EMM Labs, Totaldac
- Thread starter WLGMuzza
- Start date
Great choice. I have used a bunch of high end dacs (not emm labs or total dac in my system). I have also bought Aries cerat kassandra ii ref, and for me they are end game and totally different league. Before kassandra, I used to talk and analyze the resolution, soundstage, dynamics, and so on and always had something (a lot actually) missing for my taste. Now, all those things does not matter. It is pure music with lots of details, body, density, 3D, clarity, soundstage. Most importantly, there is nothing Hifi, only natural and organic flow. I still cannot believe how good they are. This is how, I think, we should feel when listening to music after all the time, reading, research, changing gears, efforts and spending money. For first time, I felt money well spent in high end audio. As members above have mentioned, it could be system dependent and preference biased too.
I have decided to go all Aries cerat (already got incito s preamp) and no looking back. I can only envy how kassandra ii signature and le sounds (with their impera preamp and essentia amps). Let me know your thoughts on kassandra.
I'm very happy with the Kassandra. It makes music sound 'real', it provides music with 'presence' or 'immediacy'. I'd love to look at more AC for my system but, deep sigh, too much competition for a limited budget. Enjoy!
Although late to this thread, I wanted to add my 2-cents regarding EMM and my present ownership of a NS1 Streamer and DV2 DAC pair.
I have never auditioned a MSB DAC, but have assumed that MSB’s digital was in the mix at the top of the heap of the digital food chain.
Speaking of the digital food chain, it is truly a non-win situation. I think we sometimes get so caught up in what’s best, that we forget that there is no best. There is just a grouping and a mix of the best components!
Compared to other components, one component has a plus here and a minus there. They are all different. But at the top of the heap level, they are more alike than different. That is, the differences are apparent when heard in our home venues, in the midst of our unique rooms, their furnishings and acoustics as well as the differing attributes our other hardware selections bring to the mix. Each of these many variables effect our observations and for the most part, mean they are not readily transferable to other’s circumstances and situations. These different circumstances not only include the aforementioned ones, but also our learned preferences, tastes, hearing acuity and even our attitudes at the time of an audition.
I also believe that our historical hearing examples are anything but particularly accurate That is, if an A/B comparison can’t be made, then our audio memory isn’t all that reliable. Hence, taking an auditioning experience away from one site and time and attempting to apply it later, is pretty much an impossibility, contrary to perhaps what we think can be done.
A bit of my digital audio history follows. A local audio store owner and friend, was involved with one of the early pioneers of PC audio, Gordon Rankin of Wavelength Audio. Thus, I learned about PC audio before most. At the time, PC audio was a revelation, if not a revolution.
As such, in 2006, I moved from CD’s and a Wadia CDP to a Wavelength Brick Silver DAC. With the funds from the Wadia sale, I bought a MacBook to drive the Brick. At the time, I considered that a twofer, because I could use the MacBook for its computing purposes, as well as using it in the audio room.
From the Brick, I moved to a Wavelength Crimson. Later, I acquired a Lampizator Big7, followed by a Lampi Golden Gate. I then moved to a dCS Rossini. Both the Lampi and dCS house sounds were obviously different. But each were at equally high levels of performance and each were very listenable and enjoyable.
Later, while auditioning a Rossini master clock, I learned of the new Apex upgrade to the Rossini. The clock added sonically. But it wasn’t what I would term a huge step-up -- i.e., one that I just couldn’t live without. At that point, pricing became paramount!
In round numbers, the Rossini master clock was a $10K upgrade and the Apex was similar in price. For me, adding $20K to a $20+K DAC was at best, questionable. I coupled this pricing, with the fact that the Rossini was beneath the Vivaldi stack both price wise and apparently sonic wise. This fact left me wondering what I would be missing by not owning the dCS flagship!?! I did however know that I wasn’t missing doubling the cost of the $40+K DAC, by adding the Vivaldi master clock and its upsampler & cabling!
With those facts in mind, I learned of the EMM DV2 DAC and the EMM NS1 streamer. I contacted the dCS distributor and borrowed a NS1 and DV2. After the A/B audition with my Rossini & clock, I kept the EMM combo and jettisoned the Rossini.
Whether my EMM combo would have beat the newer Rossini Apex upgrade, I don’t know. More importantly however, I didn’t care.
Not dumping another ~$20K on a $20+K DAC, let alone contemplating more than doubling that amount on the flagship Vivaldi stack, left me and my wallet happy.
Additionally, I am really enjoying the EMM combo. It provides what I would describe as a very listenable and muscial middle of the road between the Lampi and dCS sounds. Whether my EMM combo can be beat by MSB, dCS, Lampi, Wadax, Linn et al., I don’t care. Because, I’m happy to get away from the DAC add this (clock/upsampler/power supply) and doubling the price of the DAC itself et al. conveyor line; as well as the Tube DAC hassles of trialing and finding and rolling very costly new tubes, that I found to have premature failure rates.
Whether Ed Meitner and EMM is the best of the best, I’m sure that isn’t the case; because there is no best of the best and if there was, it would be beaten with the next latest, greatest, upgrade, add-on or product! Such is life in the audio highend. But from my experiences, EMM is definitely in the mix of the digital best short list!
BTW: I’m using the EMM NS1/DV2 to directly drive my Atma-Sphere MA1 amps and SoundLab Majestic 845PX speakers.
I have never auditioned a MSB DAC, but have assumed that MSB’s digital was in the mix at the top of the heap of the digital food chain.
Speaking of the digital food chain, it is truly a non-win situation. I think we sometimes get so caught up in what’s best, that we forget that there is no best. There is just a grouping and a mix of the best components!
Compared to other components, one component has a plus here and a minus there. They are all different. But at the top of the heap level, they are more alike than different. That is, the differences are apparent when heard in our home venues, in the midst of our unique rooms, their furnishings and acoustics as well as the differing attributes our other hardware selections bring to the mix. Each of these many variables effect our observations and for the most part, mean they are not readily transferable to other’s circumstances and situations. These different circumstances not only include the aforementioned ones, but also our learned preferences, tastes, hearing acuity and even our attitudes at the time of an audition.
I also believe that our historical hearing examples are anything but particularly accurate That is, if an A/B comparison can’t be made, then our audio memory isn’t all that reliable. Hence, taking an auditioning experience away from one site and time and attempting to apply it later, is pretty much an impossibility, contrary to perhaps what we think can be done.
A bit of my digital audio history follows. A local audio store owner and friend, was involved with one of the early pioneers of PC audio, Gordon Rankin of Wavelength Audio. Thus, I learned about PC audio before most. At the time, PC audio was a revelation, if not a revolution.
As such, in 2006, I moved from CD’s and a Wadia CDP to a Wavelength Brick Silver DAC. With the funds from the Wadia sale, I bought a MacBook to drive the Brick. At the time, I considered that a twofer, because I could use the MacBook for its computing purposes, as well as using it in the audio room.
From the Brick, I moved to a Wavelength Crimson. Later, I acquired a Lampizator Big7, followed by a Lampi Golden Gate. I then moved to a dCS Rossini. Both the Lampi and dCS house sounds were obviously different. But each were at equally high levels of performance and each were very listenable and enjoyable.
Later, while auditioning a Rossini master clock, I learned of the new Apex upgrade to the Rossini. The clock added sonically. But it wasn’t what I would term a huge step-up -- i.e., one that I just couldn’t live without. At that point, pricing became paramount!
In round numbers, the Rossini master clock was a $10K upgrade and the Apex was similar in price. For me, adding $20K to a $20+K DAC was at best, questionable. I coupled this pricing, with the fact that the Rossini was beneath the Vivaldi stack both price wise and apparently sonic wise. This fact left me wondering what I would be missing by not owning the dCS flagship!?! I did however know that I wasn’t missing doubling the cost of the $40+K DAC, by adding the Vivaldi master clock and its upsampler & cabling!
