The usual areas where good analog beats digital in my experience: richness, transparency, more 3D, more alive. To be fair, it was Varese streaming vs good vinyl, and the gap was small .
dCS Varese short review
- Thread starter craigr
- Start date
Hi Zuman,
You have a beautiful system. I will share my own simple man's approach on this one. In my own experience, the greatest impact in upgrading a digital source lies in musical nuance and information...BUT in absolute terms, I would say the level of performance difference in digital has the smallest overall best-worst delta (particularly given the amount you have to spend to get 'best') of all the various component categories in a system.
With those caveats, if you are one who loves really listening into a recording and hearing fingering, vibrato, in hearing how the silence and pauses actually create 'silent beats' in a system, how background syncopated rhythms come forward which perhaps you had not appreciated before (or even heard at all)...then an enormous upgrade in a digital source can be really powerful and a source of real discovery in your music collection.
HOWEVER, once again, in my experience of upgrades and changes, I would characterize digital sources as having the least impact per dollar. Speaking personally, I went from a $50 Daewoo CD player to the Zanden DAC (leaving the Daewoo as the Transport) for years. And the rest of the system was Sonus Faber Guarneris and Conrad Johnson so excellent resolving capability. I only went to the full 4-box Zanden digital (also fully updated/upgraded by Zanden) when it was clear I fully intended to keep it long-term...that was something like 12 years ago. And I have never looked back. And the system is eons older than the latest digital in terms of the number of advancements that digital has made. But in terms of all-out music making...nothing has yet moved me to look elsewhere all the way thru the Vivaldi Apex full-stack.
FURTHER, with nearly $300K, you could keep your Denafrips and go with Von Schweikert Ultra 9s and have left over for amazing digital or probably negotiate hard and get the Ultra 11s. This is merely to illustrate the kind of change that this kind of money buys. The changes would of course be different...powerful, scale, and yes possibly extracting more from your existing excellent electronics. It would immerse you probably more fully in the recordings. And I suspect, overall, the impact would be massive (literally) in the impact of your sound.
But ultimately, it is still about which you would prefer. Some would gladly revel in the micro nuances, details, insights and true music making of the Varese and not really look for the scale, power, majesty (and also nuance, etc) of the flagship speakers. Otherwise could say the opposite (fwiw, I am one of those in this particular case.)
Bottom line, if you seek the micro nuance, details, magic making, I suspect you would revel in what the Varese can do and from what I understand your Endeavor SEs have the resolving powers to show quite a lot of that musical insight and information.
Last edited:
no doubt you have sufficient levels of clarity with the Von Schweikert and Modwright to easily hear the advantage of a (insert ultra$$$$ uber dac of your choice), even over the next level down in dacs. the real question would be whether those funds might be better applied to raise the net system performance with a slight step down in dac quality, but still spendy.
for instance, maybe around a $75k-$100k dac (some great ones), and the other $150k+ spent on speaker/amp/turntable/cartridge upgrades. just as a loose template. or go digital only and put more funds into the speakers and amps. it might be a trade-off in some particular ways, but i think it would greatly favor the system advances.....maybe not the coolness factor of the tip top crazy good piece.
a rising tide raises all boats.
this system verses individual source upgrade is the question. it's why we see system building taking things overall higher prior to diving into the deep end with a single source.
Well said as always. The only amendment I would personally make is that in each area of upgrade...I have made a personal commitment to 'go for it' as far as I can...and take a long-term approach to getting to flagship level (as defined by me for my personal ears). For me, that was the Zanden 4-box digital and I purposely avoided lots of opportunities to take those incremental steps...I went from a $50 Daewoo player for years and then went straight to a second-hand Zanden DAC. And then years after that to the latest 4-box Zanden (again second hand). And have never looked back for well well over a decade....12 years or more? I found for me this approach meant I did it once and did it right and did not look back. Where I have upgraded it has come a decade later or more (CJ/Gryphon to Robert Koda, or Wilson X1s to XLFs).
i agree. system building targets are personal. i know that the Zanden 4 box has been something you have heavily relied on and has done the job for you.
as enthusiasts it's hard to predict the future.....and just what all-in might mean for ourselves personally. rarely do we get to significantly upgrade a whole system. yet when adding any super big dollar piece to any relatively modest system we are faced with that dilemma.
i do agree with you that speakers are doing the heavy lifting in any system up to a particular point and that is where the most differences are heard. so big dollars should be used for that part of a system to give foundation to everything else. where is that particular point? everyone has their own opinion. how large is your room? what music do you listen to? driver type preference? SET? big solid state? the dynamic and frequency extension priorities/expectations drive these answers. maybe somewhere $50k-$100k should get you to a point of speaker diminishing returns. and used speakers might leave you with more dollars to use elsewhere without sacrificing much performance. plenty used to choose from.
Last edited:
Elliot G.
Dealer - Bending Wave
Could you explain what "changes everything means to you"?
I do think that a better source will allow one to hear more and push the performance of a system I'm just not sure I understand what your expectations are or what that phrase actually means to you or others.
Mike I have always admired your system and your tireless commitment to pushing the envelope but in a very very methodical and careful way. In my case, I am focusing quite heavily now on speakers and pushing to that next level of scale, ease and power. Something that most likely only a 4-tower or 4-piece can do.
I do perceive diminishing returns elsewhere in the system for me now. For example, I suppose the Tripoint Elite NG would be a great addition/upgrade along with Miguel's latest piece which are only now just coming out (see Audiocrack). I suppose Siltech Triple Crowns would be fun to trial across the entire system.
But in truth, for me it is a question of how far I want to push the system with the existing XLFs (Wilson Crossover, dual Wilson Thors, Pure-Low panel subs or Funk Audio 18.2s)...or go for a complete 4-tower flagship to deliver true scale, effortlessness and power.
And this would absolutely come before something like a Wadax, Varese or Sentinel all of which I could well imagine are fantastic pieces.
Last edited:
A transrotor’s second top model with Swiss made tonearm and cartridge whose names I wasn’t familiar with. Pop/rock music was compared.
done many of those type compares.
pop/rock mostly will not be the genre revealing the top differences, but there are some super pop/rock pressings. and variances in tape transfer file quality too.
my guess is that the actual pressing quality was responsible for the majority of the difference between the Varese and the digital media, more than the particular vinyl hardware. and there is typically a wide variance in the quality of pressings too. so the actual gap might get much larger.
it's the truth of the matter. and some pressings can overwhelm you with realism the digital cannot quite touch.
it will be exciting to see you go to the next level for speakers. your problem is you are already at such a level now the ante for a real upgrade is staggering.
tempting toys to consider. your system can likely take full advantage of any of these 'cherry on top' moves. my time to play with stuff like that has apparently passed.
lots of ways to cut it and find incremental steps forward.
those could be more sideways for you with your Zanden than clearly forward. an interesting question. might be trade-offs. fun one to investigate.
Thank you! Your audio wisdom is rich and manifold. I will be sure to come back to you (and as you know, I already have) as the options narrow and timing approaches.
Re: Tambaqui:
I have not directly compared the Denafrips Terminator with a Tambaqui. Yet I auditioned a Denafrips Terminator in my system and at the time preferred the Schiit Yggdrasil Analog 2 DAC for its more natural tone. After one more improved iteration of the Yggdrasil (LIM version) in my system, I tried the Tambaqui. After an overnight warmup it was immediately clear that this did "change everything" in my system. After experiencing the greater purity of tone and lack of distortion, both of these due to lack of digital noise compared to the Yggdrasil LIM, there was no going back. I knew I didn't need to directly compare, it was a done deal. When finally, after 2 weeks, I did go back to the Yggdrasil, the difference was even greater than I thought it would be. I ended up buying a Tambaqui.
I do have to add that without paying as much attention to room acoustics as I did, the perceived difference almost certainly would have been much less. Getting first rid of all the room-induced distortion was of utmost importance (my room though is a particularly difficult one).
My system is not that much more expensive than yours. For components, see my signature (if reading on phone, visible in rotated sideways, landscape mode).
My system is a little higher end than yours and all the components have been chosen after careful A/B comparisons. It is generally revealing of all the various audiophile tweaks etc.. Earlier this year I did a shootout with 6 DACs, 5 owned and one borrowed. All of them were different but the differences were generally less than I think you would hear between other major components. And I am in complete agreement with @LL21 post in this thread that extends this argument to the ultra high end. https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/dcs-varese-short-review.39573/post-1072447
Having heard the dCS Varese there is no question in my mind that you would hear a significant difference if it were in either of our systems but it costs almost 2.5x the new value of my system and 4x the value of your system and I also have no question that the extra money would be better spent elsewhere.
Finally, if you haven't spent a lot of time and some money upgrading the power, cables, switches, clocks and sources that connect to your DAC you should do so. I found some of those changes to be as transformative as the difference between DACs and at a much lower cost.
Very kind, Paul1960. And I also agree with you that once a system's foundational parts (source, amplification, speakers) are set...there is indeed a whole 'world' of discovery in the true performance of that system when you start to look at: isolation, signal grounding, EMI/RFI shielding, room treatments (even relatively minor ones), and cabling. I think many who have not tried these might be surprised to find at least one if not most or all of these can reveal more about their original system than they might have imagined. And it is satisfying to really hone the original backbone of the system to really get it 'singing' (literally).
Good question the deserves an answer with many ""It depends".
It depends on how on someone valuates this hobby.
It depends on our preferences - there is no absolute best in this hobby. We have to consider if we like the dCS sound type.
It depends on how we rank the type of sources - if I personally considered that vinyl surpasses digital I would never spend such amount in a digital player.
As surely depends on system matching - I have no knowledge about how your system sounds.
But one thing is sure - for my preference the dCS Varese changed my listening for much better. As I am still installing in a new room, not yet optimized, not a better sound in ever aspect compared to the previous system and room , but surely much more music, something I valuate a lot. And surely the promise of a lot of enjoyment fiddling the room and system.
Disclaimer - in order to seem less unreasonable in this insane hobby I sold most of my expensive vinyl playing system to finance the jump from Vivaldi to Varese.
WOW...now THAT is a commitment to digital! I have always respected DCS for what they did well...but never found myself compelled to consider them over the Zanden...just a personal preference, plus the cost of a new DCS is significant to boot.
But intuitively, the Varese seems different to me. There is something about the continuous and consistent choice of words people use to describe it...not something I have consistently ever noticed about prior generations of DCS going all the way back to the Elgar Plus. Those that admire this newest generation seems to use words like color, depth, saturation, almost organic...while never failing to deliver the detail, nuance and pure information that DCS has always delivered.
Now imagine it without the typical boundaries of stereo - in some sense it seems the marionettes on stage have lost their wires. I was just listening to an old Hyperion CD favorite in streaming - the musicians were really enjoying!
Heitor Villa-Lobos: Music for Flute - Quinteto em Forma de Chôros / Modinha / Bachianas Brasileiras No. 6 / Distribution of Flowers / The Jet Whistle / Chôros No. 2 / Song of Love / Trio - William Bennett & Friends
Similar threads
- Locked
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |