dCS Bartok

[SuperBurrito]

It might be a better option sonically, but the price difference is absolutely colossal going from a DAVE to a Rossini DAC. They are nearly £20k now.

I bought a used Rossini for the same price as a new Dave and Mscaler. Mdave is great, but to get that combo to sing costs a few thousand extra on aftermarket Wave storm cables, linear power supply and USB decrapifiers. So a new Mdave with accessories actually costs more than the used Rossini.
Listened to both the Rossini and Mdave for over a month in my system, and I sold the Mdave without the slightest hesitation.

 

[buzzlulu]

I agree with previous comments in that it is all subjective.
A dear friend who takes his 2 channel to the extreme had the following units in his house at the same time - he OWNED them all at the same time
dCS Rossini
Naim ND555
Linn Klimax DS
Chord DAVE/mScaler

They were all used with a Naim front end and active ATC50 speakers.

The ranking I listed above was his final listing and he sold off all save the Rossini.
Just putting it out there for others to see when they evaluate. Contrary to HeadFi which has an exorbitant number of Chord fans be aware that it is a big world out there beyond Headfi and what is popular here is not as popular elsewhere.

Once again - personal choices rule. At this level they all sound good

 

[Frankie D]

I agree with previous comments in that it is all subjective.
A dear friend who takes his 2 channel to the extreme had the following units in his house at the same time - he OWNED them all at the same time
dCS Rossini
Naim ND555
Linn Klimax DS
Chord DAVE/mScaler

They were all used with a Naim front end and active ATC50 speakers.

The ranking I listed above was his final listing and he sold off all save the Rossini.
Just putting it out there for others to see when they evaluate. Contrary to HeadFi which has an exorbitant number of Chord fans be aware that it is a big world out there beyond Headfi and what is popular here is not as popular elsewhere.

Once again - personal choices rule. At this level they all sound good

+1

 

[Abyss Headphones]

We had a very positive outcome using the dCS Bartok, so much so we own it.

 

[sf7960]

I think if a dac tends to smoothen things and sound polite, it will be difficult to make reproduced music sound lifelike. Imagine permanently listening to a piano that sounds like the left pedal is depressed even when it's not.

 

[gnomen]

We already do. It's called a Steinway. If you hear Beethoven for example played on a replica of the pianos he knew and used, it sounds quite different and much better.

 

[llamaluv]

I think if a dac tends to smoothen things and sound polite, it will be difficult to make reproduced music sound lifelike. Imagine permanently listening to a piano that sounds like the left pedal is depressed even when it's not.

As a counter-perspective to recently expressed negative subjective opinions on this DAC's treatment of transients and such, I can that at least personally, I find the Bartok's rendering of leading edges to be very compelling, and is one of the qualities that sold me on the Bartok upon auditioning it.

I hear more nuance through all phases of the "sound envelope" of a note played by acoustic instrument (eg, piano or percussion), where makes it sound extra tactile and realistic to my ears. I find it very satisfying, and is a characteristic I place a lot of value in.

In contrast, I feel like some DACs (and amps!) create the impression of excitement by way of blurring of transients, whereby notes can appear quickly but without nuance to their leading edges, as if the attack phase of the sound envelope is like a simplified linear, fast-rising slope, or almost a vertical. Anyway, that's how I visualize it.

Beyond that, I don't find the Bartok to sound polite (much less "DULL") in the slightest. I do find it to sound smooth -- and very much in the positive way that term is used -- while being at least as resolving as any previous points of reference I've had experience with (namely, the DAVE, which I owned for 2-3 years, and at least one year too long). I haven't made it a mission to audition every high-end DAC on the market, though admittedly, that sounds like a frickin lot of fun .

As always though, the only way to reliably navigate conflicting subjective opinions on such matters is through forming your own by way of direct experience.

 

[ObjectiveSubjectivist]

Skrillex

 

[Frankie D]

As a counter-perspective to recently expressed negative subjective opinions on this DAC's treatment of transients and such, I can that at least personally, I find the Bartok's rendering of leading edges to be very compelling, and is one of the qualities that sold me on the Bartok upon auditioning it.

I hear more nuance through all phases of the "sound envelope" of a note played by acoustic instrument (eg, piano or percussion), where makes it sound extra tactile and realistic to my ears. I find it very satisfying, and is a characteristic I place a lot of value in.

In contrast, I feel like some DACs (and amps!) create the impression of excitement by way of blurring of transients, whereby notes can appear quickly but without nuance to their leading edges, as if the attack phase of the sound envelope is like a simplified linear, fast-rising slope, or almost a vertical. Anyway, that's how I visualize it.

Beyond that, I don't find the Bartok to sound polite (much less "DULL") in the slightest. I do find it to sound smooth -- and very much in the positive way that term is used -- while being at least as resolving as any previous points of reference I've had experience with (namely, the DAVE, which I owned for 2-3 years, and at least one year too long). I haven't made it a mission to audition every high-end DAC on the market, though admittedly, that sounds like a frickin lot of fun .

As always though, the only way to reliably navigate conflicting subjective opinions on such matters is through forming your own by way of direct experience.

I know the 2-channel reviews I have read prefer it to the Dave.

 

[Xecuter]

I know the 2-channel reviews I have read prefer it to the Dave.

FWIW a lot of people criticise Dave for being weaker with speakers and much better with headphones.
I sold my Dave because I didn't like how it performed in 2 channel, was very good with my headphone system but I was heading to 2 channel..

 

[llamaluv]

I know the 2-channel reviews I have read prefer it to the Dave.

I know from my own experience with headphones (this being head-fi, after all), that I prefer the Bartok. Go figure.

 

[edwardsean]

I know from my own experience with headphones (this being head-fi, after all), that I prefer the Bartok. Go figure.

if–you are willing to make a sizable investment, both in terms of cost and effort, the Dave can be brought to be as smooth and rich as the Bartok, while being more transparent, incisive, and accurate.

 

[judomaniak57]

if–you are willing to make a sizable investment, both in terms of cost and effort, the Dave can be brought to be as smooth and rich as the Bartok, while being more transparent, incisive, and accurate.

for the price of the Dave u shouldn't have to put in alot of effort to get good sound

 

[jlbrach]

I own the dave/blu2 and have heard the bartok for a good period of time and I prefer the dave without reservation but they are both outstanding state of the art...there is no right or wrong

 

[llamaluv]

if–you are willing to make a sizable investment, both in terms of cost and effort, the Dave can be brought to be as smooth and rich as the Bartok, while being more transparent, incisive, and accurate.

Yea, I've seen that movie. No longer interested in testing that claim by -- as you say -- throwing more time and money at the problem.

I've found the Bartok to be so much more satisfying than the DAVE ever was in my system, and that without any particular setup changes.

But again, this is ultimately a subjective thing.