improvement. Other then introduce a very audible distortion they bring noting else.

The theory behind it according to Musical Fidelity is that tube buffer lowers the impedence of the source signal to the optimum level for the preamp. The rest they say is the tube magic. I thought it didn't sound very convincing until I tried it. I added X-10 V3 tube buffer to my Cambridge Audio Azur 540C first and was amazed by the difference. That is when I also added X-DAC to see if I could make further improvement. I must say that both made noticeable improvements, the tube buffer made more of an impact than the DAC. We could all argue that solid state players/amps sound the same as tube players/amps because theoratically they all perform the same tasks. However, most people who listened to both have a preference for one over the other because they sound different to them. As far as adding distortion, I didn't notice any noticeable distortion or coloration by adding the tube buffer. Only thing I noticed was a wider soundstage.

[whoaru99]

If reviews are honest, I would get a Lavry da10 before a Benchmark DAC1. Some Lavry dealers have a trial period for their dacs too.

I spoke to Lavry and they said 15 days money back if not satisfied. Never pursued because difference I had with Benchmark was not worth $1000 to me.

Based on some of the gear that is being tossed about $3000-$4000 players (or more) you have to seriously consider that quite a few people here have pretty decent income. So, my suspicion is that for them, it takes less of an improvement to justify spending $1K than for others here - including myself. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a poor guy (well, that's subjective too ), but I need something more than small/subtle differences when I lay down $1K.

[alebonau]

Although my opinion has not been popular, still, as someone ~

So, - where does it leave us? I would say that for the most part the modern CD/DVD players are made well enough and whatever the external DAC may bring is not worth it.

Finally, on a somewhat different note, - I completely fail to see what those tube buffers do for the sound quality improvement. Other then introduce a very audible distortion they bring noting else.

Regards,
Victor

actualyl you'll find the big differnece between an external dac and that built in a cd or dvd player is actually the analog output stage(including tubes in some cases) often your just buying a decent analog output stage thats usually done pretty poxily on a dvd player and can always be improved on in a budget cd player. theres other issues in dacs and analog out stages and thats nto jsut the base components but hte implementation it self that can and does a fair old impact on the sound.

as I stated earlier though best is to try thing in yoru system, may or nto make a differnece in your system or might be better or worse than what you have.

in the case of the tube buffer what your atually buyign is purely a decent analog output stage.

[Victor]

First, I changed my single point RCA connections between my Anthem D2 processor to some moderatly priced XLR connections and the sq improved somewhat. I followed that up with a change to Nordost Red Dawn XLRs and there was a "HUGE" improvement. That finding lead me to believe that the DAC1 was really much better than I thought, but was just being held back by other equipment.

I cannot address your believe, because it is what it is, - and it is a believe. What I can address are the reasons why you might be thinking that balanced cables produced different results.

Denon, like nearly all other companies that make a High End equipment gives you an option with digital outputs, - a single-ended RCA-based SPDI/F or professional AES/BU on XLR connectors.

In case of Denon, as it is with nearly all manufacturers except for Meridian, the implementation of those interfaces is substandard. Certainly the XLR is the worst because its 110-ohm characteristic impedance cannot even be practically maintained. RCA option must have 75 Ohm impedance but no RCA connector can deliver that, even though it may be advertised as one. You need BNC.

Mismatches in impedance produce signal reflections which translate into noise and jitter. You get more of that with XLR.

It is possible, although unlikely, that that jitter and noise will be audible under the controlled conditions. Anyway you say that you can hear it and I have no reason to doubt your experience.

In any event I hope that the technical background might help you in your understanding of what exactly you are hearing.

I started experimenting with various devices as source feeds to the DAC1. I went thru various CDPs, transports and DVD players and music servers as sources until finally landing on an older Theta Data basic transport that I purchased on eBay for under $400.00

One thing that may be of interest here is to note that transport+DAC set-up will always be inferior from the signal integrity stand point to a stand-along CDP, providing that the internal electronics has the same specs in both cases. Jitter along may make the Transport+DAC set-up worst then the CDP.

regards,
Victor

[Victor]

Does that mean that even a budget CD player uses the same quality DAC as a highend CD player?

Yes it does, - and in many case it is exactly what you get.

Does that mean that the only things that separate budget CD players to highend CD players is the parts other than the DACs?

Yes it does. What also may happen is that the Higher-End CDP may use the same D/A chip but of a higher grade.

As far as I know, DAC does not consist of a sigle chip, which means just because two DACs are using Burr-Brown chips doesn't mean they are identical. This may come into play. I think the point of high quality external DAC is that since the DAC is by far the most influential part of a digital source (more so than transport mechanism, etc...), you could possibly use a cheap DVD player and still get a extremely good CD play back that rivals dedicated CD players that cost far more than external DACs which usually goes for around $1000.

You are somewhat correct here. A cheap CDP can be used as a transport. Add a sophisticated DAC and you will get very good system. The digital output circuit tends to be rather poorly implemented in cheap CD Players, but with a DAC like the Benchmark, it is of no significant importance, due to its stellar jitter rejection capabilities.

The theory behind it according to Musical Fidelity is that tube buffer lowers the impedence of the source signal to the optimum level for the preamp. The rest they say is the tube magic.

What can I say? Why do the Musical Fidelity designers think that the source has high impedance and it needs to be lowered? The statement you posted is a complete nonsense.

If I show this to any 1st year engineering student, - he/she will simply laugh at it. It sounds like a joke, really. The above statement is an example of how low the company will sink in order to attract unsuspecting audiophiles. Here is the amazing thing, - Musical Fidelity must employ engineers to design their products, so they do know the kind of nonsense that they print, - and they still print it!

I added X-10 V3 tube buffer to my Cambridge Audio Azur 540C first and was amazed by the difference. That is when I also added X-DAC to see if I could make further improvement. I must say that both made noticeable improvements, the tube buffer made more of an impact than the DAC.

I am sure that the X-10 made the difference. The question is what kind of difference that is? The fact that you like the impact of X-10 is not the point, as I am sure I would liked it too.

The tube-based circuit with its heavy 2nd harmonic distortion content will undoubtedly produce warm and very likable sound. Make no mistake about it; - you are listening to distortion even if it sounds to you like a better soundstage. But then again, such as the purpose of X-10!

regards,
Victor

[theMaximus]

Yes it does. What also may happen is that the Higher-End CDP may use the same D/A chip but of a higher grade.

I guess that means that external DACs may use higher grade D/A chip, and therefore may offer benefits over budget CD players' DACs.

What can I say? Why do the Musical Fidelity designers think that the source has high impedance and it needs to be lowered? The statement you posted is a complete nonsense.

If I show this to any 1st year engineering student, - he/she will simply laugh at it. It sounds like a joke, really. The above statement is an example of how low the company will sink in order to attract unsuspecting audiophiles. Here is the amazing thing, - Musical Fidelity must employ engineers to design their products, so they do know the kind of nonsense that they print, - and they still print it!

That is why I said it didn't sound very convincing. I'm a chemical engineer and only took the basic circuits as part of my curriculum. You seemed to be much more knowledgeable about this subject, and I respect your opinion. I bought the tube buffer after researching first hand testimonials from people who actually tried it as do a lot of people who are into this hobby, not because I bought into their marketing. If everyone who enjoys audio just buys into marketing, then the only company standing would be Bose.

I am sure that the X-10 made the difference. The question is what kind of difference that is? The fact that you like the impact of X-10 is not the point, as I am sure I would liked it too.

The tube-based circuit with its heavy 2nd harmonic distortion content will undoubtedly produce warm and very likable sound. Make no mistake about it; - you are listening to distortion even if it sounds to you like a better soundstage. But then again, such as the purpose of X-10!

You are right. If heavy 2nd harmonic distortion content will undoubtedly produce warm and very likable sound, Im all for heavy 2nd harmonic distortion. :T I guess we all spend a lot of money and time to achieve the "warm and likable sound," and some people dismiss CD's digital sound as too analytical and cold even though it produces less distortion than analogue sources such as LPs. If tube buffers achieve this for less than $400, I guess they do have places in this world regardless of the fact that the theory behind them sound bogus.

[alebonau]

sometimes, as with anything ,you need to head out and do some comparisons of the like being discussed here on a suitably revealing system. You might just be a little suprised wiht the results. I've seen who how many posts like these from people that suddenly change their mind once they experience for themselves soem of the benfits.

Important too to particuallarly try in your system because if you dont find the benfit justufying the expense then really need to look else where for upgrades in yoru system that provide better benefit.

