advertisement


Benchmark,Berkeley Weiss 202 Shootout

So when downloading via an optical Internet connections like BT and Virgin media, means you're getting second rate, poor quality data !?! And new optical HDD that are currently being launched and R&D'ed, have it all wrong too...
 
Like wise optical is worse that Asyn USb from my mac too. But then it would be wouldn't it as it has been reclocked.
 
Interesting that the galvanic efficacy of optical is outweighed by the noisy and jitter inducing receiver! I have found that the combination of optical output and a buffer/reclocker like the Musiland SRC10 and Monarchy DIP Combo is very effective, though.

And perversely, all the Pop Pulse DACs sound conspicuously better via optical input than coax or USB . . .
 
If we can get you and your Weiss DACs in the same room as a panel of listeners, along with the other hot ticket DACs of 2010 (Antelope, Wyred 4 Sound, Prism, etc), it would be really news-worthy: many people are asking the same question about these: which really is better?
 
spacey said:
So when downloading via an optical Internet connections like BT and Virgin media, means you're getting second rate, poor quality data !?! And new optical HDD that are currently being launched and R&D'ed, have it all wrong too...
Click to expand...

Shirley, you're deliberately misunderstanding this?

There's nothing wrong with optical when it comes to transmitting data efficiently, but when it comes to toslink connections between a transport & a DAC with its often incumbent transformer - toslink often fail to cut mustard IMO.

Your point about getting optical to work is besides the point - it works and with a lot of attention (rare) it can work well. So can various S/PDIF, Firewire & USB implementations - it's just that the latter tend to implemented better as a general rule.
 
Yes but every other consideration being equal, async USB or async firewire offer potentially the best solution.
No embedded timing signal, dac clock in sole control = low interface jitter.
Keith.
 
Hi Keith

Do you still have all these DACs?

Would love to hear the Weiss and the W4S.

PS
only joking ref: audionote. Havent heard this directly compared to either of the above.
 
Chris Hi, no I don't a nice chap bought his Benchmark and Berkeley, the Wyred for Sound has been sent back, the Audionote was dispatched a long time ago!
Vb Keith.
 
I've just been speaking to Jim Dowler at Audio Digital Technology. He's the UK distributor for Weiss. He tells me on the digital side of things the DAC202 is exactly the same as a DAC2 and both sound identical. The difference being only the user interface, remote control and the fact it marketed on the 'hi-end' rather than 'pro' side of Weiss.

SO why does a DAC202 need to cost £2800 more than a DAC2.
 
well i am thoroughly enjoying my dac2 so be intersting to know the answer to the previos post as i know keith would state the 202 is sonically better
 
I am afraid Jim just doesn't know what he is talking about, the FireWire chip in the two dacs is the same but that is about it, different converters 4 ,two per channel in the 202 and a completely different analogue output stage.
Keith.
 
quite a high percentage of dacII owners have bought the 202.
I can send you one to try, an let me know how it compares to your dacII?
Regards Keith.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top