[Patu]

1212m didn't work for me. Actually the cheap sound card which I'm using now (with cmediadrivers) sounds very good. But I got awesome deal for ESI Juli@ on eBay so I'm going to try that one out. Optical connection should be better with PC anyways because there's no electric connection with it.

DAC19Mk3 sounds as good as it has from the beginning.

 

[tim3320070]

You could bypass a need for a soundcard and go with a converter like the Musiland Monitor 01 or similar for under $100.

 

[Patu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tim3320070 /img/forum/go_quote.gif You could bypass a need for a soundcard and go with a converter like the Musiland Monitor 01 or similar for under $100.

That's a sound card just like any other, it's just external. I prefer not to have any more external components than I already have. It'd be interesting to try it out though, just to hear how it performs.

 

[Coreyk78]

Has anyone had a chance to compare the DAC19MK3 to a Twisted Pear Opus?

I'm looking to upgrade my DAC, even though my Zero is still working fine(knocks on wood).

I have no need for balanced output, so I would be interested in impressions of the Opus used with single-ended outputs vs. the DAC19MK3.

Part of me likes the idea of diy-ing my own dac, but pricing out everything for an Opus puts it well over $400 for parts alone, and my casework will never come close to the fit and finish of an Audio-GD piece.

At the moment I am leaning towards the dac19, because it looks beautiful and I already have plenty of other projects waiting to be built. Still, I would be very interested in what anyone who has heard both would say.

 

[haloxt]

I've been comparing compass dac vs. dac19mk3 (with 300 hours of burn-in) with the phoenix amp, and in that scenario, the compass dac really is 50% of the dac19mk3, and as pessimistically as you'd like to interpret that percentage.

Here's a first impression by sandchak of dac19SE vs. ref 1 but it's just a first impression since the ref 1 may change a lot after 1000 hours of burn in. I completely agree with the third post linked that the dac19's sound signature tries to "convey" music, slightly unintimate and slightly digital, but if the compass dac section is a good deal, the 3x more expensive dac19mk3 is an even better deal if you plan on using it with high end equipment.

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f7/aud...ml#post5814836
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f7/aud...ml#post5815283
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f7/aud...ml#post5815485

 

[Patu]

I really doubt that any solid state equipment changes after 1000 hours. I'm not that big of a believer in burn in and 1000 hours sounds pretty much ridiculous to me.

It's great that sandchak made comparison between the two but please remember that he compared the older model of DAC19. There has been numerous improvements on the Mk3. So the comparison really isn't valid.

 

[haloxt]

The dac19mk3 was given a monitor-like sound signature while the dac19se had a musical sound signature, but other than that I would think the dac19mk3 and dac19se should be in the same ballpark.

I know it's pretty dumb of me to try to gauge a dac by comparing it to a dac 3x more expensive (and from the same manufacturer

) but I think we really could use more information about the dac19mk3.

Also I hope people don't misunderstand me, when I say "convey" in my previous post, I mean the combination of sound signature and fidelity allows you to understand what the musicians are trying to convey. I never experienced that until I got the dac19mk3, which makes me like it very much.

 

[K3cT]

Any more updates guys?

 

[sandchak]

Haloxt,

There is quite a few differences between the DAC19SE and DAC19MK3, in DAC19MK3 you have the additional USB connectivity apart from optical and coaxial, it uses a redesigned board and most importantly the newly designed CAST module which makes a difference sonically - all this in a convenient desktop size all aluminum chassis.

Whereas the DAC19Se is a more conventional full size DAC which has been in production for the last 2-3 years and upgraded in early 2009, it uses the old CAST modules, it does not have the additional connectivity like the DAC19MK3 as it only has a single Coax RCA and BNC input. But there are a couple of things that the DAC19MK3 has, like a more powerful transformer and separate power regulators for each channel and this is the reason why it sounds at least as good as DAC19MK3 according to Kingwa.

Putting aside the differences in SQ between DAC19SE and REF1, if you just take a look at the interiors of both, you will quickly realize that much has gone into the REF1. Its not just about the 2 X PCM1704 or 8 X PCM1704, but much more in form of pure power (3 trafos) separate boards, advanced circuitry and processing of signals, weighing 3 times more and costing as much from the same manufacturer, who says if Compass DAC is 1, then DAC19SE is 3 and REF1 is 10, and you cant compare the DAC19SE with REF1, obviously he isnt trying to discredit his own design but I think it explains the reality - which is what I found myself while comparing the DAC19SE with the REF1.

So you are right, that there is not much if any difference between the DAC19SE and DAC19MK3 sonically - which makes me feel the difference between the REF1 and DAC19MK3 would also be similar to REF1 and DAC19SE.

