The Great NC DAC Shootout!! MENSA/BC/Nixon/MF

Jay S · « **Reply #40 on:** 6 Feb 2003, 02:05 am »

I really like the findings you guys came up with. I think its a good point to bring up the important of system matching, particularly the impact that cables can have. Another variable to play with is speaker positioning, something which I assume was kept constant during the shootout (for good reason). Given that the MENSA has such great focus, you may be able to make it sound a bit warmer by pointing the speakers straight ahead or reducing toe-in (if they were toed in during the test). On the other hand, you could increase the focus of the BC and increase treble energy by toeing in the speakers.

BikeWNC · « **Reply #41 on:** 6 Feb 2003, 02:32 am »

Jay, your right about toe in, though Brad's ExcelArrays were not set-up with any. Just straight ahead. I will say that the Newform Ribbons used in those speakers have tremendous horizontal dispersion and are crossed over at 850 Hz. The sweet spot was about a generous 3 ft wide. The line array of 6 Seas Excel woofers in each speaker loaded the room so well I could not detect a single hot spot anywhere. I only noticed the loss of high end energy above 5 ft in height due to the limited vertical dispersion of the ribbons.

Andy

jasonc · « **Reply #42 on:** 6 Feb 2003, 05:10 am »

Hello

!
Been lurking on this site for about a month now and thought it's time I chime in. I've never seen such a vast array of Emoticons at ones disposal... just having the ability to shoot at people I believe will benefit my overall hapiness and well being greatly

.

Anyway. I've had the Scott Nixon TubeDac for approx. two weeks now and this is my experience.
For the first week with this dac to be honest I was not that blown away with it's sound. It seemed a little too laid back for my taste, so laid back to my ears it stripped away a level of excitement from the music. Going back and forth, listening with dac and without it it was easy to tell music lost some of it's gusto with the dac in the mix. I was a bit surprised and a little frustrated I had just imagined great things with this little guy.

Initially I was using Radioshack cables with the Dac for the main reason that I had the dac in a small area and the TMC White Label I had were to stiff to allow for the placement I wanted. I WOKE UP and found a place where I could use the TMC with the DAC in my setup which really wasn't that difficult of a thing. This dac is so compact in design your placement options become many. So did this effect the sound? Of course it did I was using Radioshack cables. Did it completely transform the sound of the Dac in my setup? Ahh No.. well not the way I was hoping it would. The TMC did bring more punch to the DAC but with it came some brightness to the overall sound. Atleast at this piont I knew the DAC was sensitive to cables and more than I thought. Overall I'm thinking I can still live without the Dac.

A few day ago I decided to swap the cables from my amp to pre (Bolder M-80's) for the cables I was using with the Dac- TMC White Lable and I almost lost it.. instead I just smiled. PRESTO!!
With this everything snapped in focus. Music has the attack and bite I was looking for but more importantly a smoothness and musicality has washed over the system. I am getting the best sound I have ever got out of my system, maybe the best sound I have ever heard? This is insane? To make sure the dac didn't make a giant leap foward due to break in or any other reason I did some more switching with cables and listening again without the Dac as before and nothing compared. I was able to confirm I acheived audio nirvana with the M-80s connected to the Dac, relinquishing their duties from the amp to pre. and giving that job to the TMC's for the time being.
The beast is loose and the ONLY reason is the synergy this dac has with the M-80s in my system. This Dac has suddenly become precious to me.
This is my story.

Hantra · « **Reply #43 on:** 6 Feb 2003, 12:19 pm »

Confessions of an M-80 junkie. . .

I completely agree with you on the M-80's. I replaced some 47 Labs with it that I was using from my Tube DAC to my pre, and it is a very nice change.

The Nixon DAC may take some getting used to, but as you listen more, you'll realize that you aren't missing anything. When things clean up, it may sound like they are missing. I have compared the Nixon DAC to my turntable on the same track, and I am not missing a thing over the TT except for noise.

