dCS Varese short review

[Stereophonic]

Wadax Server under 80k is cheaper than Taiko Olympus Server.... and it is fully available.

 

[Stereophonic]

I like your post too @Elliot G. But Emile @Taiko Audio rules WBF and doesn't allow me to put my like on it

 

[Elliot G.]

I am not sure what one thing has to do with the other . I am not saying a word about Taiko all I am saying is the numbers that were posted are really not correct.

 

[microstrip]

The beauty is in the eye of the beholder. No price can be put on that.

Tom

Yes, it a nice way of saying what one person finds beautiful, another may not.

But in fact a little more than that in this hobby, that intrinsically involves knowledge, compares (sometimes subconsciously) and surely an wallet!

Fortunately the WBF TOS forbids politics - the only weak point of very expensive high-end is surely a political question!

 

[microstrip]

Bang for buck at $ 450 per tape? Get real.

Considering the current reduced diet of the typical tape aficionados - excluding the rare long time tape expert - the total expense will be much less than the cost of a top DAC. The fame of tape is mainly due to selection - in general only the best technical quality recordings are issued on tape.

I onw a Studer A80 and tapes just for audiophile reasons - to have a stable sound reference.

 

[microstrip]

The Wadax set-up in the M9 room MSRPs for $600,000. I don't hear a big difference between $100,000 digital and $350,000 digital and $600,000 digital. My personal favorite digital stuff is Horizon plus Olympus, for a total of $150,000 or so, a fraction of dCS and Wadax.

Yes, we all know digital gives you headaches ... Sorry to say, someone with your anti digital bias is not a good judge of digital capabilities. The high-end is a subjective hobby, negative bias does not show only in ASR.

BTW, do you have the same opinion on $100k versus 300k turntables?

I would much rather spend the next hundred thousand dollars on a tape machine -- on which I do hear a big difference.

Yes, tape machines can sound very different. Only a few have decent specifications and the great majority sounds colored. You have one of the best, why do want one more?

A refurbished Studer A80 in top condition will not cost more than $20k - surely you can pay $50k if you want a Fred Thal as new machine.

 

[rDin]

If DACs remain unresolved, the same argument could be made for vinyl. Why does all vinyl playback sound different if there is a "perfect analogue waveform"? Turntables, tonearms, platters aside, even if you just change cartridges the sound changes.

That's a false equivalence to some degree. You're comparing a DAC which has ONE job, and a mathematical one at that, to convert digital data into analog versus a turntable which is a transcription chain, and more of a physical problem than a mathematical one.

And these tell me that digital becomes more and more satisfying, with some of the last issues that may have held it back being solved in a convincing manner

You're certain there are no improvements left to come? If there are, then digital remains unsolved. If not, then maybe the Varese has solved digital. But at a cost that 99.99% of the planet will be unable to experience.

A DAC is a mathematical problem. It's already solved theoretically, but not in practice. Bringing turntables into the discussion is a distraction.

 

[wil]

All technology, whether based digitally or not, could be argued to be a “unsolved problem“ and that the natural order of technological development is, hopefully, one of reaching better quality. Whether the problems being solved, or advancements being made, are primarily mathematical or physical….? Why is that particularly important to you?

Unless, of course, it’s just another excuse to stir up another digital versus analog debate? Pretty uninteresting, imho.

And btw, You’re the one that brought up the extreme price of the DCS. It’s only fair to keep in mind that analog gear (particularly turntables) can be equally priced to the extreme.

 

[pk_LA]

I have heard the Wadax Reference/Streamer and the Horizon and the Vivaldi Apex in my own system. I have also heard the Varese in a system that I am confident to say that I am familiar with the sound of. I can confidently say that they all of these are fantastic DACs. And, all of them sound quite unique from the others. The one thing that I do love about the Wadax, though, is the tunability of it. All with two knobs. The dCS can be tuned as well but offers less control. It has distinct filters rather than a continuously variable knob. The Horizon (which I own one of) requires a tube change.

Add'l side note: Ron R has also heard the Wadax vs. many other DACs in the same conditions.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

The Wadax set-up in the M9 room MSRPs for $600,000.

throwing out that number is misleading but i get it helps to make your point. Level 4 Wadax list price (dac + server + Akasa optical + server power supply + Akasa cables) without the Wadax Ref transport is more around $450k. in my case i added a $2500 transport for the little i use it.....almost never.

your dollar number for the Horizon or dCS does not include a $125k transport. so you are not being fair.

I don't hear a big difference between $100,000 digital and $350,000 digital and $600,000 digital. My personal favorite digital stuff is Horizon plus Olympus, for a total of $150,000 or so, a fraction of dCS and Wadax.

i've heard the Horizon compared to great vinyl and they are much more different that my Wadax compared to my great vinyl. and it's a distinction and advantage i'm happy that i have....for hours a day. and i respect that Horizon lovers are happy with their choices too.

but trying to trivialize the difference is just not informed. will everyone make the same choice? or get the same ROI? of course not. but it's a real difference and worth it to some.

