[bhobba]

Hi All

My WFS DAC 2 finally arrived here in Aus. I had it delivered to a trusted acquaintance who does modding to check it out for possible upgrade potential and he was also interested in hearing it. He reports it is very very good. He thinks it can be upgraded by replacing the clock with a terra firma, but the analogue looks so good he is not sure he can do too much with that. It may be possible to make the analogue better but it is not easily accessible for that purpose and because it is already very good he doesn't think it really is worthwhile bothering.

I will be getting delivered to me Friday and will be doing an extensive listening session Saturday with some friends against some other DAC's including the Audio GD and DAC Magic. I can report further then.

It is probably is pretty useless to most who frequent this forum but I will mention it anyway. It will be down at Lehehan Audio on the Gold Coast in Australia for at least two weeks so people can pop along and check it out.

Thanks
Bill

[bhobba]

Hi All

Just returned from our outing hearing this DAC.

OK. First off when we arrived Mike (he is the owner of Lenehan Audio) said he had been listening to it and thought it was very good.  In fact he thought it was as good as his much more expensive and highly tweaked pcm 1704 DAC - with maybe, just maybe his DAC being a bit better - but not by much.  However they were very different.  First when we went into the listening area he had the WFS DAC running and a smile immediately came over my face because it was exactly the sound I like - detailed, analytical and dark.  Although its not something I particularly look for it had great bass as well - but that may have been part of the great detail.  If you have heard delta sigma DAC's before then this was delta sigma in overdrive.  Everyone thought it was the best delta sigma they had heard.

We were going to try the DAC Magic but Mike said - don't bother - this is way out of its league so we didn't give it a listen to.  Mike was shocked a DAC this affordable could be this good.  We then hooked up Mike's DAC.  It was entirely different - much more relaxed and well musical - but the detail had gone and the bass was not as good.  In quality terms I thought they were both equal - just different.  Evidently because Mike was so shocked at how good it was he had been extensively comparing it to his DAC and thought in the end his DAC may have had a slight edge - but it was scary close - not in terms of the type of sound - they were very different - but in terms of how good they were.  I had no where near the experience Mike has with his DAC, and of course I have a bias because I purchased the WFS DAC, but to me it was more than scary close - they were equal - again in terms of quality - not in type of sound. 

We tried the WFS sound direct into the amp and the digital volume control, and as you would expect, it was utterly transparent - no pre amp required here.  We tried both optical and USB - I thought the USB may have been slightly better, but others were not so sure, so it may have been my imagination.  One issue though - the USB drivers crashed a few times which is not good.  That was on a mac so hopefully the windows version is more stable.  Of course that is not good, and is something WFS needs to look into pretty quick.

Next up was the Audio GD which is also a 1704 implementation.  It was actually scary close to Mike's DAC - Mike's DAC was better, but really there was not much in it.  And at $1300 it is very good value.  It had the same relaxed musical presentation as Mike's DAC.  However it did not include a digital volume control, but if you are feeding it from a computer then that is not an issue since you can use your computers volume control.  But it is not as flexible as the WFS in that sense.

Now to the bottom line.  Since all the DAC's were close in quality terms it comes down to a personal preference thing.  If you like detail and good bass go for the WFS.  If you like a more relaxed musical presentation go for Mike's or the Audio GD DAC (you will need to contact Mike about his DAC- but its a good deal more expensive than either the WFS or the Audio GD).  I personally like the extra detail so for me it's the WFS DAC.  But the two other guys (Hugh and Terry) liked the 1704 DACs.  The WFS is about $1900 compared to the $1300.00 for the Audio GD.  To my ears the WFS was sightly better in quality terms - but there was hardly anything in it.  Was it $600.00 difference - in the way I judge these things probably not - maybe $100.00 or $200.00.  Also this is the middle quality Audio GD - the higher quality DAC would probably more than make up this difference and may even pip the WFS - but we can't be sure because we didn't try it.  It so then it would be up to Mike's DAC and have the same relaxed musical presentation.

I will say this is not the result I expected - but was what we found.  I am very happy with my DAC since it has the type of sound I like - but it may not be your cup of tea.  My suggestion is to try and listen to both types of DAC's - a WFS and a 1704.  If you like the WFS sound get that.  If you like the 1704 get an Audio GD.  Mike is so impressed with the WFS sound he wants it there for longer so he can get to the bottom of its sound - he is still shocked a DAC this cheap can be this good.

