With the newest Omega speakers, and zero NFB preamp and amplifiers, I was satisfied with Scott Nixon Chibi Saru DAC.
I could not think of any shortcomings, other than it only cost $350 including the toroid power supply option.
It was non-phase inverting, and analog outputs came from the DAC, not an opamp. What more could I ask?
I've made tweaks to it. I got rid of the toroid supply and replaced with a radio shack SLA battery.
In addition, I removed the DAC board from its plastic box, and screwed it down into a cherry wood enclosure.
I tried to match the original box's dimensions as closely as possible, but I am no woodworker.
Due to the number of NOS offerings from places ranging from DIY Paradise to Mother of Tone, I began to wonder if
better performance could be had in NOS.
The first step toward other NOS designs is Ack Dack 2.0. I was able to get one used from a fellow
audiocircle member. This unit had the "ultra-resolution" teflon cap option.
The Ack Dack 2.0, in short:
1. Sibilance. The sibilance is not sharp, but more noticeable.
On my setup, it draws attraction to the sibilance, the way they are
handled with this DAC. Almost like a highpass in the audible range.
2. Midrange. Quite thick and occluded. Not possible to hear deep
into the singer's voice, or the mix, as I should with a minimal
setup as I have. Less detailed, and the natural tones in the
recording are not as they should be. They are homogenized.
3. Bass. Tigher bass.
The Scott Nixon Chibi Saru:
1. Sibilance. The highs are more extended, yet it is softer and looser.
Overall less sibilance ssss than Ack Dack. More realistic in that I can
walk around my pad, down the hall, outside, etc. and still go "that
still sounds so good". Not so with Ack Dack due to less extended hf
to travel distances.
2. Midrange. More detailed than Ack Dack. More open,
and I can understand how on some setups it would
sound thinner. But on mine it ends up a better match.
The tone is superior on the Scott Nixon. It allows them
to come through.
3. Bass. Looser.
Conclusion: I think Ack Dack will match better on my computer desk.
It can use the warmer Ack Dack midrange, since I'm sitting so close,
and because of the smaller drivers. The one type of recording
that I can prefer Ack Dack on, are the unredeemable ones.
Such as old school doo wop, with harsh highs and no mids.
I hope this helps all the Omega people debating on NOS DACs.
There are some other DACs with good reviews out there,
Audiozone DAC1, or 1541A based Audial AYA II. I wonder if it's
worth trying those, as it requires going back to AC power.
It is past 2 AM, there's music playing, and I can't imagine anything
sounding better. Perhaps I should just leave well enough alone.
associated equipment:
Omega Super 8 XRS alnico
Omega Deephemp Cube
Sophia Electric Baby 300B monoblocks
Primaluna Prologue Three preamp
Monarchy Audio DIP Classic
Sound Blaster X-fi Xtreme Audio soundcard
