[Danny Richie]

Okay I have been having some fun with this one.

My test speakers for today were the Alpha LS's. They're powered by Dodd Audio gear. It's a very revealing and breath taking system to say the least. It also shows off upstream changes very well. The speakers will play down low too and reveal shortcomings in the bottom end easily as well.

Chris Own sent me one of his dAck units. I will be comparing it with my Rega Planet and my Bolder modified Art DI/O.

I met Chris a few years ago. He's from the same home town that I am from, Wichita Falls, TX. He's not only real likeable but a pretty sharp young man too. http://csown.dhs.org/school.html  

He came to visit earlier this year and brought by one of these D/A's he was working one. It was an early version of the dAck and I wasn't over enthused about it right away. It seemed to be a little shy in the bottom end and lacked the detail of the DI/O. I really didn't give it a fair listen either.

But this latest version has been through some improvements, according to Chris, and I was curious to give it a listen, so I had Chris send one out to me.

My Rega Planet CD player has had one mod that made a really nice difference. I got rid of the stock power cord, mounted an IEC connector in the back of the unit and added one of the MPC-12 power cords. It's a tricky built 12 gauge cryo treated cable that sounds really good. It clearly helped the sound of it a lot. This thing is a great transport too.

My DI/O has what Wayne said was kind of a half Mensa mod. It made a huge difference to that unit over the stock version. The stock version had such high output that it left little volume adjustment at all when using steeped attenuator type volume pots. It sounded no where near as good as it does now either. Wayne works wonders with it.

Wayne is supposed to be sending me his power supply with one of his Nitro cables soon and I plan to do a full review of the unit as soon as I can. He has done a great job modifying that unit and I have really liked it.

I was reluctant originally to compare Chris's dAck to my modded DI/O. The modded DI/O really is a giant killer and I just couldn't see Chris's dAck or any other inexpensive unit having anything over it. I like Chris and didn't want to have to tell him that his unit was okay but not up to Modded DI/O level.

I was also not to fond of the idea of recharging batteries and stuff. I am a plug and play guy. I don't want to have to stop and re-charge batteries before listening to something. I would just spend the money on a good power supply and cable and not fool with it.

Only 44kHz and 16 bit decoded didn't sound to impressive either.

When I received the dAck I plugged it in and let it play. I left the room and didn't give it much of a listen. I knew it needed burn in time. After it had played for about four hours I unplugged and hooked it to the charger. To my surprise it charged rather quickly. The charge light goes from red to green when it is ready to play.

So I plug it back in and let it play for 5 or 6 hours before throwing it back on the charger.

Today, Saturday, I decided to give it a listen despite it needing more burn in time.

I started with some Norah Jones.

One of the fun parts for me is sitting down to listen with an open mind or an open ear not knowing what to expect or what to listen for when suddenly differences in unexpected areas begin to surface.

My first thought was that it sounded different. Vocals were full and lush like it had a tube output or something but it seemed to be giving up something in the highs that I was used to hearing and I still questioned in the back of my mind if the bottom end might be a little soft still.

I swapped the DI/O back in and what seamed like a lot of detail level returned, or did it? It appeared as if I could now hear the background noise in the recording much more clearly, and the brush stokes on the drums were more apparent. The DI/O had a little bit more brightness about it.

I switched them back and put the dAck back in.

I listened some more and quickly realized that it wasn't the noise level in the recording that the DI/O was revealing. It was just noise. The noise floor with the dAck was simply gone. The clarity in the highs were still there, there was just no noise and it lacked a little brightness.

I tried the DI/O again. The noise floor returned. I didn't realize how much noise was there until it was gone.

I tried the Rega too. It sounds soft and a little tube like and lacks a little detail that the DI/O has but the noise floor was there also. It sounded a lot like the DI/O in that regard.

I tried some Holly Cole. I then realized the bass response in the dAck was not too soft at all. It was well controlled and extended. It matched the DI/O in this regard. At times I thought the DI/O edged it in bottom end control then other times I thought not.

Vocals were exceptionally good with the dAck, airy, smooth, natural and attention getting. Space around instruments and emotional feelings were all much better with the dAck.

Some Lyle Lovett, Joshua Judges Ruth, was then selected. The dAck really started to shine. I got excited. The difference in the noise level was unbelievable and was a nice surprise. When switching back and forth from the DI/O to the dAck I found myself listening to the DI/O much less and the dAck much more.

