Aries Cerat DACs vs. other brands

[Opabin]

While it’s interesting to read comparisons of a Kassandra Ref to a Kassandra LE DAC, even better for me (who's sadly yet to hear an Aries Cerat system) would be to hear Aries Cerat DACs compared with other brands. One might guess what AC owners would say about the sound character of multibit or Delta Sigma rivals, but how about other R2R DACs? How do the Kassandra and Ithaka sound beside DACs with similar converter topologies (Totaldac, etc.)?

 

[Opabin]

Let me try a couple of specific questions. My interest in Aries Cerat was sparked when I read enthusiastic praise for AC DACs' sound character and learned they utilise R2R ladder converter circuits. My current DAC, a Totaldac Triunity, is also an R2R ladder DAC, but built with an array of discrete Vishay foil resistors. Apparently, R2R ladder DACs just sound better to these ears, especially on live, non-studio recordings of acoustic instruments.

But how important are the differences in ladder DAC topologies? Do you think AC is correct in pointing out the flaw in the discrete resistor approach to DAC design; that individual resistors in the ladder array can never be trimmed with enough precision to the correct values? And that a properly-designed array of multiple IC R2R converters gives more accurate results? In other words, do you believe Aries Cerat's IC R2R ladder design has an inherent advantage over other topologies, or could it simply be their superior implementation that gives them the edge? And if so, how is the advantage in topology evident in sound character? This question fascinates me, as the owner of a discrete resistor DAC.

 

[Ron Resnick]

But how important are the differences in ladder DAC topologies? Do you think AC is correct in pointing out the flaw in the discrete resistor approach to DAC design; that individual resistors in the ladder array can never be trimmed with enough precision to the correct values? And that a properly-designed array of multiple IC R2R converters gives more accurate results? In other words, do you believe Aries Cerat's IC R2R ladder design has an inherent advantage over other topologies, or could it simply be their superior implementation that gives them the edge? And if so, how is the advantage in topology evident in sound character? This question fascinates me, as the owner of a discrete resistor DAC.

I feel strongly that in this hobby implementation trumps theory. In a subjective hobby any basis for a purchase decision cannot really be challenged. I cannot say it is illegitimate to select a component which implements a design whose underlying theory you prefer in concept.

Why not just compare Aries Cerat DACs to some worthy competitors, and let yours ears decide whichever you think sounds better to you according to your personal sonic preferences?

But don't get me wrong -- I, too, spend plenty of time trying to figure out which theory makes the most "sense" to me! It's fun to think about this kind of stuff!

PS: On the Bricasti DAC which has onboard R2R and delta sigma, I consistently preferred the R2R. Yet the DAC I bought, a Lampizator, I believe is not R2R!

 

[Opabin]

I feel strongly that in this hobby implementation trumps theory. In a subjective hobby any basis for a purchase decision cannot really be challenged. I cannot say it is illegitimate to select a component which implements a design whose underlying theory you prefer in concept.

Why not just compare Aries Cerat DACs to some worthy competitors, and let yours ears decide whichever you think sounds better to you according to your personal sonic preferences?

But don't get me wrong -- I, too, spend plenty of time trying to figure out which theory makes the most "sense" to me! It's fun to think about this kind of stuff!

PS: On the Bricasti DAC which has onboard R2R and delta sigma, I consistently preferred the R2R. Yet the DAC I bought, a Lampizator, I believe is not R2R!

Ron, I suspect you are right about implementation, but aren’t you glad there are guys like Stavros who are bothered by theoretical flaws and dream of something better, driven to innovate?

And of course your advice to trust my ears is right. Unfortunately, in my location, it will be challenging to arrange an audition. It may take a bit of time.

 

[morricab]

Hi Opabin,
I too find the R2R DAC architecture more natural to listen to than sigma/delta or software implementations.

However, I have so far not been that enamored with the discrete resistor implementations with the exception of TotalDAC. Personally, I think the best digital sound comes from 2 things: 1) a very good R2R chip (either with over sampling (not upsampling) or non-oversampling) 2) IV conversion that is passive or with discrete transistor 3) tube or discrete class A transistor output stage and 4) massive robust powersupply.

There are some exceptions to that but they are few and far between...for me.

The first discrete R2R implementation as far as I am aware was by Accuphase in the early 90s. They then moved to using the BB PCM63K 20 bit chip (one of the absolute best) and in their top DACs like the DC-91 used multiple chips, like Aries Cerat does today (Accuphase called it MMB or multi-multibit). This lowers the noise floor and ups the dynamics considerably.

I don't think it is possible to get a discrete DAC to the level of precision of a laser trimmed chip like a BB PCM1704, which was the best measuring of all the IC based DAC chips from the 80s and 90s. Probably the most loved ones though are the AD1865N, which is used by Aries Cerat and Audio Note among others, the Philips TD-1541 and the BB PCM63K. IMO, these will all outperform a discrete DAC if implemented in ways described above.

