dCS Varese short review

[struts]

Interesting point. And I have pondered it.

I am in the fortunate position that I can compare similar SACD and vinyl issues back-to-back. A company by the name of TRPTK makes state-of-the-art digital recordings. Its recording techniques, and resulting recordings, are superior to anything I know. It records mostly Dutch or Netherlands-based, infectiously talented, artists.
TRPTK also issued a few SACDs and LPs of selected recordings: van Poucke on Schumann, Eijlander in Dark Fire, Fridman in Reid. Gripping interpretations, exemplary recordings. With dCS Vivaldi, the comparison was embarrassing. Upgrading to Vivaldi Apex, looming with Nordost Gold and installing a Nordost QB10 to replace two Nordost QB8s plus plus plus... narrowed the gap substantially. However, the vinyl issues of these "high-end" digital(!) recordings still carried the day.
Also, the new Esoteric vinyl issues are a joy (apparently, they contain a digital step, and I could not care less). Esoteric+vinyl. Who would have thought?
What is going on? (i) digital reproduction equipment is still not up to analogue standards (ii) I suspect that vinyl, when erring during is convolute production and reproduction process, introduces linear distortions in the analogue domain, to which our hearing is accustomed and which it can easily process, contrary to digital artifacts. Ergo, only when digital reproduction equipment tames its digital gremlins, can it aspire to compete head-on with the best of analogue reproduction. According to dCS, this will set you back usd 300 thd and counting. And the proof is still in the pudding.
PS: the TRPTK classical catalogue is somewhat eclectic - which is a joy (and not always to my liking) - but its bread-and-butter recordings compete with the best interpretations bar none and have a huge sonic advantage. Sample van Poucke, or even Wilmering/Boertien in... Winterreise (it is the best interpretation in my collection). Be amazed!

Thanks for the heads up @Jack Pot. For the benefit of others TRPTK recordings are available on Qobuz (in 24/176.4 PCM). For instance the aforementioned Winterreise).

 

[Al M.]

What is going on? (i) digital reproduction equipment is still not up to analogue standards

Yet in order to make those digitally sourced LPs they need to use digital reproduction equipment (DACs) as well. So that option falls away as explanation.

(ii) I suspect that vinyl, when erring during is convolute production and reproduction process, introduces linear distortions in the analogue domain, to which our hearing is accustomed and which it can easily process, contrary to digital artifacts.

So you basically agree with my point that it's vinyl colorations that are the "secret of vinyl" and are (partially) responsible for its to many attractive sound.

Ergo, only when digital reproduction equipment tames its digital gremlins, can it aspire to compete head-on with the best of analogue reproduction.

But if vinyl introduces distortions as you say, how can it be better? Well, it may be subjectively better to some, I guess.

 

[buzzlulu]

Yet in order to make those digitally sourced LPs they need to use digital reproduction equipment (DACs) as well. So that option falls away as explanation.

Agreed 100%. All new records are digitally sourced, mastered, etc. The medium may be vinyl however ultimately it's digital,

 

[PeterA]

Agreed 100%. All new records are digitally sourced, mastered, etc. The medium may be vinyl however ultimately it's digital,

Not all new records are digitally sourced. And many of us listen to older pressings or original all analog vinyl primarily. The digital sourced vinyl is a strawman brought in to say "gotchya". Frankly, even some of that sounds better to some than pure digital.

 

[Jack Pot]

Everybody is correct.

During the mastering process of both digital and analogue, choices must be made. I call that "introducing distortion". By the way, mastering a digital recording is different from mastering an analogue recording, which says it all. The point is: analogue is a continuous signal, similar to what the human ear has been trained to listen to for millennia. Digital is not. Sony/Philips's choice of a "standard" 44.1 kHz digital sampling frequency proved to be a mistake, notwithstanding the theoretical background that justified the choice. I remember listening to the first cd players back in 1982(?) and running away in horror. At that time, I listened to vinyl on a Roksan Xerxes with SME V and Koestu Black. As a classical music buff, I used to go to the concert hall at least once a week.

The situation today is unchanged: analogue remains continuous, digital - no matter the sampling frequency - remains discontinuous. Meanwhile, a great deal has been learned about digital recording, on how to push digital artefacts produced by digitalization as far away from the audible range as possible etc... IMHO, these advances fully justify the complaints of some/many? audiophiles about digital recordings' insurmountable shortcomings. Perhaps, a time will come when these advances close the gap with analogue reproduction. But imho, it has not arrived yet. I found the best proof in excellent digital recordings that sound superior when they are cut to vinyl - which seems to minimize/ filter out? the digital artefacts generated in the D/A conversion. Here, I disagree with many vinylstas who seek the goodness of old Decca recordings. IMHO, today, vinyl from digital sources can be a joy, if done properly (I get frustrated with the hit and miss DG LPs of late: feed the fad, forget about sound quality; eg Joe Hisaishi's uplifting music massacred on LP).

