Various DAC Audition Impressions

Excellent post! And what a comparison1 Wow!

I too favor the Horizon, but have not heard many of these dacs. I heard the MSB Reference and it was great, I haven’t yet heard Wadax. I have heard the Kassandra and also loved it. My only divergence from your findings, and this is just my experience, is the Apex. I have heard it in 3 systems now—2 well set up. In fact, I found it fatiguing in 2 of those rooms. It was less clinical than non-Apex stack, but still soullless iIMO. It failed to pull me in, to make me surrender and forget myself… It was not my cup of tea at all. Also, I would add the Playback Designs MPD8 to this list. It is an excellent dac.
The Apex depends so so much on the upsampling scheme, filter and map settings I learned. If any one are out of whack it becomes clinical. This gets somewhat further compounded by the UX on the dCS. You are only able to set filter settings for a format when that format is present.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sampajanna
Summary: I only auditioned one DAC that I just did not like. Out of respect I have omitted it.
What was the dunce DAC? And why? By omitting it you cast a shadow over all the ones not on your list. Also, including it will inform readers of your preferences as much as the ones you did list.
 
What was the dunce DAC? And why? By omitting it you cast a shadow over all the ones not on your list. Also, including it will inform readers of your preferences as much as the ones you did list.
Hmm not sure I'm with your take on this one. I don't see how not listing a DAC he didn't like cast a shadow on anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pokey77
INTRODUCTION

Over the last several months I have had the honor and the pleasure of accompanying pk_LA on what likely is the most extensive audition survey of top-of-the-line DACs ever conducted. The survey was conducted using pk_LA's new system consisting of the Wilson Audio Alexx V, the Boulder 3010 line stage pre-amplifier and the Boulder 3060 stereo amplifier, and Transparent Audio Opus Generation 6 cables.


COMPARISONS

LAMPIZATOR HORIZON VERSUS DCS VIVALDI APEX — FIRST SESSION

pk_LA began by playing a vocal track I had never heard before. He did not alert me as to which DAC we were listening. We listened to the track all of the way through. Then he played it again, on the other DAC. Within 60 seconds I said I believed that we now were listening to the Horizon. He told me I was correct.

pk_LA made many track selections over the course of the evening. I selected:

"Landslide" by Fleetwood Mac on Fleetwood Mac

"Witness" by Sarah MacLachlan on Surfacing

"Hallelujah" by Jeff Buckley on Grace

"Hotel California" by The Eagles (live version)

"Walk on the Wild Side" by Suzanne Vega on An Evening of New York Songs and Stories

"I've Got the Music In Me" by Thelma Houston on I've Got the Music In Me

My initial impressions of the Horizon versus the Apex:

1) I heard a harmonic richness and instrumental decay on the Horizon which was truncated on the Apex.

2) I heard on the Apex what I sensitively perceive as a slight digital dryness and sterile menthol sonic quality, and leading edge sharpness, which has always been my personal tell-tale sign of digital that I do not personally care for.

3) I feel the perceived frequency response of the Apex is centered in the upper midrange to treble, whereas I feel the perceived frequency response of the Horizon is centered in the mid-range (like how I perceive good analog playback).

4) I heard greater depth and dimensionality from the Horizon. The Apex sounded a bit "flatter" in comparison.

5) On each track that I selected and with which I am very familiar the Horizon presented the music in a way that reminded me of vinyl. The music sounded "right"; it sounded the way I am accustomed to these very familiar tracks sounding.

The first time I ever really relaxed listening to digital was on audioquattr's system in the Netherlands with the Taiko Audio SGM Extreme feeding a Lampizator Pacific. I enjoyed listening to the Horizon at Steve's during the Horizon debut. I enjoyed listening to the Horizon at pk_LA's last night. I conclude that if I have to listen to digital the Lampizator DACs simply work for me.

The dCS components are, to my personal aesthetic, beautiful and contemporary, and they look like they are machined out of blocks of aluminum. The Horizon is the best-looking Lampizator thus far, but, with its neon tube numerical display, it still looks reminiscent of Russian laboratory equipment from the 1950s.