 

[Elliot G.]

throwing out that number is misleading but i get it helps to make your point. Level 4 Wadax list price without the Wadax Ref transport is more around $450k. in my case i added a $2500 transport for the little i use it.....almost never.

your dollar number for the Horizon or dCS does not include a $125k transport. so you are not being fair.

i've heard the Horizon compared to great vinyl and they are much more different that my Wadax compared to my great vinyl. and it's a distinction and advantage i'm happy that i have....for hours a day. and i respect that Horizon lovers are happy with their choices too.

but trying to trivialize the difference is just not informed. will everyone make the same choice? or get the same ROI? of course not. but it's a real difference and worth it to some.

One can buy the server and the DAC with the optical connection for around 260. Yes there are a bunch of additional options but they are not required to use it or get great results. One doesn't have to get 21 inch wheels, Brembo brakes and a sunroof either.
The use of huge numbers is only for making a point and show.
By the way comparing a R2 R versus a streamer is not much of a comparison they do totally different tasks.

 

[pk_LA]

throwing out that number is misleading but i get it helps to make your point. Level 4 Wadax list price without the Wadax Ref transport is more around $450k. in my case i added a $2500 transport for the little i use it.....almost never.

your dollar number for the Horizon or dCS does not include a $125k transport. so you are not being fair.

i've heard the Horizon compared to great vinyl and they are much more different that my Wadax compared to my great vinyl. and it's a distinction and advantage i'm happy that i have....for hours a day. and i respect that Horizon lovers are happy with their choices too.

but trying to trivialize the difference is just not informed. will everyone make the same choice? or get the same ROI? of course not. but it's a real difference and worth it to some.

Have you heard a Horizon vs a Wadax in the same system with the same music? I ask because I feel that many many people on WBF have a degree of confirmation bias. If we did a survey of WBF members I would wager that most would defend their own system components as superior to competitors. I, for one, agree that the Wadax is amazing. But, I am also surprised about your comments on it vs vinyl. The tubes add a body and presence that feels more vinyl-like that what I was able to get from the Wadax.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Have you heard a Horizon vs a Wadax in the same system with the same music?

no. but i heard the Horizon verses great vinyl and it was pretty clear what it was not doing. and i hear that same compare in my system every day and know what the Wadax Level 4 IS doing.

did you hear Level 4 Wadax in your investigations?

I ask because I feel that many many people on WBF have a degree of confirmation bias. If we did a survey of WBF members I would wager that most would defend their own system components as superior to competitors.

we are all dac experts and feel very strongly about it. not raining on anyone's parade. but shots at the Wadax might get returned.

I, for one, agree that the Wadax is amazing. But, I am also surprised about your comments on it vs vinyl. The tubes add a body and presence that feels more vinyl-like that what I was able to get from the Wadax.

tubes have their own signature. whether tubes = more like vinyl realism in a dac is an opinion. in my system it was not so. i agree the the Horizon is not as tube sounding as some tubed dacs. but when i heard it in a system with great vinyl it was easy to hear that tube sound it was coming through. i hear tubes. i think tubes. and i'm not anti-tubes. i have a tubed phono stage which does not make me think about tubes. ever.

don't take my comments as objectively negative about the Horizon. i love the sound of it. it's great. but it's not in the realm of the Wadax relative to vinyl which is my reference across systems.

 

[pk_LA]

no. but i heard the Horizon verses great vinyl and it was pretty clear what it was not doing. and i hear that same compare in my system every day and know what the Wadax Level 4 IS doing.

did you hear Level 4 Wadax in your investigations?

we are all dac experts and feel very strongly about it. not raining on anyone's parade. but shots at the Wadax might get returned.

tubes have their own signature. whether tubes = more like vinyl realism in a dac is an opinion. in my system it was not so. i agree the the Horizon is not as tube sounding as some tubed dacs. but when i heard it in a system with great vinyl it was easy to hear that tube sound it was coming through. i hear tubes. i think tubes. i have a tubed phono stage which does not make me think about tubes. ever.

don't take my comments as objectively negative about the Horizon. i love the sound of it. it's great. but it's not in the realm of the Wadax relative to vinyl which is my reference across systems.

To be clear: I have NOT heard the latest, greatest 'level 4' Wadax. Also, my A|B was not scientific - there were some differences beyond the DAC. For example, the Horizon was using a Roon NUC as the streamer.

"...shots at the Wadax might get returned." I must have missed the posts that were taking "shots" at the Wadax. From my pov, it seems that anything less than superlative praise of the Wadax tends to gets interpreted as intolerable criticism.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

To be clear: I have NOT heard the latest, greatest 'level 4' Wadax. Also, my A|B was not scientific - there were some differences beyond the DAC. For example, the Horizon was using a Roon NUC as the streamer.

"...shots at the Wadax might get returned." I must have missed the posts that were taking "shots" at the Wadax. From my pov, it seems that anything less than superlative praise of the Wadax tends to gets interpreted as intolerable criticism.

agree PK, you are always respectful of the Wadax.

but Ron's $600k characterization and then trivializing the performance value i take as a shot. and your post was a reaction to my response to Ron and my feelings about that. Ron has extreme love for tubes and a tube sound. and i understand that. we like different things. i want realism wherever that takes me. mostly first to vinyl. and i go from there.

 

[microstrip]

That's a false equivalence to some degree. You're comparing a DAC which has ONE job, and a mathematical one at that, to convert digital data into analog versus a turntable which is a transcription chain, and more of a physical problem than a mathematical one.

Not IMO. The DAC also has a physical problem - to convert the mathematical signal to an electric signal. Surely mathematical knowledge is needed to do it.

You're certain there are no improvements left to come? If there are, then digital remains unsolved. If not, then maybe the Varese has solved digital. But at a cost that 99.99% of the planet will be unable to experience.

We can't assume that digital is "solved". May be the dCS Varese is closer to the limits of the theoretical accuracy , keeping the subjective key sound aspects of dCS, but probably recording engineers will be able to explore this improvement in their recordings and put a challenge to it.

A DAC is a mathematical problem. It's already solved theoretically, but not in practice.

Now I can't follow you. What do you mean by solved theoretically?

Bringing turntables into the discussion is a distraction.

Not IMO. But perhaps also it is more logical to ask if we shoudl consider that tape recording has been solved in the 60's and 70's.

 

[Elliot G.]

agree PK, you are always respectful of the Wadax.

but Ron's $600k characterization and then trivializing the performance value i take as a shot. and your post was a reaction to my response to Ron and my feelings about that. Ron has extreme love for tubes and a tube sound. and i understand that. we like different things. i want realism wherever that takes me. mostly first to vinyl. and i go from there.

You are correct Ron is analog tube person with very specific tastes. Great , however that guys is a flavor, a color, a matter of his preference and taste. Many others are looking for something without that.
To me its like a vegetarian reviewing steak houses.

 

[microstrip]

I ask because I feel that many many people on WBF have a degree of confirmation bias.

This is an hobby that in some aspect is dependent on confirmation bias. IMO the keyword for the high-end is preference. Preference assumes the will of the listener to appreciate and enjoy some type of sound. Many other factors create negative and positive bias in us - the audiophile is a complex being!

But yes, WhatsPreferredForum is a boring name ...

If we did a survey of WBF members I would wager that most would defend their own system components as superior to competitors.

No, I think that most would simply assume they prefer them to alternatives.

.

 

[Al M.]

That's a false equivalence to some degree. You're comparing a DAC which has ONE job, and a mathematical one at that, to convert digital data into analog versus a turntable which is a transcription chain, and more of a physical problem than a mathematical one.


You're certain there are no improvements left to come? If there are, then digital remains unsolved. If not, then maybe the Varese has solved digital. But at a cost that 99.99% of the planet will be unable to experience.

A DAC is a mathematical problem. It's already solved theoretically, but not in practice. Bringing turntables into the discussion is a distraction.

Your bringing up of the dichotomy mathematical vs physical problem is the distraction. You are so extremely biased against digital that you are missing the obvious -- all sources are flawed and need improvement. According to your criterium of the perfect waveform, vinyl is also solved theoretically but not in practice. Of course there will be future improvements both on digital and analog, like there will be improvements in amplification and speakers.

To me personally, the digital problem is solved -- I enjoy music on my digital-only system tremendously. I have done so for a long time, and the new DAC has only increased my enjoyment. I have no desire at all to go analog. And yes, I know what I would be missing, since I have heard tons of analog in friends' systems. I am missing nothing, or in the worst case rather little, not worth the bother of acquiring a vinyl source. But that's just my perceptions and preferences.

I don't need to spend 350 grand to experience the enjoyment that I do. If others want to go for a Varese and they can afford it, that's fine too.

To get back to your original extremely biased statement, of digital being "broken", this is simply preposterous. It may be for you, but you are the one who has to deal with your digital misery, not me. I am thoroughly enjoying my digital instead.

 

[Stereophonic]

Your bringing up of the dichotomy mathematical vs physical problem is the distraction. You are so extremely biased against digital that you are missing the obvious -- all sources are flawed and need improvement. According to your criterium of the perfect waveform, vinyl is also solved theoretically but not in practice. Of course there will be future improvements both on digital and analog, like there will be improvements in amplification and speakers.

To me personally, the digital problem is solved -- I enjoy music on my digital-only system tremendously. I have done so for a long time, and the new DAC has only increased my enjoyment. I have no desire at all to go analog. And yes, I know what I would be missing, since I have heard tons of analog in friends' systems. I am missing nothing, or in the worst case rather little, not worth the bother of acquiring a vinyl source. But that's just my perceptions and preferences.

I don't need to spend 350 grand to experience the enjoyment that I do. If others want to go for a Varese and they can afford it, that's fine too.

To get back to your original extremely biased statement, of digital being "broken", this is simply preposterous. It may be for you, but you are the one who has to deal with your digital misery, not me. I am thoroughly enjoying my digital instead.

What a stunning answer.... Congrats !!!!