An aside: a few years ago, a small German outfit - Stockfish - made a curious experiment. It cut digital masters through a D/A converter to an analogue direct metal master on a Neumann VMS-82 cutting lathe; it then read the copper master with an EMT 997 tonearm/TSD-15 cartridge and fed the analogue signal to a Meitner A/D converter. The obtained DSD signal at 2.8224 Mhz was used to produce SACDs. These SACDs (two in total) are amongst the best sounding SACDs in my collection.

 

[Rexp]

Interesting point. And I have pondered it.

I am in the fortunate position that I can compare similar SACD and vinyl issues back-to-back. A company by the name of TRPTK makes state-of-the-art digital recordings. Its recording techniques, and resulting recordings, are superior to anything I know. It records mostly Dutch or Netherlands-based, infectiously talented, artists.
TRPTK also issued a few SACDs and LPs of selected recordings: van Poucke on Schumann, Eijlander in Dark Fire, Fridman in Reid. Gripping interpretations, exemplary recordings. With dCS Vivaldi, the comparison was embarrassing. Upgrading to Vivaldi Apex, looming with Nordost Gold and installing a Nordost QB10 to replace two Nordost QB8s plus plus plus... narrowed the gap substantially. However, the vinyl issues of these "high-end" digital(!) recordings still carried the day.
Also, the new Esoteric vinyl issues are a joy (apparently, they contain a digital step, and I could not care less). Esoteric+vinyl. Who would have thought?
What is going on? (i) digital reproduction equipment is still not up to analogue standards (ii) I suspect that vinyl, when erring during is convolute production and reproduction process, introduces linear distortions in the analogue domain, to which our hearing is accustomed and which it can easily process, contrary to digital artifacts. Ergo, only when digital reproduction equipment tames its digital gremlins, can it aspire to compete head-on with the best of analogue reproduction. According to dCS, this will set you back usd 300 thd and counting. And the proof is still in the pudding.
PS: the TRPTK classical catalogue is somewhat eclectic - which is a joy (and not always to my liking) - but its bread-and-butter recordings compete with the best interpretations bar none and have a huge sonic advantage. Sample van Poucke, or even Wilmering/Boertien in... Winterreise (it is the best interpretation in my collection). Be amazed!

The only conclusion is that current digital recording tech is flawed and digital recordings need tweaking to filter out the distortion embedded within.

 

[still-one]

Someone should start a new thread to continue this discussion.

 

[Al M.]

Someone should start a new thread to continue this discussion.

Thanks for the suggestion. Here it is:

Digital Vinyl: Superior Sound Compared To Just Digital?

This is a continuation from the discussion on this page from the thread: https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/dcs-varese-short-review.39573/page-5

www.whatsbestforum.com

 

[Lee]

Perhaps it's because I have read gushing reviews like this for close to 40 years that I get a bit jaded. I'm sure Varese sounds fine indeed, until of course the next "dead composer" dCS system arrives, when folks will complain how Varese sounded "clouded, flat, distant and indistinct". The only dCS system I owned was around 30 years ago, which featured the dead composers Elgar, Purcell, and Verdi. The connections took a rocket scientist to figure out (> 10-12 cables, I recall). The sound was fine, once you got the system working. The dCS Verdi transport was a disaster and had to be sent back twice to England for repairs. I think the newer dCS transports use Esoteric parts, hopefully they are more reliable.

The real advances in digital in the past 30 years have been in streaming high resolution audio (e.g., Qobuz, Roon et al.) , and we have much to thank Daniel Ek whose brilliant team at Spotify made streaming practical. If you really want to understand the engineering challenges in streaming at web scale, I highly recommend watching The Playlist on Netflix, which is a wonderful introduction to the complexities of making streaming a reality. That made it possible to distribute music at massive scale and with sufficient quality to satisfy high end listeners.

The other significant advance has been at the lower end, with streamers like Eversolo DMP-A8, which according to measurements in a number of high end magazines is about the best there is in the field, and costs about a tenth of what the Nordost Odin cabling used in that setup where Varese was demonstrated.

None of this is to say that the Varese doesn't sound great, as I am sure it does for those who can afford the six figure pricing. I'm waiting for the dCS system that will cost in excess of a million dollars per component. It's coming....with Nordost cabling that costs in the six figures per cable.

The Nordost comments seem odd to me given that the Varese comes with its own cabling except for the ac cables.

 

[Al M.]

After numerous threads and thousands of posts on WBF debating the A v D issue, why do the analogue folks (you, Jack Pot and others) continue their apparent obsession for having this ad nauseum comparative discussion again?

Because they think since it's the subjective truth for them, it's the objective truth for everyone -- or it *should* be. Pseudo-religious zealotry, maybe.

 

[pk_LA]

My impressions of the Varese after spending a couple hours listening:

Setup: Ethernet -> Varese -> VTL TL 7.5 SIII -> dAgostino M400 monos -> Wilson XVX (loom all Transparent Magnum Opus).

Impressions: I found myself comparing it to the Vivaldi Apex. It sounded like a better Vivaldi. I always felt that the Vivaldi did complex/transients without breaking a sweat. But, it also sounded analytical with such content - especially in the upper mid-range and lower high frequencies. Whereas the Vivaldi could, at times with such content, be detailed without grace the Varese was delicate and nuanced. The Varese somehow retained detail while adding a smoothness. Backgrounds/noise floor was spectacular.

Another comparison for me is the Wadax Reference. I felt the Varese was a more natural sounding DAC. While the Wadax is amazing in terms of how it ca be tuned when paired with the streamer, it can also start to sound maybe a tick artificial to my ears. The Varese did not sound artificial to me.

Finally, I think about the Varese in comparison to the Horizon, which I ended up buying. I don't think the Horizon has the resolution nor the transient handling of the Varese. But, the body, density and upper mid-range are better on the Horizon to my ears. Ron R insisted I have a tube somewhere in the pipeline and I think he was right.

I left the Varese audition with the following conclusions,
1) The Varese is an awesome dac - I am sure I would be incredibly happy with one
2) The 5 boxes is a bit much - it takes up as much space as many entire systems. And, I am sure that within months we will be pitched on cable upgrades that 'transform' the sound.
3) DACs are the fastest evolving components in hifi. I look at amps, turntables, speakers, etc - a great one of these today will still be top-notch years from now. Whereas dacs are still evolving at quite a fast rate imo.
4) $300,000 is a lot of money for a single component - ultimately, I did not feel the juice was worth the squeeze on this one. It just didn't move me like some things do. I recently bought Lyras - when I heard them I was immediately hooked.

 

[andromedaaudio]

. I recently bought Lyras - when I heard them I was immediately hooked.

Did you buy Rockport loudspeakers?

 

[microstrip]

My impressions of the Varese after spending a couple hours listening:

Setup: Ethernet -> Varese -> VTL TL 7.5 SIII -> dAgostino M400 monos -> Wilson XVX (loom all Transparent Magnum Opus).

Impressions: I found myself comparing it to the Vivaldi Apex. It sounded like a better Vivaldi. I always felt that the Vivaldi did complex/transients without breaking a sweat. But, it also sounded analytical with such content - especially in the upper mid-range and lower high frequencies. Whereas the Vivaldi could, at times with such content, be detailed without grace the Varese was delicate and nuanced. The Varese somehow retained detail while adding a smoothness. Backgrounds/noise floor was spectacular.

Another comparison for me is the Wadax Reference. I felt the Varese was a more natural sounding DAC. While the Wadax is amazing in terms of how it ca be tuned when paired with the streamer, it can also start to sound maybe a tick artificial to my ears. The Varese did not sound artificial to me.

Finally, I think about the Varese in comparison to the Horizon, which I ended up buying. I don't think the Horizon has the resolution nor the transient handling of the Varese. But, the body, density and upper mid-range are better on the Horizon to my ears. Ron R insisted I have a tube somewhere in the pipeline and I think he was right.

I left the Varese audition with the following conclusions,
1) The Varese is an awesome dac - I am sure I would be incredibly happy with one
2) The 5 boxes is a bit much - it takes up as much space as many entire systems. And, I am sure that within months we will be pitched on cable upgrades that 'transform' the sound.
3) DACs are the fastest evolving components in hifi. I look at amps, turntables, speakers, etc - a great one of these today will still be top-notch years from now. Whereas dacs are still evolving at quite a fast rate imo.
4) $300,000 is a lot of money for a single component - ultimately, I did not feel the juice was worth the squeeze on this one. It just didn't move me like some things do. I recently bought Lyras - when I heard them I was immediately hooked.