LAMPIZATOR HORIZON VERSUS DCS VIVALDI APEX — SECOND SESSION

I returned to pk_LA's house for a re-match of Lampizator Horizon versus dCS Apex. On a track I did not know I failed to identify correctly to which DAC we were listening two out of three times.

It took a track I have heard hundreds of times ("Song of Bernadette" by Jennifer Warnes on Famous Blue Raincoat) to be able to tell the DACs apart.

pk_LA reported to me during the week prior to this second session the varying sound quality from the Horizon as the Horizon broke in since my last visit. Did the Lampizator change or did the dCS change?

Brian Berdan believes that, because the Vivaldi stack pk_LA is auditioning was just upgraded with the Apex circuit board, the Apex circuit board needed breaking in. This is a plausible theory. All I know is that the canyon-like gap in sonic attractiveness I heard between the Horizon and the Apex the prior week narrowed very considerably. If I had to quantify it I would say the gap has narrowed by at least 75%.

I still hear directionally the impressions I reported originally, but the amplitude is much lower. I still hear the Horizon as being more resonant and harmonically rich, but by a much smaller extent. I still hear the Apex as having more treble energy, and the Horizon as being slightly more midrange-focused (which I find more natural and more "correct"). I still hear the Apex as being slightly drier-sounding than the Horizon, and with leading edge transients I find unnaturally sharp.

The only thing I prefer about the the Apex over the Horizon is the resolving power of the Apex. All information and detail is “dug” out of those zeros and ones by the Apex.

I still easily prefer overall the Horizon over the Apex, but the gaps in what I prefer about the Horizon have narrowed very considerably. And the fact that only a week later I had to dig deep and use a track I am extremely familiar just to tell the DACs apart is puzzling — and telling.

PS: Alcohol consumption was identical during both listening sessions.


INFIGO METHOD 4 VERSUS DCS VIVALDI APEX

The Infigo Audio Method 4 DAC (MSRP $35,000) is designed by Hans Looman, a Dutchie from Delft, The Netherlands, who now lives in Canada. Hans is the CEO and Founder of Infigo Audio. Hans was very straightforward, very low-key and very knowledgeable about digital audio circuit design.

On a couple of the tracks with which I was unfamiliar I could not tell which DAC was which. But on familiar tracks I could determine which was the Method 4 and which was the Apex.

Overall I found the Method 4 to be smoother and slightly warmer and more analog-sounding than the Apex. I found the Method 4 to offer generally slightly greater decay and more harmonic resonance than the Apex.

On Jeff Buckley's "Hallelujah" on Grace the attention-grabbing guitar pluck in the beginning of the song sounded slightly more edgy on the Apex. On the Method 4 the guitar pluck sounded like I am accustomed to it sounding. It sounded more organic and golden, rather than slightly less natural and silvery.

The last track we used to compare the DACs showed us something interesting. This particular track had a dance vibe. When we played it on the Infigo we felt we had a bit of a drive literally to get up and dance. Playing this track on the dCS I had no such feeling to get into, or to connect with, the music. The dCS made this lively track sound a bit clinical and unengaging.

The dCS Vivaldi Apex is the champion of resolution, detail, dynamics, and low-frequency punch. To my ears it is the sound of the Boulder electronics in the functionality of a DAC.

The Lampizator Horizon thus far remains my favorite DAC in this on-going audition and comparison process. Interestingly I preferred the Method 4 over the Nagra HD even though the Nagra HD has a tube amplification stage. To my ears the Method 4 sounded a touch more natural and tube-like (this, for me, is a compliment) than did the Nagra.


SW1X DAC III SPECIAL VERSUS DCS VIVALDI APEX

In contrast to the Infigo which I felt was only slightly less resolving than the Apex, the
SW1X DAC III Special was conspicuously less resolving than the Apex. The SW1X was richer-sounding and more natural-sounding and less "digital"-sounding than the Apex, but I felt the SW1X sacrificed too much in resolution to achieve its richer, warmer, smooth sound.

