Various DAC Audition Impressions

[nonesup]

You are allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the great. How often do we read nonsense “comparisons” about competing components across different systems and different rooms?

Be happy this was a survey of eight (8) different DACs in the same system and in the same room, as apples-to-apples as reasonably possible.

I have reread my post twice and unless Google translate has done a bad job, frankly I don't understand your answer.

 

[Lee]

OK first I want to say I have not heard the APEX upgrade but have listened to dCS gear quite a bit. I personally believe dCS makes some of the best gear period. But if I'm demoing dCS and I use Roon as my music management SW, why would I not use it to evaluate the product? I say demo it in the way you plan to use it. This doesn't take away from Mosaic or dCS APEX.

I agree that if you are going to use Roon then evaluate it with Roon. I love Roon and think it is a groundbreaking product. My point is that at the reference level of these fine DACs, it does make sense to evaluate the APEX units on Mosaic which offers even better sound quality.

 

[microstrip]

I agree that if you are going to use Roon then evaluate it with Roon. I love Roon and think it is a groundbreaking product. My point is that at the reference level of these fine DACs, it does make sense to evaluate the APEX units on Mosaic which offers even better sound quality.

Although I have often said that such comparisons are extremely limited, as they mainly show system compatibility, not the DAC sound quality, I think that when reporting we should at less use the best sound quality option of the gear being compared.

If the Vivaldi stack included the transport, anyone would immediately see that the sound quality of a good SACD is very superior to a standard Roon Ethernet, as used in these comparisons. In fact, as long as using this mode, I never switched to virtual music, and was very skeptical of it - I went through NAS and custom systems, but retrospectively it was a waste of time. Only after I acquired the Taiko Extreme sever with the new USB card and optimized the Ethernet connection Roon become comparable to the physical media. IMHO the "mentholated" sound Ron reports is a signal of a poor digital link or digital noise induced problem somewhere.

IMHO comparing digital gear assuming that as long as all of them were "in the same system and in the same room" they were operating at comparable conditions needs a proper warning to readers. Just MHO, YMMV.

 

[Lee]

Although I have often said that such comparisons are extremely limited, as they mainly show system compatibility, not the DAC sound quality, I think that when reporting we should at less use the best sound quality option of the gear being compared.

If the Vivaldi stack included the transport, anyone would immediately see that the sound quality of a good SACD is very superior to a standard Roon Ethernet, as used in these comparisons. In fact, as long as using this mode, I never switched to virtual music, and was very skeptical of it - I went through NAS and custom systems, but retrospectively it was a waste of time. Only after I acquired the Taiko Extreme sever with the new USB card and optimized the Ethernet connection Roon become comparable to the physical media. IMHO the "mentholated" sound Ron reports is a signal of a poor digital link or digital noise induced problem somewhere.

IMHO comparing digital gear assuming that as long as all of them were "in the same system and in the same room" they were operating at comparable conditions needs a proper warning to readers. Just MHO, YMMV.

I think that cool sound indeed may be a digital system setup issue.

 

[microstrip]

(...) How often do we read nonsense “comparisons” about competing components across different systems and different rooms? (...)

Fortunately much less times that I read well grounded and developed comparative opinions based on listening at different systems and different rooms.

In this hobby, for me, fast and immediate in an enemy of quality. And as I often say, most positives of gear will stay irrespective of system and room. Negatives can be casual due to system and room. A complicated hobby, and I am not including bias effects!

 

[Calvinj]

WADAX VERSUS DCS VIVALDI APEX

In every match except the SW1X thus far I preferred the contender to the Apex. Not on every track, but, overall, I preferred the contender over the Apex.

To my ears the Apex has a consistent sonic signature of a touch of coolness, thinness, dryness -- the sonic sensation of menthol. It is more apparent on some tracks and less apparent on other tracks. On some tracks it really is not apparent at all.

Idiosyncratically I am very, very sensitive to this kind of sound. It is a dealbreaker for me personally. This genre of sonic signature, broadly-speaking, is the reason I have never cottoned to digital playback in general.

The Wadax equaled the stunning, ultimate resolution of the Apex, but without the Apex's sonic signature of slight coolness and thinness. The Wadax sounded a little bit warmer, a little bit richer and a little bit more resonant in comparison to the Apex. I think the Wadax exhibited slightly greater decay on acoustic instruments than did the Apex.