I had heard this DAC was scary close to the best out there with the difference in price possibly not worth it - this is what I found.  What I did not expect was that is true in quality terms - not in the type of sound you get.

Because of this I am reminded of the Tranquility DAC which is the other DAC people are raving about.  It is supposed to combine the best of both DACs  - to have the relaxed musicality of the 1704's but the detail of delta sigma DAC's.  I was not attracted to this DAC because you need a pre amp - a good one which costs more than the WFS DAC itself.  However after hearing both DAC's I can see how a combination of the two would be killer.  Pre amp or no pre amp I may just have to bite the bullet and check this DAC out.  It may be a fizzer but if true it would really be something.  I will give very careful consideration to getting one of these imported.

Me and another guy thought we could easily live with any of the DAC's.  It is only via a direct comparison you appreciate the differences.  But for some others (Hugh and Terry) the 1704  was their clear preference.  Mike had to leave a bit early so I was not able to get his final verdict - but I suspect it was for his 1704.

Thanks
Bill

[bryan0101]

First thank you for your initial review for the DAC, very much appreciated.

"detailed, analytical and dark"...This is very rare combination. usually if the dac is detail and analytical, it would be lean toward bright side of things. Sometime the voltage+impedance for each dac is difference, so when downstream is picky about these, there would be big difference in A/B test, yet not necessarily from the actual quality of the Dacs. Not to mention the preamp portion in the equation.

If your friend Mike had already gotten his dac and preamp in great synergy, and A/B show they are this close, then it's no small feat for WFS dac. With enough time and resource(cabling,power, heck...change the amp), it'd could be better. Not to mention burning it in.

Also, difference in overall speakers choice plays a major role as well I believe. Is the system high eff FR, planar, OB, hungry or higheff dynamic (2/3/4.../8 ways),back horn loaded, omni directional......? Some setup favor certain range of freqs, and have very diff strength and weakness (timbre, attacks, transiency) Would love to get some more juicy detail about downstream to get a better picture of things.

Been eying for a decent review for this dac to take the plunge, as I'm sure many others are same. Thank you.

P.S. Also I don't think you'd want to change any volume in computer. Don't care whatever transport software (itune/foobar/iriver/kmplayer...), Bit perfect means no digital preamp filter, and use bypass helper whever possible (ASIO/WASAPI/itune_setting).

[bhobba]

"detailed, analytical and dark"...This is very rare combination. usually if the dac is detail and analytical, it would be lean toward bright side of things. Sometime the voltage+impedance for each dac is difference, so when downstream is picky about these, there would be big difference in A/B test, yet not necessarily from the actual quality of the Dacs. Not to mention the preamp portion in the equation.

It certainly is - I cant quite recall hearing a DAC like it. As I said delta sigma in overdrive - it seems to take all the things I usually associate with delta sigma dacs such as detail and dynamics and revs them up.  Mike was very taken with it as well - which is why he wants to keep it for a while - he wants to get to th bottom of what is going on. 

If your friend Mike had already gotten his dac and preamp in great synergy, and A/B show they are this close, then it's no small feat for WFS dac. With enough time and resource(cabling,power, heck...change the amp), it'd could be better. Not to mention burning it in.

Yes - that's another reason he was hooked.  As he said this is mid fi stuff - not the usual 5-10K stuff that has been further modded he usually mucks around with.  Yet it was scary close in quality terms to his highly synergistically tweaked DAC.  After extensive listening he gave the edge to his dac but it is still a remarkable achievement.  The issue he has though was it 'realistic' where this not only sounds good, but evokes an emotional response of being there.  I think his DAC did that better.  The DAC seems to draw you into looking deep inside the music rather than just sitting back and enjoying it.

Also, difference in overall speakers choice plays a major role as well I believe. Is the system high eff FR, planar, OB, hungry or higheff dynamic (2/3/4.../8 ways),back horn loaded, omni directional......? Some setup favor certain range of freqs, and have very diff strength and weakness (timbre, attacks, transiency) Would love to get some more juicy detail about downstream to get a better picture of things.

The speaker's were ML1's - he is their designer:
http://www.lenehanaudio.com.au/models.php

They are scary accurate speakers.  Steel lining and other stuff makes them absolutely dead. 
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=66416.msg611986#msg611986

Thanks
Bill

[bryan0101]

  Of course! Hes using his own ML1...That gives us some idea. Thanks!

[bhobba]

Of course! Hes using his own ML1...That gives us some idea. Thanks!

No - actually they were mine and so was all the other components ie amp and cables.  In fact he has recently discovered a tweak to the ML1's (that's the R in ML1 plus R) that takes new speakers beyond even the signatures he has (and a few other customers willing to fork out the dosh) and that cost twice as much.  He needs to do the tweak to them to bring them up to the same level - but right now even his highly 'hot rodded' ML1's are not as good as mine.  They will be in a few months time after he has a chance to do the tweak on them - but right now they aren't.  We however did use his 500W Macintosh's and a digital amp some of the time - but everything else was mine.  The amp was a modified valve job of just 20W:
http://www.customanalogue.com/jlti_el34.htm

It is nearly as transparent as his Macintosh's.  I originally thought it was just as transparent but careful listening gave his amp the edge.  The dynamics we heard was not the power reserves of those 500W monsters kicking in - it was in the DAC.  However because those speakers are so damn inert there was no cabinet resonances masking subtle details and those ML1's let the DAC rip - unbelievable detail.  In fact that's one reason the two guys that preferred the 1704's did so.  They played some tracks they knew really well but the detail simply overwhelmed them - it sounded - well their words were - not right - but after discussing it they were simply hearing a lot more stuff than they did before.  Headphone guys describe the 32bit ESS DAC as removing a layer of grit from recordings - and those speakers allowed you to hear it.  See what I mean by it allows you to see further into the music.  However that is a two edge sword - hearing more detail makes more demands on you as a listener to sort it all out.  Make no mistake this is an excellent DAC - but you may not like it.

I am looking to get rid of my amp though because I am a bit concerned about valves blowing and other stuff since I am looking at using it quite a few hours a day - but that is another issue.

As I said the sound is a bit unusual and takes a little getting used to.  We thought the quality was equally as good as the 1704's but since it's a bit unusual that may have simply been the novelty of it.  That's why Mike wants to keep them longer - to see what eventuates.

Thanks
Bill

[ted_b]

Bill,
Nic3e synopsis.  There are few reviews for the DAC2 so far.  A couple of questions:
1)  How much break in did the Wyred DAC2 have?  Most, including EJ, recommend 200 hrs, with some cycling so caps cool down and recharge a few times.
2) Did you adjust/set the USB output for the amp or preamp input (gain)?  Some have reported that the default max is too high for their systems (thereby possibly robbing the combo of dynamics or optimum s/n).  I know that parameter can have major impact on dynamics, etc.  Srajan has a nice tip or two on his preview
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/wyred4/dac_2.html

[bryan0101]

As I said the sound is a bit unusual and takes a little getting used to.  We thought the quality was equally as good as the 1704's but since it's a bit unusual that may have simply been the novelty of it.  That's why Mike wants to keep them longer - to see what eventuates.

That's very helpful. Thanks. At one point I was thinking of doing the Audio-gd reference one , w/ their 8x1704. But felt that I should get something more modern design if going for high res.

[Jon L]

P.S. Also I don't think you'd want to change any volume in computer. Don't care whatever transport software (itune/foobar/iriver/kmplayer...), Bit perfect means no digital preamp filter, and use bypass helper whever possible (ASIO/WASAPI/itune_setting).

From the way you sound, you obviously have not actually tried decent computer digital volume control vs. decent outboard preamp/volume control. 

Also, in the end, "bit perfect" may be something desirable, but it neither guarantees nor prevents GREAT sound quality.

[bryan0101]

Also, in the end, "bit perfect" may be something desirable, but it neither guarantees nor prevents GREAT sound quality.

That's true. But for someone whos looking at a DAC like W4S, meaning they would want to at least try out some high res recording. So why would anyone wants to use a digital software based volume. That defeat the purpose of having high res source.

True I have not compare a digital software transport's preamp filter to a decent standalone preamp, ......cause I don't have to, because volume do not belong in digital, it's in analog (SS or tube preamp). And if your system cannot distinguish a full perfect stream of high res file into dac, vs a cut up version of it by digital filter, that means upgrade time.  ...

[bhobba]

Hi Guys

As mentioned in the review I was going to investigate the Tranquility DAC.  Did that and had a very very interesting conversation with Eric in the US.  Bottom line is I will be getting it in.  Personally this is not the DAC I will be getting if it turns out to be the go - I will be waiting for when they release their high res DAC which should be in about October or there about (but probably longer knowing how these things usually pan out) because I prefer direct connection to amps - this DAC being a 16 bit cant do that - you bit drop if you use the computers volume control.

Without preempting what we will find out Eric says his DAC has the fluidity and musicality of the 1704's and near the bass and detail of the WFS.  The WFS still pips it in that area.  But to compensate he thinks the HF detail may be a bit better.

Anyway I will be starting a separate thread about this when the details become firmer.

Thanks
Bill

[bhobba]

Nice synopsis.  There are few reviews for the DAC2 so far.  A couple of questions:
1)  How much break in did the Wyred DAC2 have?  Most, including EJ, recommend 200 hrs, with some cycling so caps cool down and recharge a few times.

It had about 40-50 hours on it - will report later when it has more hours.

2) Did you adjust/set the USB output for the amp or preamp input (gain)?  Some have reported that the default max is too high for their systems (thereby possibly robbing the combo of dynamics or optimum s/n).  I know that parameter can have major impact on dynamics, etc.  Srajan has a nice tip or two on his preview
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/wyred4/dac_2.html

We had zero problems in that area - when we did use a pre amp everything was adjusted to ensure that didn't happen.  When fed directly to the amp we had no problems like that.

Thanks
Bill

[bhobba]

That's true. But for someone whos looking at a DAC like W4S, meaning they would want to at least try out some high res recording. So why would anyone wants to use a digital software based volume. That defeat the purpose of having high res source.

Not really.  Virtually all hi res recordings I am aware of are 24 bit - not 32 bit.  This DAC is 32 bit so you don't bit drop even from hi res recordings if you have good software.  And the remote control volume control is 32 bit as well.  But even if it was 24 bit as DCS found out long ago it is pretty much inaudible for realistic volumes.  I can assure you using either the computers volume control or the remote it was utterly transparent.

Thanks
Bill

[bhobba]

From the way you sound, you obviously have not actually tried decent computer digital volume control vs. decent outboard preamp/volume control.  Also, in the end, "bit perfect" may be something desirable, but it neither guarantees nor prevents GREAT sound quality.

Both the computers and the remotes volume control was utterly transparent.

Thanks
Bill

[bhobba]

That's very helpful. Thanks. At one point I was thinking of doing the Audio-gd reference one , w/ their 8x1704. But felt that I should get something more modern design if going for high res.

I would wait until I report on a direct comparison with the Tranquility.  The word from the designer is it is very close to the ESS dac in bass and detail (but the EES still has the edge) but is much more musical and fluid.  He hopes the high res dac he is currently working on will fix that and still retain the musicality and fluidity.  We will find out.

Thanks
Bill

[bryan0101]

I would wait until I report on a direct comparison with the Tranquility.  The word from the designer is it is very close to the ESS dac in bass and detail (but the EES still has the edge) but is much more musical and fluid.  He hopes the high res dac he is currently working on will fix that and still retain the musicality and fluidity.  We will find out.

Thanks
Bill

So the Tranquility is using 1704(UK) for sure? I thought nobody know whats inside... The Tranquility+mini is quite something by what I read at other post. I still cannot understand what Eric meant that his Dac has no oscillator. I mean, there's got to be a clock somewhere somehow. Right? I see many people are using it with good result, but there are zero professional review, and not posting any of the spec doesn't help either. I mean I can understand trade secret and all, but if someone wants to know about the dac for some nefarious reason, all they need to do is buy one. spec, chips, ohm.....I fail to see how these info can benefit competitors. There are tons of DAC out there using 1704, not like they sound the same.

As a programmer, I can swallow a $1300 usb only dac. I can even give in to get mini. But people like us wants to at least know abit more whats in the DAC as well just for our peace of mind.

Detail....16/44 is hard to beat a new ESS 32bits w/ 130db dynamic given both are good implementations. But musicality/fluidity....I mean how much are we talking about here % wise. Coz even for purist, Tran-Dac is asking alot of compromise here. Out of all the words audiophile writers use, musicality is one I really watch out for. Everything else I understand. But if a DAC has everything else right (stage,attacks, cymbals, decay, detail...the whole shebang), then how can it be not musical. Fluidity...get some decent 300b or 2A3....