The Infigo Method 4 sounded slightly richer and more natural and less digital than the Apex as well (as reported above) (indeed, a little bit tube-like in tone and density but without the soundstage dimensionality of tubes) but without sacrificing as much in resolution as the SW1X appears to sacrifice.

With the SW1X it seemed like some subtle details and a sense of air around singers and ambient cues were wholly missing in comparison to the highly-resolving dCS.
 
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 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!
 
Last edited:
Great reading, Ron! Thanks for that...what a great summary of the very same detailed trials from pk_LA! Incisive as always.
 
Ron you need to be reviewer !
you stay kind and focused yet do in a very detailed manner make clear conclusions
I’m happy to read how well the horizon did and in price comparisons it’s a jewel for Sure
I liked the areies cerate dac and complete setup at axpona
great read
 
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.
Thank you so much for that in-depth review. I greatly enjoyed reading it. Congratulations on your MSB Select II DAC. I hope it brings you many years of enjoyment. If you decide to step up to MSB’s Digital Director, please post a review with your thoughts. MSB says it provides a significant improvement in sound quality.

Ken
 
Ron,

Thanks for posting about about your listening to this system - IMHO considering the recordings you picked and your preferences these results could be expected.

However reading about your specific comments on the APEX coolness and thinness I think readers should note that the WADAX was used its very elaborate server and the APEX was used direct to the network - something many of us do not consider as the optimum connection for such system, particularly with solid state systems. Emile is very proud of his Extreme server when used with the APEX and has very good reasons for it!
 
(...) You are only able to set filter settings for a format when that format is present.

Yes, but then the setting is kept for this format. After you set them you can save the chosen configuration, in order to keep them available anytime if you want to carry further experiments.
BTW, what were the clock and digital cable in the APEX?
 
Yes, but then the setting is kept for this format. After you set them you can save the chosen configuration, in order to keep them available anytime if you want to carry further experiments.
BTW, what were the clock and digital cable in the APEX?
Transparent XL clock and Transparent ethernet
 
Great write up Ron! Much appreciated.
 
Wow Just wow!--what an informative write up :p Kudos indeed!

Ron you make the Energiser Bunny look redundant:oops:

BruceD
 
Emile is very proud of his Extreme server when used with the APEX and has very good reasons for it!
Do you have a link for a comment of Emile regarding Apex?
Thx

Matt
 
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?

Indeed, on the Rossini APEX here the upper range vocals are smooth and not harsh at all even without the Taiko Extreme. In fact I would go as far as saying the vocals are a standout here.

But my friend Hugh has the MSB Select II and it is a wonderful piece. Congratulations on securing a true reference DAC!
 
Indeed, on the Rossini APEX here the upper range vocals are smooth and not harsh at all even without the Taiko Extreme. In fact I would go as far as saying the vocals are a standout here.

I must say that I have no experience with Boulder electronics. I am currently listening to an old Electrocompaniet AW100 amplifier and the SoundLab's, driven directly from the dCS Vivaldi.

Globally speaking the Soundlab's / Electrocompaniet sound is surely cooler and thinner than the VTL Siegfried II /XLF's, but the sound has enough body and smoothness. I listened to "Witness" by Sarah MacLachlan on Surfacing - no way voices in this system were harsh!

But if we expect the Apex to make it sound like Thelma Houston in the Sheffield direct cut going through Atmasphere tubes in the SoundLab's we will be disapointed!
 
INTRODUCTION

Over the last several months I have had the honor and the pleasure of accompanying pk_LA on what likely is the most extensive audition survey of top-of-the-line DACs ever conducted. The survey was conducted using pk_LA's new system consisting of the Wilson Audio Alexx V, the Boulder 3010 line stage pre-amplifier and the Boulder 3060 stereo amplifier, and Transparent Audio Opus Generation 6 cables.


