Berkeley Alpha DAC

denjo · « **on:** 2 Oct 2009, 08:09 am »

I have done a search and discovered that not much has been said about the Berkeley Alpha DAC, just snippets here and there. I understand that some have organised a rave with this DAC on the agenda so it will be good to hear more about the performance of this DAC soon.
Meanwhile, I borrowed the Berkeley Alpha for a "one night only" home audition. I know the price seems quite prohibitive (inhibitive even), and appears more expensive given it is sans USB, especially the ever growing group of computer audiophiles.
Wow, the Alpha has transformed my humble SB3 and Oppo DVD into a dcs or Wadia or top-of-the-line Accuphase CDP! Well, it should at that price! When I lamented to an audio friend that my Accuphase E450 is very good but can sometimes sound a tad sterile, he advised me to get a synergistic Accuphase CDP (DP400 no less), but I simply replied that my digital frontend was good enough. The Alpha simply shows how crappy my frontend is. My Accuphase simply woke up from deep slumber!
The music is so finely and delicately layered. I can hear piano notes sustain and decay much, much better! Timbre, tone and texture is excellent!
I would be happy to hear the views of others who own or have heard this awesome DAC.

poseidonsvoice · « **Reply #1 on:** 2 Oct 2009, 12:51 pm »

A link to their website where they have reviews from Absolute Sound, etc...what DAC does this unit use? The fellas who worked at Pacific Microsonics (who developed HDCD) designed this unit.

Price: $5K.

Anand.

ted_b · « **Reply #2 on:** 2 Oct 2009, 01:21 pm »

I demo'd the BADA extensively in my home for about 2 weeks. It is a wondrous DAC that creates a large soundstage and has detail to handle any complex passage, be it 16/44 or 24/192 (this is the HiRez circle so let's keep all discussion on this and any DAC to listening in HiRez).

It switched sample rates very quickly and easily (assuming the software player allows this), and it has a plethora of inputs and outputs to satisfy most audiophiles. I've spoken with Michael and the rest of the Berkeley crew (ex-Pacifioc Microsonics, as has been mentioned) and they are quite proud of this DAC.

To me it's greatest strength is it's ability to function as a digital-only preamp. The remote includes all necessary functions (volume, input switching, balance, mute, phase) and it works very nicely in that mode.

However, I chose the Weiss DAC2 when all was said and done. I found it's midrange to sound more musical and almost tube-like, and I didn't need a preamp...I have analog sources, etc and can't utilize this feature.

denjo · « **Reply #3 on:** 5 Oct 2009, 11:20 am »

Thanks guys for your inputs.

There is one feature of the Alpha that does not appear in the manual nor was it addressed in the reviews. When the Alpha senses high jitter from the source, the slector button will begin to flicker and if the jitter is very high, the selector light goes off! I hooked my Oppo digital out to the Alpha via Toslink and played some DVDs. When the Alpha's selector light began to flicker I thought it was because of a bad connection in the wiring. Thought this might interest folks intending to own the Alpha.

The Alpha presented me with the best digital sound that I have ever experienced!

bdiament · « **Reply #4 on:** 16 Oct 2009, 08:17 pm »

A fine unit to be sure.

While it requires a Mac to set up, uses non-audiophile type connectors (DB25) and has a bit of a learning curve, when it comes to the bottom line: how it sounds with music, I've heard nothing so far that touches the ULN-8 from Metric Halo.

Aside from being the best DAC I've heard (I've also compared it with my previous favorite, the Pacific Microsonics, as well as units from Meitner, Prism, Weiss, Cranesong, Hedd, Lynx, Mytek, Benchmark and a dozen other "contenders"), it happens to work standalone, has a digitally controlled analog volume control and built in headphone amp (with separate DAC).

It is an 8 channel device and just happens to include 8 channels of A-D (the best I've heard to date), 8 mic preamps (ditto), the best recorder I've heard regardless of format or price (in the included Record Panel software), the best summing mixer I've heard (80-bit! in the included Console software) and more dsp horsepower than I will foreseeably use. (Oh, and if you like tubes -or FETs or transformers, the software allows a selection of quite credible emulations - selectable of course.)

This is really designed as a pro unit but at $6k, it costs considerably less than a lot of audiophile "jewelry" that (to my ears) it leaves in the sonic dust.

Just my perspective.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

srb · « **Reply #5 on:** 16 Oct 2009, 08:43 pm »

Really though, any $5K DAC should have both USB and Firewire interfaces. Come on!

Steve

bdiament · « **Reply #6 on:** 19 Oct 2009, 05:24 pm »

I think it important to consider that USB is currently popular in DACs primarily because of the opportunities for commerce (the ubiquity of this type of port, designed for the purpose of providing an inexpensive means of connecting a mouse or keyboard).

I cannot think of a single designer who, given carte blanche to create the best converters they are able to, would deliberately use USB as a means of transmitting or receiving digital audio (or video).

In my experience, having had the good fortune to audition dozens of contenders, both pro and "audiophile", there is not a single example in the very best performing class of these devices where USB is part of the picture. (There are one or two in the "very good" class that offer USB as one of the options. I would suggest auditioning one of these units and comparing the USB option with one of the others. That will tell you all you need to know and the listener can draw their own conclusions.)

Just my perspective.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

srb · « **Reply #7 on:** 19 Oct 2009, 05:59 pm »

Quote from: bdiament on 19 Oct 2009, 05:24 pm

I think it important to consider that USB is currently popular in DACs primarily because of the opportunities for commerce (the ubiquity of this type of port, designed for the purpose of providing an inexpensive means of connecting a mouse or keyboard).

I cannot think of a single designer who, given carte blanche to create the best converters they are able to, would deliberately use USB as a means of transmitting or receiving digital audio (or video).

In my experience, having had the good fortune to audition dozens of contenders, both pro and "audiophile", there is not a single example in the very best performing class of these devices where USB is part of the picture. (There are one or two in the "very good" class that offer USB as one of the options. I would suggest auditioning one of these units and comparing the USB option with one of the others. That will tell you all you need to know and the listener can draw their own conclusions.)

Agreed, but these units usually have multiple switched inputs, and one of those could be a USB-only equipped device, even though it may not be the primary device chosen for critical listening.

And I would prefer to extract audio from a computer via Firewire rather than S/PDIF from a soundcard.

Steve

bdiament · « **Reply #8 on:** 19 Oct 2009, 06:35 pm »

Hi Steve,

Quote from: srb on 19 Oct 2009, 05:59 pm

...And I would prefer to extract audio from a computer via Firewire rather than S/PDIF from a soundcard.

Steve

Roger that. My ULN-8 talks to the computer via Firewire.
I think it is always a good idea to keep the as much of the audio circuitry outside of the computer as possible.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

K Shep · « **Reply #9 on:** 19 Oct 2009, 07:35 pm »

Quote from: bdiament on 19 Oct 2009, 05:24 pm

I cannot think of a single designer who, given carte blanche to create the best converters they are able to, would deliberately use USB as a means of transmitting or receiving digital audio.

I can think of two - J. Gordon Rankin and Charles Hansen.

K Shep · « **Reply #10 on:** 19 Oct 2009, 07:37 pm »

Quote from: bdiament on 19 Oct 2009, 06:35 pm

I think it is always a good idea to keep the as much of the audio circuitry outside of the computer as possible.

Then why not educate yourself regarding Asynchronous transfer mode?

bdiament · « **Reply #11 on:** 19 Oct 2009, 07:51 pm »

Hi K Shep,

Quote from: K Shep on 19 Oct 2009, 07:37 pm

Then why not educate yourself regarding Asynchronous transfer mode?

I'm well aware of Asynchronous transfer mode and what USB can (and can not) do.

For my ears, the designs you mentioned, good as they indeed are, are not by any means in the top rank of converters.

Just my perspective.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

jhm731 · « **Reply #12 on:** 19 Oct 2009, 08:02 pm »

Quote from: bdiament on 16 Oct 2009, 08:17 pm

A fine unit to be sure.

While it requires a Mac to set up, uses non-audiophile type connectors (DB25) and has a bit of a learning curve, when it comes to the bottom line: how it sounds with music, I've heard nothing so far that touches the ULN-8 from Metric Halo.

Aside from being the best DAC I've heard (I've also compared it with my previous favorite, the Pacific Microsonics, as well as units from Meitner, Prism, Weiss, Cranesong, Hedd, Lynx, Mytek, Benchmark and a dozen other "contenders"), it happens to work standalone, has a digitally controlled analog volume control and built in headphone amp (with separate DAC).

It is an 8 channel device and just happens to include 8 channels of A-D (the best I've heard to date), 8 mic preamps (ditto), the best recorder I've heard regardless of format or price (in the included Record Panel software), the best summing mixer I've heard (80-bit! in the included Console software) and more dsp horsepower than I will foreseeably use. (Oh, and if you like tubes -or FETs or transformers, the software allows a selection of quite credible emulations - selectable of course.)

This is really designed as a pro unit but at $6k, it costs considerably less than a lot of audiophile "jewelry" that (to my ears) it leaves in the sonic dust.

Just my perspective.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

If Metric Halo came out with a 2 channel version of ULN-8, with RCA & XLR outputs and a remote, I think a lot
computer audiophile would buy it. Yes, I know about the ULN-2, but it's limited to 24/96.

bdiament · « **Reply #13 on:** 19 Oct 2009, 08:12 pm »

Hi jhm731,

Quote from: jhm731 on 19 Oct 2009, 08:02 pm

If Metric Halo came out with a 2 channel version of ULN-8, with RCA & XLR outputs and a remote, I think a lot
computer audiophile would buy it. Yes, I know about the ULN-2, but it's limited to 24/96.

I've heard this from a number of folks but based on what MH says, I wouldn't wait for such a device, at least not in the foreseeable future.

Besides, if you compare the price of a ULN-8 with its competition in the pro or audiophile worlds, it doesn't seem so expensive. Not to say it is cheap exactly. Just that folks spend a whole lot more for two channels of D-A that won't approach the performance of the '8.

The software that comes with the '8 includes the best sounding recorder (the Record Panel) I've ever heard and the first mixing console (MIO Console) I've ever heard that doesn't massacre the signal passing through it. The Console (with 80-bit data paths, by the way) is an amazing tool and with the software Monitor Controller (when used in conjuction with a high quality multi-track capable application, e.g. soundBlade), makes an extraordinarily useful tool for comparing different versions of the same recording or the sound of different audio software, etc., etc.

Of course many folks may not need or want these functions but they happen to be included in the deal (along with the A-Ds, mic pres, RIAA equalization, standalone preamp function, etc.). Looking at all of these, the $6k price doesn't seem so much when compared against $5k-$50k 2-channel devices that just do D-A - and not as well.

Remote? I've heard the Apple remote works on the '8.
(I haven't tried it because I don't have an Apple remote, yet.)

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

K Shep · « **Reply #14 on:** 19 Oct 2009, 08:22 pm »

Quote from: bdiament on 19 Oct 2009, 07:51 pm

I'm well aware of Asynchronous transfer mode and what USB can (and can not) do.
Just my perspective.

Your post made it sound like the opposite. I appreciate your perspective. The ubiquity of this type of port (USB), your words, is one of the features that attracted me to the Ayre DAC.

For me it was a seamless progression to add a USB DAC into my system. I bought a Mac Mini then the Ayre product. No Lynx card, no SPDIF converter.

Kirk

bdiament · « **Reply #15 on:** 19 Oct 2009, 08:26 pm »

Hi Kirk,

Quote from: K Shep on 19 Oct 2009, 08:22 pm

Your post made it sound like the opposite. I appreciate your perspective. The ubiquity of this type of port (USB), your words, is one of the features that attracted me to the Ayre DAC.

For me it was a seamless progression to add a USB DAC into my system. I bought a Mac Mini then the Ayre product. No Lynx card, no SPDIF converter.

Kirk

My saying I think it is a good idea to keep the audio circuitry of the computer was in reference to internal sound cards, regardless of the interface format.

Your Mini also has Firewire.

But if you are happy with what you have, I say enjoy.
That's what its all about anyway.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

srb · « **Reply #16 on:** 19 Oct 2009, 08:46 pm »

Wavelength (and Ayre through licensing) had to think outside the box and develop proprietary software and algorithims to make USB viable for 2 channel high fidelity.

In the studio, Firewire is more suited to transfering audio data. The way in which USB transfers audio packets does not lend itself to multi-channel work. In fact, Firewire 400 can't often keep pace and Firewire 800 has become the standard.

Steve

EDS_ · « **Reply #17 on:** 19 Oct 2009, 08:56 pm »

srb,

With respect; I think it's a mistake to claim that only the Ayre and Wavelength DACs, using Rankin's software, can sound great via USB. Lot's of NOS USB DACs sound great as do a large number of OS/US USB DACs.

srb · « **Reply #18 on:** 19 Oct 2009, 09:20 pm »

Quote from: EDS_ on 19 Oct 2009, 08:56 pm

srb,

With respect; I think it's a mistake to claim that only the Ayre and Wavelength DACs, using Rankin's software, can sound great via USB. Lot's of NOS USB DACs sound great as do a large number of OS/US USB DACs.

Although I certainly haven't heard them all, the handful that I have either heard or owned, including the MHDT Paradisea and the Stello DA100 Signature sounded better with their S/PDIF coax input than with their USB input.

So if the USB input on those sounds great, then their S/PDIF input sounds greater.

Steve

bdiament · « **Reply #19 on:** 19 Oct 2009, 09:30 pm »

Hi Steve,

Quote from: srb on 19 Oct 2009, 08:46 pm

...In the studio, Firewire is more suited to transfering audio data. The way in which USB transfers audio packets does not lend itself to multi-channel work. In fact, Firewire 400 can't often keep pace and Firewire 800 has become the standard.

Steve

In fact, the Metric Halo 2882 and ULN-8 can both do multichannel work with their Firewire 400 ports, the former at 24/96 and the latter at 24/192. No glitches. Quite the opposite in fact: especially on the ULN-8, sonic and musical Heaven.

I'm sure this has a lot to do with implementation within the device and its associated software but I'm happy to report FW400 has zero issues on these devices, at least in my experience anyway, over the several years I've been using them.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com