Jon L
For him, f/1.2 is a prime number
- Joined
- May 20, 2003
- Posts
- 4,489
- Likes
- 733
I have listened to my fair share of DAC's and CDP's, and short of the megabuck gear, it can be very difficult to find a "budget" DAC that is both musically satisfying and appeals to the left brain also. Luckily, the new PS Audio Digital Link III ($995) belongs in that rare group.
Here's what Barry Willis from "The Absolute Sound" mag said about it:
"It went into my main system as a replacement for the April Music Stello DA 100 DAC, reviewed in Issue 165. The Stello is a fine piece, one I have been tremendously happy with since I brought it home from last year’s Consumer Electronics Show, but the PS Audio is in a different league altogether, offering an almost frightening level of detail, dimensionality, and bass impact. I hate to default to one of the oldest clichés in the audio-reviewing lexicon, but the Digital Link III really did lift a few veils."
I don't quite agree with the rave flavor of the TAS review, but DLIII certainly deserves some more attention from audiophiles.
THE BASICS
DLIII uses the following components to achieve its sound:
Crystal CS8416 digital input receiver with 192kHz capability.
TI SRC4192 sample rate converter. 96kHz/192kHz selectable (no 44.1kHz).
TI PCM1798DB balanced DA converter
Fet discrete analogue output stage, Single-ended or fully balanced.
THE SOUND-SPDIF
As usual for me, I mainly tested the DAC's in my speaker rig, which usually reveals differences better, followed by headphone listening. My resident DAC is the Oritek modded Zhaolu 2.0A with AD1852 DAC chip, latest version. I fed both DAC's with my Audio PC/Foobar/ASIO dll->Lynx 2B modded spdif out->Stereovox XV2 digital cable.
Oritek Zhaolu 2.0A
DLIII sounded great out-of-box and remained so through the weeks. Most of all, it sounded very dynamically effortless through all frequency ranges. Many DAC's reveal different dynamics among treble, mid, and/or bass, so some may have great bass dynamics yet weak midrange dynamics, etc, resulting in disjoined sound that can be tiring over time. No such problems with DLIII, as all frequencies hit equally hard with similar speed and swing.
Treble was airy, flowery even, yet with great detail. There was no grain or grit to speak of, and more importantly, the treble and midrange flowed into each other with one voice and tone. Not much to complain about here. This is pretty comparable to the Oritek in quality and resolution, though DLIII's presentation is more "sunny" and "lit," not better or worse, just different IMO.
Bass was simply phenomenal at this price range. In fact, DLIII's bass outshines Oritek DAC in midbass weight and impact by a significant degree. DLIII simply rocks along with taut, deep, PRATTY bass that serves dynamic music very well while avoiding the artificially iron-hard bass that can fatigue you over time.
Midrange sounds very good, too, in line with qualities of treble/bass. But it's here that Oritek pulls ahead by a significant margin. DLIII's midrange is more sunny and bloomy with bigger images, yet lacks the extremely fine-grained density and nuance that Oritek can exhibit with a well-recorded song. In video terminology, it's like turning up the "brightness" control one notch while turning down the "contrast" one notch, leading to sunnier yet less textured images. Notice I didn't say "bright" on purpose b/c that implies some negatives or irratation, which there is none with DLIII.
This is the sort of thing I have noticed with upsampling with other gear in past, which is why I hate the fact DLIII does not give you the option of choosing straight 44.1 kHz non-upsampled sound. I'll bet my personal preferences would lie with 44.1 kHz if that was selectable, but I guess we'll never know.
There are some other notable differences as well. DLIII overall sounds fuller and more easily able to fill the room with sound pressure, not just in bass but the entire soundfield seems to project easier into the room. It's soundstaging is very nice and in line with good DAC's, but it is slightly more forward, i.e. the solo voices/instruments starts at the plane of speakers and outward. Oritek tends to start right at the plane of speakers and a bit forward and backward depending on the recording, able to portray depth information a little deeper than DLIII, a difference I've noticed in past with non-upsampling to upsampling players. These are not large differences, and both presentations certainly are within MY perception of what's right.
UPSAMPLING: 96kHz vs. 192kHz
Most of my listening was done with DLIII at at 96kHz b/c well, it simply sounded better to me than 192kHz. The above description is basically the sound at 96kHz. Once 192kHz is selected, the bloomy/sunny midrange dries up a bit, especially in low-midrange/upper-bass area, sounding smaller. The very lowest bass ranges gain a bit in impact, but the midbass bloom is sacrificed as well as smoothness of low-treble/upper-midrange. Simply put, sound becomes more artificial and more "digital" at 192kHz, though it subjectively sounds more detailed due to extra edge enhancement and leaner upper/mid-bass. I don't recommend 192kHz unless your system sounds overly soft on top and overly bloomy in midbass.
SOME MUSINGS
Overall, I wish I could combine the midrange of Oritek with the bass dynamics of DLIII, but each DAC still sounds completely great on its own. Unless you get into very well-designed, cost-no-object DAC's, you are likely to run into a situation where you will have to choose and compromise on certain aspects of the sound. For me and my music, the extra fine-resolution of Oritek midrange is pretty hard to give up. It's like looking at something through a microscope and *almost* seeing that last fine detail yet having no more lens power. Oritek midrange is like giving you just another half inch turn on the microscope knob to *really* see that detail.
Still, the overall midrange presentation of DLIII is hard to fault, and truth be told, if I didn't have the Oritek to A-B, I probably would have been completely satisfied with the whole presentation, especially with the speed, resolution, clarity, and bass prowess of DLIII dishing out the whole picture so satisfyingly.
If your musical tastes run more into rock, metal, trance, etc, I would recommend the DLIII instead. If you live and die by solo vocals, instruments, acoustic music, it's hard to go wrong with Oritek Zhaolu. It's a good thing I don't necessarily have to let go of one
POSTSCRIPT: USB Input
I was very eager to test the USB input on DLIII, b/c I'm a PC Audio guy. Unfortunately, DLIII doesn't do USB-to-I2S and takes the USB stream and converts it to spdif, which then goes through the chain like spdif.
Foobar did not work with ASIO dll, but ASIO4ALL worked, which is what I used. For some days, I actually even thought USB input may be preferable b/c it had a much more "analogue" presenation. Images had more density and weight behind them, and whatever grit/digititis remained via coax simply disappeared. There was basicaly zero brightness, hardness, grain in USB mode. If I had to set up a blind-test to fool audiophiles to think they're listening to vinyl, USB would be it.
However, after extended listening, I have come to the conclusion that subtle yet important details are not quite coming through. There's also less sense of airy sparkle to upper ranges of vocals and instruments, which I personally enjoy on a good recording. Still, if you really like vinyl sound and can't stand ANY sibilance or even a PINCH of digititus, then the USB input may be an option.
IF a certain DAC-manufacturer-who-cannot-be-named comes through with his promises, I *may* be getting a DAC that has USB-I2S connection for a 3-way DAC shootout, but we'll see...
Anyway, that's all, folks
Here's what Barry Willis from "The Absolute Sound" mag said about it:
"It went into my main system as a replacement for the April Music Stello DA 100 DAC, reviewed in Issue 165. The Stello is a fine piece, one I have been tremendously happy with since I brought it home from last year’s Consumer Electronics Show, but the PS Audio is in a different league altogether, offering an almost frightening level of detail, dimensionality, and bass impact. I hate to default to one of the oldest clichés in the audio-reviewing lexicon, but the Digital Link III really did lift a few veils."
I don't quite agree with the rave flavor of the TAS review, but DLIII certainly deserves some more attention from audiophiles.
THE BASICS
DLIII uses the following components to achieve its sound:
Crystal CS8416 digital input receiver with 192kHz capability.
TI SRC4192 sample rate converter. 96kHz/192kHz selectable (no 44.1kHz).
TI PCM1798DB balanced DA converter
Fet discrete analogue output stage, Single-ended or fully balanced.
THE SOUND-SPDIF
As usual for me, I mainly tested the DAC's in my speaker rig, which usually reveals differences better, followed by headphone listening. My resident DAC is the Oritek modded Zhaolu 2.0A with AD1852 DAC chip, latest version. I fed both DAC's with my Audio PC/Foobar/ASIO dll->Lynx 2B modded spdif out->Stereovox XV2 digital cable.
Oritek Zhaolu 2.0A
DLIII sounded great out-of-box and remained so through the weeks. Most of all, it sounded very dynamically effortless through all frequency ranges. Many DAC's reveal different dynamics among treble, mid, and/or bass, so some may have great bass dynamics yet weak midrange dynamics, etc, resulting in disjoined sound that can be tiring over time. No such problems with DLIII, as all frequencies hit equally hard with similar speed and swing.
Treble was airy, flowery even, yet with great detail. There was no grain or grit to speak of, and more importantly, the treble and midrange flowed into each other with one voice and tone. Not much to complain about here. This is pretty comparable to the Oritek in quality and resolution, though DLIII's presentation is more "sunny" and "lit," not better or worse, just different IMO.
Bass was simply phenomenal at this price range. In fact, DLIII's bass outshines Oritek DAC in midbass weight and impact by a significant degree. DLIII simply rocks along with taut, deep, PRATTY bass that serves dynamic music very well while avoiding the artificially iron-hard bass that can fatigue you over time.
Midrange sounds very good, too, in line with qualities of treble/bass. But it's here that Oritek pulls ahead by a significant margin. DLIII's midrange is more sunny and bloomy with bigger images, yet lacks the extremely fine-grained density and nuance that Oritek can exhibit with a well-recorded song. In video terminology, it's like turning up the "brightness" control one notch while turning down the "contrast" one notch, leading to sunnier yet less textured images. Notice I didn't say "bright" on purpose b/c that implies some negatives or irratation, which there is none with DLIII.
This is the sort of thing I have noticed with upsampling with other gear in past, which is why I hate the fact DLIII does not give you the option of choosing straight 44.1 kHz non-upsampled sound. I'll bet my personal preferences would lie with 44.1 kHz if that was selectable, but I guess we'll never know.
There are some other notable differences as well. DLIII overall sounds fuller and more easily able to fill the room with sound pressure, not just in bass but the entire soundfield seems to project easier into the room. It's soundstaging is very nice and in line with good DAC's, but it is slightly more forward, i.e. the solo voices/instruments starts at the plane of speakers and outward. Oritek tends to start right at the plane of speakers and a bit forward and backward depending on the recording, able to portray depth information a little deeper than DLIII, a difference I've noticed in past with non-upsampling to upsampling players. These are not large differences, and both presentations certainly are within MY perception of what's right.
UPSAMPLING: 96kHz vs. 192kHz
Most of my listening was done with DLIII at at 96kHz b/c well, it simply sounded better to me than 192kHz. The above description is basically the sound at 96kHz. Once 192kHz is selected, the bloomy/sunny midrange dries up a bit, especially in low-midrange/upper-bass area, sounding smaller. The very lowest bass ranges gain a bit in impact, but the midbass bloom is sacrificed as well as smoothness of low-treble/upper-midrange. Simply put, sound becomes more artificial and more "digital" at 192kHz, though it subjectively sounds more detailed due to extra edge enhancement and leaner upper/mid-bass. I don't recommend 192kHz unless your system sounds overly soft on top and overly bloomy in midbass.
SOME MUSINGS
Overall, I wish I could combine the midrange of Oritek with the bass dynamics of DLIII, but each DAC still sounds completely great on its own. Unless you get into very well-designed, cost-no-object DAC's, you are likely to run into a situation where you will have to choose and compromise on certain aspects of the sound. For me and my music, the extra fine-resolution of Oritek midrange is pretty hard to give up. It's like looking at something through a microscope and *almost* seeing that last fine detail yet having no more lens power. Oritek midrange is like giving you just another half inch turn on the microscope knob to *really* see that detail.
Still, the overall midrange presentation of DLIII is hard to fault, and truth be told, if I didn't have the Oritek to A-B, I probably would have been completely satisfied with the whole presentation, especially with the speed, resolution, clarity, and bass prowess of DLIII dishing out the whole picture so satisfyingly.
If your musical tastes run more into rock, metal, trance, etc, I would recommend the DLIII instead. If you live and die by solo vocals, instruments, acoustic music, it's hard to go wrong with Oritek Zhaolu. It's a good thing I don't necessarily have to let go of one
POSTSCRIPT: USB Input
I was very eager to test the USB input on DLIII, b/c I'm a PC Audio guy. Unfortunately, DLIII doesn't do USB-to-I2S and takes the USB stream and converts it to spdif, which then goes through the chain like spdif.
Foobar did not work with ASIO dll, but ASIO4ALL worked, which is what I used. For some days, I actually even thought USB input may be preferable b/c it had a much more "analogue" presenation. Images had more density and weight behind them, and whatever grit/digititis remained via coax simply disappeared. There was basicaly zero brightness, hardness, grain in USB mode. If I had to set up a blind-test to fool audiophiles to think they're listening to vinyl, USB would be it.
However, after extended listening, I have come to the conclusion that subtle yet important details are not quite coming through. There's also less sense of airy sparkle to upper ranges of vocals and instruments, which I personally enjoy on a good recording. Still, if you really like vinyl sound and can't stand ANY sibilance or even a PINCH of digititus, then the USB input may be an option.
IF a certain DAC-manufacturer-who-cannot-be-named comes through with his promises, I *may* be getting a DAC that has USB-I2S connection for a 3-way DAC shootout, but we'll see...
Anyway, that's all, folks
