Benchmark DAC1: Hate it?

[Jon L]

LOL. Good Lord.. Are we STILL having DAC-1 threads?

For those who hate DAC-1 but have ruined their resale chances by announcing this displeasure, please contact me to sell yours for $500

 

[philodox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JahJahBinks Someone should compare it with Zhaolu

Well, Lan has a Zhaolu... though I am not sure which version. I believe he is having a meet shortly with another forum member who owns the DAC1 and the DA10 [and says they sound the same

], so we might be able to read a comparison of them fairly soon.

 

[akwok]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JahJahBinks someone should compare it with Zhaolu 2.0

....

 

[Cyrilix]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JahJahBinks someone should compare it with Zhaolu 2.0

surfboardz and ori+gang said they preferred the Zhaolu to the Benchmark.

 

[swmtnbiker]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrick82 Just because it's called solid state doesn't mean there aren't any moving parts. EVERYTHING with a power supply benefits from isolation devices to reduce resonances. It doesn't have to do with "CD player skipping" at all.

I didn't say that it did. I'm just very, very dubious of claims that isolation is going to have any kind of audible effect on a DAC, much less change the basic sound signature of the device.

 

[PeeeMeS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by akwok ....

I take it you're not a big fan of the Zhaolu?

 

[Blitzula]

Another camper in the thin, too bright and analytical park.

 

[Ruppin]

Sorry. I confess to being fond of the DAC1. It even does a pretty good job as a headamp for 650s, sort of balances out the over warmness. Generally, I either run it through a Manley Shrimp and Mahis or through a Raptor. Good combo with those tubes.

I'm not saying I wouln't care to hear about something better. So, enlighten me. Don't worry about bang for the buck, just tell me what's better, how much better, and with what equipment.

 

[HumanMedia]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dpippel I didn't say that it did. I'm just very, very dubious of claims that isolation is going to have any kind of audible effect on a DAC, much less change the basic sound signature of the device.

Many electronic components are microphonic, and some devices more than others. Especially, capacitors, transistors, tubes, and timing crystals. DACs are particularly susceptible and many have the timing crystal physically isolated from the rest of the device internally. None of this is new and its been known for decades and is factored into many product designs.

 

[swmtnbiker]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HumanMedia Many electronic components are microphonic, and some devices more than others. Especially, capacitors, transistors, tubes, and timing crystals. DACs are particularly susceptible and many have the timing crystal physically isolated from the rest of the device internally. None of this is new and its been known for decades and is factored into many product designs.

Yes, but none of this has anything to do with putting cones or tennis balls under the case of a D/A converter. If it did then there would be something seriously wrong with the design of the component.

 

[HumanMedia]

Oh, and I also dont like the sound of the DAC1. Way too forward in the treble. I hear many justifications like 'its the impoved speed of the attack' and the 'leading edge of the highs are quicker' etc. But anything that is unnatural change in the waveform is distortion. I walked around after a day session with a DAC1 and thought nothing in the real world sounds like what the DAC1 was spitting out. The real world is full of soft sounds, the DAC1 is all hard forward edginess on the treble.

 

[HumanMedia]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dpippel Yes, but none of this has anything to do with putting cones or tennis balls under the case of a D/A converter. If it did then there would be something seriously wrong with the design of the component.

Do some research. Cones couple the device dispersing vibration into the more massive coupled system (good for concrete floors or wall mounts). Tennis balls will isolate the device from a system which is not tightly coupled (springy wood floors, tables that resonate). Manufacturers will not know what environment a device will be in so the end result is usually a compromise with internal isolation on critical components, chassis damping and the ability to rigidly couple the external unit, what you end up doing is based on your environment.

I believe the DAC1 isnt well designed by todays standards. Its built for robust portability more than proper resonance control.

 

[swmtnbiker]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HumanMedia Do some research. Cones couple the device dispersing vibration into the more massive coupled system (good for concrete floors or wall mounts). Tennis balls will isolate the device from a system which is not tightly coupled (springy wood floors, tables that resonate). Manufacturers will not know what environment a device will be in so the end result is usually a compromise with internal isolation on critical components, chassis damping and the ability to rigidly couple the external unit, what you end up doing is based on your environment.

I've done plenty of research and have plenty of first-hand experience, thank you very much. Engineers know that a component is going to be *sitting* on something (unless it's a rack mount) and design accordingly. I'll repeat: if a component, particularly a solid state component, is so sensitive to vibration that putting tennis balls under it noticably alters its sound signature then something is wrong with it. All IMHO of course. I've never experienced anything other than voodoo from the use of isolation products.

 

[EdipisReks]

i like the DAC-1 just fine. i've heard better (including my current DAC), but i think the benchmark is very good.

 

[sonic32]

The dac-1 presents a ton of detail, but seems a bit dry and thin. The notes don't seem to carry much body or weight. These are nit-picks, but overall this is a very good source for the money.