As to Sigma/Delta. The Lampizator implementations are very good and arguably more "airy" and resolved; however, that doesn't necessarily make them sound more "real". Recent DACs that use top AKM chips are also very very good, like from Metronome and Ayon.

That said, I still strongly prefer a good R2R DAC implementation using IC chips. A friend of mine recently brought over an Abbas DAC that uses the old Philips TD-1541 16bit chip. This sounded wonderful...plenty of resolution and lovely tone and huge dynamics. The Aries Cerat DACs sound soemwhat more neutral than this but you still know it is a tube R2R DAC and the dynamics and soundstage are huge. More detailed and resolved than the Abbas DAC as well. The AC DACs have a very "grounded" sound where there is this sensation of an ultra stable foundation upon which the music is built and organized...it all makes sense together. It is not as "airy" and extended as a Lampizator DAC and some people prefer that.

 

[RCanelas]

Fortunately you can have it all. You can have all of the precision of laser trimmed resistors of a r2r chip on a discrete resistor ladder by using... laser trimmed surface mounted resistors. If you want that next level of precision, you can also then laser trim the soldering of the resistors, just to ensure you go one order of magnitude beyond the 0.01% compliance. We do it.

This way you don't depend on of the shelf ICs and are actually free to do anything you want.

It really is more a matter of implementation and explicit design choices rather than what is being used, beyond a given threshold of course. As @morricab said, AC and AN used the same converter IC, and the results couldn't be more different. You can't pay me to listen to that AN, and I'd pay to listen to that AC.

 

[bonzo75]

My Lampi GG is R2R

 

[Ron Resnick]

aren’t you glad there are guys like Stavros who are bothered by theoretical flaws and dream of something better, driven to innovate?

1,000%! Stavros is amazing! (As as are my other favorite designers.)

 

[Ron Resnick]

A friend of mine recently brought over an Abbas DAC that uses the old Philips TD-1541 16bit chip. This sounded wonderful...plenty of resolution and lovely tone and huge dynamics.

I totally second this view. At a point in time when I thought I would be waiting months for my Baltic 4 I purchased a used Abbas. I was very impressed with the sound, and suddenly I could listen to digital.

I brought the Abbas down to a friend's house to hear it in his system, and he asked me not to take it back. He bought it from me on the spot.

 

[morricab]

I totally second this view. At a point in time when I thought I would be waiting months for my Baltic 4 I purchased a used Abbas. I was very impressed with the sound, and suddenly I could listen to digital.

I brought the Abbas down to a friend's house to hear it in his system, and he asked me not to take it back. He bought it from me on the spot.

You really think the Baltic 4 is better? Which model Abbas? My friend just got the latest version.

 

[Ron Resnick]

You really think the Baltic 4 is better?

I never said that. I never compared them side-by-side.

I've been able to listen to digital on every LampizatOr I've ever heard. I'm very happy with the Baltic 4. I adore Lukasz. Fred is extremely supportive to all clients. Marty hears what I hear. Kedar hears what I hear. Bake all this into a DAC pie and I'm happy with LampizatOr.

Which model Abbas?

I don't remember. It was used, so it likely was an older model.

 

[RaChiK]

I would leave the design, implementation, science and technology to the designer. I will hear them and decide which suits my ears and pocket. At the end, I hear the "music" coming from their products and if it generates enough emotional satisfaction, I forget, how it came. In our hobby, that`s why we pay hefty price to the designer as premium, so we can enjoy. Fortunate to have designers like Stavros, who designed AC products (outstanding sound), so that I can enjoy listening rather than searching for something missing (which I did a lot of merry go round before stopping at AC). Having said that there is always some fun discussing designs.

 

[Stef]

Aries Cerat DACs compared with other brands

Not sure if it can help but I'm actually using Aries Cerat DAC Helene which has replaced as a stand alone DAC my actual TAD SACD/CD/DAC (using Burr‑Brown PCM1794A). They are roughly at the same price and both are very well built and finished with low jitter / noise levels and a generous power supply. Both produce "neutral" sound with Aries Cerat being more "neutral warm" compared to TAD.
I feel TAD to be more "polite" while AC produces a strong energy. Overall I do prefer listening to Aries Cerat than TAD DAC. AC soundstage is wider and deeper with a more "human" feeling (also possible to adjust the BIAS to fine-tune the sound) and the USB implementation is really very good.
I've never tried / listened to Lampizator so I can't comment but I've owned a Delta Sigma DAC (Esoteric D1) which I didn't really enjoy and sold after few months. While transparent / fast / detailed / well balanced, something "real" was missing to my hears.
Hope it can help.

