Spent a most instructive afternoon/early evening with three audiophile friends in Zürich, a comparative listening session of three DACs in a known system, all fed by a nice server running JRiver:
- Playback Designs Merlot DAC
- dCS Delius DAC and Purcell Upsampler via a Weiss INT202 FireWire/AES converter, with JRiver resampling all DSD to PCM as these 15-year-old dCS (pre-RoHS era) units won’t accept DSD from a computer
- Weiss DAC202
In short, an apples to oranges comparison in that:
- the Merlot will accept and convert DSD up do 256fs and PCM up to DXD
- the Delius/Purcell combo played back re-/upsampled 24/192 PCM regardless of the native format (our engineer friend created different zones in JRiver, which also converted all DSD to PCM on the fly for dCS playback via the Weiss FW/AES-converter); it also had the disdvantage of having to be dialed down in volume by 4.5 dB to match the Merlot, which has no volume control (except for its headphone amp). Filter 6 (minimum phase) was used for the Delius throughout.
- the DAC 202 will accept DSD at its USB (but not the FireWire) input, but internally converts to PCM before conversion
We played and compared some of every format, single-blind (one person at the Goldpoint switch, the others trying to guess which DAC they were hearing). Mostly classical (opera and symphonic), some jazz and blues.
Fast forward to my/our conclusions:
- Merlot pros: smooth and liquid regardless of format, to the point where it makes some (not all) harsh sounding PCM records more palatable; a better DSD (and a great one at that) than PCM DAC, with some of the best DSD playback any of us has yet heard (my benchmark being the dCS Vivaldi, which was limited to 64fs DSD when I last heard it); all in all one of the best modern DACs we know, but…
- Merlot cons: presents a smaller, less wide, more forward, triangular-shaped soundstage (narrow at the back, lacking in depth perception) with PCM playback except perhaps DXD (with DXD and especially DSD playback the Merlot approached or matched the dCS’s soundstage to the point where differences were negligible); noticeably rolled off at the top especially with PCM playback, which sucks some life and sparkle out of some records, as a result making a handful sound slightly compressed and hard in the upper mids (partly an effect of the soundstage narrowing, and hence again, no a problem at all with DSD playback); occasionally some coloration could be detected (reminiscent of, but subtle compared to a Meitner – but happily, not with DSD playback); restrained dynamics (sometimes sounding a bit laid-back and Hi-Fi as a result, as if trying to match the sonic characteristics of its own DSD playback instead of real life)
- dCS combo pros: open, airy, wide-band, dynamic, with a huge soundstage (and by “huge” I mean realistic in terms of width, height and - comparatively speaking enormous - depth, with everything in real-life proportion, not outsized or overblown), highly resolved from top to bottom, in direct comparison particularly noticeable in the treble, which ironically makes it sound less hard than the Merlot with cymbals or recordings (such as digital remasterings of legendary recordings from “the golden era of analogue”, in particular opera or symphonic) that tend to show signs of overload/compression; although there was some give and take with some (particularly fine modern) recordings, on the whole, not only does the dCS combo PCM as well or better than the Merlot, the downright crazy part is, those iffy JRiver on the fly conversions from DSD sound at least 99% as good as real DSD on the Merlot (not everyone was able to reliably tell them apart!); tempting to claim “you are there” realism for the dCS versus the Merlot’s (nomen est omen?) “smoothness for smoothness sake”, hampered only by…
- dCS combo cons: it did sound a bit raw compared to the Merlot’s liquidity and smoothness; the sheer size of the holographic soundstage occasionally (rarely!) seems to take away from the hologram’s density of what’s placed in it with some recordings, even so, nothing ever sounds disembodied (let alone ethereal/ghostly as an earlier Meitner DAC I once auditioned), but rather, much more clearly separated as if hanging in space (listening to the dCS combo made me feel as if one could throw a ball back there, defying the fact that visibly, there was a wall behind the speakers – no way it would have bounced back, or would it?!)
