[Jalo]

Is there any DAC that are clearly better than the  Audio GD Reference 7?  Seems like the  Audio GD Reference 7 what everyone is talking about.

 

[DaveBSC]

Quote:

Is there any DAC that are clearly better than the  Audio GD Reference 7?  Seems like the  Audio GD Reference 7 what everyone is talking about.

 
The Perfect Wave is generally regarded as an excellent sounding DAC, which some have described as being superior to the Ref 7. It uses the Wolfson WM8471. PS says they tried the Sabre and liked the Wolfosn's sweeter top end better. Audio-GD took the opposite approach with their new DACs that replace the 1704 models. Their cheapest DACs use dual WM8471s, while the high-end stuff is all Sabre based.
 
Personally I'm interested in the new NFB-8, as I prefer their "musical flavor" diamond output stage to ACSS. 
 
The PWD is incredibly capable, and tough to beat for the money. You really have to spend quite a bit more on a Berkeley or Weiss I think to really hit the next level, at least as far as Delta-Sigma DACs are concerned.
 
For Redbook, vintage PCM63-K DACs could probably put up a very strong fight against some of the best current stuff. If you can find something that uses those 20-bit UltraAnalog DACs, even better. The Spectral SDR-2000 Pro used four custom versions of those DACs, and it's regarded as one of if not the best sounding DAC ever made.

 

[GWorlDofSPACE]

Quote:

I'm using a 10 year old DAC with a tube-hybrid output stage, and the sound with the LCD-2 is absolutely fantastic.  Not sure what the DAC chipset in it is.  But it has a lot of body and soul compared to the current gen DACs I have heard.
 
I also absolutely love the LCD-2 with my vinyl rig, which is why I have the LCD-2 in my family room, which is where my main hi-fi is, and not in my office - so I can listen to vinyl via the LCD-2.

 
I couldt agree more on that.
In my experience the DAC chip is not really a big deal. The secret is output stage. You can have the most technically advanced chips, like sabre32 and it will perform badly.
So guys look up to a good output stage....
 

 

[tinseljim]

Has anyone tried the Burson Audio HA160D with it? Seems like the 6moons guys think it's the one to beat - even better than the Weiss! Would love to know if others agree with Srajan or if it's just a one off?
 
 

 

[n3rdling]

I wouldn't call 6moons a very reliable source

 

[Dynobot]

Quote:

I wouldn't call 6moons a very reliable source

x2

 

[Jian]

 
Quote:

/img/forum/go_quote.gif

Bad ass CD player == still a DAC.  I see the moon eclipse uses 4 pcm1704uks :O.  Did you compare other dacs with it, or have you just been using this da... err cd player all along? :O

 
I have or had quite a lot of different DACs, including DA11, v800, MODEL 192, and have lots of hours on DAC1 HDR, DAC202 and No. 360, sources raging from modified nds1, PC, MAC. And if not using a bad ass (and right) CDT to feed them, IMHO they can't come even close to a high end CD player. And no, a bad ass CD player is not just a DAC or 4 DAC chips. That's why I never use PC/MAC source as my primary rig

 

[Jian]

Quote:

Has anyone tried the Burson Audio HA160D with it? Seems like the 6moons guys think it's the one to beat - even better than the Weiss! Would love to know if others agree with Srajan or if it's just a one off?
 
 

I wouldn't take that very seriously either.

 

[oqvist]

Quote:

Quote:

Is there any DAC that are clearly better than the  Audio GD Reference 7?  Seems like the  Audio GD Reference 7 what everyone is talking about.

 
The Perfect Wave is generally regarded as an excellent sounding DAC, which some have described as being superior to the Ref 7. It uses the Wolfson WM8471. PS says they tried the Sabre and liked the Wolfosn's sweeter top end better. Audio-GD took the opposite approach with their new DACs that replace the 1704 models. Their cheapest DACs use dual WM8471s, while the high-end stuff is all Sabre based.
 
Personally I'm interested in the new NFB-8, as I prefer their "musical flavor" diamond output stage to ACSS. 
 
The PWD is incredibly capable, and tough to beat for the money. You really have to spend quite a bit more on a Berkeley or Weiss I think to really hit the next level, at least as far as Delta-Sigma DACs are concerned.
 
For Redbook, vintage PCM63-K DACs could probably put up a very strong fight against some of the best current stuff. If you can find something that uses those 20-bit UltraAnalog DACs, even better. The Spectral SDR-2000 Pro used four custom versions of those DACs, and it's regarded as one of if not the best sounding DAC ever made.

Can you describe what this diamond output is compared to the ACSS on the "neutral" line? Have you had acess to something like the Ref 7 and Ref8/9. Otherwise what is the difference?

 

[DaveBSC]

The difference between the neutral and musical DACs is the analog output section, the front ends are the same. For those that find the ACSS DAC's super neutrality to be a bit sterile sounding, the musical flavor models have a bit of warmth to them.

 

[oqvist]

Wow have I finally found someone that have experience both with the Ref 7 and ref 8 or Ref9? So the Ref 7 is actually colder then those?
 

 

[BebopMcJiggy]

Quote:

 
Quote:

/img/forum/go_quote.gif

Bad ass CD player == still a DAC.  I see the moon eclipse uses 4 pcm1704uks :O.  Did you compare other dacs with it, or have you just been using this da... err cd player all along? :O

 
I have or had quite a lot of different DACs, including DA11, v800, MODEL 192, and have lots of hours on DAC1 HDR, DAC202 and No. 360, sources raging from modified nds1, PC, MAC. And if not using a bad ass (and right) CDT to feed them, IMHO they can't come even close to a high end CD player. And no, a bad ass CD player is not just a DAC or 4 DAC chips. That's why I never use PC/MAC source as my primary rig

Semantics but your bad ass cd player is STILL your dac.  At least when you aren't using it as a transport only.  I wasn't saying it was just a dac and not also a good transport, but I was just saying it is technically still your dac if you are using it as such.  It has no analog input so while you are using the analog output it is your dac.  Another thing... it seems to me it is using a different type of dac chip from practically every other dac you have listed.

 

[vrln]

The LCD-2 has landed. Fantastic pair with the REF7, I can second SP Wild´s view that any lack of decay is simply your source, not the headphones. My first impressions are: HD 800 has been sold. I can see why some people prefer the HD 800, and it does certain things better, but for me as someone who wants an easy to listen sound without anything that annoys me (we all have our preferences), there´s no comparison really. I´ll more later when I´ve done more testing.
 
EDIT: posted my impressions on the "LCD-2 vs HD 800" thread.

 

[yossi126]

Today I heard my LCD-2 with the Violectric V800 paired to a DIY black cube clone (some german kind of clone).
A very, very good dac. I can see how one can settle with this one.
Compared it to my HRT MS2+ and there was no contest. The MS2+ sounded unnatural in the highs (by comparison of course) and loose on the bass (knew it from the beginning but hadn't heard a considerably better dac until now).
Though I don't think this will be my next purchase, moreover the fact that Violectric is raising it's price by a 100 euros.
I think one of audio-gd's higher end sabres will suit me more.

 

[santacore]

I agree with you on the V800 performance. It's a very good dac that has taken me off the hunt for while.