Various DAC Audition Impressions

[Sampajanna]

Manufacturers and distributors should not be on their thread....ppl already know the above and it doesn't need rehashing. Having manufacturers on just colours and clouds. Yes it might not compare well, so just release an even better model and a more expensive one?

These dealers here are complaining unnecessarily. “Methinks thou dost protesteth too much.” You dont redeem your product with this, and you may turn some people off of your dealership. PK used his stereo system to choose a dac. Yours lost. Get over it. It doesn’t say anything about anything; it is just great conversation and an added detail for those in the market. I view it as good reading and I learned a few things, including that I don’t want to buy things from your dealership. (The accusations of advertising were a real turn off for me.)

It is not like anyone was going along on their way to a Horizon and then read this thread and bought a Select instead. In the same way, there is no one who was thinking, “Gosh PK didnt’ t choose the Aries Cerat/SW1X. That dac sucks.” And then they read your post and changed their mind.

 

[Audiocrack]

dCS Vivaldi DAC- $35,999

Lampizator Horizon - $50,000

Nagra HD X - $65,000

Infigo Method 4 - $35,000

Wadax Reference - $221,495

Aries Cerat Kassandra Ref - $23,375

SW1X DAC III Balanced w/ upgraded mains transformers - $16,550

MSB Select II - $84,500

(Please let me know if I got any of these prices wrong.)

I am pleased that Patrick chose to include SW1X in his test of uber high end DACs and appreciate the yeoman-ly effort involved. To be correct, the SW1X DAC provided was a DAC III Balanced with upgraded mains transformers, not a DAC I as listed. At $16,500 it was the least expensive of any of the DACs tested. It is entirely appropriate for the DAC III Balanced to be tested against any and all DACs, which, I think it safe to say, given the price and pedigree of the DACs included in the test, this sampling represented.

SW1X DACs go to 24/96 and do not play DSD. The preferred input is SPDIF, though a USB to SPDIF conversion board with tube master clock is an additional option. Source, cabling and isolation will be absolutely critical in determining the outcome. In this case, the use of an inferior cable and the passing of the signal through other components necessarily affected what Patrick and Ron heard and reported on. Given that the setup for the DAC III Balanced differed radically from the others, no reliable conclusions can be drawn about it from the test.

In fairness to all of the DACs tested, consitency of source and cabling would have yielded more accurate results, however I fully appreciate that Patrick did the best he could with what he had available. I should also mention that the DAC III Balanced provided was of a previous generation. The latest version is significantly more resolving and transparent due to refinements of the circuit.

A customer of mine in San Francisco purchased an SW1X DAC V Special ($95,000, with pure silver wound output transformers) that uses number 45 triode signal output tubes. It is the most glorious piece of equipment I have had the pleasure of interacting with on an intimate basis. The customer originally owned a dCS stack consisting of Vivaldi (not Apex) DAC, Clock and Upsampler. We provided an SW1X DAC II Standard for him to test (currently $3225). He was able to output both SPDIF and AES/EBU simultaneously from his Aurender 20 SE and could switch between the two outputs in real time. His conclusion? "The dCS was slightly warmer and slightly louder, but otherwise they are the same."

I have invited Patrick to visit when he is in the S.F. Bay Area to get another perspective on SW1X, and I invite all forum members to come hear the DAC III Balanced here in a more optimized setting with our Lotus Group Granada Loudspeaker and to hear the DAC V Special with Wilson Alexx Vs. Please get in touch. Thanks.

The prices mentioned above are all of dacs alone with the exception of Wadax: the price of the Wadax dac is not usd 221 495,-. The mentioned price is for the Wadax reference dac and server combination.

 

[Joe Cohen]

The prices mentioned above are all of dacs alone with the exception of Wadax: the price of the Wadax dac is not usd 221 495,-. The mentioned price is for the Wadax reference dac and server combination.

Thanks.

 

[Joe Cohen]

These dealers here are complaining unnecessarily. “Methinks thou dost protesteth too much.” You dont redeem your product with this, and you may turn some people off of your dealership. PK used his stereo system to choose a dac. Yours lost. Get over it. It doesn’t say anything about anything; it is just great conversation and an added detail for those in the market. I view it as good reading and I learned a few things, including that I don’t want to buy things from your dealership. (The accusations of advertising were a real turn off for me.)

