Are the $19,500 Berkeley and $35,000 dCS DACs really worth big bucks?

Ric Schultz

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2013
227
56
333
Soquel, CA
My friend in Pocoima has a modified Yggdrasil and recently received the LKS MH-DA004 DAC ($1600 delivered from China). The completely stock stone cold out of the box LKS DAC was better in almost every way. Now he has modified the LKS (per my instructions) and feels the LKS sounds as good (playing 16/44 through Beatis server, through coax, through modified IFI spdif Ipurifier) as his $20,000 turntable system. Does this mean the LKS with mods would be better than Berkeley or DCS?

The LKS DAC has I2S input, plays DSD up to 512, has digital volume control and 7 selectable digital filters.....completely discrete output stage, discrete shunt regulators for output stage and is the first and only DAC in the world that I know of that has two ESS 9038 DACs in parallel.

What is even more interesting is that the $800 Oppo Sonica (single ESS9038 DAC chip) with my latest mods is getting real close to the sound of the LKS. I will be trying better regulators and a discrete output stage in the Oppo shortly and it then may equal the LKS.........What? This is getting insane!!!!!! The Oppo has Ethernet input, wireless streaming and can play files directly from hard drives or thumb drives using software you download to your smart phone......and it sounds good stock. Now, with todays mods it is goosebump city! New regulators arriving Friday.....what fun ahead!

Until these modded units are directly compared to Berkeley, DCS, etc. etc. we won't really know how good they are.....but the Yggy is history, for sure. I am going to try and get a modded Oppo going and send it out on tour so people can hear in their own home and in their own system how it compares with super "big bucks" machines. This is a fantastic time in the history of digital playback......we have some bargains here that may be unprecedented. Giant killers? We shall see.
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,685
4,474
963
Greater Boston
My friend in Pocoima has a modified Yggdrasil and recently received the LKS MH-DA004 DAC ($1600 delivered from China). The completely stock stone cold out of the box LKS DAC was better in almost every way. Now he has modified the LKS (per my instructions) and feels the LKS sounds as good (playing 16/44 through Beatis server, through coax, through modified IFI spdif Ipurifier) as his $20,000 turntable system. Does this mean the LKS with mods would be better than Berkeley or DCS?

The LKS DAC has I2S input, plays DSD up to 512, has digital volume control and 7 selectable digital filters.....completely discrete output stage, discrete shunt regulators for output stage and is the first and only DAC in the world that I know of that has two ESS 9038 DACs in parallel.

What is even more interesting is that the $800 Oppo Sonica (single ESS9038 DAC chip) with my latest mods is getting real close to the sound of the LKS. I will be trying better regulators and a discrete output stage in the Oppo shortly and it then may equal the LKS.........What? This is getting insane!!!!!! The Oppo has Ethernet input, wireless streaming and can play files directly from hard drives or thumb drives using software you download to your smart phone......and it sounds good stock. Now, with todays mods it is goosebump city! New regulators arriving Friday.....what fun ahead!

Until these modded units are directly compared to Berkeley, DCS, etc. etc. we won't really know how good they are.....but the Yggy is history, for sure. I am going to try and get a modded Oppo going and send it out on tour so people can hear in their own home and in their own system how it compares with super "big bucks" machines. This is a fantastic time in the history of digital playback......we have some bargains here that may be unprecedented. Giant killers? We shall see.

The question obviously is what you define as "better". Without specifics, any assertions can be made, and personal taste runs rampant over any objective criteria. While I may not agree with everything that RH says in the linked review of the Yggdrasil, at least he is specific in his observations.
 

Joe Whip

Well-Known Member
Feb 8, 2014
1,735
557
405
Wayne, PA
I am sorry but when it comes to his mods of the latest Chinese DAC of the month, Ric comes off a bit too strong for me.
 

rockitman

Member Sponsor
Sep 20, 2011
7,097
412
1,210
Northern NY
I don't know. I do know my $6k msrp PS Audio Direct stream does a fine job. If digital was my primary medium, then I would probably look at the more expensive hi-end DAC's and compare them against this PSA direct stream DAC.
 

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
Owners of expensive DACs can expect one month of peace: :D

"Although Moffatt warned me that the Yggy wouldn’t sound good right out of the box, I gave it a quick listen anyway after an hour of warm-up. He was right; the Yggy was hard, bright, forward, and flat. I checked in with it a couple of times over the next week and heard it improving somewhat, but it was still disappointing. I decided to let it sit in my rack, powered up, for a full month before revisiting it."
 

the sound of Tao

Well-Known Member
Jul 18, 2014
3,620
4,838
940
The question obviously is what you define as "better". Without specifics, any assertions can be made, and personal taste runs rampant over any objective criteria. While I may not agree with everything that RH says in the linked review of the Yggdrasil, at least he is specific in his observations.

Absolutely Al, given that best really mostly just means different and that one person's best could be another person's much worse. It is always possible if not always easiest to break our conclusion down into some simplified specific subjective criteria.