- Weiss pros: always thought highly (and continue to do so) of those Weiss products that are all about engineering, such as the professional FireWire/AES/DAT converter etc. (of which the INT202 we used with the dCS combo is a direct descendant), but when it comes to conversion to analogue, perfect measurements don’t necessarily add up to great sound
- cons: the Weiss sounded flat and compressed in comparison (far from being a bad DAC, better is the enemy of good), regardless of format (shockingly so, its owner gasped, given the Weiss bettered the Berkeley Alpha DAC in just the same respect in earlier listening comparisons)
In short, the Weiss sounded like good Hi-Fi, the Merlot like supremely polished Hi-Fi, and the “antiquated” dCS combo like an ever so slightly raw version of reality.
What was perhaps most astonishing was that while DSD (true of all the 64fs, 128fs and 256fs files we listened to) did sound best played back natively on the Merlot, it sounded only marginally different from (and hence only marginally better than) converted on the fly to PCM and as such converted by the dCS combo.
I was suddenly reminded by what another audiophile acquaintance (dare I say friend) told me: that using more careful (and integer-numbered) offline DSD to PCM conversion such as with the DSDMaster tool (beats JRiver on the fly conversion any day), such PCM files played back with the Daniel Hertz Masterclass media player sounded just like DSD to him if not better.
In principle, I believe formats should be played back natively whenever possible, having said that, the smoothness we heard with the Merlot was irrespective of format, and on a side note, I know from personal experience that a superior media player will make the ancient dCS combo’s “rawness” all but disappear (not to mention external clocking, as well as carefully chosen audiophile fine fuses, power conditioning, AES/EBU, FireWire and power cabling – today’s dCS combo was nowhere near “maxed out”) – and hence the gap may indeed close to where in a blind test, I wouldn’t want to bet my own on being able to tell which is which…
(On a side note, I do feel dCS, after being forced to re-design their whole product line due to RoHS regulations, sonically took a noticeable step backwards before taking the next one forward.)
So our conclusion was that yes, the Merlot is a DAC worth owning, and DSD worth listening to – even so, it was nowhere near the quantum leap we expected.
More research in order: Chord DAVE, Merging NADAC and T&A DAC 8 are currently at the top of our engineer friend’s wish list, I’m also hoping to sneak in a Lampizator Atlantic at some point…
Greetings from Switzerland, David.
P.S.
Should mention that I concentrated on the differences rather than similarities in this writeup. The three DACs, as different as they sound, don't as much differ in weight, body, bass, or other Hi-Fi criteria as in the ones mentioned above, and in terms of emotion, I noticed that each time I started tapping my feet (or smiling broadly), it turned out the dCS was playing, even though the Merlot converting DSD was no slouch in this respect either. The Weiss, I’m sorry to say, wasn’t very inspiring in this respect.
P.P.S.
Admittedly, the whole experience was a bit sobering in hindsight. My two friends were ready to get their checkbooks out in anticipation of that qualitative quantum leap we didn’t get, whereas I have been toying with the idea of adding a DSD DAC for some time (although preferably one with volume control, clocking I/O etc.). The owner of the Weiss, who’s also the initiator of the meeting, aches (or I should say, is still looking) for a satisfactory all-purpose solution (meaning, a DAC that will play back all the relevant formats equally well, preferably no-fuss). Most importantly, we all enjoyed the weekend tremendously, and already set a date for the next DAC shootout. But note the man’s an electronics engineer, so the idea of 15 years of technological progress gone by that seemingly add up, if not to nothing, so to a barely discernible difference in sonics was a profound shock.
P.P.P.S.
Disclaimer: I personally don’t have any principled preferences other than great sound (by which I mean lifelike, “you are there” realism) – despite my profound love for and interest in the technological side of audio, I’ve always insisted that if I were presented with perfect sound, lifted the lid and discovered a hamster was running on its wheel, I’d shrug it off and continue to listen and enjoy.