It is not like anyone was going along on their way to a Horizon and then read this thread and bought a Select instead. In the same way, there is no one who was thinking, “Gosh PK didnt’ t choose the Aries Cerat/SW1X. That dac sucks.” And then they read your post and changed their mind.

As someone who has been in this business since 1993 and who has exhibited at more shows than I can remember, I can say with certainty that there will always some circumstance where a component is not heard in its best or most true light. There is not necessarily an intrinsic fault or inferiority to the component. These things are entirely situational. This was not a scientific test, but a survey of different combinations of components, some, very random, heroic, you might say, reaching high, you might also say, but entirely unscientific.

Perhaps the best way to hear a component is in a context that the company knows shows its strength. Especially for the high end consumer. Possibly that company can offer a pathway to something that just might make magic for you.

And what if you come away not liking what you hear? Then it's down to taste, but at least you have heard the gear in a setting that the company believes delivers on the promise. Of course they hope you see the merit in their approach all the same. This way is also not scientific. It is more of an art.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Speaking only for myself, and not for pk_LA, I hope it is obvious that we did not seek out mid-level products from certain manufacturers and top-level products from other manufacturers. Ideally we would have been able to audition each manufacturer’s top-level product.

We would have loved to have auditioned the SW1X DAC V and the top-of-the-line Aries Cerat DAC.

 

[Joe Cohen]

Speaking only for myself, and not for pk_LA, I hope it is obvious that we did not seek out mid-level products from certain manufacturers and top-level products from other manufacturers. Ideally we would have been able to audition each manufacturer’s top-level product.

We would have loved to have auditioned the SW1X DAC V and the top-of-the-line Aries Cerat DAC.

You are always welcome to come hear the DAC V here, and the DAC III Balanced as well in a different setting. Might shed some light. Thanks.

 

[Phantom-Audio]

Speaking only for myself, and not for pk_LA, I hope it is obvious that we did not seek out mid-level products from certain manufacturers and top-level products from other manufacturers. Ideally we would have been able to audition each manufacturer’s top-level product.

We would have loved to have auditioned the SW1X DAC V and the top-of-the-line Aries Cerat DAC.

I think Aries Cerat has two Distributors/Dealers in the United States, I remember seeing their 1 million-dollar systems on tube. Worth a try to listen to their top of the Line DACs those Battle Ship systems Would love to hear your thoughts and impression.

 

[Phantom-Audio]

The prices mentioned above are all of dacs alone with the exception of Wadax: the price of the Wadax dac is not usd 221 495,-. The mentioned price is for the Wadax reference dac and server combination.

I would need to sell more crack to afford that

 

[Sampajanna]

As someone who has been in this business since 1993 and who has exhibited at more shows than I can remember, I can say with certainty that there will always some circumstance where a component is not heard in its best or most true light. There is not necessarily an intrinsic fault or inferiority to the component. These things are entirely situational. This was not a scientific test, but a survey of different combinations of components, some, very random, heroic, you might say, reaching high, you might also say, but entirely unscientific.

Perhaps the best way to hear a component is in a context that the company knows shows its strength. Especially for the high end consumer. Possibly that company can offer a pathway to something that just might make magic for you.

And what if you come away not liking what you hear? Then it's down to taste, but at least you have heard the gear in a setting that the company believes delivers on the promise. Of course they hope you see the merit in their approach all the same. This way is also not scientific. It is more of an art.

You missed the point of my post entirely….

 

[Audiocrack]

I would need to sell more crack to afford that

What about selling (more) audio components in order to afford the reference combo?

 

[Ron Resnick]

You are always welcome to come hear the DAC V here, and the DAC III Balanced as well in a different setting. Might shed some light. Thanks.

Dear Joe,

Thank you for your kind invitation. Let me also take this opportunity to thank you, publicly, for sending the DAC III to pk_LA. You were very open, generous and you made the whole process very easy!

I asked you on the telephone at one point “how does the sound improve in your view as you move from the DAC III to higher up the line?” If I remember correctly you replied: “the sound improves in every way.” So we were conscious that the DAC III was by far the least expensive model we were auditioning, and that sonic treats await up the model line.

