Non-OS DACs: Shigaraki vs Scott Nixon vs AckDac 2.0 Help!

nathan_klassen · « **on:** 25 Feb 2006, 12:53 am »

After reading about the various Non-OS DACs on the market there seem to be three, listed in the topic line, that have maintained my interest and received consistent praise. Sadly, a local comparison of these three is not possible so I'm hoping that AC members can provide some insight. Ultimately what I'm looking for is musicality. Detail/Soundstage/etc is a purely secondary concern for me, I just want to enjoy the music. My system gets me "most" of the way there, on a shoe string budget, but I'm thinking that one of these Non-OS DACs will get me the rest of the way, within my budgetary constraints that is.

Any and all feedback welcome. System information is in my signature and my musical preferences include pretty much everything, except for country, punk, and metal.

Thanks for your time,

Nathan Klassen

gary · « **Reply #1 on:** 25 Feb 2006, 01:27 am »

Can you solder? If so I think the cheapest way to go would be the Monica II from diyparadise.com; you could build it in a nice enclosure and power it with an SLA battery for probably ~$200. I used to have a Nixon DacKit, which i thought was great, and I think everyone who has heard both felt the Monica was superior.

Gary

KT · « **Reply #2 on:** 27 Feb 2006, 02:27 pm »

How much are you looking to spend? And can you DIY?

I like the Monica II over the Nixon DacKit. I think you would be happy with either, but I think the Monica II has a way of presenting the relationship between musical lines in a way the DacKit doesn't. DacKit is still very musical, however. Both are an unbeatable value. As both cost roughly the same, I would go with Monica II.

Scott Nixon's TubeDac+ is similar to the DacKit in decoding the music, but it adds the richness, warmth, and lusciousness of tubes. This takes away a little from the pace and rhythm of the music, but it adds a nice richness to the sound. This warmth may be too much for your system or ears, but if you want this the TubeDac+ may be the way to go.

I haven't had experience with the AckDac or Shigaraki so I can't comment on those.

Best,
KT

Bemopti123 · « **Reply #3 on:** 27 Feb 2006, 02:56 pm »

I have the Shigaraki DAC as well as a Bel Canto DAC-2.0(OS)....all I can say is that non OS DAC purpotedly have a more natural presentation that OS DAC lack. To my ears, the Bel Canto has more body, a more forceful presentation that gives a excellent run to well recorded music. The Shigaraki is lighter, some might even call it a bit slender or thin, it is great if you system is balanced towards a dark or robust sound.

Asides from doing DIY, you should look into Non OS DAC from Canada....the guy who makes the SECTOR integrated has an excellent looking DAC that is affordable, no soldering required. Ask GHM about it, he has one. I Pm GHM about my systems and we usually compare notes. Ask him.

Paul K

Horizons · « **Reply #4 on:** 27 Feb 2006, 07:21 pm »

I'm sure you don't want to hear this but that Monarchy amp is not very musical IMHO. I owned one for a few years and finally sold it because it was slightly irritating and bright. To these ears, the Monarchy amps are just too razor sharp and transparent for mhy tastes.

I have a Monica DAC and it is very musical. The only reason I don't use it anymore is the low (.7V?) total output.

I am now using another non-OS DAC, the Lite Audio AH. Most musical dac I have ever heard. It loses a little bit of the midrange magic of the Monica but has better bass, highs, and higher output to drive my Parasound amp directly.

YMMV.

dado5 · « **Reply #5 on:** 27 Feb 2006, 08:25 pm »

I just got a Lite AH and I am stunned.

I had heard an AN DAC kit 1.2 A-B'ed with a Sony ES777 and thought the Audio Note finished yards ahead. I did not make a conclusion that NOS was better though as this was only a one time exposure. Since then I have heard an AN DAC 3 and both 47 DACs and I liked them all, but these were not compared to any OS units.

The Lite AH vs. my NAD 521BEE is a repeat of the AN DAC kit vs. the ES777....the nature of the difference is identical. The NOS boxes really do have a more vivid and dynamic sound than the OS players. Conventional CD sounds flat and disjointed in comparison. The contrast between highs and lows, soft and loud and fast and slow is sharper with NOS. The music has a toe tapping pace that is absent with the OS machines (the difference was dramatic on many recordings but Led Zep's Rock and Roll really highlighted it). Depending on what your taste is, the 'visuals' of the NOS units may be better or worse....they don't image as sharp as standard players but they give a reach-in sense of depth that makes OS machines two-dimensional. To my ears NOS playback is just more involving.

IMO, conventional CD playback restrains the music somehow. I would have to agree with the theory behind NOS...the damage done to the timing of the music signal by the digital filtering process is audibly worse than the digital noise it is trying to get rid of.....the cure is worse than the disease.

The Lite AH is only 175 clams and there is lots of info on the web about modding this design.......it just screams 'Try Me!'

Rob

Horizons · « **Reply #6 on:** 27 Feb 2006, 08:42 pm »

Quote from: dado5

I just got a Lite AH and I am stunned.

You should hear it with the output caps upgraded. I replaced mine with Black Gates and I am still shaking my head over how good this thing sounds. It is NOT the most analytically accurate DAC I have ever heard but it is clearly the most musical and analog sounding DAC IMO.

dado5 · « **Reply #7 on:** 27 Feb 2006, 09:07 pm »

Quote

You should hear it with the output caps upgraded....

I am thinking of the transformer route myself....bypass the op amp and capacitor all together. The 1543 will actually work right off the I/V resistor, but that would require a power supply mod with the Lite AH version in order to get enough voltage out (like you I drive my amp directly). It's a pricey mod as the transformers cost more than the AH does, but I think it may be the best way to go. I won't be getting around to it for a while, but I will post my impressions when I do.

