Berkeley Audio DAC

I own one. I haven't spent too much time doing critical listening so I'll only stick to what I can concretely define.

It's one of those rare pieces of audio equipment that I knew I had to own after hearing it in the first minute. In my headphone set up, very noticeable in-your-face improvements include (but is not limited to) a far more coherent deeper larger sound stage, much better detail retrieval, and less fatiguing highs. Overall, it's been an absolute smash. It's performance with high resolution audio tracks is even more stunning.

It's versatility is yet another indispensable plus. To me, it's high cost is justified by the fact that it functions as one of the few state of the art centerpieces for a computer audio system and as a world class preamp.

I've only heard most of the popular DACs here in passing so I'm hesitant to make any declarations in regards to its position in relation to the rest of the field but I can tell you that I prefer it without question and that it outperforms every other DAC that I've ever owned. Also, I can share my experience with the dealer I purchased it from (Maier Shadi from The Audio Salon in Los Angeles). I called asking about the Berkeley and a disc player that's three times the cost; Mr. Shadi suggested that I buy the Berkeley and said that he recommends it without hesitation to even his lucrative clients with bottomless budgets as the best possible sound from a digital source.

hi,
what do you use for a transport for playing CD?
how do you source/stream high rez audio to it?
do you see much sensitivity to the source/transport?
thanks

It's a really good DAC. I won't say it's the best I've heard but top 5.

Not heard personally, but from the people I find reliable... make this "top 3" regardless of price

I've yet to see any direct comparisons to other well-regarded stuff, although I really only browse headphone forums. I'm pretty curious myself, but I'll just say that $5000 will buy you a LOT of vintage DAC. A quick Google search told me that one guy thinks it's better than the Weiss DAC2, and Robert Harley in TAS seems to indicate that it's slightly worse than the Spectral CD player on redbook... that's all I found.

I don't even know what chip is in it.

Edit: so are y'all gonna name us a "top 5" or "top 3?"

I thought the DAC sounded too digital in the upper register

but then again I was comparing to dCS and Esoteric goodies

It does use their own software for digital filtering (with HDCD off course) but down the line things are nothing special: one AD18xx (cannot remember the exact reference) and opamps for I/V and filtering/buffering. Well done, you bet!

IMO over certain performance level, the DAC of choice is something system- or taste- dependent. So the winner for me may be the third, or fifth, for another... and maybe going from "top 5" to "top 3" shows enough potential for the piece

I would be very interested in a BAD comparison with the Empirical Audio Overdrive. I don't really need preamp, though I will take it and the EA implementation is quite interesting. I haven't listened to either myself, except for a few minutes of BAD at a dealer without any familiar points of reference.

DAC chip: bets are high on the AD1853 (same as Benchmark DAC1 incidentally).

chesebert, which Esoteric were you comparing? Thanks.

I'm wondering how this would compare to the Wadia 27 that I'm getting modded.

Although I have not heard it, supposedly where this dac really shines is high rez files such as 24/96 and 24/176-192 of which in reagards to the latter, there is not a whole heck of a lot, maybe a dozen titles. It should however sound GREAT with 16/44 material but that material can only sound so good. I have a dac that in it's day was $8k MSRP. Playing 16/44 and 24/96 files of the same material is night and day difference. The hi bit rate material is just mesmerizing. The only way I would pony up for the BAD is if I was going to lay in a stock of Hi Rez files and discs and that is a whole nuther cash outlay.

X-01

The differences were mainly in the HF naturalness. Violin on X01 just sounded more real, not as real as the dCS puccini, however.

I spent about 3 hrs going back and forth between the 3 players hoping that I would find no difference; alas that's not the case. I ended up preferring the dCS over Esoteric by a narrow but decisive margin.

oh the speakers were Magico mini, ok for home speakers, but great for studio monitoring...they are very very fast.

On a purely conjectural basis, I would say the Berkeley DAC is a more refined version of DAC1.

I own the BADA "Alpha" and have compared in my rack to many top DACs - including Weiss Medea, Weiss DAC2, DAC1, Empirical, Oritek DAC/Pre, Bel Canto, and more.

I also run the Bay Area Audiophile Society (BAAS) and describe a comparison event that we held here. The Alpha "won" that event convincingly (but a setup problem did not give the Medea a fair shot).

I have also auditioned dCS, Esoteric, etc.

Based on all of this experience, I would say that the Alpha is a "Top 10" DAC. Its strength is its digital section:

• Excellent digital filtering
• Superb digital attenuation
• Stunning HDCD implementation
• SOTA handling of high-resolution formats

Its weaknesses (compared to SOTA) are its I/O and, to a lesser extent, its master clock. Both its digital-in and analog-out sections are pedestrian. Ordinary parts and data-sheet-caliber design. (The power supply is decent.)

I replaced the master clock and SE analog-out section with custom Oritek units. Big difference. Maybe top-3 now? <g>

BTW, the DAC chip is the AD1955A (which is SACD-capable). SACD feature not implemented.

Summary: Excellent unit, made better with straightforward mods. In this bracket, buyer taste matters as outright flaws are few! What's important to you?

Disclaimer: Ori is a fellow BAAS officer and a friend.