In Post #164 hereof you wrote of pk_LA’s survey: “This was not a scientific test, but a survey of different combinations of components, some, very random, heroic, you might say, reaching high, you might also say, but entirely unscientific.”

While I appreciate the very kind offer to listen to the DAC V at your studio wouldn’t listening to an unfamiliar DAC, by itself, in an unfamiliar system with unfamiliar speakers in an unfamiliar room — and thinking that I am learning anything about how the DAC V sounds versus competing DACs — be far less scientific than what pk_LA did in his survey?

 

[Joe Cohen]

Dear Joe,

Thank you for your kind invitation. Let me also take this opportunity to thank you, publicly, for sending the DAC III to pk_LA. You were very open, generous and you made the whole process very easy!

I asked you on the telephone at one point “how does the sound improve in your view as you move from the DAC III to higher up the line?” If I remember correctly you replied: “the sound improves in every way.” So we were conscious that the DAC III was by far the least expensive model we were auditioning, and that sonic treats await up the model line.

In Post #164 hereof you wrote of pk_LA’s survey: “This was not a scientific test, but a survey of different combinations of components, some, very random, heroic, you might say, reaching high, you might also say, but entirely unscientific.”

While I appreciate the very kind offer to listen to the DAC V at your studio wouldn’t listening to an unfamiliar DAC, by itself, in an unfamiliar system with unfamiliar speakers in an unfamiliar room — and thinking that I am learning anything about how the DAC V sounds versus competing DACs — be far less scientific than what pk_LA did in his survey?

Thank you Ron. In the test a dCS upsampler was inserted between the source and the DAC III Balanced to accommodate its SPDIF input. That put the DAC on an entirely different footing than any of the others auditioned and would have without question degraded it’s performance. I contend that you have yet to hear it in a proper setting, hence my invitation.

 

[Steve Williams]

It seems this thread of Patrick's has devolved into manufacturers' replies rather than just accepting what Patrick has decided upon. Really!!

My mantra has always been, "my ears, my wallet , my decision"

All of the DAC's mentioned by Patrick are excellent in their own way and each would be excellent in any system. Having said that I applaud Patrick for sharing with us what he heard and what he decided. However once stated this thread has become a manufacturers slugfest

It's all good Patrick. You made a great decision and I wish you many hours of listening enjoyment. After all, that's what this is all about . I am looking forward to hearing your new MSB and hopefully the DD on Sept 10

 

[microstrip]

It seems this thread of Patrick's has devolved into manufacturers' replies rather than just accepting what Patrick has decided upon. Really!!

My mantra has always been, "my ears, my wallet , my decision"

All of the DAC's mentioned by Patrick are excellent in their own way and each would be excellent in any system. Having said that I applaud Patrick for sharing with us what he heard and what he decided. However once stated this thread has become a manufacturers slugfest

It's all good Patrick. You made a great decision and I wish you many hours of listening enjoyment. After all, that's what this is all about . I am looking forward to hearing your new MSB and hopefully the DD on Sept 10

I think no one has questioned Patrick choice and his words - people respected his system and his opinion, we just asked for more details. However I myself questioned Ron about his comments mainly because he just visited for a short time and used an A/B comparison system with all the problems I see in such method, particularly as the whole system was not optimized, particularly considering the recordings and sound type he seems to prefer.

I think that we have a forum to debate such questions, not just praise the gear we got according to "my ears, my wallet , my decision". For me the methodology is sometimes much more interesting than just the gear choice. YMMV, surely.

Considering your comment on manufacturers it would be great if people involved in design, manufacture or dealership clear stated their affiliation in the signature.

 

[Ron Resnick]

However I myself questioned Ron about his comments mainly because he just visited for a short time and used an A/B comparison system

To clarify we consistently used an A/B/A procedure. I find listening to one, and then the other, confusing, unless we also hear the first one again.

 

[U_J]

Congrats to PK_la and Ron on your thoughts and listening experiences and opening the door to people like me who would rarely if ever have the opportunity to listen and compare such distinguished equipment, this is what I would love to see more of in forums such as WBF, for me I don't really care if a listening test was carried out "scientifically" or not because all you end up with is endless arguments about the validity of the test.