I’m usually more into apples to apples comparisons, and never much thought of comparing formats, because I’m primarily a music lover, and so much of the music I love hasn’t yet made its way to high-resolution digital, so that for years I was happy to see it released on RBCD instead of not at all. Although I admire reference-quality engineering and own my share of audiophile recordings, being able to play those back is no more than a plus to me. The most telling horror scenario I experienced in roughly 30 years in my audiophile hobby was being invited over to someone’s home who had what seemed closer to a seven- than six-figure system, a self-proclaimed “fan” who played back a sampler of e.g. a train passing by (gleefully pointing to the subwoofers getting a workout), and when I modestly asked for him to put on something else, it turned out it was one of only three albums in his collection, with the other two containing aerobic music belonging to his fake-blonde trophy wife…
- Playback Designs Merlot DAC
- dCS Delius DAC and Purcell Upsampler via a Weiss INT202 FireWire/AES converter, with JRiver resampling all DSD to PCM as these 15-year-old dCS (pre-RoHS era) units won’t accept DSD from a computer
- Weiss DAC202
In short, an apples to oranges comparison in that:
- the Merlot will accept and convert DSD up do 256fs and PCM up to DXD
- the Delius/Purcell combo played back re-/upsampled 24/192 PCM regardless of the native format (our engineer friend created different zones in JRiver, which also converted all DSD to PCM on the fly for dCS playback via the Weiss FW/AES-converter); it also had the disdvantage of having to be dialed down in volume by 4.5 dB to match the Merlot, which has no volume control (except for its headphone amp). Filter 6 (minimum phase) was used for the Delius throughout.
- the DAC 202 will accept DSD at its USB (but not the FireWire) input, but internally converts to PCM before conversion
We played and compared some of every format, single-blind (one person at the Goldpoint switch, the others trying to guess which DAC they were hearing). Mostly classical (opera and symphonic), some jazz and blues.
Fast forward to my/our conclusions:
- Merlot pros: smooth and liquid regardless of format, to the point where it makes some (not all) harsh sounding PCM records more palatable; a better DSD (and a great one at that) than PCM DAC, with some of the best DSD playback any of us has yet heard (my benchmark being the dCS Vivaldi, which was limited to 64fs DSD when I last heard it); all in all one of the best modern DACs we know, but…
- Merlot cons: presents a smaller, less wide, more forward, triangular-shaped soundstage (narrow at the back, lacking in depth perception) with PCM playback except perhaps DXD (with DXD and especially DSD playback the Merlot approached or matched the dCS’s soundstage to the point where differences were negligible); noticeably rolled off at the top especially with PCM playback, which sucks some life and sparkle out of some records, as a result making a handful sound slightly compressed and hard in the upper mids (partly an effect of the soundstage narrowing, and hence again, no a problem at all with DSD playback); occasionally some coloration could be detected (reminiscent of, but subtle compared to a Meitner – but happily, not with DSD playback); restrained dynamics (sometimes sounding a bit laid-back and Hi-Fi as a result, as if trying to match the sonic characteristics of its own DSD playback instead of real life)
- dCS combo pros: open, airy, wide-band, dynamic, with a huge soundstage (and by “huge” I mean realistic in terms of width, height and - comparatively speaking enormous - depth, with everything in real-life proportion, not outsized or overblown), highly resolved from top to bottom, in direct comparison particularly noticeable in the treble, which ironically makes it sound less hard than the Merlot with cymbals or recordings (such as digital remasterings of legendary recordings from “the golden era of analogue”, in particular opera or symphonic) that tend to show signs of overload/compression; although there was some give and take with some (particularly fine modern) recordings, on the whole, not only does the dCS combo PCM as well or better than the Merlot, the downright crazy part is, those iffy JRiver on the fly conversions from DSD sound at least 99% as good as real DSD on the Merlot (not everyone was able to reliably tell them apart!); tempting to claim “you are there” realism for the dCS versus the Merlot’s (nomen est omen?) “smoothness for smoothness sake”, hampered only by…
- dCS combo cons: it did sound a bit raw compared to the Merlot’s liquidity and smoothness; the sheer size of the holographic soundstage occasionally (rarely!) seems to take away from the hologram’s density of what’s placed in it with some recordings, even so, nothing ever sounds disembodied (let alone ethereal/ghostly as an earlier Meitner DAC I once auditioned), but rather, much more clearly separated as if hanging in space (listening to the dCS combo made me feel as if one could throw a ball back there, defying the fact that visibly, there was a wall behind the speakers – no way it would have bounced back, or would it?!)
- Weiss pros: always thought highly (and continue to do so) of those Weiss products that are all about engineering, such as the professional FireWire/AES/DAT converter etc. (of which the INT202 we used with the dCS combo is a direct descendant), but when it comes to conversion to analogue, perfect measurements don’t necessarily add up to great sound
- cons: the Weiss sounded flat and compressed in comparison (far from being a bad DAC, better is the enemy of good), regardless of format (shockingly so, its owner gasped, given the Weiss bettered the Berkeley Alpha DAC in just the same respect in earlier listening comparisons)
In short, the Weiss sounded like good Hi-Fi, the Merlot like supremely polished Hi-Fi, and the “antiquated” dCS combo like an ever so slightly raw version of reality.