 

[Patu]

So DAC19 is 3 and Ref1 is 10. This would mean that DAC19 delivers 30 % of the performance of Ref1, which sounds totally ridiculous to me. I'm sure Ref1 delivers more than DAC19, but that it'd be over three times better, please. For me it's impossible to use percentages to compare hifi equipment against each other.

I've heard Compass DAC section and DAC19Mk3 in my setup. If I'd have to rank them with percentages it'd be something like 85-90 % for compass if DAC19Mk3 is 100 %. And I can't even do that. Some people might even prefer Compass to DAC19Mk3 because it has slightly easier and more relaxed sound.

Many hifi magazines use percentages to rank the equipment they have reviewed. If something is ranked 3 (30 %) against 10 (100 %) in a scale of 0-10 then 3 should sound crappy as hell. 3 would mean that the sound is just unacceptable in every way. For example our local hifi magazine called Hifimaailma, ranks equipment from 4-10. If something sounds bad or the sound is very colored in a bad way then worse that I've seen is something like 6-7. But never below that. Below that would mean that something is really lacking or ******* up.

So I think that Kingwa's ranking isn't very accurate.

 

[haloxt]

I'm thinking that the numbers of 1, 3, 10 were made when the rest of the chain is comprised of very high end equipment. Since most of us are not using the compass or dac19mk3 with gear in the same price-class as the Ref 1, the audible difference we hear between all three dac's should shrink dramatically. I think the compass and dac19mk3 are more than enough for most audiophiles though, ref 1 is probably for people who have a real fetish for fidelity.

 

[iszatso]

Having the dac19mk3 paired with the c-2c, realize how dependent equipment matching and the interelatedness of components. To bring out the full potential of the dac19 I need to change the volume pot on the c-2c. The dak19 and the c-2c are being held back by the volume pot upgrade. (in the midst of doing.) So can imagine the individual choices one must pursue to get the best out of their equipment. Each link in the chain effects sound quality.

Whatever number rating is given to each component, that number rating is based on a fixed setup inputing the values for the subjective number.

The secret seems to be, having the equipment so paired that it maximizes the qualities of each piece of equipment in the link and not having any one piece outperforming any of the other.

Usually enough is enough for me until I hear a creditable source change something in the chain that increases the sound quality and is noticeable and cost effective. Then the chase begins again.

 

[Patu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haloxt /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm thinking that the numbers of 1, 3, 10 were made when the rest of the chain is comprised of very high end equipment. Since most of us are not using the compass or dac19mk3 with gear in the same price-class as the Ref 1, the audible difference we hear between all three dac's should shrink dramatically. I think the compass and dac19mk3 are more than enough for most audiophiles though, ref 1 is probably for people who have a real fetish for fidelity.

I'm not sure if I understood what you meant with this reply.

I'm using DAC19Mk3 with a same price class components than Ref1. Actually even more expensive than Ref1.

 

[sandchak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patu /img/forum/go_quote.gif So DAC19 is 3 and Ref1 is 10. This would mean that DAC19 delivers 30 % of the performance of Ref1, which sounds totally ridiculous to me. I'm sure Ref1 delivers more than DAC19, but that it'd be over three times better, please. For me it's impossible to use percentages to compare hifi equipment against each other. I've heard Compass DAC section and DAC19Mk3 in my setup. If I'd have to rank them with percentages it'd be something like 85-90 % for compass if DAC19Mk3 is 100 %. And I can't even do that. Some people might even prefer Compass to DAC19Mk3 because it has slightly easier and more relaxed sound. Many hifi magazines use percentages to rank the equipment they have reviewed. If something is ranked 3 (30 %) against 10 (100 %) in a scale of 0-10 then 3 should sound crappy as hell. 3 would mean that the sound is just unacceptable in every way. For example our local hifi magazine called Hifimaailma, ranks equipment from 4-10. If something sounds bad or the sound is very colored in a bad way then worse that I've seen is something like 6-7. But never below that. Below that would mean that something is really lacking or ******* up. So I think that Kingwa's ranking isn't very accurate.

Patu,

One - I dont think Kingwa was giving those numbers in a general way as the magazine you are talking about where 1 of 10 would mean terribly bad. He was only trying compare the 3 DACs which he has made.

Two - I hear both DAC19SE and REF1 and I can say REF1 sounds ridiculously better than DAC19SE.

Three - I understand it is very difficult for you to accept what I say, because you are not willing to believe the SQ of both DAC19SE and DAC19MK3 are in the same ballmark. In fact the DAC19SE seems to me was built to sound better without all the convenience of DAC19MK3.

 

[haloxt]

Dac19mk3 does have convenience factor over the ref 1 with its smaller size, plus it's 3x cheaper so it's perfect for me

.