Demerara
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2012
- Posts
- 1
- Likes
- 11
NOTE: I realize I am posting this in a head-fi forum, though I am providing very limited information about the headphone output in the following review of the Tube DAC-11. From the little listening I was able to do on headphones (decidedly budget Sennheiser HD203s at that), the sound characteristics I heard through loudspeakers was of a similar nature.
I have been using the Grant Fidelity Tube DAC-11 for about 4 weeks now, think I have a reasonable “first impression”, and wanted to share my enthusiasm for a very high value piece of audio gear. The Tube DAC-11 currently checks in at $350 and I feel you certainly get tremendous value with this DAC. The marketplace is not short of DACs in this price range but there is a fair share of very mediocre gear out there and a limited handful of ones that punch above their weight class, so to speak. The Tube DAC-11 comfortably fits in the latter category, at least to my ears.
From the standpoint of comparison, a number of reasonably decent DACs do inhabit this price range but considering the nearly “do-all” capacity of the DAC-11, it definitely represents great value. A very welcome feature is the tube output stage which allows plenty of “tube rolling” options to change the sound signature. The included Chinese-sourced 6N11 is fairly good.
It would not be all that useful to repeat the detailed features and technical overview available on Grant Fidelity’s website, so I will just provide the link for those interested in that information: http://shop.grantfidelity.com/Grant-Fidelity-TubeDAC-11-D-A-Converter.html.
I think most people choosing to read this review are more interested in my opinion of the sound from this DAC, not a rehash of technical details and the like. It bears some notice that this is simply my opinion, one from a decidedly “amateur” audiophile, so take that for what it’s worth. (As an amateur reviewer, please have some tolerance for lack of information or incorrect information, however unintentional.) In short, I find the DAC-11 quite revelatory, not only in its ability to convey a very detailed, clean and crisp sound, but also revelatory in its ability to provide such a high sense of value. I keep returning to this mantra because it is so surprising to me when I consider the level of performance relative to the quite affordable price.
The DAC-11 is a NOS design and will simply play whatever sample rate it is fed through its many inputs. USB is capable of 24/96, while the optical and coaxial digital inputs support 24/192. There are also 2 analog inputs which is great for convenience if other gear is to be hooked up and played through the passive on board pre-amp, or headphone stage. Grant Fidelity themselves strongly recommend a power cord upgrade and while my upgraded cord was not super high end, it did seem to offer some improvements from the stock cord using some quick A-B tests. I might try something better in the future.
Most of my listening was through the tube output. I have not had the chance to try any other tubes other than the included 6N11, though I have an EH 6922 and a Philips JAN 6922 awaiting trial. I did some limited headphone trials (good enough for me, but I did not do extensive listening so should refrain from any critical comments) but most of my listening was through loudspeakers driven by a power amp, using the DAC-11 as a preamp. For the record, the gear: a Burson PP160 and Mission 752…perchance a slightly curious combination, but it is what I have on hand. I used a Sony BDP350 for Redbook CD playback via coaxial cable, an iPod touch docked to a Pure i-20 via optical and coax, and a PC music server through USB as source equipment (Yulong ASIO USB driver).
The most salient aspect of the sound quality via either transistor or tube outputs is the remarkable detail retrieval, with a caveat as described below. Of course, the ancillary gear will have some influence on this, but if you have reasonably resolving gear, the DAC-11 will shine. The DAC-11 does especially well with recordings of jazz ensembles, small chamber classical music, acoustic pop/rock and individual singers and instruments. I did find some limitations with larger orchestral recordings and to some extent multi layered pop/rock recordings as there was some congealing of the sound where I found individual placement of instruments harder to distinguish. Nonetheless it hardly falls flat on its face with more demanding recordings such as a large symphonic piece; it fares admirably, but does not offer the last word in spatial detail and resolution.
Comparing the SS vs. the tube output, I found the tube preferable in my system as far as synergy. My intention was to tame the inherent tendency to stridency and brightness in my amp and loudspeaker combination and the tube output of the DAC-11 accomplished this quite well. Switching to the SS output, the same level of clarity and detail was there as with the tube but perhaps a touch brighter and more shrill in the top end. I am quite sensitive to brightness-induced listener fatigue and I found after some extended listening, the SS output went in that direction for me. This is not to say this would happen in every system but as mentioned my gear was already leaning to brightness. The SS output did have a slight edge in bottom end extension but the tube output surprised me here with good impact and snap in the bass octaves. Tubes often have listeners criticizing an overly euphonic sound but I found the tube output with the 6N11 offered just the right amount of “sweetness” and warmth while retaining excellent clarity and detail. I have high hopes for the Philips JAN 6922 mentioned earlier as soon as I get around to it.
My comparison DAC gear was limited but many are probably familiar with the Burson HA160D, if not in person, then at least from many glowing reviews. It is definitely in a different price category so the comparison is hardly fair but the DAC-11 did not throw its hands up and fall over, in fact it again flat out surprised me considering the price. I strongly believe in synergistic combinations of audio gear and the DAC-11 works well in my system largely due to whatever brightness-taming capacity it has via the tube outputs, as alluded to before. The HA160D is remarkable for its ability to convey stunning detail, provide exemplary extension in both treble and bass ranges and a very convincing midrange with great depth and soundstage. The DAC-11, by comparison, does all of the above fairly well but is outclassed in every regard by the HA160D to my ears, but note significantly there is an $800-odd price differential. Of note, I am finding some narrowness in the soundstage and depth in the DAC-11 but it is a slight quibble and likely to improve with further burn-in of the 6N11 or a wholesale switch to a higher performing tube.
In summary, the DAC-11 is an outstanding performer, not only for its excellent sound quality but for the many features it has and foremost for the remarkable price-to-performance ratio. An easy recommendation.
I have been using the Grant Fidelity Tube DAC-11 for about 4 weeks now, think I have a reasonable “first impression”, and wanted to share my enthusiasm for a very high value piece of audio gear. The Tube DAC-11 currently checks in at $350 and I feel you certainly get tremendous value with this DAC. The marketplace is not short of DACs in this price range but there is a fair share of very mediocre gear out there and a limited handful of ones that punch above their weight class, so to speak. The Tube DAC-11 comfortably fits in the latter category, at least to my ears.
From the standpoint of comparison, a number of reasonably decent DACs do inhabit this price range but considering the nearly “do-all” capacity of the DAC-11, it definitely represents great value. A very welcome feature is the tube output stage which allows plenty of “tube rolling” options to change the sound signature. The included Chinese-sourced 6N11 is fairly good.
It would not be all that useful to repeat the detailed features and technical overview available on Grant Fidelity’s website, so I will just provide the link for those interested in that information: http://shop.grantfidelity.com/Grant-Fidelity-TubeDAC-11-D-A-Converter.html.
I think most people choosing to read this review are more interested in my opinion of the sound from this DAC, not a rehash of technical details and the like. It bears some notice that this is simply my opinion, one from a decidedly “amateur” audiophile, so take that for what it’s worth. (As an amateur reviewer, please have some tolerance for lack of information or incorrect information, however unintentional.) In short, I find the DAC-11 quite revelatory, not only in its ability to convey a very detailed, clean and crisp sound, but also revelatory in its ability to provide such a high sense of value. I keep returning to this mantra because it is so surprising to me when I consider the level of performance relative to the quite affordable price.
The DAC-11 is a NOS design and will simply play whatever sample rate it is fed through its many inputs. USB is capable of 24/96, while the optical and coaxial digital inputs support 24/192. There are also 2 analog inputs which is great for convenience if other gear is to be hooked up and played through the passive on board pre-amp, or headphone stage. Grant Fidelity themselves strongly recommend a power cord upgrade and while my upgraded cord was not super high end, it did seem to offer some improvements from the stock cord using some quick A-B tests. I might try something better in the future.
Most of my listening was through the tube output. I have not had the chance to try any other tubes other than the included 6N11, though I have an EH 6922 and a Philips JAN 6922 awaiting trial. I did some limited headphone trials (good enough for me, but I did not do extensive listening so should refrain from any critical comments) but most of my listening was through loudspeakers driven by a power amp, using the DAC-11 as a preamp. For the record, the gear: a Burson PP160 and Mission 752…perchance a slightly curious combination, but it is what I have on hand. I used a Sony BDP350 for Redbook CD playback via coaxial cable, an iPod touch docked to a Pure i-20 via optical and coax, and a PC music server through USB as source equipment (Yulong ASIO USB driver).
The most salient aspect of the sound quality via either transistor or tube outputs is the remarkable detail retrieval, with a caveat as described below. Of course, the ancillary gear will have some influence on this, but if you have reasonably resolving gear, the DAC-11 will shine. The DAC-11 does especially well with recordings of jazz ensembles, small chamber classical music, acoustic pop/rock and individual singers and instruments. I did find some limitations with larger orchestral recordings and to some extent multi layered pop/rock recordings as there was some congealing of the sound where I found individual placement of instruments harder to distinguish. Nonetheless it hardly falls flat on its face with more demanding recordings such as a large symphonic piece; it fares admirably, but does not offer the last word in spatial detail and resolution.
Comparing the SS vs. the tube output, I found the tube preferable in my system as far as synergy. My intention was to tame the inherent tendency to stridency and brightness in my amp and loudspeaker combination and the tube output of the DAC-11 accomplished this quite well. Switching to the SS output, the same level of clarity and detail was there as with the tube but perhaps a touch brighter and more shrill in the top end. I am quite sensitive to brightness-induced listener fatigue and I found after some extended listening, the SS output went in that direction for me. This is not to say this would happen in every system but as mentioned my gear was already leaning to brightness. The SS output did have a slight edge in bottom end extension but the tube output surprised me here with good impact and snap in the bass octaves. Tubes often have listeners criticizing an overly euphonic sound but I found the tube output with the 6N11 offered just the right amount of “sweetness” and warmth while retaining excellent clarity and detail. I have high hopes for the Philips JAN 6922 mentioned earlier as soon as I get around to it.
My comparison DAC gear was limited but many are probably familiar with the Burson HA160D, if not in person, then at least from many glowing reviews. It is definitely in a different price category so the comparison is hardly fair but the DAC-11 did not throw its hands up and fall over, in fact it again flat out surprised me considering the price. I strongly believe in synergistic combinations of audio gear and the DAC-11 works well in my system largely due to whatever brightness-taming capacity it has via the tube outputs, as alluded to before. The HA160D is remarkable for its ability to convey stunning detail, provide exemplary extension in both treble and bass ranges and a very convincing midrange with great depth and soundstage. The DAC-11, by comparison, does all of the above fairly well but is outclassed in every regard by the HA160D to my ears, but note significantly there is an $800-odd price differential. Of note, I am finding some narrowness in the soundstage and depth in the DAC-11 but it is a slight quibble and likely to improve with further burn-in of the 6N11 or a wholesale switch to a higher performing tube.
In summary, the DAC-11 is an outstanding performer, not only for its excellent sound quality but for the many features it has and foremost for the remarkable price-to-performance ratio. An easy recommendation.
