Event at Goodwin's High End: Computer Audio and dCS Rossini DAC

[microstrip]

If I might summarize the new digital experience with the Vivaldi stack through the outstanding system that we heard at Goodwin's it would be mainly the following two items on a much higher level than I ever heard before from digital:

1) tonal density
2) timbral micro-resolution

These two together deliver a rather realistic timbral richness, close to what I have thus far only heard from top analog. And all that was just from CD, either Redbook CD or HDCD. No 'hi-res'.

Solo violin in the Reference Recordings HDCD of Sait Saens' Danse Macabre was very convincing, but so was orchestral string sound, french horns etc.

Interestingly, the high frequency resolution from CD was just outstanding, even though also HDCD is bound by the 44.1 kHz sampling limit. At one point Peter A. who sat behind me tapped on my shoulder and said "I have never heard such triangles from digital". He also found a cymbal crash that I had not paid attention to very convincing in its sound and decay through the recorded hall (decay of sound overall was on a top level too). The transparency of sound came close to the best analog I have heard. There was also no high-frequency fatigue as Peter pointed out. It almost appears that the application of the Nyquist theorem to audio was correct all along, we just have never before heard an audible result that would do its theoretical outcome justice.

***

In that large room at Goodwin's the soundstage was just huge. It was fully 3-D, with palpable, layered and precise imaging, great decay and emergence of instrumental sound out of silence as you would hear in a concert hall. It was the best soundstage that I have ever heard. It seemed as good from Redbook CD as it was from HDCD.

If the Rossini Player with clock would get 3/4 of the way where the sound of the Vivaldi stack was I'd be very happy.

Al. M,

Excellent report. Your proper use of a conjunction of subjective concepts manages to describe in a very good way what is the difference between my experiences with the Vivaldi and other top CD playing systems. The tonal density is really unique, coupled with lots of "local energy" in a well layered in space. This sound then spreads in the correct way in space.

I am also addressing mainly classical music.

 

[Al M.]

Al. M,

Excellent report. Your proper use of a conjunction of subjective concepts manages to describe in a very good way what is the difference between my experiences with the Vivaldi and other top CD playing systems. The tonal density is really unique, coupled with lots of "local energy" in a well layered in space. This sound then spreads in the correct way in space.

I am also addressing mainly classical music.

Thanks, Microstrip. It seems we are all in broad agreement here.

 

[Al M.]

Please post when you do.

The top dCS has always been the best I have ever experienced, but I cannot justify that amount of expenditure.

Hoping the Rossini comes close. Second best for me has been the Berkeley Ref, so your findings are of unusual relevance - at least to me.

Yes, I will report back, Jim. I may also invite others to join me in the session, and then it would not be just one opinion that is given. I would also be interested to hear the Berkeley Ref side by side in that session, we'll see.

 

[JimmyS]

Yes, I will report back, Jim. I may also invite others to join me in the session, and then it would not be just one opinion that is given. I would also be interested to hear the Berkeley Ref side by side in that session, we'll see.

When I was shopping for a DAC last year, I was able to listen to the Berkeley Ref, MSB analog, DCS Debussy, and DCS Puccini all in the same setup at Goodwins.

My quick summary is that the Berkeley provides a very detailed musical presentation, while the DCS provides a more natural sounding musical presentation. For me, the Berkeley was fun to listen to for a few songs but after that I couldn't connect with the music. I ended up with the Debussy to hold me over until the Rossini would be available.

 

[Al M.]

When I was shopping for a DAC last year, I was able to listen to the Berkeley Ref, MSB analog, DCS Debussy, and DCS Puccini all in the same setup at Goodwins.

My quick summary is that the Berkeley provides a very detailed musical presentation, while the DCS provides a more natural sounding musical presentation. For me, the Berkeley was fun to listen to for a few songs but after that I couldn't connect with the music. I ended up with the Debussy to hold me over until the Rossini would be available.

Interesting, thanks. I would have thought that these older dCS DACs should have been very detailed also, from what their general reputation seems to be. I didn't know that Goodwin's carry MSB. How did the MSB analog compare?

 

[JimmyS]

Interesting, thanks. I would have thought that these older dCS DACs should have been very detailed also, from what their general reputation seems to be. I didn't know that Goodwin's carry MSB. How did the MSB analog compare?

I believe the MSB was there on loan or a customer trade-in (wasnt there in my later visits).

Its been 8 months since I heard all three, and I'll apologize in advance for the lack of audio reviewer vocabulary. The conclusions I came away with from listening to all three where that if you wanted "Detail" the Berkeley was the solution. The DCS I would say had "Focus" rather than "Detail", as I didn't experience any listening fatigue in the hours I spent listening to it, where as with the Berkeley my brain would shut off after 3-4 songs. The MSB lacked the "focus" of the DCS, particularly on the acoustic bass tracks I like to listen to (I'm a former Viola and Bass player) and the overall image it presented didnt seem right to me.

I was in town for work in October, and got the chance to hear the Rossini and later compare it to the Debussy. I didn't think that the older Debussy was detailed compared to the newer Rossini. Got to hear maybe 3 songs to A/B them and my initial impression was that the Debussy sounded "congested". Definitely need to hear them both again next time I am in the area for work, but based on the initial listen I have a feeling I'll be finding a way to fund the upgrade.

Cheers,
Jimmy.

 

[Al M.]

I believe the MSB was there on loan or a customer trade-in (wasnt there in my later visits).

Its been 8 months since I heard all three, and I'll apologize in advance for the lack of audio reviewer vocabulary. The conclusions I came away with from listening to all three where that if you wanted "Detail" the Berkeley was the solution. The DCS I would say had "Focus" rather than "Detail", as I didn't experience any listening fatigue in the hours I spent listening to it, where as with the Berkeley my brain would shut off after 3-4 songs. The MSB lacked the "focus" of the DCS, particularly on the acoustic bass tracks I like to listen to (I'm a former Viola and Bass player) and the overall image it presented didnt seem right to me.

I was in town for work in October, and got the chance to hear the Rossini and later compare it to the Debussy. I didn't think that the older Debussy was detailed compared to the newer Rossini. Got to hear maybe 3 songs to A/B them and my initial impression was that the Debussy sounded "congested". Definitely need to hear them both again next time I am in the area for work, but based on the initial listen I have a feeling I'll be finding a way to fund the upgrade.

Cheers,
Jimmy.

Thanks, Jimmy, for sharing your impressions.

 

[ack]

I've heard the MSB Analog DAC at Goodwin's in the past (they are a dealer), and I felt its name is very representative of the sound: typical good analog, meaning a little soft sounding, round, perhaps less resolving than the Berkeley but never compared them head to head. A good product.

 

[acousticsguru]

If one were to compare offline conversions from DSD to PCM (planning a little blind test), playing back the native DSD file from e.g. a USB pen drive, does the Rossini automatically boost the playback by 6 dB? Also, am I assuming correctly that the USB pen drive containing the native DSD files (DFF or DSF) and conversions (e.g. WAV) would need to be formatted in FAT32 in order to be recognized? Thanks in advance!

Greetings from Switzerland, David.