Put another way I found the Wadax to be a Pareto Optimal improvement over the Apex: at least one sonic attribute was improved, with no other sonic attribute being degraded. The Wadax sounded less digital and more natural to me than the Apex while, to my ears, maintaining the same resolving power of air and ambience and details and low frequency punch and frequency extension as the Apex. The Wadax’s elimination of the Apex's coolness and dryness did not come at the cost of, or any diminution to, any desireable sonic attribute.


ARIES CERAT KASSANDRA VERSUS DCS VIVALDI APEX

The Kassandra, the entry-level DAC from Aries Cerat, at about half the price of the Lampizator Horizon, brought me back to what I liked about the Lampizator Horizon: the sonic liquidity and the greater body and the soundstage dimensionality of tubes. I think the Horizon took these attributes even a step further than did the Kassandra, but, since we did not hear the Horizon side-by-side with the Kassandra, I cannot be sure.

If the Kassandra gave up anything to the dCS in ultimate resolution it was a minor sacrifice, and — to me — well worth the trade for the slightly greater liquidity and warmth and dimensionality of tubes. I think the dCS reproduced the detail and the texture and the punch of the lowest frequencies better than did the Kassandra.


MSB SELECT II VERSUS DCS VIVALDI APEX

An important development occurred between the departure of the Aries Cerat Kassandra and my audition of the MSB Select II: pk_LA fiddled with more of the filters on the dCS Vivaldi Apex, and figured out how to smooth out the sound a little bit so the Apex wasn’t truncating decay as much and was not highlighting detail and the leading edge of transients as much. This reduced the dryness and improved the listenability of the Apex for me, and narrowed — once again — the differences between the Apex and the other DACs. My personal sonic issues with the Apex were not eliminated, but they were further reduced in intensity. By the end of the survey the Apex sounded materially different than it did in the beginning.

The MSB Select II did not match the slight liquidity and slight dimensionality advantages of the tube DACs, but it definitely is my favorite of all of the solid-state DACs. The MSB just has a more relaxed and calm sonic quality to it. I also heard this relaxed sound from KeithR’s MSB Reference compared to his MSB Premier. (I suspect the Reference is the sweet/value spot in the MSB line.) This calm or relaxed quality is a little hard to describe, but it’s definitely there, and it allows me able to sit and listen to music without fatigue.

The MSB has a fuller, more “dense,” and more analog-type sound than any of the other solid-state DACs, I believe. Of course I can’t be sure because we no longer had the Wadax in house for a direct comparison.

Before pk_LA smoothed out the Apex, I was hoping the MSB would pick up two points of desirable sonic warmth and musicality, while sacrificing less than two points of resolution. After pk_LA smoothed out the Apex I think the MSB was just as resolving as the Apex. From my point of view this meant that the MSB was smoother and warmer and more musical, than the Apex, but without sacrificing any resolution to the Apex.


CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

From the the tube end of liquidity and warmth and dimensionality on the left to the solid-state end of resolution, detail and leading edge precision on the right I would place the top contenders as follows:

Lampizator Horizon -- Aries Cerat Kassandra -- Infigo Method 4 -- Nagra DAC HD -- MSB Select II -- Wadax -- dCS Vivaldi

The SW1X DAC III Special is on a different indifference curve because I feel it gave up too many points in resolution for the points in smoothness and warmth and analog like sound it delivered.

Across these comparisons I believe that the Horizon, the Kassandra, the Select II, the Wadax are on the same indifference curve.

I put the Apex on a slightly lower indifference curve only because, except possibly for system-matching reasons, I don’t see why anybody would prefer the dCS over the Wadax.

The two extremities of this curve are tube liquidity and warmth and musicality at the one end, and maximum resolution, detail, dynamics, crisp transient response and sharp leading edges at the other end of the curve. What a surprise! Tubes versus transistors yet again!

I think the differences between and among the most of these DACs is relatively minor. If I had to make up a number I'd say something like 10% to 25%. This feels like the right (if intellectually indefensible) quantification of order of magnitude.

I believe there is no sense in which one DAC is 50% or 100% more highly resolving than any of the others. I feel there's no sense in which one DAC is 50% or 100% more musical or smoother or more analog like then another. I think any claim to the contrary is partisanship of ownership, and hyperbole.

