[RipcordAFF]

Hey everybody,

I have a question. Currently my system consists of a Macbook that will be used as source (note that the source files will be high bit rate mp3s, averaging around 320) using optical out to an unmodded Zero for a HP amp and AKG k701.

I was considering doing some upgrades in pieces consisting mostly of the Kicas Caliente HP amp, Emotiva preamp, the new Emotiva DAC (not out yet though) and replacing a smaller desktop amp i have for speakers. This route, I realized, was pretty expensive once all said and done, despite all the pieces being less than $400 individually.

So I started looking at the crazy expensive DAC\HP amps\preamps that would obviate the need for most of that gear. Besides, a smaller footprint works best on a desk. So I am looking mostly at the Grace m902 and the Benchmark DAC1 (maybe the USB one).

I have done my research here and the general consensus is the DAC1 is a DAC with a headamp thrown in and m902 is a headamp with a DAC thrown in. The DAC1's DAC, by all accounts, has outstanding resolving power and extremely detailed, not mitigated much by its amplifier. I understand that the m902's DAC is going to be much less detailed and not as capable of pure resolving power. But my question is, isn't that what I want? I already have the k701's that can be prone to a little edgyness and brightness, along with mp3's that might not like the super fine resolution of the DAC from the DAC1.

In other words, would I better of with the softer, perhaps more musical DAC from the m902 (and better HP amp!) due to the already bright, analytical nature of my k701 and the imperfect nature of my source files?

And, lastly, the m902 is ohhhh so pretty

Thanks!

 

[parrot5]

"What you want" is the m902, but "what you want down the road" might be the best-resolving DAC + an amp that suits the K701.

*My preference* is to get a DAC that is capable of resolving details first, then everything comes after. Not to limit myself with a DAC that "sounds better" with the current equipment.

Keep in mind that I said the above based on your comment that the m902 DAC is "much less detailed and not as capable of pure resolving power". I am very interested in the m902 too, and want to try it with the K702.

 

[RipcordAFF]

Quote:

Originally Posted by parrot5 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Keep in mind that I said the above based on your comment that the m902 DAC is "much less detailed and not as capable of pure resolving power". I am very interested in the m902 too, and want to try it with the K702.

Note though, that I have not heard either. All I know about the superior resolving power of the DAC1 vs the m902 is what I have read here.

 

[parrot5]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RipcordAFF /img/forum/go_quote.gif Note though, that I have not heard either. All I know about the superior resolving power of the DAC1 vs the m902 is what I have read here.

Just saying make sure you won't miss the resolving power of the DAC1, because I sure did. I started with a DAC1 (USB), didn't like the mids. Sold it and bought the Lavry DA10, but started to miss the details and soundstage of the DAC1. Recently bought the DAC1 again (a Pre this time).
So if you are a detail freak (and you have a K701 so it's more probable..), I think you will like the DAC1, and it will be hard to like a less resolving dac after. If you like full body in the mids more than anything, you may not like the DAC1.
(I like both details and forward mids, so I decided to add a amp to the DAC1 and we'll see how it goes

)

 

[stokitw]

I don't have the experience on DAC1.
For me, the resolution from m902 is actually good enough.
The DAC part of m902 is smooth, while it's amp part is very revealing.
As amp alone, the resolution is better than Lavry DA10 and is about the same level of SPL Auditor.
I like the fact that m902's DAC is smooth, because the synergy from DAC & amp gives you a so-call musical yet accurate sound.

 

[tubaman]

Indeed the DAC1 USB + K701 combo is very, very clear, clean, and detailed. And DAC1 is already a little bit forward, with the K701 which is by itself very revealing, your music quality becomes very important. With K702 you could get a cable to mitigate/tune the sound but with K701 you really can't. So, be forewarned.

 

[denydog]

I bought the m902 in combination with K701 in part because I also figured the reputation of the m902 being a little fuller or richer sounding would pair well with the clarity of the K701. I'm not sure just how much of the Grace's sound diference is contributed by the DAC or how much by the HP amp circuit, but it's worked out very well.

I've heard a DAC-1 a few times, and I do agree it's a bit sharper/more detailed. But I've also found that the DAC in my CDP is also a little brighter/sharper/more dynamic than the m902 DAC. I'm actually only really aware of the difference when switching the Grace's input control back and forth between the digital and analog out from the CDP. On some recordings I prefer the DAC in the CDP, and others, the slightly smoother DAC in the Grace. It's hard for me to say if one is more detailed, or just harsher. Or if one is smoother, or just duller. I find this kind of judgement to be a fine line. In reality, I'm perfectly content to listen to the m902 DAC full time, and usually only switch to the slightly sharper DAC in the CDP once in a while when listening to my main speakers. (I use the Grace as my main system pre-amp)

And that's really why I don't see giving up the Grace anytime soon. It's numerous inputs makes it extremely versatile. Plus the very nice sounding analog output to my power amp, combined with the remote control, and just the overall quality of the thing makes it hard to consider replacing.

The newest DAC-1 HDR does come closer to the functionality of the Grace though.

 

[AdamWysokinski]

I haven't listened to DAC1, although giving its very detailed characteristic, I wouldn't combine it with revealing and detailed K701. My previous DAC - MHDT Paradisea - was also very detailed and therefore prone to any recording faults, to the degree that certain albums were just unlistenable or very fatiguing (e.g. scary background noises when listening to classical music in the night). Details are fine, but not in such excess

 

[CapQ]

MacBook + DAC1 is def a waste....
The main function of DAC1 is its DAC (of course^^) and it's really need a decent digi out to feed. As well as I tried my DAC1 (non-usb version)'s headphone output before and I dont believe it can works with K701 well.
The main function of M902 is its amp which is enough for driving K701. That's what you looking for, an amp, not a DAC.

 

[RipcordAFF]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CapQ /img/forum/go_quote.gif MacBook + DAC1 is def a waste.... The main function of DAC1 is its DAC (of course^^) and it's really need a decent digi out to feed. As well as I tried my DAC1 (non-usb version)'s headphone output before and I dont believe it can works with K701 well. The main function of M902 is its amp which is enough for driving K701. That's what you looking for, an amp, not a DAC.

Well....I am little confused by your post. I am not powering it out of the analog HP out of the macbook, but rather the *supposedly* bit perfect optical out. Indeed they are the same jack, but the macbook's digital out is, by all accounts, superb...So I do believe that I still need a DAC..