I have plans in Seattle Analog related so we can chat while I am out that way in the near future. I look forward to seeing that room of yours and getting some listening time.
I have plans in Seattle Analog related so we can chat while I am out that way in the near future. I look forward to seeing that room of yours and getting some listening time.
I would as well have preferred the reviewer added some more reference points. All we know is that he has reviewed a whole lot, probably suffice to do some limited investigation, but bought none of them. There may be various reasons why he is not mentioning the other ones he tested... it may be the reviewer could not or was not allowed to or simply would not.
I never have this issue as a reviewer. I always name the comparators and exactly what I hear is different. Then I make value judgements based on the direction my audio compass points me.
Greetings WBF Members!
I am new to the WBF, but for more information about Believe High Fidelity we have made introductions here and if you plan to attend CES see our system here.
I would like the introduce the 120lbs Kassandra MkII from Aries Cerat (also available in a 240lbs dual chassis signature version)
-Separate individual power supplies for each stage (input/output, etc)
-32 R2R Ladder DACS (16 for each channel) in the reference version and as many as 64 in the Signature Edition for unmatched jitter and channel separation. Nearest competitor is Total Dac box system at 12 ladders (6 per channel)
-E280F Supertubes. No off-the-shelf tube options and no rolling required
-Extensive Choke regulation to eliminate PSU jitter
-Internal superclock to which can be bypassed to show how much improvement in jitter can be had
-All Custom components built in house or to spec for maximum sonic performance and zero lag in transients of which most tube based designs are known for.
Kassandra Mk II preview at Mono and Stereo can be found here. Stay tuned for the full review
I am fascinated by the Kassandre DAC, it does seems to take some cue's from Audio Note (1865 chip, I/V transformers, output transformer, digital input transformer, tube regulated power supply on the top model etc etc). I admire what they have done with the design. I would like so see more reviews mind. TotalDAC is drowning is great and consistent reviews, we seem to have only one for the Kassandre, and the guy bought it. Not saying that is fishy, but I do hate that when it occurs, turns me off a bit.
My worry with investing such a huge chunk of money in a DAC is:
1. The technology is super fast paced and moving forward even 30 years on. How updatable would this DAC be. I see clip in boards like in the CH Precision and MSB a good move.
2. Areas cerat is a one man band company, anyway a small new company is more accurate no doubt. No disrespect, and so is TotalDAC, but I would worry if it disappeared in a few years, where does that leave the owner of said DAC, and resale. Ewe are talking luxury performance car prices, and I would be nervous buying a tiny car companies offering that level. For example, we see what Goldmund amps are going for now, 100K down to 18K used.
I may be accused of being hypocritical as I do own the Audio Note DAC 5. However, I bought it used for much less than list, Audio Note has been established for a long time with a track record. I think if I ever moved DACs at any point in the future, I would build a DIY Ladder DAC with tubed PS and line board. Such a DAC using for example, using the Soekris boards could be done for under £4K and using good quality parts. Would it be as good as the Kassandre? Possibly not, but I bet it would get very close, and I would tune it to my system along the way, which is important to me.
Anyway, my opinion. I admit others will not agree, and I respect that view. And I also respect innovative design in audio which Areas Cerat does seem to accomplish. But at this level of investment, as they say in the Dragon's Den - I am out.
Hello Astrostar, you raise some valid points which are applicable to a wider range of brands and products of course.
First, on the review of the Kassandra. You are right that in the last review the reviewer ended up buying the unit, you will concur that we can't tell him not to buy it neither
, but there are two other reviews of the Kassandra Reference. One by Mono&Stereo as well and one from Haute Fidélité in France. You can find them (as well as a translation) on this page of the manufacturer's website: http://aries-cerat.eu/reviewsMore reviews are underway but it takes time... You might want to know, to the testimony of the brand, a review by Enjoy the Music just came out regarding the Diana Forte amplifier: http://www.enjoythemusic.com/superi...Diana_Forte_Stereo_Power_Amplifier_Review.htm
Aries Cerat is not a one-man company. There are several people working there but it is effectively Stavros who is not only the owner but also the main engineer. Now, there is a whole host of companies (including some big names) out there that are in a very similar (or even worse) situations. I will not name those companies but allow me to claim that the implied lack of establishment of Aries Cerat is truly unjustified IMHO, even in comparison to many of its peers.
Not only has Stavros responsibility for his employees (AC products are fully developed and built or assembled in-house whereas others often subcontract the production and sometimes even the engineering), he also makes several products, from DACs to speakers. The latter is another element which mitigates consumer risk if you ask me.
Last but not least, do take into account the personal service you are getting with a company like Aries Cerat and the accessibility to its owner for any question or inquiry.
I will only say that the Kassandra is no more "obsolete" than your Audio Note DAC 5, so I don't see how the "Technology is super fast paced..." comment really applies. Implicit in your purchase of the DAC 5 is the understanding that the older DAC architecture is by no means obsolete or outdated. How updatable is your DAC 5? Do you think your DAC 5 is inferior to a TotalDAC? I personally do not think that just because it is not "upgradeable" . Probably the DAC 5 with its old AD1865 chip sounds better than TotalDACs "modern" solution. Why? Probably the power supply, IV conversion and analog output stage are superior in the DAC 5...just like they are certain to be in the Kassandra.
I can tell you that the Soekris DAC is not all that from what I have heard so far. In fact, I think unless extreme care is taken an IC ladder dac will probably perform better even if it is a lower number of bits. it is the rage to go "discrete", which was done first ASAIK by Accuphase in the late 80s. I would wager that DIY route would be a step down from what you have now and likely well below the Kassandra as well.
Unless you are a DSD true believer, if you stick with PCM then I don't see the technology in the Kassandra as outdated...older, for sure, but obsolete...well the proof of that is strictly in the listening.
As we have seen in another thread regarding number of bits, beyond 16 true bits of resolution it probably has no significant impact on the final sound quality...at least with native 16/44 PCM recordings. Probably not with 24/96 or 24/192 recordings either.
It looks bizarre that you are using the support of the people who claim that beyond 16 true bits of resolution has probably no significant impact on the final sound quality - usually these people will also tell you all decent CD players sound the same, or that your preferred just adds audible distortion or noise!
Well I completely disagree, as there are excellent recordings in PCM, and in non-PCM (which comprises of DSD, DXD, MQA, and upsampled PCM), that one should have all. Restriction to me is senseless though is one better than the other makes for good forum debate
There is nothing bizzare about pointing out that, subjectively, there are some extremely good sounding DACs that likely don't get anywhere near 20 bits of true resolution (i.e. noise floor is interferring with dynamic range to go lower) and some DACs that are not so widely regarded that have measurements that are extremely good. I am sure an Audio Note DAC 5 signature does not have an amazing noise floor or S/N ratio and that it is probably not even getting to the full 18 bits that the AD1865 can deliver but by most accounts, including a very good critic Martin Colloms, it is a very good sounding DAC.
My point is that the number of bits a DAC resolves (true resolution not just what the DAC chip can decode) does not accurately give a determination of its sound quality and therefore is largely meaningless.
So, you would stick with like for like? PCM recording sounds best in PCM and DSD recording best with DSD? Or do you find PCM upsampled to DSD sounds better than PCM (high rez or otherwise)?
I am not sure. With some recordings it can sound good upsampled, some not. I haven't got enough data points on good PCM -> DSD converters. But I would want the flexibility.
I was not pointing to the facts (where we can easily agree, as sound quality correlation with technical specs is still a missing part of digital) , but your choice of cheer leaders ...
Did you ever listen to the Audio Note DAC5 signature? IMHO MC review adds nothing to our knowledge about the sound quality of this DAC, he does not even address specific recordings. It is written in a style I deeply dislike - I am a known reviewer, you must believe me when I say it sounds really great and probably you will never have the opportunity to listen to it. End of review.
Anyway, concerning HiRez MC writes that "Two extra bits (18bits) and a doubled sample rate were easy to hear, which testifies to the very high quality of the DAC interface.", perhaps intrinsically admitting that it sounds better than 16 bit redbook.
I was not pointing to the facts (where we can easily agree, as sound quality correlation with technical specs is still a missing part of digital) , but your choice of cheer leaders ...
Did you ever listen to the Audio Note DAC5 signature? IMHO MC review adds nothing to our knowledge about the sound quality of this DAC, he does not even address specific recordings. It is written in a style I deeply dislike - I am a known reviewer, you must believe me when I say it sounds really great and probably you will never have the opportunity to listen to it. End of review.
Anyway, concerning HiRez MC writes that "Two extra bits (18bits) and a doubled sample rate were easy to hear, which testifies to the very high quality of the DAC interface.", perhaps intrinsically admitting that it sounds better than 16 bit redbook.
Well not sure what your issue is with MC but I have found him to be one of the most accurate reviewers out there and consistently so. If he says it's phenomenal then I know, at the very least, that it is not hyperbole, regardless of how he chose to write this particular review. It shows, in fact that he was flabbergasted by it because he is usually giving very detailed descriptions of what he hears.
Yes, many of his reviews are decent, balanced and detailed reviews. But IMHO not this one, it is what was on the table. Anyway my opinion is just my opinion, as you have kindly posted a link to the review people can now read it if they are interested. I do not read reviews to read endorsements, mainly for entertainment and information. I have been a subscriber to HifiCritic for many years.
Anyway, did you listen to the Audio Note DAC5 signature?
Similar threads