With those facts in mind, I learned of the EMM DV2 DAC and the EMM NS1 streamer. I contacted the dCS distributor and borrowed a NS1 and DV2. After the A/B audition with my Rossini & clock, I kept the EMM combo and jettisoned the Rossini.
Whether my EMM combo would have beat the newer Rossini Apex upgrade, I don’t know. More importantly however, I didn’t care.
Not dumping another ~$20K on a $20+K DAC, let alone contemplating more than doubling that amount on the flagship Vivaldi stack, left me and my wallet happy.
Additionally, I am really enjoying the EMM combo. It provides what I would describe as a very listenable and muscial middle of the road between the Lampi and dCS sounds. Whether my EMM combo can be beat by MSB, dCS, Lampi, Wadax, Linn et al., I don’t care. Because, I’m happy to get away from the DAC add this (clock/upsampler/power supply) and doubling the price of the DAC itself et al. conveyor line; as well as the Tube DAC hassles of trialing and finding and rolling very costly new tubes, that I found to have premature failure rates.
Whether Ed Meitner and EMM is the best of the best, I’m sure that isn’t the case; because there is no best of the best and if there was, it would be beaten with the next latest, greatest, upgrade, add-on or product! Such is life in the audio highend. But from my experiences, EMM is definitely in the mix of the digital best short list!
BTW: I’m using the EMM NS1/DV2 to directly drive my Atma-Sphere MA1 amps and SoundLab Majestic 845PX speakers.
You have a very reasonable approach! What works best in your system, is best.
In systems I have owned or encountered, my DA2 was more musical and easy on my ears than Rossini, if similar in overall resolution. Less "digital" and smoother. And it costs less. I also found that I have to work a lot harder to get rid of artifacts with DCS digital inputs, esp ethernet, than with the NS1+optilink setup.
There are a few specific things that DCS does better, but the NS1+DA2 has been more friendly in my system and pleasant to listen to. Even compared to other DACs, there is a particular flow or "swirl" I hear on vocals, where everything is smooth, and the tail end has tons of detail and texture, that is very unique to EMM Labs (and maybe Playback Designs?). Even the holographic presentation of Lampis (which sound fantastic IMO) don't have this particular musical flow.
The only real downside is I find this combo is more work to clean up background noise than with devices that use linear power supplies, no upsampling, and multibit modulators (less noise going to ground). I'm really curious to see if the Altaira system will be able to soak up this residual noise. I'm sure if your signal cables are good enough, it also becomes less of an issue.
Your descriptive ability is superb, Ian B. Your posts in this thread have had a great knack of expressing the same sonic nuances and differences that I have experienced.
My Lampizator (Big7 & Golden Gate), dCS (Rossini) and now, EMM (NS1/DV2) ownership experiences have been good, but different; which obviously is to be expected. Each DAC, was a pleasure to listen to. It would have been sublime to be able to listen to all three whenever the mood stuck. But, of course, that would be the case for every component in the audio chain. At some point, because of logistics and sheer cost, a decision of what to keep and what to say goodbye to, must be made.
When comparing my Rossini & clock to the DV2, the DV2 just ticked more of my preference boxes. It combined detail retrieval with a smoothness that I had not experienced.
The full-range SoundLab electrostatic speakers excel at transients. From what I’ve heard from other DAC’s, the DV2 compounded the SoundLab's superb transient reproduction . The plucked strings and the swipes and plunks on the body and fret board of a standing bass never sounded better, or more real. Nils Lofgren’s acoustic guitar string plucks and his hand percussions on the guitar body on his "Keith Don’t Go" live track, were the best I had ever heard.
But what really stuck me was the DV2’s 3-D abilities. The you-are-there illusion is the most important sonic attribute for me, followed by transients and accurate timber and harmonics. I believe the qualities of the latter two attributes cause a recorded instrument to sound as much like a live one as possible. Any of these 3 DAC’s excel at these abilities. The differences are subtle. But there were differences and I used those differences to make my ultimate selection.
The DV2’s symphonic instrument separation was the best I had ever heard. For audio shows and demonstrations minimalist recordings of female vocalists or small ensembles are often used. However from my experience, a large-scale orchestra and a symphony’s crescendos separate the good, from the truly great audio components. In such cases, I’ve always found what I would term congestion to be an issue. The less restrained and congested a sonic spectacular is, the better the system. This is where I found the DV2 to exceed the Rossini. Its spatial resolution of instruments in space and their separation, better than anything I had previously experienced. This allowed the music to flow and for me to just sit and be a part of the performance as opposed to being critical of it, or of the reproduction I was hearing.
For its price and if one is going to use a DAC to directly drive their amps, the DV2 would be hard to beat. However, for approx. 2/3 less cost, I understand EMM’s MA3 DAC is performance-for-the dollar, EMM’s sweet spot. This is even more true, because the MA3 also has a volume control and an Ethernet input like the configuration found on the outboard NS1 streamer.
Hi, I fully agree with your assessment of the EMM Labs DV2! I also found the DV2 DAC sounds lifelike in dynamics, transients, texture and color.
There is a caveat, though: The EMM Labs filter algorithm does provide almost perfect impulse response for transients, but reverts to linear phase brick wall for more steady state sounds.
Being a nerd heavily invested in the the EMM Labs platform, I personally wish they added an apodizing filter into the mix to remove ringing of sounds after the transient because that designs sounds very pleasing with my other DACs, and even in MQA playback on EMM Labs own DACs. The Meitner filters have extremely good technical performance, but I reckon that a minimum phase apodizing filter actually sounds more analog. A combination of the two seems like it would be best, which I think is what Playback Designs does (maybe they try not to step on each others toes too much). If they ever read the comments I would very much recommend they try this, even if just lowering the filter cutoff 1khz.
Besides that, the only other shortfall I have found is that other DACs have better dynamic range and lower background noise. I find myself working harder, investing more into for solutions and interconnects to get more space, excitement, and black background.
Of course, the sound staging, resolution, musicality, and smoothness are fantastic, and it looks beautiful. I agree with all the positive comments above about the layering and 3D quality too. And yet, having done some comparisons over the last couple years there are things I would improve if possible.
Hi Ian, I believe EMM Labs' filter choice is adaptive, changing with signal content. I have no issue with its dynamic performance. In fact, via my sound system, I found its dynamic performance lifelike. How do you know that they are not using an Apodizing filter?
Last edited:
To be honest, it just doesn't sound like an apodizing filter. But if you play back an MQA stream/file (not my usual preference) on the DA2/DV2/MA3 you can hear more relaxed and fluid timing because MQA does use one.
I'm pretty sure that what EMM Labs does is blend between an ultra slow rolloff filter on the transient, and then back to a steep low-alias one. Perhaps they also switch between minimum and linear phase as well on the transient edge (a guess). So it definitely does adapt to the signal content, and on the leading edge transient they absolutely get it right. But I find for bass etc that rings out, it gets a little stiff after the initial transient, which is the sound of a steep linear phase filter.
If your system sounds great, who am I to argue? And perhaps it is more noticeable with rhythmic than orchestral music. But when I AB with DACs that have selectable apodizing filters it seems like they let more energy through, the bass pushes more air, and it sounds more relaxed, like DSD. DSD is really the benchmark for me and I just want my PCM to be as close to that as it can be. This critique only applies to PCM playback.
I know there are a lot of designers who are very much against apodizing filters because they can no longer state 20hz-20khz frequency response for CD quality.
Anyway, I'm not knocking the DAC. It probably has one of the best soundstages, and least fatiguing presentations out there, and the detail level is extremely impressive. I've had to be away from it a couple times this year, and the other DAC I was using provided for some interesting contrasts.
Last edited:
Hi Ian, Sorry, I am in no position to comment on your observations! The reason is because I listen exclusively to DSD via SACDs.
Well, you can't beat that! You also don't have to deal with the network noise.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |