Ok, some early impressions from last night.
First (just because it's fast and easy) is the headphone output vs. the HP output on the Emotiva XSP-1 preamp.
It literally only took a matter of seconds to determine the HP output on the DC-1 is FAR superior to the one on the XSP-1. This was tested briefly using my Senn HD-598s. I didn't even have to play through an entire track for this test. The XSP-1 HP output sounds thinner, and less "full bodied" if that makes sense.
I plan to do more testing in the future, with more HPs, but with the gap I heard between them, I doubt the outcome will change.
I did test the DC-1 through the Emotiva XSP-1 for about an hour or so. I then went direct to the amps. Weather or not it was placebo, I don't know, but it did seem to sound more detailed IMO. Further testing MUST be done to give my conclusive opinion, and this feeling may change...more comparison must take place.
I then ran my Cambridge Audio Azur 340C CD player into both the analog in on the DC-1 and to the digital coax as well. That way I could a/b the sound using the same player, disc, etc. Also the sound of the Cambridge from its analog outputs is what I am used to. Through the DC-1s analog input, it sounded exactly how I thought it would. No change there.
However, through the digital coax (using the DC-1 as the DAC) it sounded considerably different. So much, in fact, that with some guitars and bass sounds, the timbre of the instrument seemed to change. I backed this up with several tracks and sections. Vocals too, took on a different timbre, but was more difficult to discern unless it was intimate vocals in an acoustic song. Never-the-less, IMO, it did sound very much different.
Ok, with that out of the way, here is where I am at currently with the Cambridge DACs vs. the DC-1. Remember this is mostly low level listening, so I haven't yet had the opportunity to really "push" things the way I like to when auditioning gear.
The Cambridge Audio (abbreviated as CA from here on out) sounds like what I am used to. IMO, it sounds "fine" and if I had never compared it to the DC-1, I would think that most all CD players would sound similar. Especially given that it is largely believed that most DACs sound very similar, with only subtleties in their differences.
IMO, in my room, with my gear, I do not believe that these two DACs sound the same.
The CA DAC sounds like a good representation of the music, and initially I thought it sounded a bit "thicker" or "fuller" than the DC-1. Upon continued listening and A/B testing, I began to think that I was mistaken. The CA sounds fuller, yes, but not for the reason I had initially thought. IMO, it sounds fuller only because it sounds a bit "smeared" or "sloppy" when compared directly to the DC-1. By comparison, the DC-1 sounds a bit "thinner" upon initial impression, but you soon realize that this "thinness" isn't a thin sound, but merely a more detailed sound, that seems to start and stop the sound waves with no overhang, hesitation, or added decay. This is VERY difficult for me to describe in words, so I hope that makes sense.
To elaborate a bit for clarification. I feel the DC-1 is more resolving of fine detail, and it seems to be allowing me to better hear things that were "lost in the mix" before. I am not talking about additional instruments. I am talking about the way the strings are being raked, the way the guitarist is fretting the strings, breathing in vocal lines, and an extra sense of air separating different textures and subtle undertones that ring out when a chord is struck. More on this when I have time and am not tired.
Signal chain for the bulk of this listening and ALL of the A/B testing was Cambridge Audio Azur 340C > Emotiva X-Series digital coax cable AND Monoprice premium RCA cables > Emotiva DC-1 > Emotiva X-Series XLR cables > Emotiva XPA-1 amps > Monoprice 12g speaker wire > Bowers & Wilkins 684 towers.