COMPARISONS

LAMPIZATOR HORIZON VERSUS DCS VIVALDI APEX — FIRST SESSION

pk_LA began by playing a vocal track I had never heard before. He did not alert me as to which DAC we were listening. We listened to the track all of the way through. Then he played it again, on the other DAC. Within 60 seconds I said I believed that we now were listening to the Horizon. He told me I was correct.

pk_LA made many track selections over the course of the evening. I selected:

"Landslide" by Fleetwood Mac on Fleetwood Mac

"Witness" by Sarah MacLachlan on Surfacing

"Hallelujah" by Jeff Buckley on Grace

"Hotel California" by The Eagles (live version)

"Walk on the Wild Side" by Suzanne Vega on An Evening of New York Songs and Stories

"I've Got the Music In Me" by Thelma Houston on I've Got the Music In Me

My initial impressions of the Horizon versus the Apex:

1) I heard a harmonic richness and instrumental decay on the Horizon which was truncated on the Apex.

2) I heard on the Apex what I sensitively perceive as a slight digital dryness and sterile menthol sonic quality, and leading edge sharpness, which has always been my personal tell-tale sign of digital that I do not personally care for.

3) I feel the perceived frequency response of the Apex is centered in the upper midrange to treble, whereas I feel the perceived frequency response of the Horizon is centered in the mid-range (like how I perceive good analog playback).

4) I heard greater depth and dimensionality from the Horizon. The Apex sounded a bit "flatter" in comparison.

5) On each track that I selected and with which I am very familiar the Horizon presented the music in a way that reminded me of vinyl. The music sounded "right"; it sounded the way I am accustomed to these very familiar tracks sounding.

The first time I ever really relaxed listening to digital was on audioquattr's system in the Netherlands with the Taiko Audio SGM Extreme feeding a Lampizator Pacific. I enjoyed listening to the Horizon at Steve's during the Horizon debut. I enjoyed listening to the Horizon at pk_LA's last night. I conclude that if I have to listen to digital the Lampizator DACs simply work for me.

The dCS components are, to my personal aesthetic, beautiful and contemporary, and they look like they are machined out of blocks of aluminum. The Horizon is the best-looking Lampizator thus far, but, with its neon tube numerical display, it still looks reminiscent of Russian laboratory equipment from the 1950s.


LAMPIZATOR HORIZON VERSUS DCS VIVALDI APEX — SECOND SESSION

I returned to pk_LA's house for a re-match of Lampizator Horizon versus dCS Apex. On a track I did not know I failed to identify correctly to which DAC we were listening two out of three times.

It took a track I have heard hundreds of times ("Song of Bernadette" by Jennifer Warnes on Famous Blue Raincoat) to be able to tell the DACs apart.

pk_LA reported to me during the week prior to this second session the varying sound quality from the Horizon as the Horizon broke in since my last visit. Did the Lampizator change or did the dCS change?

Brian Berdan believes that, because the Vivaldi stack pk_LA is auditioning was just upgraded with the Apex circuit board, the Apex circuit board needed breaking in. This is a plausible theory. All I know is that the canyon-like gap in sonic attractiveness I heard between the Horizon and the Apex the prior week narrowed very considerably. If I had to quantify it I would say the gap has narrowed by at least 75%.

I still hear directionally the impressions I reported originally, but the amplitude is much lower. I still hear the Horizon as being more resonant and harmonically rich, but by a much smaller extent. I still hear the Apex as having more treble energy, and the Horizon as being slightly more midrange-focused (which I find more natural and more "correct"). I still hear the Apex as being slightly drier-sounding than the Horizon, and with leading edge transients I find unnaturally sharp.

The only thing I prefer about the the Apex over the Horizon is the resolving power of the Apex. All information and detail is “dug” out of those zeros and ones by the Apex.

I still easily prefer overall the Horizon over the Apex, but the gaps in what I prefer about the Horizon have narrowed very considerably. And the fact that only a week later I had to dig deep and use a track I am extremely familiar just to tell the DACs apart is puzzling — and telling.

PS: Alcohol consumption was identical during both listening sessions.