What was perhaps most astonishing was that while DSD (true of all the 64fs, 128fs and 256fs files we listened to) did sound best played back natively on the Merlot, it sounded only marginally different from (and hence only marginally better than) converted on the fly to PCM and as such converted by the dCS combo.
I was suddenly reminded by what another audiophile acquaintance (dare I say friend) told me: that using more careful (and integer-numbered) offline DSD to PCM conversion such as with the DSDMaster tool (beats JRiver on the fly conversion any day), such PCM files played back with the Daniel Hertz Masterclass media player sounded just like DSD to him if not better.
In principle, I believe formats should be played back natively whenever possible, having said that, the smoothness we heard with the Merlot was irrespective of format, and on a side note, I know from personal experience that a superior media player will make the ancient dCS combo’s “rawness” all but disappear (not to mention external clocking, as well as carefully chosen audiophile fine fuses, power conditioning, AES/EBU, FireWire and power cabling – today’s dCS combo was nowhere near “maxed out”) – and hence the gap may indeed close to where in a blind test, I wouldn’t want to bet my own on being able to tell which is which…
(On a side note, I do feel dCS, after being forced to re-design their whole product line due to RoHS regulations, sonically took a noticeable step backwards before taking the next one forward.)
So our conclusion was that yes, the Merlot is a DAC worth owning, and DSD worth listening to – even so, it was nowhere near the quantum leap we expected.
More research in order: Chord DAVE, Merging NADAC and T&A DAC 8 are currently at the top of our engineer friend’s wish list, I’m also hoping to sneak in a Lampizator Atlantic at some point…
Greetings from Switzerland, David.
P.S.
Should mention that I concentrated on the differences rather than similarities in this writeup. The three DACs, as different as they sound, don't as much differ in weight, body, bass, or other Hi-Fi criteria as in the ones mentioned above, and in terms of emotion, I noticed that each time I started tapping my feet (or smiling broadly), it turned out the dCS was playing, even though the Merlot converting DSD was no slouch in this respect either. The Weiss, I’m sorry to say, wasn’t very inspiring in this respect.
P.P.S.
Admittedly, the whole experience was a bit sobering in hindsight. My two friends were ready to get their checkbooks out in anticipation of that qualitative quantum leap we didn’t get, whereas I have been toying with the idea of adding a DSD DAC for some time (although preferably one with volume control, clocking I/O etc.). The owner of the Weiss, who’s also the initiator of the meeting, aches (or I should say, is still looking) for a satisfactory all-purpose solution (meaning, a DAC that will play back all the relevant formats equally well, preferably no-fuss). Most importantly, we all enjoyed the weekend tremendously, and already set a date for the next DAC shootout. But note the man’s an electronics engineer, so the idea of 15 years of technological progress gone by that seemingly add up, if not to nothing, so to a barely discernible difference in sonics was a profound shock.
P.P.P.S.
Disclaimer: I personally don’t have any principled preferences other than great sound (by which I mean lifelike, “you are there” realism) – despite my profound love for and interest in the technological side of audio, I’ve always insisted that if I were presented with perfect sound, lifted the lid and discovered a hamster was running on its wheel, I’d shrug it off and continue to listen and enjoy.
I’m usually more into apples to apples comparisons, and never much thought of comparing formats, because I’m primarily a music lover, and so much of the music I love hasn’t yet made its way to high-resolution digital, so that for years I was happy to see it released on RBCD instead of not at all. Although I admire reference-quality engineering and own my share of audiophile recordings, being able to play those back is no more than a plus to me. The most telling horror scenario I experienced in roughly 30 years in my audiophile hobby was being invited over to someone’s home who had what seemed closer to a seven- than six-figure system, a self-proclaimed “fan” who played back a sampler of e.g. a train passing by (gleefully pointing to the subwoofers getting a workout), and when I modestly asked for him to put on something else, it turned out it was one of only three albums in his collection, with the other two containing aerobic music belonging to his fake-blonde trophy wife…
Last edited: