advertisement


Benchmark DAC1 users thread

Thanks Tiger, I'm not remotely upset about my feelings for the DAC itself.

I do wish that people would not use HiFi Forums for misinformation based on interpretation of other peoples purchasing decisions.

I bought the DAC1 *AFTER* hearing it at AndrewB's, not after reading about the updates to its circuitry.
 
Quite right Cliff, lets face it who cares about its circuitry or the circuitry of any other DAC, **** I can hardly even spell circuitry. Stay strong Cliff.
 
I don't think this is true Mark, I find the Beresford great for music listening, I haven't compared it with other DAC's but have had no complaints at all.

My comments are based on owning and comparing a Beresford and an iBasso. As I said earlier, I look forward to Fox's comments v-a-v the iBasso and DAC1 when he makes the comparison.

No Mark, it addresses your petty point scoring "the circuit has not changed since 1999" post.

If my pointing out that the design of the DAC1 is old counts as petty point scoring with you, then so be it...the change of 5532 manufacturer does not constitute a major upgrade from my perspective.

I am happy to ridicule ad nauseam any tosser who thinks I just defend purchases made on the basis of cut and paste...In what way does that make me dependent on linked postings from Stereophile for audio enjoyment?

You are the one doing the the cut and paste from a magazine not me.

The DAC1 I have and use (mainly) for work on the end of a DVD player to feed sound to the backup system works well, so well in fact that it makes (on the end of a Meridian 500) a laughing stock out of the SB+

You are obviously pleased with your purchase. Very good.
 
Yes. The Beresford has a more fleshed out sound with greater drive and weight in the bass. The Benchmark is more 'airy' and lithe in balance. It can sound quite good with sympathetically recorded material, but makes badly recorded material unlistenable. It's not bright or harsh, rather it shows these recordings as being anaemic ad flat.

Lefty

Lefty, you are a spot on with that description, it doesnt suffer badly recorded or compressed material very well at all.

So.. Where is that perfect DAC.

There is a DAX decade in the classifieds, are they up to the job?
 
Exactly what I found when I did a similar dem at AlexS's. The Densen driving digits into the DAC1 managed to give the best sound from the DAC1 in exactly the areas Lefty mentions - the Densen alone was better still.

regards
Jason

Phew... good to know I'm not imagining things! I really want to like this DAC (what with all the perfect measurements) but my ears aren't letting me.

As to the Densen, I think they're going to have to bury me with it! This experience has only served to increase my love for the old girl.

Lefty
 
So.. Where is that perfect DAC.

There is a DAX decade in the classifieds, are they up to the job?

Have to admit to being curious. I've only heard good things about this DAC. Another that has got my attention is the Stello DA100.

Lefty
 
OK, Chord Chorus arrived this morning. Got them plugged in and whilst there's now more 'beef' to the low frequencies, the upper mid is still under-nourished and a bit thin and reedy.

I think this DAC's days are numbered in my system...

Lefty
 
So lefty, you've bought a £700 DAC and a couple of hundred quids worth of cable to try and improve the sound from your £170 SB3?

Why not simply buy a better network music player - Transporter, SB+ or the new Linn thing spring to mind
 
So lefty, you've bought a £700 DAC and a couple of hundred quids worth of cable to try and improve the sound from your £170 SB3?

Why not simply buy a better network music player - Transporter, SB+ or the new Linn thing spring to mind

Yup, except I bought them both secondhand and so paid considerably less than the £900 they retail for. I agree with you in principle though. If my budget were to increase then I would look at a SB+ before the likes of something like a Chord DAC 64.

Lefty
 
OK, Chord Chorus arrived this morning. Got them plugged in and whilst there's now more 'beef' to the low frequencies, the upper mid is still under-nourished and a bit thin and reedy.

I think this DAC's days are numbered in my system...

Lefty

rolling cables will not change the musical presentation of the DAC1. however, its sonic characteristics can be fixed/flavored to one's desire with cables. if you like the DAC1 presentation you may want to try sticking it out a bit, give the cables 100 hrs or so, and try rolling something else (buy s/h). if not, i wouldn't bother dicking around with cables.

if you're willing to DIY some IC, i think you would like the warmish/colorful Oyaide PA-02 at $6/ft. i currently have 2 pairs (one balanced and one SE) that have really fleshed things out without turning the music into pudding. i'm currently using a Stereovox XV2 as a digital IC that a bit on the lean side compared to the Canare, but am considering buying a different Oyaide bulk cable to DIY for comparison.

