HeadRoom Balanced, Benchmark DAC1 - comparison?

[MaloS]

HeadRoom balanced with DAC = $1400
Benchmark DAC1 with USB = $1275

How do they compare (tonality, detail, soundstage) when driving headphones balanced or single-ended?

I am deliberately placing emphasis on USB here because of my need for it, and bringing up these two to be as similar as possible (the only difference in functionality is that DAC1 does not have analog inputs).

 

[kool bubba ice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaloS /img/forum/go_quote.gif HeadRoom balanced with DAC = $1400 Benchmark DAC1 with USB = $1275 How do they compare (tonality, detail, soundstage) when driving headphones balanced or single-ended? I am deliberately placing emphasis on USB here because of my need for it, and bringing up these two to be as similar as possible (the only difference in functionality is that DAC1 does not have analog inputs).

I been wanting to know this for the longest time. I went with the HR-2 instead cause I wanted a amp for my 2 SE cans & was 300 cheaper... as my DAC1 wasn't very effective at driving them.. & want to know how big the improvement is.. It will probably be slightly better & different.. I'd be surprised if its noticablly better then the DAC1 balanced.

 

[schaqfu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaloS /img/forum/go_quote.gif HeadRoom balanced with DAC = $1400 Benchmark DAC1 with USB = $1275 How do they compare (tonality, detail, soundstage) when driving headphones balanced or single-ended? I am deliberately placing emphasis on USB here because of my need for it, and bringing up these two to be as similar as possible (the only difference in functionality is that DAC1 does not have analog inputs).

Because USB functionality is so important for you (as it is for me, which is why I own a DAC1-USB), you should note they are not equal in this respect. When I spoke with HeadRoom a year ago, they told me that all their DACs can only support a maximum of 48KHz/24bit over USB, while the DAC1, of course, prides itself on native bit-perfect 96KHz/24bit over USB. If you think you're ever going to have hi-res audio files to listen to over USB, that's a huge dealbreaker. At least it was for me. I currently have my DAC1 paired with the Headroom Ultra Micro amp. I'm happy.

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

IMHO I think the HeadRoom is going to have the juice to drive headphones better, balanced or 2 SE. If you want to play 24/96 native files, and get a DAC1, you'll end up getting an amp to drive the headphones later.

If you get the Headroom, and you have a way to add optical or coax to your PC, then you can still take advantage of the 24/96 that way via the HeadRoom, but still have USB for everything else.

 

[xenithon]

I think the HR would have more juice and perhaps be better since it is a "dedicated" balanced amp. It is also more flexible - it has two SE outputs too, SE and balanced inputs, crossfeed, etc.

That said, perhaps look at it with a longer-term vision in mind? That is, you could have two options:
1. get the HR sans DAC and get a separate USB DAC
2. get the HR with DAC and get a USB interface which you could use to feed the HR's DAC.

Both the the above could be done on a modular basis (first get the HR, and get the second component at a later stage).

With option #1 you could get a USB DAC which could even handle up to 24/192, and you would then feed its analog output to the HR amp.

With option #2 you would use the USB interface just to get the data out of the computer and into digital form (optical or coax) and send that to the HR's DAC. You'd be limited to the HR Dac's potential though.

Cheers,
X

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

If I recall, the HR analog inputs are split into balanced signals, so you could feed the HR from another USB device like the Pico. But the HR internal DAC is a balanced output and might actually sound better at 24/48 than the Pico doing up-sampling and then feeding unbalanced analog into the HR.

I am glad I don't have to worry about USB only, since both my Macbooks and my iMac have optical out. Today I was feeding 24/96 audio from Linn Records into my Apogee mini-dac via optical from Mac, and listening to my HD600 balanced out of the Apogee. I am planning to get a HR Balanced Amp to drive the HD600, but with the Apogee XLR out sounding so good, Maybe the DAC1 isn't such a bad idea to drive headphones too?

I think the biggest plus for the DAC1 is the ability to scale your system up around it, with 24/96 USB (if that is important to you) and sending the signal into a better amp later. I don't think it would be out of place driving $5,000 mono-block amps and $10,000 speakers. The HR has no analog out, unless you use XLR or SE headphone out like a pre-amp (which headroom says actually works quite well, and I use my Pico that way).

It makes the decision all that more difficult.

 

[djembeplay]

I would be really interested to hear someone do a direct A/B test in reguards to the OP's 2 listed products.

As a side thought, one thing comes to mind that you may want to keep in mind... Seriously ask yourself how important it is to have a DAC that samples above the standard CD rate of 16/44. If you are only going to go above this to download a couple test samples... it seems silly. Even if you only seldomly listen to SACDs or any music above CD quality for that matter... it still seems silly. Why? Because for the same price, a non-OS DAC will beat the pants off of an OS DAC. Non-OS DACs are cheaper to build and can thus be higher quality at a certain price. Also, the camps are split between whether people even enjoy an interpolated, oversampled sound of a more expensive but equal quality OS DAC to a more natural, mellow sound of a cheaper non-OS DAC. Given this argument pertains specifically to CD listening...

Anyways, if you listen to alot of music above 16/44... great, then an OS-DAC is what you will want. But... let's not make the mistake of correlating a lower bitrate DAC with a lower quality DAC.

I, for one, would really like to know if there is a balanced HP amp made with a nice integrated non-OS DAC... that would be my ideal. But, anyways... I don't mean to hijack the post.

Peace

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

Originally Posted by djembeplay /img/forum/go_quote.gif [snip] (1) Anyways, if you listen to alot of music above 16/44... great, then an OS-DAC is what you will want. But... let's not make the mistake of correlating a lower bitrate DAC with a lower quality DAC. (2) I, for one, would really like to know if there is a balanced HP amp made with a nice integrated non-OS DAC... that would be my ideal. But, anyways... I don't mean to hijack the post. Peace

1) agreed

2) that would be the HeadRoom Balanced Desktop with DAC $1398

 

[djembeplay]

Heh, that's funny... I've been researching like crazy today and have landed squarely on the Headroom Balanced Desktop at this point... this is the last post I was going to look at before I sign out for the day, and you just put the icing on the cake so to speak

.

I actually haven't heard that much about the quality of the DAC it's self in the Balanced Desktop, but what I have heard has been glowing. It is pretty good then? Heh, just yesterday I was looking at the xCan v8, but someone said they opened it up to find a very mediocre DAC chip... plus I'm turned on by the idea of running a Balanced set-up based on the weight of improvement most seem to express...

I had heard that it wasn't so much when I was researching speaker systems... but who knows, all subjective... plus, speakers are different beasts... HPs are probobly much more revealing of a change from SE-to-Balanced.

Man, I'm tired... I ramble when I'm tired.

Thanks for the input.

 

[The Monkey]

I have both, through which I primarily use my balanced HD650, but also run a balanced HF-1. To me, the DAC1 sounds slightly more detailed in the mids and highs, especially up top, but it also sounds thin. The balanced desktop has a much more expansive soundstage and deeper, more detailed bass. Both have nice PRAT, but I think the Balanced Desktop grooves more, making it much more suitable for rock. Pretty black backgrounds on both, but the HR seems to "slur" a little bit more. By "slur" I mean that the HR floats from note to note with a little less edge/etch. I don't know if this means slightly less detail, or slightly more decay, but it makes for a more "romantic" sound. In terms of tonality, I think the Balanced Desktop is neutral/warm and the DAC1 is bright/clinical. While I like the DAC1 a lot, it's the HR balanced desktop that I love and which I will stay with for my phones. The DAC1 will be used with my Airport Express and my NAD/Vienna Acoustics, which could use more detail and less bloom.

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Monkey /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have both, through which I primarily use my balanced HD650, but also run a balanced HF-1. To me, the DAC1 sounds slightly more detailed in the mids and highs, especially up top, but it also sounds thin. The balanced desktop has a much more expansive soundstage and deeper, more detailed bass. Both have nice PRAT, but I think the Balanced Desktop grooves more, making it much more suitable for rock. Pretty black backgrounds on both, but the HR seems to "slur" a little bit more. By "slur" I mean that the HR floats from note to note with a little less edge/etch. I don't know if this means slightly less detail, or slightly more decay, but it makes for a more "romantic" sound. In terms of tonality, I think the Balanced Desktop is neutral/warm and the DAC1 is bright/clinical. While I like the DAC1 a lot, it's the HR balanced desktop that I love and which I will stay with for my phones. The DAC1 will be used with my Airport Express and my NAD/Vienna Acoustics, which could use more detail and less bloom.

Great report. The HR Balanced Desktop has been on my short list for my balanced amp, and I plan to use my Neutrik 12" XLR cables to feed it from my Apogee mini-DAC, saving me the $400 for internal DAC.

My Apogee currently feeds my Woo 6 from the 1/8" line out, and also drives my HD600 from the balanced outs. The XLR out driving the HD600 is crisp fast and clean, quiet and detailed, with good separation of instruments and air. Nobody can say my HD600 are slow and dull with the Apogee as source and APS V3 balanced cable. But, I could use a little more warmth and power from the HeadRoom amp driving them instead.

 

[jjj121]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict /img/forum/go_quote.gif Great report. The HR Balanced Desktop has been on my short list for my balanced amp, and I plan to use my Neutrik 12" XLR cables to feed it from my Apogee mini-DAC, saving me the $400 for internal DAC. My Apogee currently feeds my Woo 6 from the 1/8" line out, and also drives my HD600 from the balanced outs. The XLR out driving the HD600 is crisp fast and clean, quiet and detailed, with good separation of instruments and air. Nobody can say my HD600 are slow and dull with the Apogee as source and APS V3 balanced cable. But, I could use a little more warmth and power from the HeadRoom amp driving them instead.

I have similar setup and am also considering HR desktop balanced.
apogee mini-dac XLR out -> Equinox balanced (female) -> HD650

So from your listening, you prefer apogee XLR to Woo 6 from 1/8"?

The major concern for me to purchase HR balanced is its lack of pre-out. I'm glad to hear XLR or SE headphone out works quite well like a pre-amp.

I'm a bit regretful that I should buy the balanced cable male connector instead of female. I remember someone posted the link where to buy XLR male-male adaptor, but I could not find it. Does anybody can help me on this?

Thanks!

 

[MaloS]

Paying attention here, quietly, keep up the discussion =).

Can someone else pitch in on the detail retrieval abilities of the two?

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjj121 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have similar setup and am also considering HR desktop balanced. apogee mini-dac XLR out -> Equinox balanced (female) -> HD650 So from your listening, you prefer apogee XLR to Woo 6 from 1/8"? Quote: Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict Actually, I think the HD600 with my single ended APS v3 cable sound great from the Woo 6, just different from balanced. I have trouble putting a finger on it exactly - one improvement with the Woo is actually more bass, and the mids are warmer and richer. The highs are different, but I can't decide which is more realistic yet. It is a real pain to switch out the cables and amps to compare them. I think while the Woo 6 is maybe more musical (colored), balanced from the Apogee is more transparent. The major concern for me to purchase HR balanced is its lack of pre-out. I'm glad to hear XLR or SE headphone out works quite well like a pre-amp. I'm a bit regretful that I should buy the balanced cable male connector instead of female. I remember someone posted the link where to buy XLR male-male adaptor, but I could not find it. Does anybody can help me on this? Quote: Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict 2 XLR MALE to XLR MALE MICROPHONE CABLE ADAPTERS - eBay (item 170208870339 end time Apr-14-08 20:30:00 PDT) Thanks!

That was me that found the cheap male-male XLR. I think I will likely have Alex at APS re-terminate my balanced cable when I get an amp, just because the adapter looks kinda like cheap pot metal when they arrived, and I am sure they wont help the sound.

 

[djembeplay]

Lol, dude... headphoneaddict.... I was just looking through your equipment list there... Have you considered going to AA meetings for this? I mean, really, help is just a phone-call away these days

I was thinking you could lighten your load a bit there if you just picked up the Headroom Balanced Desktop and ran 600 foot XLR cables to your headphones... then you could just walk anywhere in your house with em'... even out in the yard.