[KR...]

In the lastest issue of Stereophile, John Marks Reviews the Benchmark Media Systems DAC1 as both a DAC and a Headphone Amp. Just wanted to let you guys know.

check out their website here :

http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/digital/dac1/default.asp

 

[bootman]

What did they say about the headphone amp performance?

BTW, Benchmark also sells the headphone circuitry separately.

Its called the HPA-2

Here is a pic.

It's basicly a headphone amp on a jack.

I did mention their older HPA-1 a while back.

 

[KR...]

He loved it as a DAC, but thought that the Grace 901 was a better Headphone Amp, but this is a better DAC. The Grace 901 also cost a lot more. The makers and the writer both say that this DAC can turn any DVD Player (even $50 ones

) into a legit Audiophile source. He used the Senn HD600 with them.

 

[jpelg]

KR... - you could have listened to mine at the last Grado meet!

 

[KR...]

Quote:

Originally posted by jpelg KR... - you could have listened to mine at the last Grado meet!

which one?

I heard the Grace 901 at the meet.

 

[grinch]

Quote:

Originally posted by KR... which one?

the dac1. i listened to it a bit when i was discussing and trying out the w2002 and w100 headphones with jpelg. it seems to be a neat little machine, and i wonder if it could get even better when using a nice transport (was hooked up to a portable).

 

[KR...]

Quote:

Originally posted by grinch the dac1. i listened to it a bit when i was discussing and trying out the w2002 and w100 headphones with jpelg. it seems to be a neat little machine, and i wonder if it could get even better when using a nice transport (was hooked up to a portable).

oh that little thing! Yeah, too bad it was hooked up to a portable

 

[lan]

Quote:

Originally posted by KR... oh that little thing! Yeah, too bad it was hooked up to a portable

What happened to the idea of using it with the $50 machine being acceptable? Can't believe it? haha.

 

[aos]

This DAC has some sort of jitter attenuation, and if done right that has the effect of rendering the quality of the source totally irrelevant. As long as the source doesn't contain any actual errors or deviates from standard - some portables have optical outs that wouldn't satisfy these criteria.

 

[jpelg]

Quote:

oh that little thing! Yeah, too bad it was hooked up to a portable.

But you didn't listen to it, did you? Just because the portable was driving it?

You might have been suprised, even with the portable as the source, despite its diminutive size.

 

[KR...]

Quote:

Originally posted by lan What happened to the idea of using it with the $50 machine being acceptable? Can't believe it? haha.

that's a $50 DVD player! learn to read, it's fun!

 

[jpelg]

Quote:

that's a $50 DVD player!

Doesn't matter. Portable CDP, full-sized DVD player. Either will work with the DAC1.

 

[KR...]

not all transports are the same you know

 

[jpelg]

Quote:

not all transports are the same you know

Must...fight....
...the...urge...
...for... sarcasm....


Whew! OK. The moment has passed

.

 

[aos]

Quote:

not all transports are the same you know

If you pass them through asynchronous reclocker (not sample rate converter!), they are (provided the bitstream is bit perfect, i.e. non-scratched CDs or error correction working fine, none of which should be an issue). In practice you might get secondary effects that would still make a measurable difference (i.e. jitter rejection is not infinite especially in < 1kHz range), signal always makes it way backwards from chips to power rails to other chips after reclocker etc.). But with ideal hardware you'd get signals that are identical in time domain (i.e. literally identical). I'm not very good at hearing very subtle differences (I can hear different cables but it is not obvious; replacing clock in a cd player with low jitter one was quite obvious though) but I should test this theory in practice as I have one of those reclocking DACs.