I understand that it is not always easy to define what makes things better for us but just trying is half the battle. It would be great if people could try and help everyone actually understand something rather than just skipping straight through to what they feel is some absolute answer but is actually just a truly limited observation.

It would be really great if when wanting to make these claims of best if we could also put the work in and further substantiate the subjective claims eg... A is better than B (for me) because... it is more detailed/natural/transparent/linear/coherent/visceral/alive/vital/holographic/engaging/natural/warm/present/dynamic/tonally correct etc etc and so on... just explaining experience with a few simple words means that we can all benefit.
 

caesar

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2010
4,290
767
1,698
...
I understand that it is not always easy to define what makes things better for us but just trying is half the battle. It would be great if people could try and help everyone actually understand something rather than just skipping straight through to what they feel is some absolute answer but is actually just a truly limited observation.

It would be really great if when wanting to make these claims of best if we could also put the work in and further substantiate the subjective claims eg... A is better than B (for me) because... it is more detailed/natural/transparent/linear/coherent/visceral/alive/vital/holographic/engaging/natural/warm/present/dynamic/tonally correct etc etc and so on... just explaining experience with a few simple words means that we can all benefit.

Tao,

Very well put! Many reviewers are insecure and fail to do this. They are scared that if they don't declare something as "BEST" their stupid readers will never buy the product they are writing about.

Yet when they fail to describe the experience of each product and how it relatively compares to other products, they just spit the green sticky stuff from the back of their throat into the face of the fans as it makes the job that much harder for the fans to figure out what to audition. Fans have to take their precious time to travel, arrange to put things in their system (potentially banging things up), take time to compare instead of listening to music, etc., which can be eased by simple comparisons...

This is the reason guys like "Worthless to the Audio Fan" Robert Harley earned his nickname...He had dcs vivaldi and called it the best. 2 months later he had the berkley in his system and called it the best., never comparing the 2 DACs! The 2 are actually different and will appeal to different people... And only when berkeley ref 2 comes out "Worthless" Harley notices that ref 1 lacks liquidity!

It is a real shame that Tom Martin, who owns TAS - and surely knows better about customer experience from his work making Dell one of the greatest companies in the history of earth - has abdicated his leadership to Harley
 

caesar

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2010
4,290
767
1,698
http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/schiit-audio-yggdrasil-dac/

Anyone compared these DACs to the Shiit Audio Yggdrasil DAC?

You really have to listen for yourself, as high end audio is a luxury experience. Although I have not yet heard the Shiit, I like both the Chord DAVE and Bricasti to both the severely analytical Berkeley Ref and the dCS. Both are reference level DACs and are at a fraction of the cost of the well-marketed brands. Only listening will let you get past the marketing BS.
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,685
4,474
963
Greater Boston
Although I have not yet heard the Shiit, I like both the Chord DAVE and Bricasti to both the severely analytical Berkeley Ref and the dCS. Both are reference level DACs and are at a fraction of the cost of the well-marketed brands. Only listening will let you get past the marketing BS.

Could you please define what you mean with the Berkeley Ref and dCS being "severely analytical"?
 

RogerD

VIP/Donor
May 23, 2010
3,734
318
565
BiggestLittleCity
I think the Monarchy NM24 tube DAC is a legitimate giant killer. The new model might even be better than mine,but if you roll the tubes and if you use a grounding device it can be a impressive DAC. I did replace two the coupling caps which is a cheap and easy mod. The bass is tremendous and very detailed...very neutral. The important fact about digital systems,once the noise is removed the results can be stunning. No luxury needed.
 

morricab

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2014
9,391
4,988
978
Switzerland
I think the Monarchy NM24 tube DAC is a legitimate giant killer. The new model might even be better than mine,but if you roll the tubes and if you use a grounding device it can be a impressive DAC. I did replace two the coupling caps which is a cheap and easy mod. The bass is tremendous and very detailed...very neutral. The important fact about digital systems,once the noise is removed the results can be stunning. No luxury needed.
I agree, this Dac is killer but the older version with 20bit BB PCM63 chips is arguably even better. Couple this with a Monarchy DIP and Monarchy power regenerator and you really get superb red book digital. Very musical and analog like. I have stuck with mine for more than 10 years because I haven't heard a definitive KO from any other DAC. It is unfailingly holographic and quite neutral (no artificial warmth) and responds extremely well to tube rolling. Plenty of detail too. Too bad Monarchy seems to be out of business.
 

morricab

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2014
9,391
4,988
978
Switzerland
Could you please define what you mean with the Berkeley Ref and dCS being "severely analytical"?

The DCS dacs I have heard fit this description but I have not heard a Vivaldi stack.
 

Alpinist

Well-Known Member
Jun 17, 2014
530
143
280
USA
You really have to listen for yourself, as high end audio is a luxury experience. Although I have not yet heard the Shiit, I like both the Chord DAVE and Bricasti to both the severely analytical Berkeley Ref and the dCS. Both are reference level DACs and are at a fraction of the cost of the well-marketed brands. Only listening will let you get past the marketing BS.

