DC-1

[garbulky]

Oct 22, 2013 20:13:56 GMT -5 eveningsky said:

Hello TJHenry,
Hello all,

I am also considering the DC1.
I own the XDA1 and the Benchmark DAC1.

I wish to share my experience with the DAC1 and the XDA1, and a comparison (believe it or not) between the two and a the analogue audio out through the mini 1/8 inch jack of my Mac Pro desktop computer.

I am ashamed to say this, but these are my experiences / opinions on what I currently own and use:

On much of my music content, it does not seem to matter very much, within reason, what DAC I use, because so much of my music content is simply, not very good SQ. And trying to spend too much on my sound system is simply a waste of money.

When I listen to a good quality sound source, just that better quality source alone, leads to a massive improvement in SQ.

The XDA1 sounds somewhat shrill and somewhat "digital" but it brings a smile to my face and to my ears, every time listen to it. It is simply a wonderful product. The dynamic range and detail are simply stunning, given a good sound content. And not infrequently, the SQ on some well known music CDs, older and current, is simply an embarrassment / shockingly poor.

My great frustration and embarrassment is the Benchmark DAC1. I purchased this unit years ago for a considerable price, wo a discount (per company policy). Nicely build. Good connections. All connections work perfectly. It synchronizes the digital inputs perfectly. The volume rheostat has begun to fail. But folks, the SQ from this DAC1 unit, cannot compare to the XDA1 which is IMO clearly far superior. It cannot even compare to the analogue out connection from my early 2008 Mac Pro. I cannot believe it so I tested it several times with several sources of music. The SQ from my Mac Pro is simply better / clearer / more pleasant, with equal detail, and this difference is to my ears NOT subtle.

I do not have experience with more modern iterations of the Benchmark products, and probably will avoid them in my future. I wish them well. They seem to enjoy excellent professional reviews, and are probably good. But how quickly technology overtakes so many technology based products. Especially with small innovative companies like Emotiva. And given their relatively high cost ... . I do not see the point.

I am playing into stereo powered monitors from the company Mackie model HR824.

So this is my experience with the DACs I own. I am strongly considering the DC1, currently on sale. But to be honnest, my routine Mac Pro sound card is really surprisingly good. And my XDA1 is simply wonderful.

Best wishes,
ES

What;s your amps and speakers? How do you have the speakers positioned? I find speaker positioning makes a huge difference in sound. If you have a bass null/hump, that can make poorer performing equipment sound better and by that I mean the macbook pro soundcard.
Also the amps need to have enough grunt.

[GreenKiwi]

I would also add, the XDA-1 is a really awesome DAC. If you're happy with it, then there isn't really any need to upgrade.

[Deleted]

Oct 23, 2013 3:25:21 GMT -5 GreenKiwi said:

I would also add, the XDA-1 is a really awesome DAC. If you're happy with it, then there isn't really any need to upgrade.

agreed unless you have issues like me...who went from the xda1 to xda2 to dc1 all withing about 4 months haha

[GreenKiwi]

True. Well I am currently the owner of two xda-1s AND 2 DC-1s

Need to start selling.

[vcautokid]

I think the DC-1 is Emotiva's best work yet. The XDA-1 rocks and XDA-2 is good too. I love the sound of the DC-1 the best.

[PGT]

I've got a (new) Sherbourn PA2-50 and a spare pair of mini-monitors, Snell Acoustics Type M's. For my office, I was thinking of replacing my Jawbone Big Jambox with the amp and Snell's....perhaps with a DC-1. Source is an iPad that sits nearby..currently using Bluetooth to the Jambox. I could send the output of the iPad to the DC-1, then on to the amp....would make for a nice executive system.

That said...would a DC-1/Airmotiv combo be a better choice? It might cost a few bucks more after selling the other gear. Certainly would be more compact on my desktop. Its currently a nearfield setup by dual 22" monitors.

the Snell's are a $500 pair from the mid 1990's....130mm mid (5.25") and metal dome tweeter...the crossovers on Snells were hand-matched to ensure equal F/R between L/R.

[audiobill]

Long story short, I'm a long time audio guy that has most recently had Audio Research components, followed by a Balanced Audio Technology VK-31SE driving their VK-250 amp.

I'm listening through Dynaudio Geminis, Magneplanar 1.6 QRs, and Sennheiser HD-600 headphones.

On a whim and the sale, I ordered the XPA-2 and was so pleased I followed with the XSP-1, XDA-2, the A100 and Airmotiv 4's (for the bedroom TV), and the DC-1.

