[mr_bill]

For those of you users to chime in on the differences in digital front ends.  My experience is, yes I can here the difference between my older NAD monitor series player and my SB3/Benchmark Dac but the differences I've experienced with digital are very small. 

Manufacturers and reviewers of course will state that the newer units or upgrades are 'mind blowing' and 'blows away' product xyz.

Some of you have gotten to play with some very nice gear and I would be interested in your comments or results.

Thanks,
Bill

And yes, my system is very revealing and can show differences!
 

[martyo]

Hi mr_bill,

And yes, my system is very revealing and can show differences!

Would you post your system on the systems page? It always helps me to understand opinions and to give a frame of reference to the discussion. 

Thanks

[mr_bill]

Done!

Thanks Martyo.

[acd483]

My goal in digital is for the unit to be as transparent and distortion free as possible. The Benchmark DAC is rated as one of the most transparent components available, which is why it will be my next component purchase. The beauty of it is that for my application, it will be my preamp as well as DAC. Two birds with one stone. Just wish it had remote volume control and source switching!

Your NAD sounds different because it introduces audible distortion, which is what causes differences in sound. I own an NAD 743 receiver, and it is an excellent piece of equipment.

Bottom line...you don't need anything more than your SB3/Benchmark DAC. There is no piece of equipment that can introduce an audible improvement. Enjoy the music man!

[samplesj]

While I'll agree that a SB3/Benchmark DAC1 combo is very nice, I don't agree that nothing else can introduce an audible improvement.  You'd be hard pressed to find something night and day better I bet, but I'd not call it the end all be all.

I ran that combo for a long time, but to me the SB3/Chime combo now is much nicer.  The Chime matched it pretty much across the board (except where it was better ).

I did level match the two in my comparisons.  It wasn't single or double blind.  Also while it was fairly quick it was changed instantly because I had to turn the know to switch inputs and change volume.

In comparison the DAC1 was thin.  Violins didn't have as much body (woody/reverb) to them.

[acd483]

Tube v. SS is like apples v. oranges.

If you like the sound of second order distortion, the tubed Chime is "better". All depends on your taste. If you want transparency, the Benchmark is audibly "perfect" and can't be beat in terms of SS gear.

[art]

Bottom line...you don't need anything more than your SB3/Benchmark DAC. There is no piece of equipment that can introduce an audible improvement. Enjoy the music man!

Well, damn.......the rest of us should just close up shop now! If there is absolutely, positively, no piece of equipment...........oh, why bother....

(Some debate, eh? Just like debating Cartman: he yells "Screw you guys, I'm  going home!", and you lose. Guess we all lose this Great Debate.)

Pat

[TONEPUB]

Bottom line...you don't need anything more than your SB3/Benchmark DAC. There is no piece of equipment that can introduce an audible improvement. Enjoy the music man!

Pat

The DAC-1 is an exellent piece for the money.  If you want a DAC-1 USB, pm me, I'm done with mine.  The soudn quality for the money is hard to beat (personally, I haven't yet) but there is a lot of great digital out there that really leaves it in the dust, you just have to fork over more cash. 

But it's out there....

[JLM]

Seems to me that we each have a unique set of sensitivities to many different aspects of life, audio being no different.  That's why I call myself a "speaker guy" because, like you Mr. Bill, while I can hear differences in sources or amplification, they just don't push my good or bad buttons like speakers do. 

I've had a couple of well respected front ends over the past 3 years, but currently am "slumming" with a stock Oppo, while saving for a DAC and don't feel a huge loss.  With the pace that digital continues to improve this relative insensitivity has its financial advantages.  (Just read the 12th Tone Audio issue of the $32k Naim CDP.)

[denjo]

Digital playback has already reached a stage where improvements at best are incremental and any sonic advantages to be secured are probably better spent on speakers, amplification and/or cables. I have heard an earlier iteration of Benchmark's DAC-1, CIAudio's VDA-2 and while I ended up with the Altmann Attraction DAC, I cannot say that the differences are huge between these DACs. However, swopping preamplifiers or cables brought out greater, discernible differences than with swopping DACs. For example, I found the Benchmark less warm, more clinical than the Altmann but I think these are sonic attributes that can be tamed or tuned with proper matching of amplifiers and/or cables (maybe speakers too!). 

[acd483]

Bottom line...you don't need anything more than your SB3/Benchmark DAC. There is no piece of equipment that can introduce an audible improvement. Enjoy the music man!

Well, damn.......the rest of us should just close up shop now! If there is absolutely, positively, no piece of equipment...........oh, why bother....

(Some debate, eh? Just like debating Cartman: he yells "Screw you guys, I'm  going home!", and you lose. Guess we all lose this Great Debate.)