If I were choosing for myself, I would get the Lampizator Horizon if I wanted a tube DAC, and I would get the MSB Select II if I wanted a solid-state DAC.

If somebody wants to maximize resolving power and detail and dynamics without any signature of dryness or coolness or menthol quality, and without any emphasized leading edge transient response, then I recommend the Wadax.

If somebody wants to maximize liquidity and dimensionality and naturalness and “musicality,” then I recommend the Horizon. If you prefer the technical design or the aesthetics of the Kassandra, then get the Kassandra. I think the sounds of these DACsare in the same direction, but the Horizon goes a little bit further in that direction.

If somebody wants to stay with solid-state and seeks a denser, slightly warmer, slightly more analog-like experience, I recommend the MSB Select II on the expensive end (with no sacrifice in resolution) and the Infigo (and the MSB Reference) in the $30,000 to $50,000 range.

Thanks, again, to pk_LA for allowing me to join him on this incredible survey of state-of-the-art DACS!

Full disclosure. I work for infigo but I also own the Dac. It’s good to know my dac can keep up with the best of audio. I have really enjoyed my listening experience. Thanks for such a detailed review of all the DACS you tried.

 

[Sampajanna]

But this discussion of dCS owners preferring cool is not true, at least in my case. Historically I have preferred tubes and leaned on the warm side of neutral. In fact I specifically mentioned the professional recordings I do because I remember the live events and the recordings (especially the better ones where I nailed the mic placement) serve as a guide to playback quality.

My honest view is that the APEX DACs are not lean at all nor less rich and harmonic. Indeed these are standout qualities of the DAC and I know this because guitar and string ensembles exhibit these qualities in such an involving way when played back through the Rossini APEX.

Which of the other discussed dacs have you compared your Rossini to in your system?

 

[bryans]

I agree that if you are going to use Roon then evaluate it with Roon. I love Roon and think it is a groundbreaking product. My point is that at the reference level of these fine DACs, it does make sense to evaluate the APEX units on Mosaic which offers even better sound quality.

I guess we can agree to disagree on this one. If I was evaluating APEX units and I planned to use Roon with the APEX, I would use Roon when doing my evaluating. Now if I was planning on using Mosaic then that is what I would use during the evaluation. I just believe evaluating a product the way I plan on using it.

Clearly we all do things differently and that is OK.

 

[microstrip]

I guess we can agree to disagree on this one. If I was evaluating APEX units and I planned to use Roon with the APEX, I would use Roon when doing my evaluating. Now if I was planning on using Mosaic then that is what I would use during the evaluation. I just believe evaluating a product the way I plan on using it.

Clearly we all do things differently and that is OK.

If you were evaluating the APEX for yourself, no objection. You would be free to evaluate it in any way, even without filter optimization. But if we are evaluating it to report to other people on its sound quality we are expected to report on the best conditions we can achieve or at less warn readers about it. Just MHO, YMMV.

 

[bryans]

If you were evaluating the APEX for yourself, no objection. You would be free to evaluate it in any way, even without filter optimization. But if we are evaluating it to report to other people on its sound quality we are expected to report on the best conditions we can achieve or at less warn readers about it. Just MHO, YMMV.

Hmm maybe I read the original post wrong. I thought @pk_LA laid out the steps he went through in picking the best DAC for him.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Hmm maybe I read the original post wrong. I thought @pk_LA laid out the steps he went through in picking the best DAC for him.

think of PK's and Ron's process as simply a launching pad for everyone with a dac preference to talk about how they might have done it, or already have done it. anything less would have been spooky....like your kids cleaning their room without you asking.

not real world. what are they hiding?

 

[PeterA]

If you were evaluating the APEX for yourself, no objection. You would be free to evaluate it in any way, even without filter optimization. But if we are evaluating it to report to other people on its sound quality we are expected to report on the best conditions we can achieve or at less warn readers about it. Just MHO, YMMV.

Francisco, if it’s only your opinion and mileage may vary, where does the reviewing protocol expectation come from besides you?

 

[Peter Hönnemann]

Great work. Being a biased happy Vivaldi APEX owner I only regret that you have not listened to the dCS using the Taiko Audio Extreme server or using a quality router. It would remove some of your objections, particularly in the vocals and decays. Can I ask what were the clock cables?

I agree with you, it would be a better comparison with the Taiko Extreme.
I might be a stupid question but… do you still need DCS Master Clock und the DCS Upsampler when you use the Taiko Extreme ?

 

[Elliot G.]

I agree with you, it would be a better comparison with the Taiko Extreme.
I might be a stupid question but… do you still need DCS Master Clock und the DCS Upsampler when you use the Taiko Extreme ?

Mike Lavigne did a comparison using the Taiko with two of the DACS mentioned here and wrote about it BTw.
There are an almost infinite number of combinations that can be played and for someone to find fault with the results is weird to me. PK ( who I do not know) did IMO a very good job at assembling a very serious list of the best audio has to offer. His comparisons may not have been done in a way that everyone here is satisfied with but alas its his system and he alone has to write the check.
I don't think PK is attempting to become a reviewer and so he did what he wanted to make a decision. Others may have done something differently and came to different conclusions but in this case he did it and he made a choice.
I have compared directly a few of these DACS, Mike did his and others will do theirs. It is not an easy thing to assemble all this hardware in one place at one time. I believe differently than PK but why should that matter to him. It shouldn't anymore than his choice matter to me in my system.
It is very obvious to me on WBF the only thing that people hold in common is they have different opinions and there is not a whole lot of respect for the the differing points of view on many topics.
Congratulations to PK for his efforts and his making a choice. IMO the rest should do their own homework and make their choice based on their system, their budget and their taste.

 

[Verdier]

As many of you know, I set out to audition a number of the leading DACs in my system with the goal of identifying the ideal fit for my ears. Below is a bit of a stream of consciousness summary of how it all sounded and went for me.

But, first please let me outline a few parameters and disclosures...

1. These notes are my thoughts and impressions based on my impressions. They are not in any way meant as a declaration or even a proper review.
2. Not all of the DACs were inserted in the system identically! Some of them were heard with a streamer or a clock or bespoke cables. I will try to identify the setups below. For those looking to 'sweep the knee' on this post - one DAC had a FTA USB while another had a $5 USB!
3. Many DACs were connected to the pre-amp using Transparent Opus Gen 6 balanced interconnects that were not tuned for the DAC. The tuning of the interconnects makes a noticeable difference - more so depending on the variance from what it is tuned to vs. the actual component. I have noted where this was the case.
4. I tried to remain consistent with music tracks for all DACs with music ranging from classical to rock to EDM to folk
5. There was an attempt to equalize the sound pressure across all
6. Each DAC was compared against a dCS Vivaldi Apex stack (Clock, Upsampler, DAC)
7. DACs were setup with the Boulder 3010 using trim functions for equalizing so that we could instantly switch back and forth and A|B|A listen
8. Some DACs I had for days and others for only a few hours!
9. I am not bought into, "...how the artists intended it..." I do not care too much about measurements. I have firsthand seen debates between artists and engineers occur on mixes to the effect of, "...it sounds best under x! But, we should mix it this way as most people will listen with y..." Let me say this another way. I care about music that moves me emotionally. I have regularly smiled when I read statements about "...how the artists intended..." I suggest that these people speak to some artists on how the process works.

The system that was used is outlined below.

1. Source: Roon Nucleus connected via either network or by USB (specified per DAC)
2. DAC: Variable
3. Pre-Amp: Boulder 3010
4. Amp: Boulder 3060
5. Speakers: Wilson Alexx V
6. Cables: All cabling is Transparent Opus Gen 6 (power cords are all Gen 5)

Basis system: dCS Vivaldi

• Connections:
  • Ethernet connection to network
  • Transparent Magnum Opus Gen 6 balanced interconnect *tuned
• Audition setup: Dealer loaned it to me
• Impressions
  • Detail and resolution as good as I have ever heard
  • Can be a bit harsh upper range vocals
  • Wanted for more body - it can be somewhat thin
  • Incredible ability to resolve complex transients
  • Wanted for longer more natural decay - felt like it was 'just the facts' and absolutely no more
  • Lacked some warmth
  • Upper mid-range balanced
  • GREAT on classical music, processed music and EDM
• Other: The dCS is highly dependent on the Upsampler and DAC variables that are user set. There is a filter on the Upsampler, an Upsampler output formal (DSD etc), a DAC filter and a DAC map. And, they all affect the sound.