 

[Opabin]

Not sure if it can help but I'm actually using Aries Cerat DAC Helene which has replaced as a stand alone DAC my actual TAD SACD/CD/DAC (using Burr‑Brown PCM1794A). They are roughly at the same price and both are very well built and finished with low jitter / noise levels and a generous power supply. Both produce "neutral" sound with Aries Cerat being more "neutral warm" compared to TAD.
I feel TAD to be more "polite" while AC produces a strong energy. Overall I do prefer listening to Aries Cerat than TAD DAC. AC soundstage is wider and deeper with a more "human" feeling (also possible to adjust the BIAS to fine-tune the sound) and the USB implementation is really very good.
I've never tried / listened to Lampizator so I can't comment but I've owned a Delta Sigma DAC (Esoteric D1) which I didn't really enjoy and sold after few months. While transparent / fast / detailed / well balanced, something "real" was missing to my hears.
Hope it can help.

Yes, thank you, your report is very interesting and helpful. It confirms impressions from other comments I’ve read about AC DACs and adds more detail. The comparison of your “polite” DAC with the (less polite?) more energetic Helene was especially noteworthy. One of the qualities I most prize in my Totaldac Triunity is a lively energy and sense of immediacy that it preserves in music. It is satisfying to know you hear something similar in the music from your Aries Cerat.

Before you bought your Helene, did you have a chance to audition it in your home system, or did you listen to it at your hi-fi shop?

 

[Stef]

Yes, thank you, your report is very interesting and helpful. It confirms impressions from other comments I’ve read about AC DACs and adds more detail. The comparison of your “polite” DAC with the (less polite?) more energetic Helene was especially noteworthy. One of the qualities I most prize in my Totaldac Triunity is a lively energy and sense of immediacy that it preserves in music. It is satisfying to know you hear something similar in the music from your Aries Cerat.

Before you bought your Helene, did you have a chance to audition it in your home system, or did you listen to it at your dealer's shop?

Yes you nailed it, energy is a very predominant attribute of the Aries Cerat DAC. I really praise this "live" feeling given by this DAC. To answer your question I bought it blind (just reading owners comments) but had to choose the Helene (8 R2R) due to the size / weight of the Kassandra (16 R2R) which was my first choice

 

[Argonaut]

@Stef …A Lovely looking music room you have there.

 

[Opabin]

Hi Opabin,
I too find the R2R DAC architecture more natural to listen to than sigma/delta or software implementations.

However, I have so far not been that enamored with the discrete resistor implementations with the exception of TotalDAC. Personally, I think the best digital sound comes from 2 things: 1) a very good R2R chip (either with over sampling (not upsampling) or non-oversampling) 2) IV conversion that is passive or with discrete transistor 3) tube or discrete class A transistor output stage and 4) massive robust powersupply.

There are some exceptions to that but they are few and far between...for me.

The first discrete R2R implementation as far as I am aware was by Accuphase in the early 90s. They then moved to using the BB PCM63K 20 bit chip (one of the absolute best) and in their top DACs like the DC-91 used multiple chips, like Aries Cerat does today (Accuphase called it MMB or multi-multibit). This lowers the noise floor and ups the dynamics considerably.

I don't think it is possible to get a discrete DAC to the level of precision of a laser trimmed chip like a BB PCM1704, which was the best measuring of all the IC based DAC chips from the 80s and 90s. Probably the most loved ones though are the AD1865N, which is used by Aries Cerat and Audio Note among others, the Philips TD-1541 and the BB PCM63K. IMO, these will all outperform a discrete DAC if implemented in ways described above.

As to Sigma/Delta. The Lampizator implementations are very good and arguably more "airy" and resolved; however, that doesn't necessarily make them sound more "real". Recent DACs that use top AKM chips are also very very good, like from Metronome and Ayon.

That said, I still strongly prefer a good R2R DAC implementation using IC chips. A friend of mine recently brought over an Abbas DAC that uses the old Philips TD-1541 16bit chip. This sounded wonderful...plenty of resolution and lovely tone and huge dynamics. The Aries Cerat DACs sound soemwhat more neutral than this but you still know it is a tube R2R DAC and the dynamics and soundstage are huge. More detailed and resolved than the Abbas DAC as well. The AC DACs have a very "grounded" sound where there is this sensation of an ultra stable foundation upon which the music is built and organized...it all makes sense together. It is not as "airy" and extended as a Lampizator DAC and some people prefer that.

Hi Brad,

It was so interesting to read your views on converter design priorities and your experience with various DACs in the context of the Aries Cerat house sound. Many thanks! I’m old enough to remember the Accuphase multi-multibit DACs, but never had a chance to hear them at their best. Where I lived at the time, they usually were auditioned with Tannoy Westminsters, not my cup of tea.

Re “airy”: I want to hear all the air captured in the recording, but not a bit extra. I do love skilful recordings that capture musicians in naturally-resonant spaces, but if a recorded voice or piano, for instance, is very close-miked, I don’t want my system to inject airy artificial ambiance.

Re “grounded”: Even to a non-engineer, the extreme care and importance given to the take-no-prisoners Aries Cerat power supply designs is clearly evident. One gets the impression that convenient or cost-saving compromises used elsewhere would never be accepted for AC power supply units. Is that approach perhaps a source for the grounded sound foundation?