Benchmark DAC2 HGC review in Stereophile, February 2014 issue.
Sorry for the delay in following up on my recent post, in which I mentioned I would provide a summary of the Stereophile review of the Benchmark DAC2 HGC for those who didn’t subscribe or have access to Stereophile magazine. By this time the review is already on the Stereophile.com website. The direct link to the review is:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/benchmark-dac2-hgc-da-processorheadphone-amplifier
For your reference, two other reviews of the Dac2 are:
Everything Audio:
http://www.everythingaudionetwork.blogspot.com/2012/10/exclusive-first-review-benchmark-media.html
The Absolute Sound
http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/three-new-dsd-capable-dacs/
Summary: Stereophile review
The review is in two parts: the review itself, by Erick Lichte; and the Measurements section by John Atkinson, editor.
Review section summary and highlights: (exact quotes)
- “The layout is very clear and organized, the styling professionally oriented. The fit and finish were great, and the feel of the volume control was solid and silky.
-Benchmark claims that the DAC2 HGC is a full 10dB quieter than the DAC1.
-Headphone sound quality - provided fantastic listening via my Sennheiser HD600s -
DAC2's ability to offer wonderful image size and separation via headphones, while still giving each instrument the proper solidity and scale in the mix. I think that partly comes from a low level of self-noise, which the DAC2 certainly seemed to have. But from treble to bass, the DAC2's sound through headphones was also very dynamic and even, highlighting nothing but missing nothing.
-The DAC2 HGC's treble performance seemed a big step forward from that of the DAC1 and DAC1 HDR. Sure enough, the DAC2 had slightly cleaner treble performance than the older DAC1 HDR. But surprisingly, the DAC2 offered far more body on the tone, which can be heard as a more solid sonic image, or perhaps a slightly more full-bodied rendering of each sound. The Benchmark DACs of old were sometimes criticized for sounding a bit cold and analytical. The DAC2 didn't editorialize euphonically, but it did seem to have a lot more soul in its music making. It was also noticeably better than the DAC1 HDR at keeping aural images separate, and creating the sense that little to no noise was riding along with the music.
- Versus the Centrance DACmini – The Benchmark had more excitement and immediacy, offered greater image separation, and much better control in the bass. Both DACs played musically, but felt very different in terms of pacing, transient attack, and release. The DAC2 HGC also gets the nod for the perceived resolution of every recording . Via the DAC2, I felt I could hear far deeper, and with less effort, into each track.
-Versus the Bel Canto e.One DAC3.5 VBS ($4,985) -- What struck me was how similar the Benchmark and Bel Canto were in terms of tonal balance, treble resolution, and delicacy. I was
very surprised that the Benchmark, at less than half the Bel Canto's price, could so closely compete with it in sound.
The DAC2 HGC had an up-front immediacy that I very much enjoyed with some tracks, though not quite the Bel Canto's unambiguous front-to-back layering. Aside from the issue of image width, the Benchmark DAC2 was very close to the Bel Canto's performance in most other musically meaningful ways.
Unlike the Bel Canto, the DAC2 HGC offers DSD decoding.
- Summing up: The DAC2 HGC is a step forward in every way from Benchmark Media's DAC1 models. It offers easy computer interfacing, a myriad of input options, remote control, and solid build quality, all from a company that has been around a while, and that stands behind its products. More than that, the DAC2 HGC is a fantastic value in terms of its sheer musical ability. It offers fantastic resolution, an even tonal balance, and an engaging, up-front perspective on the music. I can safely predict Benchmark's DAC2 HGC will be a hit.”
Measurements section by John Atkinson: (mostly exact quotes)
-“Benchmark's frequency response with data sampled at 44.1, 96, and 192kHz - In each case, the response is flat. Channel separation via the digital inputs was superb.
-The Benchmark DAC2 offered one of the highest resolutions I have measured.
- With the very low level of noise and superb linearity, reproduction of an undithered 16-bit tone was essentially perfect: the waveform is symmetrical about the time axis, the three DC voltages described by the data are well resolved, and the reconstruction filter's symmetrical Gibbs Phenomenon "ringing" on the tops and bottoms of the waveform is readily evident. With undithered 24-bit data, the result is an excellent sinewave.
- Even driving a very demanding 600 ohm load, the DAC2 offered very low levels of analog distortion. Intermodulation distortion was also superbly low, again even into 600 ohms.
- … spectrum almost completely free from jitter-related sidebands, and with the odd-order harmonics of the low-frequency, LSB-level squarewave all at the correct levels.
- The analog inputs offered a very wide frequency response
- Regarding channel separation and harmonic and intermodulation distortion for the analog inputs, the results were just as superb as for the digital inputs,
- Used as an analog–analog preamplifier, the DAC2 HGC offered superb performance (my summary).
- Summing up the Benchmark DAC2 HGC's measured performance is easy: It's simply superb.”