Hi Caesar,

I have done many hours of auditioning of the Berkeley Ref2 DAC and I can tell you it sounds pretty much the opposite of analytical. In fact, it is one of the most tube-like sounding solid state DACs you will find. It has a very musical presentation with loads of midrange body and very smooth treble with zero digital artifice. My MQA version of the Berkeley Ref2 will be arriving in a few weeks, so I'll give a full report then.

Best,
Ken
 

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
(...) to both the severely analytical Berkeley Ref and the dCS. (...)

No experience with the Berkeley Ref, but no way the Vivaldi stack is "severely analytical". It has a great resolving power, and shows more detail than any other DAC I have owned, but it also shows the "glue" between the details that make listening more similar to real. In some sense it also perfectly integrates the analytical details in the whole.

Many enjoyable DACs present spacious sound with 3D, but when the recording has the information the Vivaldi presents acoustic density in space in an unique way, creating power and dialogue in the stage - but it needs a properly tuned system to show it. When mismatched it becomes really boring.
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,685
4,474
963
Greater Boston
The DCS dacs I have heard fit this description but I have not heard a Vivaldi stack.

Which description? What does "analytical" mean? Showing all the details? If that's the case, I want a system that is as analytical as possible, because whenever I visit a live concert of unamplified music and sit reasonably close to the performers, I get almost overwhelmed with detail.

BTW, in that context, through all that detail I also usually don't hear in live music an often hailed 'fluidity' (yes, including with great performers). So this is a dubious parameter to me, and reminds me more of lesser analog than of live music and top reproduction (including top analog).

Or do you mean clinical, an emascerated sound without good body? Neither the Berkeley Ref nor the curent dCS gear fall into that category. I have heard great body from these, but obviously that also depends on system context -- that is why direct comparisons within the same system are important. You can't extrapolate from hearing different DACs in different systems.
 

morricab

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2014
9,391
4,988
978
Switzerland
Which description? What does "analytical" mean? Showing all the details? If that's the case, I want a system that is as analytical as possible, because whenever I visit a live concert of unamplified music and sit reasonably close to the performers, I get almost overwhelmed with detail.

BTW, in that context, through all that detail I also usually don't hear in live music an often hailed 'fluidity' (yes, including with great performers). So this is a dubious parameter to me, and reminds me more of lesser analog than of live music and top reproduction (including top analog).

Or do you mean clinical, an emascerated sound without good body? Neither the Berkeley Ref nor the curent dCS gear fall into that category. I have heard great body from these, but obviously that also depends on system context -- that is why direct comparisons within the same system are important. You can't extrapolate from hearing different DACs in different systems.

More towards the second description but it is also meaning a tonality that is leaner than the real thing as a result of certain distortion patterns that simply don't sound natural...synthetic if you will. It is apparent detail without the correct harmonic balance. Certain distortions create apparent detail in the highs but this is false and not heard like that in real life.

i do not agree that head to head comparisons are necessary for understanding the sound of a component. It helps in the context of a given system but not for general assessment .
 

BMCG

VIP/Donor
Oct 1, 2016
234
41
133
United Kingdom
Or do you mean clinical, an emascerated sound without good body? Neither the Berkeley Ref nor the curent dCS gear fall into that category. I have heard great body from these, but obviously that also depends on system context -- that is why direct comparisons within the same system are important. You can't extrapolate from hearing different DACs in different systems.

Given the extent to which something as seemingly banal as the clock cables - out of direct signal path - can influence the tonality/imaging of the Vivaldi DAC's reproduction....yes system context matters....remarkably so.
 

Al M.

VIP/Donor
Sep 10, 2013
8,685
4,474
963
Greater Boston
More towards the second description but it is also meaning a tonality that is leaner than the real thing as a result of certain distortion patterns that simply don't sound natural...synthetic if you will. It is apparent detail without the correct harmonic balance. Certain distortions create apparent detail in the highs but this is false and not heard like that in real life.

None of those problems intrinsically exist in dCS gear. If you read the assessment of Peter A. about the dCS Rossini,

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...win-s-High-End&p=379841&viewfull=1#post379841

he specifically points out the naturalness of ssound with proper harmonic integrity (and he exclusively listens to vinyl at home). And BTW, the most realistic, and thus harmonically integrated, presentation of a triangle, including perfect decay, that I have heard was not from top analog, but from a dCS Vivaldi stack playing a 44.1 kHz Reference Recordings CD.

i do not agree that head to head comparisons are necessary for understanding the sound of a component. It helps in the context of a given system but not for general assessment .

Of course head to head comparisons within a single system are the only way to accurately assess the sound of individual components. Claiming otherwise would betray lack of thorough experience with a sufficiently diverse spectrum of high end systems/room situations (sorry to be so blunt about the truth).
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing