[340519]

I just read in the new stereophile that benchmark as a company has stated that the dac1 and dac3 sound the same. Interesting.

 

[465176]

I've used the DAC3 everyday for two years now. I find it very analytical. The resolution it provides is addictive however I find the top end a bit too sharp and punchy. Instruments with fast transients particularly drums such as snares and hi hats are so airy that they exist in a space of their own instead of being cohesive and integrated. For some genres of music this is great but for others it creates a off balance drawing your attention to those elements in the mix. I've found the DAC3 really excels at film because it's so quick and dynamic with very deep extension at both ends. However some electronic dance music comes across as very unmusical, cold and inhuman. The DAC3 is technically brilliant but I can never really relax and chill out when I'm listening to it. It is brutally honest and it takes some time to get used to. I have implemented a high shelf eq using software which takes the edge off the top end when I'm listening to dance music which I feel is necessary to make it enjoyable but this still does not really address the overly airy and sharp top end presentation.

Overall my impressions of the DAC3 are actually very positive like most of what you'l find online. It does much more right than wrong. It is technically very impressive and you will hear details you never did before however there is something about the way it conveys music sometimes which I find very frustrating. Still, l I would not trade this dac for another.

This is EXACTLY how I perceived the DAC3 as well. I had it and the Hugo 2 at the same time, intending to choose ‘the best’ and sell on the other. Instead I found facets of both which I really enjoyed. I was entranced by the speed and resolution of DAC3, but agree with you 100% it’s not an easy listen sometimes. I also felt it could sometimes seem a little 2D and ‘flat’, whereas the Hugo 2 allowed me to listen in to every strand a little easier, music blossomed out the speakers more, and it seemed to have far more depth. What made me sell on the DAC3 was the comparative crudeness of the volume control, particularly when using the remote. I never warmed to that. Getting an exact level was frustrating and more than a little random. Whereas on Hugo 2 you got exact repeatable gradations with each responsive click of the remote. I do a lot of late night listening and when using DAC3s remote more often than not I’d either get something not quite loud enough, or too loud, and in the end it was far easier to just get up and use the volume knob to dial in the comfortable level. I also feel that the pot is the one area where performance could degrade as the pot wears over the years. A DAC3 with a far more accurate remote control of the volume would be a day 1 purchase for me. Also wasn’t keen on the flashing input light when no digital signal was present, with no way to turn that off if you wanted to leave it on. In the end I sold the Benchmark and part-exchanged Hugo 2 to enable purchase of a TT2. Long story short I now have the TT, which I found easier on the ear (especially with poorer mastered recordings) than the TT2 or DAC3. Ironically though now considering buying a DAC3 again, as I do find myself missing it's resolution and connectivity sometimes, and frankly I admire Benchmark’s ego and foo-free approach to its products and interacting with people on forums. It’s a breath of fresh air.

 

[nordkapp]

This is EXACTLY how I perceived the DAC3 as well. I had it and the Hugo 2 at the same time, intending to choose ‘the best’ and sell on the other. Instead I found facets of both which I really enjoyed. I was entranced by the speed and resolution of DAC3, but agree with you 100% it’s not an easy listen sometimes. I also felt it could sometimes seem a little 2D and ‘flat’, whereas the Hugo 2 allowed me to listen in to every strand a little easier, music blossomed out the speakers more, and it seemed to have far more depth. What made me sell on the DAC3 was the comparative crudeness of the volume control, particularly when using the remote. I never warmed to that. Getting an exact level was frustrating and more than a little random. Whereas on Hugo 2 you got exact repeatable gradations with each responsive click of the remote. I do a lot of late night listening and when using DAC3s remote more often than not I’d either get something not quite loud enough, or too loud, and in the end it was far easier to just get up and use the volume knob to dial in the comfortable level. I also feel that the pot is the one area where performance could degrade as the pot wears over the years. A DAC3 with a far more accurate remote control of the volume would be a day 1 purchase for me. Also wasn’t keen on the flashing input light when no digital signal was present, with no way to turn that off if you wanted to leave it on. In the end I sold the Benchmark and part-exchanged Hugo 2 to enable purchase of a TT2. Long story short I now have the TT, which I found easier on the ear (especially with poorer mastered recordings) than the TT2 or DAC3. Ironically though now considering buying a DAC3 again, as I do find myself missing it's resolution and connectivity sometimes, and frankly I admire Benchmark’s ego and foo-free approach to its products and interacting with people on forums. It’s a breath of fresh air.

This is precisely why I sold my DAC3 DX and purchased a DAC3B and HPA4. Remote volume adjusting on the DX was maddening. So i gained a SOTA haedphone amp and volume control all in one now. End game for me.

 

[rkt31]

Though dac3 matches very well with it's own amp ahb2 via XLR out but yes the volume control of dac 3 is not that good. Hugo 2 has in built volume control and is done in digital domain in FPGA itself because it's a part of algorithm. While dac3 uses readymade chip of sabre. So I found Hugo 2 to be extremely good match to ahb2 even though Hugo 2 has only RCA out . Even in low gain of ahb2 Hugo 2 gives plenty of output via RCA out. No wonder benchmark had to launch a dedicated pre la4. Hugo 2 has the advantage of high output via RCA so doesn't need la4.

 

[noway]

Lots of postings about LEDs here. You could always invest 5 bucks into a pack of LightDims: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=LightDims&ref=sr_as_oo

 

[465176]

Though dac3 matches very well with it's own amp ahb2 via XLR out but yes the volume control of dac 3 is not that good. Hugo 2 has in built volume control and is done in digital domain in FPGA itself because it's a part of algorithm. While dac3 uses readymade chip of sabre. So I found Hugo 2 to be extremely good match to ahb2 even though Hugo 2 has only RCA out . Even in low gain of ahb2 Hugo 2 gives plenty of output via RCA out. No wonder benchmark had to launch a dedicated pre la4. Hugo 2 has the advantage of high output via RCA so doesn't need la4.

Yes the volume control setup of Hugo 2 is absolutely superior. It’s hard to go back to the mechanical inaccuracy of a remote control pot afterwards. I’m actually quite tempted to sell TT (though I do love it!) and go back to owning two dacs instead. I did enjoy owning both Hugo 2 and DAC3 HGC very much - the best of both dac worlds and nice to have a change when one fancies it, and have one unit for portable use too.

 

[340519]

I don't know fellas... I find the volume control on the Benchmark dacs just fine.

 

[nycenglish]

I don't know fellas... I find the volume control on the Benchmark dacs just fine.

Same here - I actually think it's v good.

 

[465176]

I don't know fellas... I find the volume control on the Benchmark dacs just fine.

I think the effects vary depending on one’s partnering gear. My headphones at the time were only 32 ohms and very easy to drive, so dealing with the lower ends of the volume control using the remote was almost hopeless, and frequently frustrating. My amp was 0.5V input sensitivity too, which also meant having to hover over the lower end of the volume control despite the internal jumpers being set for a better match.

Fact is software driven volume changes are far more accurate than relying on where a motor driven pot ends up, using the remote, especially with higher sensitivity gear.

 

[340519]

I think the effects vary depending on one’s partnering gear. My headphones at the time were only 32 ohms and very easy to drive, so dealing with the lower ends of the volume control using the remote was almost hopeless, and frequently frustrating. My amp was 0.5V input sensitivity too, which also meant having to hover over the lower end of the volume control despite the internal jumpers being set for a better match.

Fact is software driven volume changes are far more accurate than relying on where a motor driven pot ends up, using the remote, especially with higher sensitivity gear.

Yeah, with the 800 and the S I'm somewhere around 12 o'clock at 300 ohms, but with some of my other pairs I'm around 9 o'clock because of them being around 32. I also have the jumpers changed.

 

[FourT6and2]

Y'all think the DAC3-B + Drop THX 789 will be too cold of a combo? Headphones are kind of warm though so maybe it will work.

 

[rkt31]

Too cold ? A typical so called audiophile phobia of cold sounding gear which is non existent actually ? Why audiophile people are so much afraid of accurate and transparent sound ?

 

[FourT6and2]

Too cold ? A typical so called audiophile phobia of cold sounding gear which is non existent actually ? Why audiophile people are so much afraid of accurate and transparent sound ?

I'm just going by what everybody on this forum says People have reported each of these have a certain sound. And I'm just wondering how they jive together. What I'm afraid of is spending thousands of dollars on something I won't like.

 

[rkt31]

Good measurements specially low thd indicate a transparent, accurate and neutral sound. I wonder why anybody should be afraid of that !

 

[340519]

Good measurements specially low thd indicate a transparent, accurate and neutral sound. I wonder why anybody should be afraid of that !

I agree, the benchmarks have been just accurate in my books. That's why I've been a customer over the last decade starting with the plain dac1 and I will a customer going forward.