Lampizator Horizon

• Connections:
  • FTA USB from Roon Nuc
  • Transparent Opus Gen 6 balanced interconnect *not tuned
• Audition setup: Sent for audition
• Impressions
  • Wow! The holographic soundstage is amazing!
  • Density!
  • Decay
  • Air and space - instruments are there!
  • Not a quick and resolving as the dCS but so so musical
• Other: The Horizon changed sound signature in the days I had with it more-so than solid-state gear I am used to. I was urged by Steve W to be patient but I was not. I have since wondered as the person I sent mine to indicated that once broken in it was incredible. I do not doubt it. That first night I plugged it in it was like nothing I have heard before.

Nagra HD X

• Connections:
  • Source was replaced by an Ideon Absolute Stream and Clock
  • USB to DAC (dealer brought top end Audio Quest)
  • Audio Quest Dragon balanced interconnect to pre-amp
• Audition setup: Dealer onsite audition for 2 hours
• Impressions
  • Smoother than dCS
  • Nice linearity and body with classical and rock
  • Struggled v dCS on some quick transients
  • Less musical than dCS on highly processed music and EDM
  • Mid-range focused v dCS
• Other: I could have happily gone with this DAC

Infigo Method 4

• Connections:
  • Bespoke streamer brought by Infigo Audio
  • USB to DAC
  • Transparent Opus Gen 6 balanced interconnect to pre-amp *not tuned
• Audition setup: Infigo Principle brought to my home for a couple hours
• Impressions
  • Warm - almost tube warm
  • Soundstage was similar to dCS
  • Struggled v dCS on some quick transients
  • On some dance tracks such as Senorita (Shawn Mendes and Camilla Cabello) it was get up and dance engaging.
  • Seemed to really shine with upper midrange centric tracks
• Other: The Principal of Infigo is one of the nicer and most intellectually curious people I have met in audio

Wadax Reference

• Connections:
  • Wadax Reference Server
  • Specific optical cable between server and DAC
  • Audio Quest Niagra 7000 power conditioner
  • Ethernet to server via Audio Quest Diamond
  • Audio Quest Dragon balanced interconnect to pre-amp
• Audition setup: Dealer visit for 2 hours
• Impressions
  • Linear
  • Smooth
  • Noise floor higher than dCS
  • Very musical
  • Server adjustments - Gain etc made massive changes in sound and were necessary
  • Soundstage very similar to dCS
  • No matter what music thrown at it it sounded great
  • Very balanced
  • Handled transients as well as dCS
• Other:
  • I do not understand the Wadax haters. It is a damn impressive DAC. One might argue value but, at least in my system to my ears, it was a wow.
  • I suspect that the server is required for the sound on this one.

Aries Cerat Kassandra Ref

• Connections:
  • $5 computer USB from Nuc
  • Transparent Opus Gen 6 balanced interconnect to pre-amp *not tuned
• Audition setup: Very kind visit from Robert Do
• Impressions
  • Imagine solid state with a hint of tubes
  • Linear and quick
  • Noise floor higher than dCS
  • A tick muddled on quick transients
  • Slightly less musical on processed and EDM than dCS
• Other:
  • Near entry level DAC for Aries Cerat that held up to the dCS flagship. Wish I had more time with it!
  • Changed the power cord from Transparent Opus to Inakustik reference silver and it resolved as well as the dCS

SW1X DAC 1

• Connections:
  • Coax from my upstairs bedroom subwoofer went from Upsampler as passthrough to DAC
• Audition setup: Sent from distributor for audition
• Impressions
  • Wonderful tube sound
  • Did not seem to have the soundstage like the Lampi
  • Struggled on transient and complex sections compared to the dCS
  • Very smooth
  • Lower mid balanced
• Other:
  • This was a somewhat unfair comparison. The cable was an Amazon Basics subwoofer coax passing through other components.
  • I do not feel entirely comfortable with this set of notes given the cobbled together setup

MSB Select II

• Connections:
  • Roon Nuc -> Shunyata Omega USB t-> ProISL
  • Transparent Opus Gen 6 balanced interconnect to pre-amp *not tuned
• Audition setup: Purchased used for demo
• Impressions
  • Body and density!
  • Balanced across the spectrum
  • Linearity to match anything
  • Has every bit the detail of the dCS
  • No harshness anywhere
  • Has a width and depth of soundstage that is great
  • Want for a tick more dynamic slam
  • One of only two DACs that matched or bettered the dCS on all tracks played
• Other:
  • I am keeping the MSB!