Pat

I should have written "no piece of SS equipment..."

As I say, if you're a tube guy, a tube DAC will change the sound v. the Benchmark, and if you like "warmer" sound, it is probably a better choice. I'd much rather focus on speakers than equipment.

Now should you all go home? No, because the Benchmark is an ugly looking thing and it's got no remote control. There's always room for improvement in other areas, just not transparency of sound.

[Marbles]

Now should you all go home? No, because the Benchmark is an ugly looking thing and it's got no remote control. There's always room for improvement in other areas, just not transparency of sound.

I guess you haven't heard Empirical Audio's modded DAC-1 

[acd483]

Now should you all go home? No, because the Benchmark is an ugly looking thing and it's got no remote control. There's always room for improvement in other areas, just not transparency of sound.

I guess you haven't heard Empirical Audio's modded DAC-1 

Can we all agree that jitter results in distortion? The Benchmark, un-modded, is audibly distortion free. What more do you want?

A quick browse over EA's site shows a manufacturer clearly cashing in on tweako products that I don't believe make an audible difference, and charges a fortune for his wares. No thanks! If you believe the modded DAC-1 is worth more than three times its original price that's your business. I won't debate this subject and have nothing more to say on it.

[miklorsmith]

Promise?

The DAC-1 is an asynchronous upsampler.  Theoretically perfect?  Not according to everyone.  I think Lessloss is right on with their synchronous approach and clock-locking.  I haven't heard the DAC-1 but the LL presents a new lens to digital that is refreshing and amazing.

Their website is quite a tour de force.  I didn't understand a lot of it on first reading, well still don't actually, but a lot of the concepts that seem esoteric make a lot of sense once you've heard them.

In my system, digital sources make a tremendous amount of difference, comparable with preamps or amps.

[lonewolfny42]

miklorsmith....

In my system, digital sources make a tremendous amount of difference, comparable with preamps or amps.

And Mike has tried at least four dac's there.....Link...

[art]

Can we all agree that jitter results in distortion?

And your point is?

The Benchmark, un-modded, is audibly distortion free. What more do you want?

There is more than just the lack of audible distortion to any piece of gear. Besides, everyone has their own reference to what is inaudible, and what is tolerable.

I won't debate this subject and have nothing more to say on it.

If your argument consists of such rigid, dogmatic assertions, then "Thank You."

Pat

[acd483]

Can we all agree that jitter results in distortion?

And your point is?

The Benchmark, un-modded, is audibly distortion free. What more do you want?

There is more than just the lack of audible distortion to any piece of gear. Besides, everyone has their own reference to what is inaudible, and what is tolerable.

I won't debate this subject and have nothing more to say on it.

If your argument consists of such rigid, dogmatic assertions, then "Thank You."

Pat

The Benchmark contains state of the art components and is proven to pass on no audible distortion. What else do you want in a DAC? I really cant see, from a performance standpoint, how the results of the Benchmark can be bettered. It is technically transparent.

Your claim that "...everyone has their own reference to what is inaudible, and what is tolerable". Huh? There is no person on the planet that can hear the distortion in the Benchmark. I've stated before, it's one thing to like the sound of tubes, but quite another to claim you can hear distortion beyond the realm of human possibility.

Those "rigid, dogmatic assertions" like the test results on the Benchmark website...yeah, pretty irrefutable, but you claim there are other factors past lack of audible distortion that play a role in a component's sound...please enlighten me.

[miklorsmith]

Test results supplied by a manufacturer on their website are all you need to convince yourself you have perfect sound?  You have a lot to learn, son.   

Might I remind you that you said you had nothing more to add.  Oh wait, you didn't.

[art]

Let's see......using the logic of acd843, all of those numerous pre- and power-amps that used tons of global negative feedback should be perfect, because they all had inaudible levels of distortion. Distortion numbers with so many zeroes that you needed a score card to keep track of them all.

And they all sounded alike! (Yes, like crap.)

Enlighten you.........? Well, I get the hunch it would be easier for Dale Gribble to grow oranges in Alaska than to accomplish that. Why can't you just simply state that you are really, really, really happy with the way your system sounds, and that you don't see how it could improve significantly, without spending $$$$$$$$$$. Instead of saying flat-out that there is none better.

Of course, your position might be a bit easier to defend if you had not chosen a transport with such a pitiful SPDIF output.

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=45330.0

But......what do I know......?

Pat

[acd483]

Actually, I don't own a Squeezebox.

And the results from the Benchmark site tell me that the DAC-1 doesn't introduce distortion, i.e. it's transparent. The sound, miklorsmith, comes from the speakers, if I understand correctly.