Well, I know you’re all waiting for the results of the DAC shootout, so I won’t waste any time in laying down my 4 pages of notes, and quotes from the guys.
First off, let’s revisit Brad’s system, and the review configuration of it to let you know what we were listening to.
Our review system consists of the following:
- Tact RCS 2.2X
- Audio Research SP-6A (heavily modded by Richard Gray)
- Odyssey Stratos Monos
- Excelarray speakers (line array with Seas Excel’s and a Newform ribbon)
- Vecteur D-2 Transport
- Musical Fidelity A324
- Chris Venhaus Cat 5 DIY
- DH Labs digital cables
- Stock and Chris Venhaus flavors of power cords
- Bolder Cables M-80 Interconnects
Brad’s room is 25’ x 16’ x 14’ with a vault down the center.
For our testing purposes, all room correction was turned OFF, and we did not run through the GW Labs DSP. Also, we were able to get solid volume measurements using test tones from the Tact and a Rad Shack SPL meter.
Attendees were:
Myself, BradV, Richard, Carl, and Andy.
We listened to the following DAC’s:
- Musical Fidelity A324
- Bel Canto DAC2
- Scott Nixon Tube DAC
- DI/O from Bolder Cables with MENSA mod
Special thanks goes out to BradV for letting us use the crib while mine is under construction. Thanks to Wayne from Bolder Cables for loaning us his personal MENSA, and some cables. Thanks to Brad’s wife for making the awesome dip to dampen some of Brad’s chip crunching during tracks.
All of the following are MY observations, unless otherwise specified.
OK, without further ado, I present to you the NC DAC Shootout Play by Play. . . .
MF A324
_______________________________________
__________________
First off, we listened to Brad’s DAC which is the Musical Fidelity. We matched up the volume so that we’d know what SPL we needed to listen to all the other DAC’s at, and then we sat down for some serious shooting out. We listened at 76-77db to all discs, and all DAC’s. All DAC’s used STOCK power except the MENSA.
The first disc up was Norah Jones’
Come Away With Me. Track 3 was our first selection for serious listening. That just happens to be also when Brad finished his first load of chips! The crunching is a cool feature, but I like it turned off for purposes of our shootout. . .
Track 3 was sweet. Norah’s voice was really nice, and the piano was smooth, and life-sized. There is some guitar action at 3:00 on that track which was nice and clean, and very well separated from the rest of the music. Overall, this was a very enjoyable disc, and as our ears were getting warmed up, we switched to the
Mapleshade’s Music Festival disc.
This is a great disc, and right away I noticed the spatial cues, and superb imaging we were getting. These Excelarray’s are really nice speakers! At 2:00 on track 1, there are some killer drums coming in. This was very impactful, and full of life. Impressively real. Track 2 is also really nice on this DAC. The background is quiet, and black. The only complaint I have here is that at 2:00 or so, the horns became a bit tinned. This wasn’t offensive or anything, but it wasn’t really easy to listen to either.
Patricia Barber was up next on
Café Blue. Track 11 on this disc is spectacular! The piano on this track sounded really nice, but wasn’t particularly rich. I suppose that is my bias b/c I am used to very rich piano from my all tube setup. There are some sweet cymbals on this track, and they themselves were a nice reference point for DAC judging. On Brad’s MF DAC, these cymbals were very spatial, and full. They were located well past the edge of the speakers.
The drum hits are really nice, and impactful on this track, but I noticed that they may have been a bit less full than the other DAC’s. You could really hear the attack, but it was hard to hear the entire drum. This is difficult for any system to reproduce, but the other DAC’s did a better job on this I think. This track sounded a bit thin on the MF DAC.
Bel Canto
_______________________________________
_________________
Next up is the Bel Canto. All of our DAC’s were plugged in and warming up in other outlets so none were cold. Brad’s pre also had a mute, so nothing had to be powered down to do the switching.
The Bel Canto first had its own attempt at the same Patricia Barber track we had just heard. Andy and I both thought the piano was smoother with the BC. It had more richness than the MF DAC. Brad says this DAC sounds a bit warmer than the MF, but with less air.
The cymbals were a bit smaller, and stood out less from the presentation. This is perhaps the “less air” that we talked about. I seem to hear at 4:30 that there is more bass attack, but less decay. This is a bit strange b/c on the drums, as Andy said, you could hear less of the stick, and more of the decay of the drum. I heard more of the entire drum than I did before.
We swapped out for the Mapleshades disc. Again, I noticed that the attack on the double bass was not as pronounced, but there was more natural decay, and richness. Andy said that he thought there was a vocal richness to this disc that wasn’t as prevalent as before. The background seemed a bit quieter on this DAC vs. the MF. Piano tones were very rich, and those horns we talked about were smoother, and according to Brad, were easier to listen to.
Andy again commented on how the MF was more airy, and the BC seemed more open. Track 1 on the Mapleshades disc seemed faster. Perhaps this was a side effect of being a bit quieter, or perhaps the lack of air made it seem quieter, and faster. Not sure. Andy says that the BC is more laid back than the MF. A few also commented on the soundstage being a bit deeper, and maybe a bit less wide.
One disc we listened to was called
Innovators by Sam Cardon, and Kurt Bestor. This was a really neat disc for picking out low-level detail, and the BC may have had a bit less accuracy on the low level details than the MF. At 1:53 in track 9, there is a spatial thing happening, and it seemed to be a foot or so right of the right speaker. Brad says the vibraphone in this track is sweeter, but almost too sweet.
Track 9 was also the one where digital filtering artifacts were most noticeable. There is quite a bit going on at 4:00, and it is easy to notice if there are artifacts from filtering and oversampling. It’s hard to know what they sound like if you haven’t had a filterless, non-oversampling DAC, but I caught it. It was a bit better sounding than the MF on those particulars.
Track 10 sounded more like live guitar music than with the MF.
Norah Jones is next, and she has a more well rounded voice with the BC. The piano is definitely smoother, but just as large. Andy concludes that these DAC’s are very easy to tell apart, and have very good distinctively different traits. He says it all depends on what you need in your system. I agree!
MENSA (sort of)
_______________________________________
___________________
Next comes the MENSA. We took a chip break after plugging it to the system, but we had an issue where the power cable came out of the back. One problem with Wayne’s BEEFY power cable, and supply is the cable is heavy, and if it has tension, it will pull out. So, we found this after 20 mins, and put it back in, and started to listen.
Bad idea. Don’t listen to a DAC that isn’t warm. Especially this one. We were all freaked out, so we just left it plugged, and went to the Nixon DAC.
Scott Nixon Tube DAC
_______________________________________
___________________
When we plugged the Scott Nixon DAC in, we noticed a bit of hum. It was very low level, but I had never noticed it before. It’s dead quiet in my system. Sometimes eerily quiet. . .
Anyhow, we switched power supplies to Wayne’s, and that didn’t help. So we switched back. It could have been the close proximity to the AR tube pre, or the cabling. Not sure. We went ahead and listened b/c it was only distracting when it wasn’t playing.
Track 1 on Norah Jones required 6db or so more volume to match all the others. We also had to switch phase. The Nixon has low gain, and requires phase switching because of the lack of an analog stage. But good things come from leaving parts OUT. The piano on track 1 was more defined, and on one of the vocal parts, I heard some background vocalists I had not heard before.
The SN was much quieter than the other DAC’s, and I believe this led to increased dynamics b/c the notes were coming from a blacker than black background. This is something I have noticed with a DAC that does not use oversampling, or filtering. It is hard to notice unless you have heard it before, and lived with it. The natural decay is all still there, but there is complete silence between notes. That’s one of the things I like most about this DAC.
Although my cohorts may disagree, I thought that the SN DAC had more bass, and there was more natural decay. Again, this could have been the absence of digital noise. Andy doesn’t seem to think that the depth of soundstage is there as it was with the other DAC’s. Carl and Rich both agree that the SN DAC was “warmer, and cozier” than the other DAC’s. Richard thought that the soundstage height had dropped as well.
On track 9 of
Innovators at 1:35, the spatial info seemed to be a little more in front of the speaker on the right. Also, at the 4:00 digital noise mark, I noticed a complete lack of the digital confusion that I had heard earlier. This is a strange phenomenon, and one that few of us are aware is present if we haven’t lived without it.
Track 10 gave us less detail on the SN according to Andy, and a bit flatter soundstage than the BC. Carl says it’s not as convincing in the highs as the other DAC’s, and Rich again emphasized the SN’s smooth midrange.
On Mapleshades’ disc, track one had plenty of silence between drum hits. The dynamics had increased over the previous DAC’s, and the midrange was really nice. I have to say that this was the first time I could say with 100% certainty that what we were hearing at 2:00 in track 1 was a saxaphone. It sounded like a sax all along, but I wouldn’t have sworn it until I heard it on this DAC.
Andy’s feeling is that the highs were still not as sweet on the BC, and even a bit rolled off. Track 4 gave us strong bass. Perhaps there was a bit less attack on the bass than with the MF. The piano is life-sized, and has more tonal definition than any DAC we heard. The consensus is that this DAC is very easy to listen to.
On the Patricia Barber, the piano was luscious! Near the end of the track, the individual cymbal hits during the cymbal roll were easier to discern. I have conclusions about this, which are based in opinion, and I will post them later. I want to keep the review as non-biased as I can.
MENSA
_______________________________________
___________________
Now, on to our last DAC, the MENSA DI/O. I was very excited to get a chance to listen to this DAC. Andy was looking forward to it as well. This DAC also had the fatty upgraded power supply from Wayne.
This time, we had ample warm-up time, and things were much improved! On the Barber track, the vocals had more air. The piano was more recessed than with the previous DAC’s. The other DAC’s really emphasized the midrange more. This DAC was not emphasizing ANYTHING. This DAC was the same at every frequency, and had very little coloration. The piano did seem a bit veiled, but again, we had just finished listening to a luscious DAC made for piano.
We heard more bass, but it wasn’t quite as tight. The attack on the double bass was more pronounced on the Mapleshades track. More pronounced than any of the other DAC’s. Andy says the MENSA is more focused and crisp than any of the other DAC’s we heard. Also, he thought it was more balanced from top to bottom. Carl thought the MENSA was a bit cold, and maybe sterile.
The cymbals seemed to go higher, and the highs were perhaps more extended. This DAC had less emotion than the other DAC’s in our test. This is quite probably more accurate in the true sense of the word, but not necessarily more enjoyable. This is perhaps wildly system dependant, as is everything! The DAC was very crisp in relation to the others.
Andy says again how well balanced it is. It wasn’t cold, or warm. It was just a DAC. Carl says it reproduces all sounds accurately, and I found it to be the quietest of all the DAC’s except for the SN DAC.
If it seems that the MENSA review is shorter, the listening session was also a bit shorter. It took no time to pick out the particulars of this DAC, as there were none. It was consistently consistent.
_______________________________________
___________________
In conclusion, draw your own conclusion. I am sure that each of us will post our opinions on these sweet DAC’s, but I will end the objective portion of the review without picking a clear winner. Each of these DAC’s are very nice, and not one would disappoint. It all depends on what you are after.
I hope our shootout at least gives you a better idea of what these DAC’s are about so you can narrow down your DAC choices.