Vocals in the DI/O sound a little thin and honky in comparison. They even seamed a little shouty at times while the dAck remained smooth and less congested.

The DI/O begin to sound too noisy to listen to. I kept wanting to turn it down. While the dAck was so smooth I just kept wanting to turn it up. I realized I could listen at a little louder levels with much less fatigue, and my system was not even fatiguing to begin with.

I then tried some Blue Man Group.  

Again I was sucked in by the dAck. I would listen to part of a track on the DI/O and switch back to the dAck for a comparison just to find myself listening to the whole composition.

I started listening to track after track and cranking it up. It was as if I was hearing this stuff for the first time all over again.

Hard not to notice with every CD selected was the goose bump factor of the dAck. I noticed that I was just listening for differences when I had the DI/O in and when I put the dAck in I would just get sucked in. Several times with each CD I goose bumped up all over and was nearly moved to tears with a few Lyle Lovett tracks and with several from the Blue Man Group. I felt embarrassed to type that.    I didn't cry!

I am thinking now, who needs high dollar power supplies and expensive cables? If going to battery power means a super low noise floor I am now a battery powered dude all the way. There may also be much that can be said for a simple circuit design with little in the signal path.

I still think the dAck gives up a little high level detail to the DI/O especially in the very top octaves. I wonder if by-passing the few caps in the dAck with some .1uF Sonicaps will up the detail level just by a notch or two? I bet I'll know soon.

I didn't think I would, but I highly recommend giving the dAck a try. It may not do for everyone what it does here. All systems are different and system matching is important, but if you never try it you'll never know.

I am not a real review type of guy either. I seldom ever post any kind of review and seldom ever indorse other products, but when I find something that to me is not only good but presents a genuine value I can't help myself.

Offering a high level of bang for the buck is what I strive for myself and when I recognize that in other companies it really stands out to me.

Dodd Audio was one of the first companies to offer what I feel like is a huge bang for the buck.

Ack Industries is the second. http://ack.dhs.org

Highly recommended,    and I don't think he will get this one back.

[ABEX]

No,not another affordable DAC!

Geez just when you think it's safe to go in the water,I mean think you have the best affordable DAC!

It must drive people that want  to have the best in an affordable DAC NUTS!

I saw your new line of Ribbon Tweeters and they look great!  
I have been a fan of Ribbons going back to the 70's with Infinity's and Magnepans. Very Transparent when implemented correctly without the spitty sound of amplification.

Waiting on Specs in order to upgrade my XO's with SoniCaps and Resistors. Have not decided on new Inductors for my NEAR M50's which have newer versioned Metal Drivers ,but maintain the Inverted Dome Tweeters.

I did an A\B test against my old Maggies using NEAR's old M15's with their original Drivers and they Beat the Maggies hands down. The newer Drivers are truer to the actual event I feel.

Thanks for bringing another affordable DAC to my attention! I really do not know weather to thank you or dislike you for it,but it really does not matter to me as I already have a smART DAC with a better than Stock PS for it.

Thanks for the info,anyway!

[Psychicanimal]

What kind, if any, of noise reduction equipment were you using?  Sems to me you do not mention any.  If so, this comparison would not be fair, as DACs demand really low noise to function well.  What you would be comparing, in fact, is the battery vs the ART's power supply.  Not fair at all...

[doug s.]

hi danny,

this Ack! dack has certainly interested me.  (it's certainly a looker!  )  but, psychic makes a walid point.  when i started modding my di/o, the noise, which sounded sorta like ya describe, yust kept getting less & less, the resolution of what it really was - musicians' movements, breathing, etc, yust kept getting clearer & clearer.  adding an isolation x-former to the di/o furthered this process, as did adding an additional isolation transformer to the transport.  (plugging them both into a third isolation x-former garnered no further gains in my rig, which is why psychic & i are having a friendly "disagreement" in another thread!   )  one particular cd i have - hawaiian slack-key masters, wolume ll, is especially good for analyzing this, as it contains a lot of close-miked solo recordings.

anyway, if i could keep all the detail & resolution i'm getting, & further lower the noise, that would be a cool thing.  i may have to have chris send me a demo i could return if it wasn't clearly better, but i'd need the bigger battery pack - my system gets left on far too long for the stocker...  mebbe, if it's really better than my di/o, i'd keep the di/o for general use, & turn on the Ack! for when in the "sweet spot"...    

regards,

doug s.

[Oxia]

Danny,

That was a great review! I've been fascinated by this DAC ever since I heard of it. Can you comment on exactly how long it takes to achieve a full recharge? Also, please update your review as the dAck! continues to burn in.

BTW, I don't agree with the others that have said that this is an unfair review. Any component is the sum total of it's parts and the execution of it's design, in equal measure. As such, it's ultimate performance will be a reflection of its inherent design principles and compromises. Consequently, it's not simply a matter of "DAC 'A' has an unfair advantage over DAC 'B' because it runs on a battery pack as opposed to AC power". You could extend this line of thinking to an absurd extreme, and then complain that *any* difference between products makes comparisons between them invalid (i.e. we therefore cannot compare ribbons to cones and domes, 3-ways to 2-ways, tubes to solid state, etc).

As I see it, this was a proper apples-to-apples comparison as both DACs offer comparable functionality (we're not talking about refrigerators versus ovens here) and they were used in the same environment, under the same conditions, and they were both operated in a way that is **within the scope of its design parameters**. The last part is important because while the playing field must be equal, the design of the 2 products under comparison does not have to be as long as they fulfill the same function. It's not the fault of the "dAck!" that the DIO was designed to run on AC power, any more than the fact that the DIO also uses an oversampling filter. These were all design choices and compromises made by their respective designers, but at the end of the day, they are still DACs and thus they are comparable. It would only be unfair if, say, one DAC was tested using an outboard anti-jitter device and the other was not, since one DAC would have an unequal advantage due to the inclusion of an outside factor that was not **within the scope of its design parameters**, and thus it would constitute an uneven playing field.

[Psychicanimal]

BTW, I don't agree with the others that have said that this is an unfair review. Any component is the sum total of it's parts and the execution of it's design, in equal measure. As such, it's ultimate performance will be a reflection of its inherent design principles and com ...

Get real, will you?  Power supply is extremely important.  Comparing battery powered vs electric will introduce the element of fluctuations in voltage, quality of electricity and noise from location to location and from time of day in the same location.    DACs with good integral noise control measurtes like the $4.5K Dodson 218 still benefit from serious noise control measures.  It is evident you have not messed around with noise control measures in DACs.  If you had you would not be speaking in such theoretical trems.  As for comparing one vs another, I'll leave that to Dusty...

DAC's are like phono cartridges, it's really hard to say which one is "best".  It really depends on how it sounds in the particular system it's in. We've had several customers replace modded DI/O's with ours (including Brian Cheney of VMPS) and we've talked to others who preferred the modded DI/O. System synergy and personal taste have alot to do with it. Doing a "shootout" between DAC's in a single system only tells you what you like in that particular system.

BTW, I do not own an ART Di/O.  I use Dusty's DAC with some heavy duty noise control measures.

[Hantra]

Does the dAck still use Scott Nixon's boards?  I mean, Nixon's regular DAC will run on batteries, and is much cheaper.  So I guess the casework is the costly part.

[Marbles]

Danny,

I think that Wayne's power supply does make a difference with the noise, it should, it has a bybee in it.

While we're on the subject, that in line Bybee thing he sells really helps with the noise if you put it on the digi cable, right before the DAC.

Let us know how it goes if you try those two things.

[Danny Richie]

Not fair at all...

What would not have been fair would have been to have not posted anything at all.

What would have not been fair would have been to report on how it sounds in relation to nothing with no point of reference.

The dAck sounded too good not to post info about it.

As for noise levels here in this area that comes through the power lines, I would say it is much less here than in other areas. This somewhat rural area where I live has little RFI compared to big cities. Power is fairly clean too.

I have found that shielded cables, ESR shielding, and power conditioners and even the Bybee's have much less effect here if any compared to the effects they have in the Dallas area (2 hours away).

How much of the difference I noted was due to the battery powered system I do not know. There are other major differences too. The dAck uses no filter, no up-sampling, and a very simplistic design.

Again, Wayne is sending me one of his power supplies to not only try. I told him I would purchase it. I look forward to getting it and will give the Bolder modded DI/O a full review after I get the power supply.

Maybe we should try the DI/O on battery power too?

Does the dAck still use Scott Nixon's boards?

I have not heard anything about that, and do not know if it does or does not use his boards. You might ask Chris Own about that.

[Oxia]

Psychicanimal wrote:
"Get real, will you? Power supply is extremely important. Comparing battery powered vs electric will introduce the element of fluctuations in voltage, quality of electricity..."

Where exactly did I write that power supply is *not* important? I said nothing of the sort.  I think you've misunderstood my point, which was about testing methodology. In short, there was nothing invalid about Danny's test or his conclusions. If the dAck's design gives it immunity to noise from the AC mains, and this in turn contributes positively to its sound quality, then great. This is the sort of thing that a good and thorough review should point out -- differences and how they translate into strengths and weaknesses.

Let's put this another way. Let's say we were comparing 2 amplifiers. In the end, we determine that amp A sounded cleary better than amp B, however amp A was designed with built-in AC power regeneration. Does that make the conclusion that amp A sounded better than amp B invalid? No, because all things being equal, amp A was designed with specific features that gave it a decisive edge over amp B. To somehow "disqualify" amp A for having an "unfair advantage", is silly. If amp B was "disadvantaged" because of certain aspects of its design, that's simply a function of the choices that its designer made. Cest la vie.

Every choice that a designer makes entails prioritization of certain goals over others. In the case of the dAck!, the designer clearly valued clean power over convenience, hence the battery pack. The DIO (which was modded) was designed with more convience in mind, however, I'm certain that thoughtful upgrades was made to its power supply to make this as much of a non-issue as possible. These are just two different ways to skin a cat, but it is certainly fair to compare the two within the same system, in the same environment. If one designer engineered his product to work better in the same environment, then more power to them.

OK, I have one more point to make. Let's say that our hypothetical amp A and amp B are both running on regenerated AC power during our comparison, and consequently the difference in performance is now lessened. Would you therefore preceive the fact that amp B will only approach the performance level of amp A if you include the extra expense of an AC regenerator to be an advantage or a disadvantage in this comparison?

[Psychicanimal]

I think you've misunderstood my point, which was about testing methodology. In short, there was nothing invalid about Danny's test or his conclusions. If the dAck's design gives it immunity to noise from the AC mains ...

The dAck's design does not give it immunity to noise from the AC mains, its power source does.  Which is why you are comparing apples to oranges.  No one who really knows about audio gear setup would use a DAC w/out balanced noise control measures (also separate for transport), even if living in the country.  For your information, noise does get amplified in the system, no matter how little.  Even battery powered equipment suffers from DC noise--that's what the Bybees were originally designed for.  Again, I see that you are not speaking from experience--no offense meant.

Danny, using the ART with a battery power source would be the best thing to do.  I do prefer a simple circuit design, that's why I have the CIAudio.  Now, you need to remember that Bybee filters are polishers and not useful for removing grunge.  Even in the countryside there will be noise.  Not like my previous apt. in a Bloomingdale, IL midrise my friend Deano dubbed "RFI Towers", but definitely not clean...

DAC's are like phono cartridges, it's really hard to say which one is "best". It really depends on how it sounds in the particular system it's in. We've had several customers replace modded DI/O's with ours (including Brian Cheney of VMPS) and we've talked to others who preferred the modded DI/O. System synergy and personal taste have alot to do with it. Doing a "shootout" between DAC's in a single system only tells you what you like in that particular system.

[Oxia]

The dAck's design does not give it immunity to noise from the AC mains, its power source does. Which is why you are comparing apples to oranges

Except that in this case, the battery supply is an *integral* part of the dAck's design. To consider the dAck apart from it's battery pack is like... bacon without eggs. OK, not the best example, but I hope you get the idea. The DIO was tested with it's own supplied PS (and this was a modded DIO with, I believe, an uprated PS and filtering caps). That's why it's an apples-to-apples comparison -- because both DACs were tested using the respective power supplies that they were designed for. If you're going to complain about the lack of battery power for the DIO to "keep things even", why not decry the lack of a non-oversampling filter too?

No one who really knows about audio gear setup would use a DAC w/out balanced noise control measures

Well, clean power is essential for getting the most out of any system, and I admire the length that the dAck goes towards this, although having to recharge every four hours is definitely for the hairshirt audiophile crowd -- of which I'm a card-carrying member, thank you. However, be reminded that this was a review of DACs, not power conditioners.

Again, I see that you are not speaking from experience--no offense meant.

No offense taken, but you're missing the point, which is that battery power (dAck) vs stiff regulated PS (DIO) are just two different ways to approach power delivery, but this does not make the caparison between dAck and DIO to be unfair or invalid. One method may be better than the other, but isn't that the point of a comparison, to see which DAC (by itself, without outside assistance) performs best?
 
As it happens, I too am an adherent of the need for clean power, so you don't need to preach to me. I never disputed the importance of clean power, I was just supporting Danny's review and the way he tested the DACs.  Specifically, Danny tested both DACs the way they came from their respective designers. No more, no less. I think that Danny did all that a reviewer can reasonably be expected to, in order to keep the playing field level for comparison. If you really expect Danny to run the DIO off a battery pack, it begs the question of what can be reasonable expected from a reviewer. Do you really want somebody to tweak a piece of gear that they're reviewing, such that in the end it bearly resembles what it started out as? Sure, why not jury rig a battery pack for it, and throw in some Bybees for good measure... I'm kidding of course, but how far is too far?

[Sa-dono]

Oxia and Psychicanimal:

You guys can obviously argue these points until you're blue in the face, so lets move beyond it. You both have valid points.

Oxia is pretty much saying that the battery supply is an inherent advantage, and therefore it is a level playing field. Which to a degree is true.

Psychicanimal is pretty much saying that, however, by not using the cleanest possible power with the DIO, you are not taking its possible performance to the limit. This is also true.

So let's leave Danny's review be, with the added note that the power supplied to the DIO could tip the scales. Your own power should be taken into account..and since there is the trial period, listen and decide for yourself if interested.


Thank you for the review Danny! I know there were people interested in how it sounded (including me).

[Rocket]

hi,

just thought i would add my 2 cents.

i can't really comment about power conditioners as i'm always putting my money into upgrading components.  i still need to buy some really good cables   .

however, i can comment on battery supplies as i have a battery powered amplifier.  my amp is an n.e.w. dc-66 which is powered by 4 x panasonic 12v 33a/h batteries.

anyway my friend has the same amp but the ac version.  he came to my house and we swapped amps for over 2 hours and to be honest we couldnt' hear any differences.  i was pretty upset as my amp cost twice as much as his amp did.

regards

rocket

[Oxia]

Well said, Sa-dono.

Danny, could you please comment on how long the battery takes to recharge? You mentioned that it's quite fast, but would that be 1 hour? More, or maybe less?

Rocket,
Your battery powered amp sounds very intriguing. I don't want to get this thread too far off topic, but would you have a URL for it?

[Danny Richie]

I didn't get an exact time frame on it, but it was less than two hours for sure and might have been closer to one hour.

I was expecting something like what I get from my cordless drills that I can run down after about an hour of continuos use and then they take 6 hours to charge back up.

[jackman]

I have a suggestion.  Why not use two sets of rechargeable batteries?  One set could be used in the player while the other sits on the recharger.  This way, you could swap them out if you wanted to listen to music for longer periods of time.  Like I do with my cell phone.

Just a thought.

J

[OBF]

I had a similar thought regarding 2 sets of batteries, but I get the impression that you don't actually remove a battery "pack" to charge, you just plug the DAC into the wall and flip a switch, i.e. I think the charger is built in.  So the question would be how hard/easy it is to swap batteries, and is it even possible to charge a battery outside the DAC?

[Rob Babcock]

That's kind of the impression I got, too.  I'm not sure you can pop the battery out like a cell phones.  Two things that would be cool would be a quick removable or hot swappable power cell combined with an AC adapter, or at least the provisions for using one.  I realize this may hurt performance, but you could run it from a wall wart for non critical background listening while your battery charges.

BTW, that's one very cool looin' DAC, er, I mean dACK!

[Wayne1]

I am sending Danny one of my new power supplies today.

It is made with better wire than the older one I used to make.

It is "quicker sounding" I feel the transients are more natural sounding without all the shielding and insulation that was used in the older cable.

There is also some filtering added on the input and output of the transformer.

This supply I made for Danny does NOT have any Bybees added to it. As Danny is a Bybee dealer, he can add them in line for a lot less money

I will also be including a digital cable for Danny to try out.

Please let us all know what you think of the differences between the Stancor power supply you are using now and the BOLDER supply.