I just placed an order today. Now the wait begins. I spent a bunch of time trying to find good reviews. It is a bit of a surprise that there is not really much out there on the V2+.
So weird indeed that the usual suspects are nowhere to be seen reviewing such a major upgrade. It doesn't make sense seeing Virtuoso receiving so many reviews and now complete dead silence despite V5 op amp circuitry and 8 wpc
As a side note, i also bought the Oppo dac with the Ess sabre pro 9038 at that time and the difference between it and the internal 9018 one in the V2+ was minimal.
Slightly less glare, but that's pretty much it. Not a deal breaker, but if/when Burson releases an updated dac board with the 9038 chip on it, I'd likely buy it but i wouldn't rush to do so.
Thing is, there are so many parameters involved when comparing products from different brands. If Burson manages to squeeze every drop out of Sabre 9038 like they did with 9018 on V2+, it might actually turn into a real deal breaker. You never know. 9038 is imminent...DAC market talks...It's going to be hard for them to bring the best out of it with the next (hopefully not a rush out) release though.
Thing is, there are so many parameters involved when comparing products from different brands. If Burson manages to squeeze every drop out of Sabre 9038 like they did with 9018 on V2+, it might actually turn into a real deal breaker. You never know. 9038 is imminent...DAC market talks...It's going to be hard for them to bring the best out of it with the next (hopefully not a rush out) release though.
And I completely agree with you on that. I too, believe they implemented the 9018 to its fullest in the V2 and I'm sure they're working hard to do the same with the 9038 board.
I just placed an order today. Now the wait begins. I spent a bunch of time trying to find good reviews. It is a bit of a surprise that there is not really much out there on the V2+.
And I completely agree with you on that. I too, believe they implemented the 9018 to its fullest in the V2 and I'm sure they're working hard to do the same with the 9038 board.
The 9028 chip is pin compatible with the 9018, so it would be just a matter of using the new one instead of the old if they don't have much R&D time available.
The 9028 chip is pin compatible with the 9018, so it would be just a matter of using the new one instead of the old if they don't have much R&D time available.
R&D is their everyday job. In my opinion they should put all of their time and effort in perfecting the better of the two. Burson team has the know-how for sure.
In case the step down version 9028 allows only for the same tonal profile then what's the point to spend time with it, really...
It may be only "worth it" if one happens to be a technology junkie. None of those things are worth a darn, unless implemented correctly for sound. Just plunking in something with neat features may actually be counter productive. I am sure that is why there is a wait state going on. Being audio junkies, I am sure that the good folks at Burson are just as anxious as we are to play with the new device... BUT, judging by their record, I don't expect to see any changes, until they are completely satisfied that the sound quality is actually improved by making those changes.
New only for the sake of something shiny and new, is not usually the best approach ...IMHO.
Well improving THD in the most sensitive audio range surely means nothing, just change for change sake for sure. These guys at Benchmark don't know anything.
Any DAC chip .. the audio end results are due to implementation far more than chip specs.
THD to three to five decimal places, thousandths versus ten Thousandths.. is likely not truly audible. That kind of difference may be valuable in the laboratory... in your ears. Likely not that much.
It does look good in marketing brochures and specs. And they do that to sell to many people that will never hear the difference...but have to have the latest and greatest...with the best numbers (as irrelevant as they may be) OOOOH Shiny...
I am sure Benchmark folks know lots.. and maybe have what they consider a good implementation... maybe the farm out the implementation... maybe they feel that first to market with the latest glitz buys them something. ?? That does not mean that Burson has it down, yet. They are a pretty small shop in the scheme of things. As we know they pursue their concept of audio perfection. I am confident that when they do, it will become available. But none of this is done with some kind of magic wand... It takes time and resources. Again, even if for nothing other than marketing it will be a good move... as long as they don't murder the sound that we like!
Need you be so sarcastic? I was just presenting my ideas. I honor yours, even though the presentation lacks somewhat in polish!
I just purchased the v2+ and I'm a little confused about something.
I thought the dac output was fixed. When I leave the v2+ via the dac outputs to my integrated, I can still control the volume from the burson.
Am I correct in assuming both dac output and pre output can be controlled from the burson? Well, I know that but does the pre output use the Texas instruments analog volume and the dac output uses the dsp volume control on the Sabre chip?
I noticed the same thing and was surprised. I sent a note to Alex at Burson asking about this around a week ago and have got no answer.
I believe that your analysis is correct based on a review I read (can't find it now) but without official confirmation, I am not sure.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
In my opinion they should put all of their time and effort in perfecting the better of the two. Burson team has the know-how for sure.
