Inside the latest Benchmark DAC1

[tiberian]

how does a gilmore amp sound like...?

IMO the dac amp is neutral sounding and quite detailed without any rolloff in extreme frequencies. my xp-7 has some rolloff and not as detailed, but the sound is smoother and midrange is better...

 

[Iron_Dreamer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiberian how does a gilmore amp sound like...? IMO the dac amp is neutral sounding and quite detailed without any rolloff in extreme frequencies. my xp-7 has some rolloff and not as detailed, but the sound is smoother and midrange is better...

Well the Gilmore is basically as you described the DAC1 amp, transparent, neutral, detailed, and extended, but no king or warmth, smoothness, etc. I am really starting to love this DAC, I find myself going arounf the house tapping out various beats, humming, etc, like I haven't done in a long time. I just had an awesome half hour of power (LOL) with Iced Earth's Gettysburg.

 

[Glassman]

I bet it's all thanks to a clean clock produced onboard.. you can even substitute AD1896A with SRC4192 by Burr Brown, even better specs.. and the I/V conversion will definitely profit from kind of ZAPfilter.. you seem to like AD1852/53, they should be in the same breed sound-wise, the only advantage of '53 is that you can handle the I/V yourself ie. better than on-chip..

well, I hope modded E-MU will please me a long enough time until I find some time to build some killer DAC inside my soon-to-be Blue Hawaii.. providing E-MU has incredible digital output as Empirical Audio claims, I'm in for something

 

[LKK]

I don't know if this is the right place to post this, but I don't really like the DAC1 that much.
The jitter reduction is not as amazing as Benchmark said. I have tried a few different sources with different results. Some are better and some are not so good.
The headphone output is nothing speacial.
The DAC section is ok, but not worth the price for me. I had it compared side by side with a micromega DAC(quite old, ~$200 used) and dAck DAC with Monarch DIP. I like the dAck combo a lot more and feel the micromega is more "musical".
I used MPX3 and HD650 for testing.
Anyway, at least they are offering money within a month or so.

 

[Iron_Dreamer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glassman I bet it's all thanks to a clean clock produced onboard.. you can even substitute AD1896A with SRC4192 by Burr Brown, even better specs.. and the I/V conversion will definitely profit from kind of ZAPfilter.. you seem to like AD1852/53, they should be in the same breed sound-wise, the only advantage of '53 is that you can handle the I/V yourself ie. better than on-chip.. well, I hope modded E-MU will please me a long enough time until I find some time to build some killer DAC inside my soon-to-be Blue Hawaii.. providing E-MU has incredible digital output as Empirical Audio claims, I'm in for something

At least from my only BH experience, you're definitely in for something

I looked up the SRC4192, it doesn't look to be compatible with the AD1896A. Just as well I'm so happy with the sound right now, it will be a while before I start fiddling with things.

 

[Iron_Dreamer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LKK I don't know if this is the right place to post this, but I don't really like the DAC1 that much. The jitter reduction is not as amazing as Benchmark said. I have tried a few different sources with different results. Some are better and some are not so good. The headphone output is nothing speacial. The DAC section is ok, but not worth the price for me. I had it compared side by side with a micromega DAC(quite old, ~$200 used) and dAck DAC with Monarch DIP. I like the dAck combo a lot more and feel the micromega is more "musical". I used MPX3 and HD650 for testing. Anyway, at least they are offering money within a month or so.

I can see how you'd find other DAC's more musical, this one is intended to be as clean and neutal as possible, it even says so in the manual, part of their philosophy is that the DAC and ADC stages of any rig should be neutral, since their color would show up in all future sounds produced by said rig. The stuff I have written abotu it sounding a bit cold are probably the same thing you picked up on as being non-musical. I guess that is why a good tube amp seem like a natural fit, though the DAC1's sound is really starting to grow on me.

 

[LKK]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iron_Dreamer I can see how you'd find other DAC's more musical, this one is intended to be as clean and neutal as possible, it even says so in the manual, part of their philosophy is that the DAC and ADC stages of any rig should be neutral, since their color would show up in all future sounds produced by said rig. The stuff I have written abotu it sounding a bit cold are probably the same thing you picked up on as being non-musical. I guess that is why a good tube amp seem like a natural fit, though the DAC1's sound is really starting to grow on me.

I agree.
But next time if you have a chance, give the dAck DAC a listen. I think it goes very well with CD3000.

 

[cadobhuk]

His wooden cd3000 sound quite different from your stock ones,so whats good for yours might not be good for his.

 

[tiberian]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iron_Dreamer Well the Gilmore is basically as you described the DAC1 amp, transparent, neutral, detailed, and extended, but no king or warmth, smoothness, etc. I am really starting to love this DAC, I find myself going arounf the house tapping out various beats, humming, etc, like I haven't done in a long time. I just had an awesome half hour of power (LOL) with Iced Earth's Gettysburg.

thanks. no wonder gilmore amps are not tuberoller's cup of tea.

 

[Edwood]

I'm really really really curious as to how the Benchmark pairs up with the Grace.

The "little lean on the bass" part worries me, though.

I need all the bass I can get with the R10's. Moreso with the K1000's.

-Ed

 

[Ferbose]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mulveling Thanks for the impressions, ID. Hmm, this DAC would be nice because I could also use it with DVD videos - though I wonder if it would be worth it for a compressed audio format.

Most DVDs have LPCM that is probably 48kHz/24bit, which should surpass CD quality. Dolby Digital supports compressed 48/24 but it is lossy. The stereo digital output is a folded-down signal using parameters specified in the recording. After these two compromises, I don't know if it is supposed to sound better than CDs or not. When I listened to the Dolby Digital signal on AIX's DVD-A demonstration disc via stereo PCM digital output to Benchmark, it sounds as good as the best CDs I have. IMO, it should be worth using DVDs with Benchmark DAC1.
I never listen to MP3 because I assume the compression is very lossy. The other day my friend downloaded a "medium quality" MP3 of a superbly-recorded CD I have. He converted it back to .wav file so it can be read by Sony DVP-NS900V and we listened to it through DAC1. To my amazement, the sound quality is >95% there compared to the CD. We had to listen very carefully to spot a few minor differences here and there. I guess MP3 is not so lossy afterall. Through Benchmark DAC1, the MP3 sounds as good as the original CD through Sony's internal DAC. Heck, NS900V was widely regarded as a good-sounding SACD/DVD player for its original MSRP of $1000. If the original recording is good on a DVD, it should sound great with DAC1.

 

[kwong]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iron_Dreamer ... I think they are both great deals, because I have heard (or heard of) no other components that offer their respective levels of performance at competetive prices. The EMU is in the range of $500-$1000 CDP's. Stereophile compares the DAC1 to $10000+ DAC's.

Headfi has re-shaped my belief once more

Somewhere I heard EMU ~ Lynx2 ~ G08, and some said EMU is probably better than Lynx because Lynx is too clinical, but now you say 588 > Benchmark. I assume G08 > 588, so I conclude EMU is just better then Audigy

Gosh ... I'm glad I didn't buy 1812M. I've never wanted to spend more than $500 anyway <- Makes me feel better when I say this

 

[lan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwong Headfi has re-shaped my belief once more

Ultimately it comes down to trust your own ears, preferences, and system synergy. I'd take any views with caution. Sometimes differences aren't that much and exagerated. Sometimes equipment isn't really better but just different and new.

In an absolute sense of performance, it's hard to say where things lie unless you are using very good equipment overall. To me for judging a source, cables, powercords, and power conditioning can make or break the differences.

 

[Iron_Dreamer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LKK I agree. But next time if you have a chance, give the dAck DAC a listen. I think it goes very well with CD3000.

I would love to hear a dACK, yet the opportunity never seems to come up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cadobhuk His wooden cd3000 sound quite different from your stock ones,so whats good for yours might not be good for his.

True, but it's not that different, the main character is the same, just tweaked a little, warmer mids and smoother treble; wider, deeper soundstage; and deeper bass mainly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwong 588 > Benchmark

I never said that. I was saying that the modded EMU is about as good as the 588, so the Benchmark is on a whole different level from both, i.e. Benchmark >> 588.

 

[Jasper994]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iron_Dreamer At least from my only BH experience, you're definitely in for something I looked up the SRC4192, it doesn't look to be compatible with the AD1896A. Just as well I'm so happy with the sound right now, it will be a while before I start fiddling with things.

<as in one to two weeks>