[wkhanna]

Everybody is probably sick and tied of hearing this from me, but I will reiterate once again.
I recently added a Carver C-19 pre-amp with four Sovtek tubes to my system. That was before I got a CA 640C. If there is more distortion in my system now, all I can say is don’t knock it till you try it. For an investment of well under 1K, the performance of my entire system increased significantly. Very significantly. And not just by my ear, but by others with better ‘ears’ than mine.

Regardless of the ‘tube’ topic, my point is that if your interested music SQ, a good pre-amp upgrade for the same 1K investment may yield proportionably more improvement to your overall system performance than 1K spent on a Cdp or DAC alone.

You obviously have a 'Healthy' system already based on your profile listing. Determining the weak link in it is the 64K question.

[alebonau]

Everybody is probably sick and tied of hearing this from me, but I will reiterate once again.
I recently added a Carver C-19 pre-amp with four Sovtek tubes to my system. That was before I got a CA 640C. If there is more distortion in my system now, all I can say is don’t knock it till you try it. For an investment of well under 1K, the performance of my entire system increased significantly. Very significantly. And not just by my ear, but by others with better ‘ears’ than mine.

Regardless of the ‘tube’ topic, my point is that if your interested music SQ, a good pre-amp upgrade for the same 1K investment may yield proportionably more improvement to your overall system performance than 1K spent on a Cdp or DAC alone.

You obviously have a 'Healthy' system already based on your profile listing. Determining the weak link in it is the 64K question.

absolutely the importance of the 2ch pre often ignored when yet it can be key to getting the best otu of a system.

very right too in regards the 64k question. and only one way to answer that, to try a few different components in the system to guage as to what might be the answer.

[AptosJeff]

Victor,
Thanks for the insight on DAC's. I am considering them myself, as I can't afford a cdp that I like the sound of.

I wouldn't belittle MF; they have some nice sounding gear for the money. Some highly competent companies with technical products have embarrasing marketing material (I work for one). It is hard to get the knowledgeable engineers to write or even review the stuff. If I don't do it myself at our company, it ends up a mess.
Hang in there; your views may not be popular, but that's ok and the knowledge helps all of us.

[AptosJeff]

Very helpful thread ...

thanks to all contributers. I've been researching DACs for a while and the Lavry DA10 sounds like my cup of tea. I also like the MF A5 and Ayre CX-7E, but don't want to spend that much. I'm going to try to get the Lavry on a trial basis (thanks whoaru99).

Many cdp's just don't sound very good to me and whatever I can do to help, I will. It's not that they don't have enough distortion and need more 2nd harmonic; they sound quite distorted to me compared to live music and good quality analog sources. Just my opinion - not trying to start a war. Remember we all hear differently!

[bigburner]

Being a simple direct thought process kind of fellow; I've never really understood the use of abstract descriptors like 'dry', 'clinical', analytical', 'warm', enveloping', or whatever. To my ears something either sounds like live music or it doesn't. The Benchmark makes the system sound more like live music than any other DAC I've owned or auditioned.

Thomas, I too struggle with terms like 'analytical' (which is frequently applied to the Benchmark DAC1) and 'warm' (which is frequently applied to the Bel Canto DAC2). The Bel Canto DAC2 sounds great because, let's face it, who wants a 'cold' sound?!

Your definition of "something either sounds like live music or it doesn't" is an excellent one.

Having said that, I can cope with the possibility that the sound of a DAC may vary a bit from one DAC to another due to the variability of the analogue output stage. Victor discusses this later in this thread. Perhaps that's the reason why the Bel Canto DAC2 sounds warmer? This an area in which I would welcome further discussion.

Nigel.

[bigburner]

Although my opinion has not been popular, still, as someone who used to build outboard DACs I would like chime in…

What is the reason for looking to buy an outboard DAC? One thing that comes to mind is a desire to improve the sound quality of the existing CD or DVD player. Can the DAC do that? Well, - it depends on a circuitry used in a CD/DVD player, doesn’t?

These days nearly every company that sells CD/DVD players use nearly identical output circuit with the AKM D/A converter as a centerpiece. AKM manufactures several versions of what appears to be the same basic circuit that sports 24 bit precision and uses Delta-Sigma conversion approach. Sony uses their own D/A chips which are quite good being pulse-current dacs and still other companies, such as Denon, may use Analog Devices or Texas Instruments chips. It really does not matter, because all those chips are very similar to each other and all sport 24 bit internal architecture.

The analog reconstruction filter that follows the converter is greatly responsible for the perceived sound. Here I have yet to see a CD/DVD manufacture that does an adequate job as far as this filter is concerned. If principles of the DSP to be any guide here, one would say that by the time the signal negotiates this filter, the S/N degrades to about 14-15 bits, with 16 bits being an absolute best possible. This applies nearly across the board. Sony ES PRO series CD players would do 16 bits along with some Denon products but Mark Levinson’s would not as far as I remember. There are some others.

So, if the outboard DAC does a better job, then there is a reason to use it. The Benchmark DAC certainly is 16-bit capable, which is rare. Here we also can forget about any fear of jitter, thanks to the use of ASRC with its digital PLL that works within 2 Hz window. In general most DACs do not do well with jitter suppression because the SPDI/F connection relies on the signal recovery principle and it uses a special circuit to lock-on on the incoming signal. This circuit depends on the local clock. The synchronization can never be 100% and so the jitter may result. Nothing can be done about it, unless this circuit is superb and works below 1 Hz at the very least. There are some products on the market that will do that, but they are not main stream. ASRC as used by Benchmark is the most elegant solution that works very well.

So, - where does it leave us? I would say that for the most part the modern CD/DVD players are made well enough and whatever the external DAC may bring is not worth it.

Finally, on a somewhat different note, - I completely fail to see what those tube buffers do for the sound quality improvement. Other then introduce a very audible distortion they bring noting else.

Regards,
Victor

Victor, let me start by saying that your opinion is always welcome with me.

You mentioned the analogue reconstruction filter. Is this a complex piece of circuitry? How can you tell (other than by listening) if the analogue reconstruction filter in your CD/DVD is a high quality one? Does the quality of the analogue reconstruction filter contribute greatly to the price of a CD/DVD player? For example, why does the Benchmark DAC1 cost US$1,000 whereas my humble Oppo 971 with its superb PQ only cost US$200? I know that price doesn't equate to quality but Benchmark does not appear to be a company that markets to people with more money than sense.

I've posed multiple questions here. If some old fashioned Victor honesty is warranted in your reply then I promise that I can take it!

Regards,
Nigel.

[Victor]

Analog reconstruction filter is a practical necessity in any digital system that must interface with the outside world. The output section of any CD or DVD player or an outboard DAC must have this filter. I did say that in my opinion this filter is responsible for the perceived sound of the system, because there is really nothing else that can influence the sound as much.

From a purely technical perspective in a digital system several parameters can be responsible for the sound of the system, - they are: the THD, the S/N and the frequency response. Change anyone of those appreciably to the worst and the sound will change.

The principles of DSP dictate that in order to preserve the required 16-bit resolution, the reconstruction filter must be of certain degree of complexity. In my experience I have yet to see a CD/DVD player that would adhere to the theory as needed. This reality results in an increased noise, and decreased overall signal resolution which might be audible.

Another issue, - filter alignment. Here we have a requirement for the linear phase circuit, due to the fact that the human hearing is extremely attuned to the phase linearity. The problem is that a linear phase filter of a necessary complexity is difficult to construct. In other words the phase linearity and filter complexity become kind of mutually exclusive. It is possible, but expensive, may not be as reliable and might require hand-tuning. Nobody wants to do that in a production environment.

The frequency response is another issue here, because in order to get the complexity and phase linearity the cut-off frequency of the filter may have to infringe on the audible pass-band, - with clearly audible results.

So, - here you have it, - engineering is far from simple as it is a study in multidimensional compromises, the reconstruction filter rates as a problem of an average difficulty. You can get it right, like the Benchmark did, or you can get it wrong like most companies out there even a boutique ones. It is a degree of how wrong you get it mandates the sound quality that an audiophile perceives.

If you get it right, then it is possible to built a CD player and sell it for $150US and its sound will not be different from a player costing $5000+US. I know this for a fact, as I have been there myself.

Regards,
Victor

[Russ L]

Although my opinion has not been popular, still, as someone who used to build outboard DACs I would like chime in…
ASRC as used by Benchmark is the most elegant solution that works very well.
Regards,
Victor

At last we agree on something! :W -Russ

[bigburner]

At last we agree on something! :W -Russ

Whew!