PACE
 
I am using bigger fuses and one of RKRs Beast power cables on my DAC1 with noticable improvements in every aspect to my ears.

I also now use the DAC1 as a pre-amp. It is worth noting that when first using the Benchmark as a pre-amp it sounded muffled in comparison to the fixed calibrated setting. It seems to have de-muffled itself after a period of burn in with this setting?????? I guess the pre-amp section has components not used in the fixed calibrated mode? I have since gone back and compared the calibrated setting against the adjustable volume pre-amp setting and found there to be little difference now?

Anyway - my main question is: Has anybody listened to a modified DAC1 that two or three companies now offer stateside? fyi http://www.empiricalaudio.com/frmods.html#Benchmark DAC-1 Turbomod
 
I am using bigger fuses and one of RKRs Beast power cables on my DAC1 with noticable improvements in every aspect to my ears.

I also now use the DAC1 as a pre-amp. It is worth noting that when first using the Benchmark as a pre-amp it sounded muffled in comparison to the fixed calibrated setting. It seems to have de-muffled itself after a period of burn in with this setting?????? I guess the pre-amp section has components not used in the fixed calibrated mode? I have since gone back and compared the calibrated setting against the adjustable volume pre-amp setting and found there to be little difference now?

Anyway - my main question is: Has anybody listened to a modified DAC1 that two or three companies now offer stateside? fyi http://www.empiricalaudio.com/frmods.html#Benchmark DAC-1 Turbomod

I've haven't heard a modified version, but I'd imagine you could get a preferable sound (in the context of your system/ears), but it's unlikely you'll get a technically better sound giving Benchmark's devotion to the DAC1. Interesting that you comment about fuses and leads, because I have played with fuses before (solid copper) and could certainly detect a smoother top-end on an old rack-mount model. Leads I noticed nothing. To be honest, I wouldn't worry about fuses etc. with the latest DAC1 versions (not to mention warranty) as they seem to sound smoother and more refined by comparison.

As for the volume control sounding muffled? Not from my experience, though they don't last forever if used regularly with headphones etc.

Peter
 
thanks for the reply. Fuses do seem to make a big difference to my ears. The power lead is made from 6mm Twin and Earth, interwoven and housed in a flexible hose. It is very thick and has an IEC Wattgate. Quite a noticable difference. The benchmark has a much fuller sound with the harshness greatly diminished and lovely full vocals. However, most modern CDs still sound dreadful to my ears - I listen to analogue tape recordings mostly on CD.
 
Yup, except I bought them both secondhand and so paid considerably less than the £900 they retail for. I agree with you in principle though. If my budget were to increase then I would look at a SB+ before the likes of something like a Chord DAC 64.

Lefty

I actually went the other way and found the BM to be cheaper and more or less the same as a DAC64, plus I got a new 5 year guarantee as opposed to one which was expiring soon on the Chord and which I had claimed on.

The benchmark is better since

1) it does its thing in real time
2) its a lot less sensitive to transports than the Chord
3) its less than half the price

The presentations are slightly different and the Chord does a majical 3d effect on about 2% of CD's but sounds considerably worse on about 5%

The rest of the time you can't tell them apart.

My next step is to get my CD collection ripped and provided my under construction media PC can do a decent job with DVD (big ask ?) maybe get rid of DVD32R No2.

If you dislike the "thinness" of the BM the problem is that you don't like what was really recorded and want something that actually muffles the sound and fattens it up a bit.

All the current top kit is heading towards this much leaner sound because thats whats really on the recording - like it or not.

My BM sounds just like my TT but with an octave more bass and none of that snap crackle and pop, and also minus that characteristic LP12 colouration.

Id try connecting the BM directly to a PC spdiff out before buying a slim transporter or Linn DS.
 
...found the BM to be cheaper and more or less the same as a DAC64.

Seconded.

Sounds bloody marvelous in my system.

The problem I find in doing things like swapping DACs into a system is that it took me about 2 months to tune the DAC1 properly within my system - and I'm still finding small ways to get more out of it.

Over the last three years I've moved to EAR amps and recently changed my power amp but found I had an earth loop. In solving that issue I swapped around my leads. I bought down a Russ Andrews lead that I found made no difference at all when I bought it about 10 years ago. Now, in the DAC1, it demonstrably did!

I can very easily get the DAC1 to sound boring/uninteresting/thin.

M
 


advertisement


Back
Top