The way I see it there is just as much science in having hundreds of listening experiences from a variety of people and sources to gauge how good a product is or the type of sound that it produces ( i.e. we have averaged the responses ) as there is in having paralled D/A convertors to reduce noise and improve linearity ( an accepted scientific method ) that devices like the Aries Kassandra employs ( and brags about ) !

The more listener notes and tests the better with any number and variety of devices/cables/speakers music etc etc , I enjoy reading about music society get togethers where a number of products were listened to and hearing the thoughts of people on their preferences or the sound they heard, this is part of the great mish mash that makes up this hobby/profession.

A lot of people place a high emphasis on online "expert" reviewers but it is clear that nearly all reviewers have a limited range of equipment and even experience to properly judge equipment fairly or objectively, I watch all the online reviews and love reading reviews in Stereophile or on this forum but am not naive enough to just trust a single review I want to hear reviews from your average and not so average joe and the equipment they have tried or own themselves, the more the merrier and the closer I think you get to understanding how something really sounds.

Nothing worse though when somebody places their honest opinion ( flawed or not ) out there on a forum and then they just get attacked from all different angles, lets rejoice in the fact that someone has made the effort to put their experiences out there for everyone to enjoy.

I for one look forward to more listening experiences and comparisons of equipment like pk_LA and Rons' experience with the DACs in this thread.

 

[InfigoAudio]

Having been invited to show our Method 4 DAC one evening right after The Home Entertainment show to be included in the list of tested DACs was a great honor.
One of the things that invariably happens to impromptu sessions with various equipment is the element of improvisation to get it all connected in such a way that easy A/B is possible.
In our case, this meant having the Method 4 connect to a USB output directly on the Roon core, which is not exactly ideal, when compared to another player that has it's own stack of interfaces that have been well connected and tried over time.

In any case, regardless of the outcome, I had a great evening of listening and ultimately that's what our (sometimes gotten out of hand) hobby is all about

Anyone that's interested in seeing/listening to the Method 4 can do so at the next CAF in November, Infigo will be there in 2 different rooms.

Thanks again Patrick and Ron for the great discussions that came forth from this exercise. It's been fun to follow the various opinions and I hope to see more of these threads here in the future.

Hans.

 

[Sampajanna]

Having been invited to show our Method 4 DAC one evening right after The Home Entertainment show to be included in the list of tested DACs was a great honor.
One of the things that invariably happens to impromptu sessions with various equipment is the element of improvisation to get it all connected in such a way that easy A/B is possible.
In our case, this meant having the Method 4 connect to a USB output directly on the Roon core, which is not exactly ideal, when compared to another player that has it's own stack of interfaces that have been well connected and tried over time.

In any case, regardless of the outcome, I had a great evening of listening and ultimately that's what our (sometimes gotten out of hand) hobby is all about

Anyone that's interested in seeing/listening to the Method 4 can do so at the next CAF in November, Infigo will be there in 2 different rooms.

Thanks again Patrick and Ron for the great discussions that came forth from this exercise. It's been fun to follow the various opinions and I hope to see more of these threads here in the future.

Hans.

This thread is intolerable…

Thanks for this…. Golly gee, Now I know that the Method 4 really is great. Probably better than the Select. Certainly was in your testing right? And, then of course comes the invite to come hear it at your dealership…. I am sensing a formulae here:

1) PK test was not valid
2) In our tests the dac we sell is better
3) come hear it at our showroom….

4) finger in back of throat….

I would also hope to see more such threads if it weren’t for the dealers coming out of the woodwork; people who rarely contribute to WBF discussions all of sudden posting about the product they sell….. Distasteful….

 

[InfigoAudio]

I'm sorry if that's the way you see it but that was most certainly not the spirit in which I intended posting above message.

 

[Sampajanna]

I'm sorry if that's the way you see it but that was most certainly not the spirit in which I intended posting above message.

Thanks for that. I snapped too early maybe. Apologies.
The earlier acusation of advertising bias followed by lots of dealers posting on a thread that should be user-based irked me a bit.
Thanks for being the bigger man.