INFIGO METHOD 4 VERSUS DCS VIVALDI APEX

The Infigo Audio Method 4 DAC (MSRP $35,000) is designed by Hans Looman, a Dutchie from Delft, The Netherlands, who now lives in Canada. Hans is the CEO and Founder of Infigo Audio. Hans was very straightforward, very low-key and very knowledgeable about digital audio circuit design.

On a couple of the tracks with which I was unfamiliar I could not tell which DAC was which. But on familiar tracks I could determine which was the Method 4 and which was the Apex.

Overall I found the Method 4 to be smoother and slightly warmer and more analog-sounding than the Apex. I found the Method 4 to offer generally slightly greater decay and more harmonic resonance than the Apex.

On Jeff Buckley's "Hallelujah" on Grace the attention-grabbing guitar pluck in the beginning of the song sounded slightly more edgy on the Apex. On the Method 4 the guitar pluck sounded like I am accustomed to it sounding. It sounded more organic and golden, rather than slightly less natural and silvery.

The last track we used to compare the DACs showed us something interesting. This particular track had a dance vibe. When we played it on the Infigo we felt we had a bit of a drive literally to get up and dance. Playing this track on the dCS I had no such feeling to get into, or to connect with, the music. The dCS made this lively track sound a bit clinical and unengaging.

The dCS Vivaldi Apex is the champion of resolution, detail, dynamics, and low-frequency punch. To my ears it is the sound of the Boulder electronics in the functionality of a DAC.

The Lampizator Horizon thus far remains my favorite DAC in this on-going audition and comparison process. Interestingly I preferred the Method 4 over the Nagra HD even though the Nagra HD has a tube amplification stage. To my ears the Method 4 sounded a touch more natural and tube-like (this, for me, is a compliment) than did the Nagra.


SW1X DAC III SPECIAL VERSUS DCS VIVALDI APEX

In contrast to the Infigo which I felt was only slightly less resolving than the Apex, the
SW1X DAC III Special was conspicuously less resolving than the Apex. The SW1X was richer-sounding and more natural-sounding and less "digital"-sounding than the Apex, but I felt the SW1X sacrificed too much in resolution to achieve its richer, warmer, smooth sound.

The Infigo Method 4 sounded slightly richer and more natural and less digital than the Apex as well (as reported above) (indeed, a little bit tube-like in tone and density but without the soundstage dimensionality of tubes) but without sacrificing as much in resolution as the SW1X appears to sacrifice.

With the SW1X it seemed like some subtle details and a sense of air around singers and ambient cues were wholly missing in comparison to the highly-resolving dCS.
I suspect you are still in break-in phase. I am about 180 hours in on the APEX break-in and it is still getting better. I don't hear the issues you list in points #2 and #3 above.
 
I just heard the Apex stack in 2 different settings again. I agree completely with Ron.
 
since Pk did buy the MSB and also liked the Wadax if not for the price, i figured current and future readers of this thread might want a reference to an actual direct compare of those two dacs. PK and Ron took their MSB <-> Wadax perspectives against a third dac in sessions two weeks apart. this other compare was head to head, with 10 listeners on hand, with both dacs warmed up and settled, and the MSB was more optimized since it had a fully optimized and tweaked Taiko Extreme.

this other thread has first person feedback by more than just myself and the Wadax dealer. it's a long thread and if anyone desires i can link specific posts. but for now i figured i'll let it stand on it's own and not editorialize. many might have read it back early in the year. i will only say that doing a full blown head to head in my system took a huge amount of effort (it involved cross country shipping and picking up freight at a depot in 10 degree weather and unloading (3 flight cases, 125 pounds each) on 3 feet of snow and an ice layer on my driveway.....no local dealer bringing it in under balmy weather and 3 hours later removing it), but i feel it did deliver to me personally, what i needed to nail down. i know how these two dacs and servers compare. YMMV.

the actual compare is in the first 20 or so pages. after that it's me optimizing the Wadax Ref dac and server over a few months.

and as PK said;
  • 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.

 
Last edited:

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu