dCS Varese short review

[still-one]

Paragon Sight and Sound in Ann Arbor MI has the Varese system set up (with about 150 hours on it). I stopped in for something else but they had me listen to it. I only had about 20 minutes and it wasn’t a serious audition for me. But I listened closely to a few of my favorite tracks. Nevertheless, please take with a grain of salt my observations:
1) are we really now needing 5 huge boxes stacked on another rack at eye level height to get the job done? And I thought the Vivaldi stack was big. I understand most people at this level have a dedicated room. I don’t and have to live with gear. Regardless of the result, it seems like part of the goal was just making it big and impressive.
2) Case in point - the sales person acknowledged how good the Linn Klimax DS 3 is in one box. Not at the same level, but close - and in one elegant box. On that front - well done Linn.
3) They had the same model SF speakers I own hooked up (with XVXs waiting to be reconnected), and driven by D’Agostino Momentum (I think) monos and preamp. I thought the sound a just a bit bright and dry which surprised me. Again - not a fully broken in Varese. Tons of detail and it was an open wide soundstage.
Just my $.02 after a quick listen. Others will certainly disagree but I came away thinking it still has the DCS house sound. At this level - should it? Maybe that goes away with more break in. And, maybe that’s the very best digital can be. If so, then I prefer the slightly different presentation of other reference sources I’ve heard.
Best,

That is a very interesting perspective and as for your point 2 inconsistent with any comments I have heard from anyone I have been in contact with at Paragon. No one that I have spoken to at Paragon has indicated that the Varese is close to a Vivaldi stack let alone a Linn Klimax unit.

I can understand that not everyone may not like what you describe as the dCS house sound. Fair enough. There is other digital that I could live with and others that do not get me to what I want to hear. I hope you had the opportunity to go back and forth between the Vivaldi and Varese units. When I did, they surely didn’t sound similar at all.

 

[buzzlulu]

Paragon Sight and Sound in Ann Arbor MI has the Varese system set up (with about 150 hours on it). I stopped in for something else but they had me listen to it. I only had about 20 minutes and it wasn’t a serious audition for me. But I listened closely to a few of my favorite tracks. Nevertheless, please take with a grain of salt my observations:
1) are we really now needing 5 huge boxes stacked on another rack at eye level height to get the job done? And I thought the Vivaldi stack was big. I understand most people at this level have a dedicated room. I don’t and have to live with gear. Regardless of the result, it seems like part of the goal was just making it big and impressive.
2) Case in point - the sales person acknowledged how good the Linn Klimax DS 3 is in one box. Not at the same level, but close - and in one elegant box. On that front - well done Linn.
3) They had the same model SF speakers I own hooked up (with XVXs waiting to be reconnected), and driven by D’Agostino Momentum (I think) monos and preamp. I thought the sound a just a bit bright and dry which surprised me. Again - not a fully broken in Varese. Tons of detail and it was an open wide soundstage.
Just my $.02 after a quick listen. Others will certainly disagree but I came away thinking it still has the DCS house sound. At this level - should it? Maybe that goes away with more break in. And, maybe that’s the very best digital can be. If so, then I prefer the slightly different presentation of other reference sources I’ve heard.
Best,

INTERESTING comments!

I am a RossinI APEX owner......and prior to that a Linn Klimax DS owner since 2011. I still have my Klimax DS (original slim line case) and use it in a headphone only system. It has been continually upgraded and is up to date with Organik and the new Uphorik power supply.

I have been on the fence upgrading from Rossini to Vivaldi. It seems to me Vivaldi's days are numbered......despite dCS's insistence it is not going anywhere.

 

[Mgrif104]

That is a very interesting perspective and as for your point 2 inconsistent with any comments I have heard from anyone I have been in contact with at Paragon. No one that I have spoken to at Paragon has indicated that the Varese is close to a Vivaldi stack let alone a Linn Klimax unit.

I can understand that not everyone may not like what you describe as the dCS house sound. Fair enough. There is other digital that I could live with and others that do not get me to what I want to hear. I hope you had the opportunity to go back and forth between the Vivaldi and Varese units. When I did, they surely didn’t sound similar at all.

Unfortunately, I did not get a chance to compare the Vivaldi and Varese stacks at that time. But, I’ve heard Vivaldi, Rossini and Bartok at different times different systems and formed some impressions about the house sound. Now, those may be inaccurate impressions on my part - and it may be my bias coming through. I’m very familiar with the speakers, less familiar with the transparent cabling they were using, and not familiar with the preamp and amp. The sales person agreed that it might be a bit bright and not fully fleshed out - which I’ll attribute to it needing more run in time. I also didn’t have time to compare directly to the Linn unit - and the dealer asked if I could come back and do that comparison. As I wasn’t shopping for Varese, that didn’t seem fair to ask him to do that setup.
Perhaps I shouldn’t have posted impressions here given that I have limited experience with the gear. But, I will stand by my observations. Regardless of price (realistically, I’m not a Varese buyer, but am squarely in the crosshairs for TOTL Ideon, T+A, and Linn, etc.) ) or my ability to afford, I’ve heard other digital that sounded closer to what I’m looking for.
My $.02 only.
Best,

 

[nirodha]

Perhaps I shouldn’t have posted impressions here given that I have limited experience with the gear.

Don’t worry. You have every right to vent your opinions. I have yet to encounter the first objective brain.

 

[pk_LA]

Unfortunately, I did not get a chance to compare the Vivaldi and Varese stacks at that time. But, I’ve heard Vivaldi, Rossini and Bartok at different times different systems and formed some impressions about the house sound. Now, those may be inaccurate impressions on my part - and it may be my bias coming through. I’m very familiar with the speakers, less familiar with the transparent cabling they were using, and not familiar with the preamp and amp. The sales person agreed that it might be a bit bright and not fully fleshed out - which I’ll attribute to it needing more run in time. I also didn’t have time to compare directly to the Linn unit - and the dealer asked if I could come back and do that comparison. As I wasn’t shopping for Varese, that didn’t seem fair to ask him to do that setup.
Perhaps I shouldn’t have posted impressions here given that I have limited experience with the gear. But, I will stand by my observations. Regardless of price (realistically, I’m not a Varese buyer, but am squarely in the crosshairs for TOTL Ideon, T+A, and Linn, etc.) ) or my ability to afford, I’ve heard other digital that sounded closer to what I’m looking for.
My $.02 only.
Best,

It is very curious. Especially given that the d'Agostino gear tends to be a bit sweet and the Transparent (guessing it was Opus or Magnum Opus), which tend to be on the warm side.

I have owned a Rossini and spent more than a month with a Vivaldi Apex in my system. Ultimately, I felt that they were very resolving and handled trickly transitions/transients as well as anything. But, they were a tick neutral - dare I say cold - for my tastes.

 

[bonzo75]

Jeff, surely the answer to your question, and by how much it is better or worse or just different, depends on what the vinyl front end is.

No it depends more on what the vinyl recordings used are

 

[Mike Lavigne]

No it depends more on what the vinyl recordings used are

agree and agree.

 

[Kingrex]

Unfortunately, I did not get a chance to compare the Vivaldi and Varese stacks at that time. But, I’ve heard Vivaldi, Rossini and Bartok at different times different systems and formed some impressions about the house sound. Now, those may be inaccurate impressions on my part - and it may be my bias coming through. I’m very familiar with the speakers, less familiar with the transparent cabling they were using, and not familiar with the preamp and amp. The sales person agreed that it might be a bit bright and not fully fleshed out - which I’ll attribute to it needing more run in time. I also didn’t have time to compare directly to the Linn unit - and the dealer asked if I could come back and do that comparison. As I wasn’t shopping for Varese, that didn’t seem fair to ask him to do that setup.
Perhaps I shouldn’t have posted impressions here given that I have limited experience with the gear. But, I will stand by my observations. Regardless of price (realistically, I’m not a Varese buyer, but am squarely in the crosshairs for TOTL Ideon, T+A, and Linn, etc.) ) or my ability to afford, I’ve heard other digital that sounded closer to what I’m looking for.
My $.02 only.
Best,

I feel the same every time I look at that stack. Really? It takes that much isolation to reduce noise?
Hopefully they dont go the way of Dartzeel. Race to the highest price with the blingiest box.

We get a better idea of what something may sound like through multiple anecdotal evidence. Especially with audio as every system is different. If someone hears something somewhere, its good to share you impressions, accompanied by a description of the system and room.

Thanks for contributing.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I feel the same every time I look at that stack. Really? It takes that much isolation to reduce noise?

with digital the media is 'wanting'.......not robust......in terms of degrees of sounding real. so as our technology is approaching digital's ideal it seems to really reward over-the-top approaches to noise and power supplies. tiny incremental steps matter and we can hear them. it's one reason we use digital to set up systems, it tells you clearly the slightest restrictions. analog is not nearly as sensitive to not being perfectly optimized.

the CD media seems to be a little better by degrees with this, but with files or streaming it's extreme.

so when you see Wadax with all it's exotic chassis shapes and mass, very large heavy power supplies, crazy spendy DC cables......then read about all the stuff Taiko is doing lowering noise with the Olympus efforts just for the server......what dCS is doing is simply staying with that trend. and it will likely get more that way than less. with the Varese i was actually surprised there are not separate added power supplies, or even interfaces to add them later. it's just the way it is chasing ultimate digital. one piece 'simple' chassis digital can't compete, and is not sufficiently relatively future proof. maybe a trickle-down piece like the Wadax Studio Player might be one answer that does some of that. i'm sure there will be a dCS version of that based on the Varese technology at some point.

the good thing is the ease of use of digital and musical access makes up for it's fragility and cost/complication of all the chassis pieces. so the experiential equation chasing great digital performance makes it worth it to some.

 

[PeterA]

No it depends more on what the vinyl recordings used are

I disagree. Take your favorite high-quality vinyl pressings and play them on three or four different front end combinations. The presentation will surely be better on some or one then on the rest, depending on the gear chosen. Recordings matter, but so does the front end and the quality of the set up.

 

[bonzo75]

I disagree. Take your favorite high-quality vinyl pressings and play them on three or four different front end combinations. The presentation will surely be better on some or one then on the rest, depending on the gear chosen. Recordings matter, but so does the front end and the quality of the set up.

It will be different, not necessarily better. Sure if you screw something up it can be bad. And then there is audiophile better, which is to keep finding attributes making things one up over the other. One thing for sure, any vinyl front end will sound bad with bad records.

And downstream system of course

 

[Kingrex]

At some point I wondet about the benefit of more boxes compared to better software.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I disagree. Take your favorite high-quality vinyl pressings and play them on three or four different front end combinations. The presentation will surely be better on some or one then on the rest, depending on the gear chosen. Recordings matter, but so does the front end and the quality of the set up.

but the question is not whether different levels of vinyl playback hardware sound different. certainly they do sound different, and some are quite a bit better sounding. but my point and Kedar's is that the difference in pressing quality is greater than the difference in vinyl playback quality beyond a certain level of vinyl hardware and set-up quality.

the media is more significant than the hardware, not that the hardware is not significant. the best turntable, cartridge and phono with a mediocre/pedestrian pressing will bow to a merely "very good" turntable, cartridge and phono playing a super duper pressing in the same system. just how it is. that greater amount of better information comes thru. you can't fight a better more complete recording.

we can certainly argue where the cut off might be between good and very good turntable performance above which better turntable performance would not overcome a significant pressing advantage. that's fair. very good is pretty good.

and so when you start making claims of vinyl superiority over digital, and by how much, pressing quality is more a factor than hardware, past a certain level of vinyl hardware. it's the big deal.

honestly i don't think you spend enough time with digital to really have a feel for this. i do this compare every day and have for decades. with various levels of turntable performance and top level digital. the best digital can get close until i bring out the big guns.....whichever turntable i use.

 

[bonzo75]

At some point I wondet about the benefit of more boxes compared to better software.

Scratching the itch of what the additional box or next upgrade is.

Feels great when you get there

 

[PeterA]

with digital the media is 'wanting'.......not robust......in terms of degrees of sounding real. so as our technology is approaching digital's ideal it seems to really reward over-the-top approaches to noise and power supplies. tiny incremental steps matter and we can hear them. it's one reason we use digital to set up systems, it tells you clearly the slightest restrictions. analog is not nearly as sensitive to not being perfectly optimized.

the CD media seems to be a little better by degrees with this, but with files or streaming it's extreme.

I realize this is a digital thread about a new device, but I do not agree that digital is more sensitive to set up and being perfectly optimized.

I suspect those who fly in cartridge set up guys to optimize performance with disagree. So do those guys who do set up themselves and experiment further with thread type and thread tension and power cords to turntable motor controllers. And then there is record cleaning. This stuff can make very appreciable differences in presentation and performance.

I thought a digital system, which is a multi box solution like this new dCS would include dealer set up once and then you’re done and that ease of use and remote control convenience is one of the benefits. Perhaps there is filter optimization and selection and various cables to play with.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I realize this is a digital thread about a new device, but I do not agree that digital is more sensitive to set up

not what i said.

what i did say was; it tells you clearly the slightest restrictions. analog is not nearly as sensitive to not being perfectly optimized.

only that digital is a knife edge media, which has a small window of rightness. a little off with digital is way off. more limited than analog so we hear system set up easier since wrong is more prominent. analog a little off or colored is still more pleasing and less obviously wrong.

and as a tool digital is easier and faster to use.

you are no expert or experienced about what digital can do or not do. and you have little experience using digital for set up.

and being perfectly optimized.

a different thing altogether. finding perfect set-up with analog is also a challenge, but on the way to it, it is much better and enjoyable. the path more pleasant and less off putting. you can be half way there, and think you are all the way.

 

[Kingrex]

only that digital is a knife edge media, which has a small window of rightness. a little off with digital is way off. more limited than analog so we hear system set up easier since wrong is more prominent. analog a little off or colored is still more pleasing and less obviously wrong.

and as a tool digital is easier and faster to use.



with analog is also a challenge, but on the way to it, it is much better and enjoyable. the path more pleasant and less off putting. you can be half way there, and think you are all the way.

I don't know I agree. Digital can be thrown on a floor and sound very good. Especially if your spinning disc or playing files. Streaming takes more work to get right. But there is no knife edge fall outside and its unlistenable.

I find with vinyl, off by a hairs breath and lots of goodness is lost. Viewed from the opposite, I see people post they made some small tweek in their vinyl setup and magic is suddenly there.

At your level you have a view. But its coming from a 1%er altitude. There is a hugh population below that find a basic digital setup to be wonderful.

I found the vinyl path to be very offputting. I'm not into the tweek, listen, tweek, listen, tweek some more. Then pay someone to help and it's still not revealing what you expect. Finally JR or Wally Tools came over and nails it. Much better. Not fundimentaly different. Definitely more clarity and detail. More right.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I don't know I agree. Digital can be thrown on a floor and sound very good. Especially if your spinning disc or playing files. Streaming takes more work to get right. But there is no knife edge fall outside and its unlistenable.

it's a relative thing. which media is less tolerant of exact set-up audibly?

I find with vinyl, off by a hairs breath and lots of goodness is lost. Viewed from the opposite, I see people post they made some small tweek in their vinyl setup and magic is suddenly there.

agree that below a certain level of vinyl performance all things are possible. but....we are discussing systems here contemplating a $300k digital front end. so logically any vinyl in such a system would be pretty good already.

At your level you have a view. But its coming from a 1%er altitude. There is a hugh population below that find a basic digital setup to be wonderful.

I found the vinyl path to be very offputting. I'm not into the tweek, listen, tweek, listen, tweek some more. Then pay someone to help and it's still not revealing what you expect. Finally JR or Wally Tools came over and nails it. Much better. Not fundimentaly different. Definitely more clarity and detail. More right.

Rex, just trying to use the best tools for a job.....and relating my personal experience. i know that professional hifi set up guys (Stirling Trayle, Jim Smith) use digital files for set-up references. both because it's practical, and accurate for feedback. vinyl just not practical, or narrowly successful enough.

but agree that very good sounding digital can be inexpensive, and not need anything exotic to be enjoyable. but we are on What's Best Forum.

this is a thread about a $300k digital front end. and we are discussing references in how to judge it. if you are here you got past the whole elitist thing already.