I'll wait for the full review from 6moons and bite the bullet for W4S.

just for kick here is my Havana's gut, straight from their website

[bhobba]

So the Tranquility is using 1704(UK) for sure? I thought nobody know whats inside...

I don't think I said the Tranquility uses a 1704.  I compared the WFS to 1704 DACs - and that comparison did not include the Tranquility.  And you are correct - no one knows what DAC is in it but you can rest assured it is not a 1704 since that is a 24 bit dac and whatever they are using is not 24 bit.

The Tranquility+mini is quite something by what I read at other post. I still cannot understand what Eric meant that his Dac has no oscillator. I mean, there's got to be a clock somewhere somehow. Right

Not necessarily - he could be deriving it from a phase locked loop for example.  But I suspect he is using a clock.

I see many people are using it with good result, but there are zero professional review, and not posting any of the spec doesn't help either. I mean I can understand trade secret and all, but if someone wants to know about the dac for some nefarious reason, all they need to do is buy one. spec, chips, ohm.....I fail to see how these info can benefit competitors. There are tons of DAC out there using 1704, not like they sound the same.

As a programmer, I can swallow a $1300 usb only dac. I can even give in to get mini. But people like us wants to at least know abit more whats in the DAC as well just for our peace of mind.

Detail....16/44 is hard to beat a new ESS 32bits w/ 130db dynamic given both are good implementations. But musicality/fluidity....I mean how much are we talking about here % wise. Coz even for purist, Tran-Dac is asking alot of compromise here. Out of all the words audiophile writers use, musicality is one I really watch out for. Everything else I understand. But if a DAC has everything else right (stage,attacks, cymbals, decay, detail...the whole shebang), then how can it be not musical. Fluidity...get some decent 300b or 2A3....

I'll wait for the full review from 6moons and bite the bullet for W4S.

I would wait until I do a direct comparison between the two DAC's.

Musicality is something ephemeral and involves an emotional response.  The WFS was more accurate than the 1704 DAC I heard.  The WFS produced incredible detail and bass.  I loved it - but you and others may not.  In fact two of the guys I was with didn't.  The 1704 was more musical ie it invoked more of a relaxed emotional response, rather than the unraveling of the incredible amount of detail you heard from the WFS.

Thanks
Bill

[Ric Schultz]

Though DAC chips have a basic sound.....you cannot judge a DAC chip by someones implementation.  The ESS DAC can sound way more "musical"  than heard in the stock W4S and the 1704 can sound more "detailed and dynamic" than most implementations.  But the chips do have their limitations......but what are they?  The W4S is done very well, but it is not a state of the art assault.  There are much better (and more) power transformers, regulators, bypass caps, clocks, damping and subtle executions that will (in time) reveal a mucho better machine.  One thing you can try is to remove the steel plate and bolt holding down the toroidal transformer.....then lift the transformer off the chassis and set it back down on a quarter to half inch piece of wood.  If you feel the need to secure the tranny (so it won't fly around.....it has wings  he he) then you can use a little Amazing Goop to glue it or use some tie wraps and drill some holes around the outside of the tranny and secure from an enlarged center hole through the other holes on the outside of the tranny.  You can just leave it sitting there if you remember to not turn the DAC on its side.  Please try this and let us know what you hear.  Certainly not mindblowing,....but should be more open sounding.  This is just the beginning of what can be done.  Repalacing the fuse would be next.  I cannot wait to get ahold of one of these DAC 2s and see what can be done. 

[bryan0101]

That's a cool tweak.

OTOH, bit of pictures (...make it a lot) inside the dac is always welcome 

[bhobba]

Though DAC chips have a basic sound.....you cannot judge a DAC chip by someones implementation.  The ESS DAC can sound way more "musical"  than heard in the stock W4S and the 1704 can sound more "detailed and dynamic" than most implementations..........I cannot wait to get ahold of one of these DAC 2s and see what can be done.

Absolutely.  I was not trying to intimate the 1704 is inherently musical or the ESS chip is inherently not, or conversely the ESS his inherently detailed and the 1704 not.  I was simply reporting on what I found during a listening session and how I would like the best of both worlds - which led me to investigate the Tranquility.

I will send you a PM on what you think can be done with this DAC. 

Thanks
Bill