Summary: I only auditioned one DAC that I just did not like. Out of respect I have omitted it. I could have lived with any of the above DACs. The MSB and the Wadax were uniquely great at everything I played. The dCS is awesome with processed music and classical. The Lampizator continues to be curious to me as it was literally magical that first day! I am admittedly impatient and a bit compulsive - I maybe cut the cord too quick. I was close to buying the Wadax but the MSB was so very good that I just could not rationalize the price delta. In other words, price was somewhat always in the mix. But, I was ready to buy any of these and if the Wadax had been noticeably stronger I would have bought it. I wish I could have A|B'd it to the MSB and even the Lampi. But, when I heard the MSB I felt it sounded as good from memory as anything and that was it.

A very interesting review, thank you!!!

I am of course aware that it is not possible to compare all DACs on the market (it would not be possible for me anyway). Nevertheless, I personally miss the quite new TRINITY Silver Reference DAC and the CH Precision DAC with the separate power supply in this comparison, also the JMF.

Furthermore, I can well imagine that an Aries Cerat Kassandra Signature would have been the better tube DAC.

Regardless, the report is easy to follow and makes me very curious about the top class DACs.

 

[Gregm]

I agree that if you are going to use Roon then evaluate it with Roon. I love Roon and think it is a groundbreaking product. My point is that at the reference level of these fine DACs, it does make sense to evaluate the APEX units on Mosaic which offers even better sound quality.

Picking up on the idea of a better sounding player: recently I was auditioning DACs (and blown away by the Wadax & the Ideon Epsilon- another story), the people there used an Ideon streamer, via Roon. Just for the fun of it, I asked them to switch to Ideon's own software and the result was -- WOW!
Now, room is much more user friendly, universal, goes everywhere and does everything - may even serve coffee one of these days! But the difference in clarity, detail, dynamics -- especially clarity -- is not subtle.
This is not to criticise Ronn, just to mention that other players are out there which may do the trick for us.

 

[Lee]

Picking up on the idea of a better sounding player: recently I was auditioning DACs (and blown away by the Wadax & the Ideon Epsilon- another story), the people there used an Ideon streamer, via Roon. Just for the fun of it, I asked them to switch to Ideon's own software and the result was -- WOW!
Now, room is much more user friendly, universal, goes everywhere and does everything - may even serve coffee one of these days! But the difference in clarity, detail, dynamics -- especially clarity -- is not subtle.
This is not to criticise Ronn, just to mention that other players are out there which may do the trick for us.

Good point. Maybe there is some optimization that happens when the DAC manufacturer designs the playback software.

Mosaic sounds fantastic. It probably needs one more iteration for ultimate usability but the latest version works very well for me. It's really easy to have an iPad in the listening chair and be able to try various filters on the fly.

 

[Lee]

Next we should ask Vince Galbo to send Patrick a Digital Director for the Select II and redo the comparison all over again.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

It’s not just the dac maker software alone I doubt anyone makes a complete software from scratch
it’s the maker putting sound first and I’ll bet most all dacs sound better then just Roon alone used.
you can use Roon as the gui to another player but best is no Roon lol.

beg to differ.

Roon is best, and 'the' best, when it's absolutely baked into the server operating system hook, line and sinker. all-in. period.

Roon as one alternative....halfway Roon....or....rumor of Roon, suffers from a case of imperfect Roon. so the performance is all over......too.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

So u saying wadax Roon is proprietary into his server ?
interesting please explain ?

from the start Wadax committed fully to Roon. i'm not saying Roon is proprietary to Wadax, and......it's possible they have some Roon 'secret sauce'.....but if they do i have no knowledge of it.

they are not half way committed to it, they are all in.

however; Wadax has Roon hard wired, and does the updates automatically and has special Roon plugins (other server manufacturers might have these too). here is what the Wadax Reference Server web page says.....