Thanks for a well balanced and informative report - it increases my expectation bias on the Varese! For me information is a keyword when listening to music in my system - and to my ears the dCS Vivaldi managed to bring in my system more and more true information than others I listened, as well as exceptional transient behaviour. But in order to complement this behaviour I always added tubes to have the needed delicateness, density and body I also appreciate.

BTW, I think that the A/B compares between Vivaldi and Varese directly driving power amplifiers must be carefully considered. IMO the Vivaldi always sounded much better driving a good preamplifier - may be the Varese has improvements in the analog stage equivalent to a good preamplifier in his analog stage,

 

[pk_LA]

My impressions of the Varese after spending a couple hours listening:

Setup: Ethernet -> Varese -> VTL TL 7.5 SIII -> dAgostino M400 monos -> Wilson XVX (loom all Transparent Magnum Opus).

Impressions: I found myself comparing it to the Vivaldi Apex. It sounded like a better Vivaldi. I always felt that the Vivaldi did complex/transients without breaking a sweat. But, it also sounded analytical with such content - especially in the upper mid-range and lower high frequencies. Whereas the Vivaldi could, at times with such content, be detailed without grace the Varese was delicate and nuanced. The Varese somehow retained detail while adding a smoothness. Backgrounds/noise floor was spectacular.

Another comparison for me is the Wadax Reference. I felt the Varese was a more natural sounding DAC. While the Wadax is amazing in terms of how it ca be tuned when paired with the streamer, it can also start to sound maybe a tick artificial to my ears. The Varese did not sound artificial to me.

Finally, I think about the Varese in comparison to the Horizon, which I ended up buying. I don't think the Horizon has the resolution nor the transient handling of the Varese. But, the body, density and upper mid-range are better on the Horizon to my ears. Ron R insisted I have a tube somewhere in the pipeline and I think he was right.

I left the Varese audition with the following conclusions,
1) The Varese is an awesome dac - I am sure I would be incredibly happy with one
2) The 5 boxes is a bit much - it takes up as much space as many entire systems. And, I am sure that within months we will be pitched on cable upgrades that 'transform' the sound.
3) DACs are the fastest evolving components in hifi. I look at amps, turntables, speakers, etc - a great one of these today will still be top-notch years from now. Whereas dacs are still evolving at quite a fast rate imo.
4) $300,000 is a lot of money for a single component - ultimately, I did not feel the juice was worth the squeeze on this one. It just didn't move me like some things do. I recently bought Lyras - when I heard them I was immediately hooked.

One caveat: My comments on the Wadax are prior to the latest power supply and cabling. I say this because I understand that those have made major differences with the DAC.

 

[pk_LA]

Thanks for a well balanced and informative report - it increases my expectation bias on the Varese! For me information is a keyword when listening to music in my system - and to my ears the dCS Vivaldi managed to bring in my system more and more true information than others I listened, as well as exceptional transient behaviour. But in order to complement this behaviour I always added tubes to have the needed delicateness, density and body I also appreciate.

BTW, I think that the A/B compares between Vivaldi and Varese directly driving power amplifiers must be carefully considered. IMO the Vivaldi always sounded much better driving a good preamplifier - may be the Varese has improvements in the analog stage equivalent to a good preamplifier in his analog stage,

I will confess something. In the end it was the number of boxes and the cost that kept me from buying it. Had it been 3 boxes and $150,000 I would have gotten it.

 

[pk_LA]

Did you buy Rockport loudspeakers?

I did buy the Lyra's. That is one purchase I am so very happy with. While they don't have the bass that my Alexx Vs did, I like pretty much everything else about them moreso.

 

[microstrip]

I will confess something. In the end it was the number of boxes and the cost that kept me from buying it. Had it been 3 boxes and $150,000 I would have gotten it.

Had it been 10 boxes and $150,000 I would order it today!

 

[ationg]

Had it been 10 boxes and $150,000 I would order it today!

If it was 3 boxes and $150k, I would be really curious how it compares with the $100k Cascade..

 

[microstrip]

Just found it - the HifNews review by Andrew Everard & Paul Miller of the dCS Varese.

https://dcsaudio.com/assets/hfnfebdcsvarese.pdf

I must say that for now I only looked at the measurands section - the curiosity has high! - they are impressive!

 

[mcduman]

i finally heard the varese yesterday next to vivaldi apex and can confidently say that it is not a better vivaldi. it is not even from the same family. it is something completely new and different esp when it comes to holography, dynamism and bass performance. 5 boxes are ridiculous for digital playback so it will be dcs challenge to bring it down to 2-3 boxes with 90% of the sound. imo vivaldi as it is today is already dead.