B

nature boy · « **Reply #44 on:** 6 Feb 2003, 12:31 pm »

Hmmmmmmmmmm,

Scott Nixon tube DAC, Bolder Cable M-80's & and Bolder Cable digital cable w/ Eichmann bullet plugs maybe this combo is worth a try in my system.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

NB

Brad V · « **Reply #45 on:** 6 Feb 2003, 12:48 pm »

Hi Brandon,

Wasn't the M80's the cables we used for the DAC Shootout?

Thanks,

Brad

Hantra · « **Reply #46 on:** 6 Feb 2003, 01:47 pm »

B:

Yep. .

jasonc · « **Reply #47 on:** 7 Feb 2003, 12:10 am »

I forgot to mention.. the digital cable the Scott makes is very good indeed. The Bolder cable with the standard Bullet plugs is better. The difference here though is not nearly as profound as the difference in analog cables.

Also forgot to mention I'm using a Pioneer DV-656a as a tranport with the Dac and I'm thinking of getting it modified by Dan Wright.. still can't imagine getting better sound then I'm getting now

.
Another dilemma I have, if you could call it that, is what to use instead of the TMC White Labels on the amp- Odyssey Stratos>-< Arcam AVR100 as pre. Open to suggestions. Thinking TMC Yellow Lable because I'm getting good synergy with my currect setup and Yellows are more intended for this application.

BikeWNC · « **Reply #48 on:** 7 Feb 2003, 12:36 am »

I'm using a Pioneer DV-440 with Modwright level 2 and bybee mods for my transport. I think it is excellent, though to be honest I haven't had the chance to compare it to other transports . If you like the Bolder M-80 ICs why not try another pair between amp and pre? After hearing them this past weekend, I think they are a great value for the money.

Jay S · « **Reply #49 on:** 7 Feb 2003, 01:14 am »

Interesting to hear that your DV656A performs so well as a transport for the SN dac. I am considering getting a DV47Ai (which has the same transport mechanism and lots of common circuitry) to replace my Cary 303, which I am using as a transport now. Do let us know if you are able to do any comparisons, particularly with known performers like the Sony 9000ES.

Guan · « **Reply #50 on:** 7 Feb 2003, 01:58 am »

Jason: I have used the entire line of TMC cables. My favorites are the White label both RCA and balanced versions. The Yellow label is a little warm and opaque in comparison which might or might not work well depending on your system. I would rather use a more transparent cable like the White between pre/power. The TMC speaker cables are also rather good for the money and provide a very low noise floor.

However, good as the TMCs are, my current ic and speaker cables surpasses them in all areas. I am now using New Zealand-made SlinkyLinks cables. These use pure silver conductors in an air dieletric. They are neutral, liquid, very high resolution and just get out the way of the music. The TMCs sound more grainy, brighter and slightly fatiguing in comparison!

jasonc · « **Reply #51 on:** 7 Feb 2003, 04:42 am »

Tsunami- I was thinking of M-80s originally between pre/power to have an all M80 setup but now I'm not sure. I like the balance i'm getting with the TMC and M80 combo right now. Preferably I'd like to stay all copper between the pre/power because my system/room has this foward nature. The SN Tube Dac has done it's job to alter this but now of course I'm just trying to make a good thing better.

Jay S.
So far the only player I have compared the Pioneer to is my 2 yr old Toshiba SD-2200 dvdp and the Pioneer is in a different class. I owned a Norh CD-1 for some time and loved it's sound. I can honestly say the DV-656a unmodified as transport and the Scott Nixon Tube Dac have raised the bar a few notches.

Guan- I've always thought TMC cables have not gotten the proper attention they deserve. They really are great cables for the money. As far as the SlinkyLinks they do seem interesting. I remember reading about them when thy first came out not sure if they had the bullet plugs then.. and just forgot about them. I had a pair of Silver Audio Hyacinths in the past and I found I liked the TMC White Lable better in my setup. I still would be willing to hear the SlinkLinks... sure not all silver cables sound the same, god knows copper cables don't.
Can these ic's be purchased in the states and do you know if they're available in .5 and 1m lengths?
Thanks.

Jay S · « **Reply #52 on:** 7 Feb 2003, 02:20 pm »

Quote from: jasonc

Jay S.
So far the only player I have compared the Pioneer to is my 2 yr old Toshiba SD-2200 dvdp and the Pioneer is in a different class. I owned a Norh CD-1 for some time and loved it's sound. I can honestly say the DV-656a unmodified as transport and the Scott Nixon Tube Dac have raised the bar a few notches:mrgreen: :

Hi Jason,

Well, if the stock 656a + SN tube dac are in a different class above the CD-1 then I am impressed. I hold the CD-1 in high regard as a musical and balanced player (though I've only heard it with some very good NOS 5751 tubes, never with the stock tubes). I've got the MENSA dac... I just need to pull the trigger on a universal player. If whichever universal I decide on turns out to be a step back as a redbook transport compared to my Cary, I could get an upgraded clock (LClock or Trichord) installed quite cheaply here in Hong Kong. I will be ordering a DeZorel power filter soon, which should help out the power supplies of the stock universal player.

Too bad there aren't any hybrid DVD-A/CD disks out yet.... it would be interesting to compare DVD-A vs CD on your 656a.

Guan · « **Reply #53 on:** 8 Feb 2003, 01:39 am »

Hi Jason,

SlinkyLink cables in my experience do not have the stereotypical brightness/edginess associated with some other silver cables. They have the musicality and body of good copper cables and the vividness and resolution of silver without sounding contrived or too hifi. The ic's use bullet plugs and the speaker cable has special hollow banana plugs. I'm sure they are available in any length you require. John Ransley, of TotallyWired (groovy name!), the distributor, is a pleasure to deal with.
More info:

http://www.totallywired.co.nz/slinkylinks.htm

Guan

jasonc · « **Reply #54 on:** 9 Feb 2003, 10:59 pm »

Jay S,
In regards to the CD-1 performance vs the 656a + Tubedac it's important to note a few things. One, this is based on memory only. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, when I had the CD-1 my speakers.. Prism 6.9s, were not fed the same power but infact were slightly underpowered using a Arcam AVR100. Since I let go of the CD-1 I have added an Odyssey Stratos w/cap upgrade which has drastically improved the performance of my system. So do I feel I'm getting better cd playback with the 656a and SN dac than what I remember from the CD-1.. yes.. but it may not mean much. It's fair to say the CD-1 would have benefited with the the Stratos in the heart of the system.

Guan, thanks for the info on the ic's. Need to hold off on any purchases right now but I will keep these cables in mind when the time comes.

J

Jay S · « **Reply #55 on:** 10 Feb 2003, 01:17 am »

Jason,

Thanks for the clarification.

Cheers,

- Jay

Sean · « **Reply #56 on:** 2 Nov 2003, 09:21 am »

This has been a good and informative thread. Obviously, it is quite possible ( and should be expected by "seasoned audiophiles" ) that one could obtain very different results using different cabling and / or a different system. This is not to mention the differences that could enter into the equation when considering personal preferences.

Having said that, it appears that there might have been some slight differences of opinions, but that everyone was basically hearing the same things as each DAC was entered into the system. This is a good thing as it demonstrates consistency in your test methodology and that nobody involved in this comparison is "deaf"

As a side note, i find it pretty interesting that the general consensus of the modified DIO was that it was "accurate" yet "boring". Music in itself is not boring, so obviously, the modified DIO is doing something very wrong. My comments are not solely based on the observations that others have made during this shoot-out, but also by the fact that i have auditioned a Bolder modified DIO that made use of an aftermarket 3+ amp non-toroidal based power supply. With the modified DIO substituted into an actively quad-amped, staggered driver time aligned system, the soundstage instantly shrank in every direction. That is, what was previously a very wide, deep and tall soundstage was now squashed between the speakers. On top of this, the DIO lacked the ability to retrieve low level information and completely trunctuated the harmonic overtones of each note. The end result was that we had gone from music that was big, bold and vibrant to something that was squashed, canned and bleached. Needless to say, we were far from impressed with this device, even after trying to alter the performance that we were achieving by substituting over a half dozen different cables into the chain. The end result was a far more sterile presentation that lacked spacial cues. It is results like this that make "rave internet reviews" hard to swallow.

As to the BC DAC, it would also appear that my past experiences with this DAC and what you folks experienced are much the same. That is, i found the BC to be somewhat warm and smooth sounding with a slightly "round" characteristic to the sound. While it is quite pleasant to listen to, especially with bright / hard digital recordings, it lacks the air, open-ness and agility of the better units available. Not bad though and miles above the modified DIO in terms of sheer "musicality".

The MF DAC sounds like an MF piece to me. That is, it continues down the same path of the MF "house sound" that they've been building for a few years now. It is relatively quick and clean sounding with good articulation but lacking in body, warmth and impact. Their gear strikes me as being "ballerina-like" i.e. quick and nimble but it will never bowl you over with sheer "power". Many of the benefits of the detail and "air" that this device demonstrates may be attributable to upsampling. If done "properly" with a good set of ( or lack of ) filters, the sound can be extremely spacious and detailed without the grain and glare typically associated with "highly detailed" digital gear. Obviously, there is a lot going on here and it is up to the engineer / designer to balance all of the variables involved.

While i've not heard any of Scott's more recent work, i have owned one of his earlier Anodyne pieces. Don't know what tubes he's using now nor how different the circuitry is, but the one that i had ran 6DJ8's if i recall correctly. This was a "tubey" sounding unit i.e. good warmth and midrange liquidity but lacked bass defintion and high frequency articulation. In some respects, it could come across as sounding a little "slow" due to being a little warmer sounding, which tends to add weight to recordings that are already warm. Personally, i liked the CAL tubed gear better as it didn't sound quite as veiled. I do have to comment that Scott's stuff appears to offer phenomenal value for the money, which is never a bad thing.

Having said all of that, i have to think that i would have heard very similar things to what you folks reported during your "shoot-out" since our general observations appear to be pretty close, even under quite varied circumstances. As Tsunami pointed out, it is too bad that one can't walk to your local audio store and find all of the endearing traits of each of these devices wrapped up in one package at a reasonable price. As such, one obviously has to select components that work well with the rest of their systems and personal preferences. After all, there is no sense in buying / operating a component or system that looks good on paper and in reviews but doesn't make you want to listen to your music. Buy what you like and enjoy it. After all, you're the only one that's going to be using it and listening to it on a daily basis

doug s. · « **Reply #57 on:** 2 Nov 2003, 04:33 pm »

hi sean,

interesting comments about the di/o. i know how ya feel about this dac, as francisco has apprised me of yer feelings before... as i'm sure yure aware, this is not my experience w/it in my system, but my specific dac is a likely bit different, no doubt, being self-modded. i use the standard "upgrade" stancor p/s, plugged into an isolation transformer. my points of reference for comparison have included an alchemist cdp, the resolution audio cd-50, & the latest electrocompaniet dac. my di/o easily holds its own in this company. but, my dac experience is certainly no where near as extensive as yours.

i'm wondering if you have had a chance to audition any of these three units - the ack! dack, the mytek pro-audio dac, & the benchmark pro-audio dac. these are dacs i'm interested in checking out, & as i'm not made of money, feedback from others whose opinions i respect, is certainly welcome!

mytek has digital download stuff on their site, where ya can compare their dac w/a benchmark & one other dac. (apogee?) they obviously feel their's is best, & that folks who compare will feel the same way...

regards,

doug s.

Sean · « **Reply #58 on:** 3 Nov 2003, 08:16 am »

Doug: I can't say that i'm familiar with any of the products that you've mentioned. I have pretty much mellowed out on the digital front for now and am concentrating on trying to catch up on the million different projects i have over here. As such, i'm not going to be of much use to anybody in terms of newer gear for some time to come. I've just got too much going on and have spread myself too thin for too long. Sorry i can't help. I don't venture over here too much, but it seems like these guys are doing a pretty good job of staying on top of things. Sean
>

cjr888 · « **Reply #59 on:** 3 Nov 2003, 12:35 pm »

Still haven't tried the Nixon, though I plan to in the next few months. System is currently not together as we move the room around.

About the ART -- when I had a slightly modified unit in my system, from memory, "accurate" but "boring" wasn't how I would have described it...

In my opinion, I would have gone with 'lively and quick' instead of 'boring', and somewhat agree with 'accurate'. I would agree with 'boring', if it was meant to mean to opposite of lush or full bodied though.....