Quote

It is NOT the most analytically accurate DAC...

Yeah this is a bit of a paradox. The AH doesn't hit you in the face with detail BUT it is easier to follow a particular instrument or musical line with the AH than with NAD. The NAD has detail, but I have to concentrate more in order to keep up with any micro aspect as the music moves along. The case was the same with the Audio Note and the Sony. I think in this respect these NOS players really are like turntables.....it is very easy to pick out one aspect of the recording and just loose yourself in it.....I am re-living my Well Tempered days.

The best digital my system has seen and it's the cheapest component I've ever bought....woo hoo!

Horizons · « **Reply #8 on:** 27 Feb 2006, 11:34 pm »

dado5, my observations match yours entirely.

I decided not to go the xformer route for now as I have my opamps socketed. I can freely swap opamps and output coupling caps to tune the sound of this giant killer.

That is the thing about non-OS dacs, I find myself just getting lost in the music as opposed to analyzing the bass, mids, highs, depth, etc.

I hope I'm not hijacking this thread now...

GHM · « **Reply #9 on:** 28 Feb 2006, 01:43 am »

Looks like you fellows have nailed the NON OS sound. I agree wholeheartedly. I disagree about the Monarchy SM70 though. It has always been one of my favorites. I guess I prefer my amplifiers to be as transparent as possible. I can tweak the sound with the source and preamp ..the amplifier must be as transparent as possible IMHO. The little Monarchy SM70 unseated a McIntosh I paid over 2 Grand for. After listening to the little SM70 the MAC had to hit the road jack.

It's funny..now that my ears have become accustom to the NON OS sound with tubes in the equation. Listening to music before I buy it at Barnes and Nobles through their headsets is really irritating. It used to sound OK depending on the quality of the recording. Now all the sampled recordings sound shrill after listening to NON OS and tubes with the same recordings.
Their streaming digital really sounds like crap!

Hantra · « **Reply #10 on:** 28 Feb 2006, 02:04 am »

I've heard the other DAC's you mention, and I find the Nixon DAC superior. I just had a sneak preview of the new USBTD from Nixon, and I am ready to sign up. The improvement was quite a bit more than I was expecting.

I don't know anything about anything named Monica, except for the one the former Pres used to boink. The thought alone would dissuade me from anything with that name.

lonewolfny42 · « **Reply #11 on:** 28 Feb 2006, 02:13 am »

Quote from: Hantra

I don't know anything about anything named Monica, except for the one the former Pres used to boink. The thought alone would dissuade me from anything with that name.

Now thats funny....

....here's the right Monica....

Hantra · « **Reply #12 on:** 28 Feb 2006, 02:20 am »

Quote from: lonewolfny42

Now thats funny.... ....here's the right Monica....

Ohhhhhh! That Monica is teh hawt!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Still not sure about the DAC tho.

albee · « **Reply #13 on:** 28 Feb 2006, 03:17 am »

Mam Mia! Lunch!

NOS guys, do you use coax or optical? I tried both and coax seems to be the way to go. I use a plain and simple AR digi-coax to my AH and run Tara's to my Kramer 903. Sounds great.

(Any pics on these opamp or cap quick changes?)

chadh · « **Reply #14 on:** 28 Feb 2006, 03:20 am »

Quote from: fabaudio

May I introduce you to.......Monica!

And who are her two rather over-enthusiastic friends?

Chad

chadh · « **Reply #15 on:** 28 Feb 2006, 03:32 am »

Frank,

I guess it deserved to be said twice!

Chad

dado5 · « **Reply #16 on:** 28 Feb 2006, 03:35 pm »

Quote

I decided not to go the xformer route for now as I have my opamps socketed

What opamps have you tried and what value BG cap did you use?

Thanks,
Rob

mcrespo71 · « **Reply #17 on:** 28 Feb 2006, 03:45 pm »

I have the Ack Dack 2.0 and use it with a Rega Jupiter transport. It's really musical, but it does stage well. If you decide on an Ack, get it with the hi-rez option.

tfroncek · « **Reply #18 on:** 28 Feb 2006, 03:55 pm »

Not that there's anything wrong with that... the word "fantastic"... but the word is actually "spectacular". And indeed this particular pair is spectacular.

elnero · « **Reply #19 on:** 28 Feb 2006, 04:02 pm »

I have an MHDT Laboratories Dialogue II, another TDA1543 based, passive I/V NOS DAC which are available regularly on eBay from the builder. Typically they go for around $200 + $35 shipping to NA. They also offer a few other models, the Renaissance II which is another TDA1543 based design but implements a tube buffer in the output which I assume is a similar design as Scott Nixons TubeDAC+. He also has two TDA1545 based designs, the Constantine and Paradisea. Both have opamp outputs but the Paradisea has a tube buffer as well.

I like my Dialogue II but I'll admit I'm looking for an upgrade, in my search I've come across the Storm Digital D02 http://storm-digital.com/diy/eng/products_eng.html. This is a TDA1543 design but has 8 DAC's in parallel similar to the DDDAC1543 and DAC-AH, the difference here is the D02 has a passive I/V, reclocking circuit and can be used with either battery power (Panasonic SLA) or AC power selectable through a multifunction switch on the front panel. I've talked to the builder over Messenger and he plans to offer a black version, a clock upgrade and a cheaper "lite" version without battery power and display. I've been debating between this and a Lite DAC-60 but the Storm Digital looks to me like it might be my best option for an upgrade from what I have now that won't change things dramatically but improve upon a sound I already like very much.