After careful comparison with the PS Audio DLIII DAC, I liked the XDA-2 better, and the DC-1 even much better than the XDA-2. Talk about smooth, non-fatiguing detail!!

So, I'll probably return the XDA-2 within the return period.

The main reason I see for keeping the XSP-1 is in the case where I want to change to a DAC without the DC-1's preamp/headphone features, but I'm so pleased I can't foresee that happening!

I'm a little torn about keeping the "big boy sized" XSP-1.

Back to the music!!

[audiobill]

PS....the BAT components have been put up on ebay!

[Poodleluvr]

Oct 23, 2013 14:55:04 GMT -5 audiobill said:

Long story short, I'm a long time audio guy that has most recently had Audio Research components, followed by a Balanced Audio Technology VK-31SE driving their VK-250 amp.

I'm listening through Dynaudio Geminis, Magneplanar 1.6 QRs, and Sennheiser HD-600 headphones.

On a whim and the sale, I ordered the XPA-2 and was so pleased I followed with the XSP-1, XDA-2, the A100 and Airmotiv 4's (for the bedroom TV), and the DC-1.

After careful comparison with the PS Audio DLIII DAC, I liked the XDA-2 better, and the DC-1 even much better than the XDA-2. Talk about smooth, non-fatiguing detail!!

So, I'll probably return the XDA-2 within the return period.

The main reason I see for keeping the XSP-1 is in the case where I want to change to a DAC without the DC-1's preamp/headphone features, but I'm so pleased I can't foresee that happening!

I'm a little torn about keeping the "big boy sized" XSP-1.

Back to the music!!

If you are testing out a potential new DAC purchase against your current DAC, the XSP-1 has Balanced Direct-In 1 and 2. This would allow you to immediately switch back and forth between the two DACs for a side by side comparison.

[eveningsky]

Hello Garbulky,

XLR balanced outs from my Benchmark DAC1 into my stereo powered monitor speakers. Nearfield monitor speakers.

Yes, speaker placement is very very very important. As is acoustic treatment of the listening space. Absolute non-sexxxy factors which contribute to SQ big time. I have become true a believer.

IMO, I have my speakers placed rather well, in a partially acoustically treated space / room.

But, same everything for my comparison described in my original post.

It rethought my post. I am perhaps being too harsh in my judgment of the Benchmark. It is truly not bad. In fact, it is good and somewhat different. But truly, when I determine that the Benchmark DACf1 is so close to my audio analogue out from my early 1988 Mac Pro in its SQ, and my several hundred dollar XDA1 is better than both?

I purchased my Benchmark DAC1 in Sep2004 for nearly $1000. I really did not expect that its SQ would be overtaken this quickly, but perhaps I was not realistic in my expectation.

"Oh Technology, though art a powerful force who detractest heavily from my dream purchase of the present"!

Best wishes,
ES

[garbulky]

Oct 23, 2013 16:54:48 GMT -5 eveningsky said:

Hello Garbulky,

XLR balanced outs from my Benchmark DAC1 into my stereo powered monitor speakers. Nearfield monitor speakers.

Yes, speaker placement is very very very important. As is acoustic treatment of the listening space. Absolute non-sexxxy factors which contribute to SQ big time. I have become true a believer.

IMO, I have my speakers placed rather well, in a partially acoustically treated space / room.

But, same everything for my comparison described in my original post.

It rethought my post. I am perhaps being too harsh in my judgment of the Benchmark. It is truly not bad. In fact, it is good and somewhat different. But truly, when I determine that the Benchmark DACf1 is so close to my audio analogue out from my early 1988 Mac Pro in its SQ, and my several hundred dollar XDA1 is better than both?

I purchased my Benchmark DAC1 in Sep2004 for nearly $1000. I really did not expect that its SQ would be overtaken this quickly, but perhaps I was not realistic in my expectation.

"Oh Technology, though art a powerful force who detractest heavily from my dream purchase of the present"!

Best wishes,
ES

Well first. GOOD ON YOU for figuring out speaker placement and acoustic treatment. A huge plus in my book.

Second. Don't doubt what you hear - especially if you've been listening for some time! Your ears can be amazing.

Third (almost directly contradictory to what I just said above) - the macbook pro's soundcard should have been completely outclassed using most DAC's out there. So there's something going on here - just not sure what....
I do know that DAC differences are subtle and requires some rather good electornics and speakers to make it shine. So, it's possible that the nearfield placement or simply the monitors you use are not the best in resolution. My speaker preferences are speakers that are spread widely apart with a slight toe in, away from the walls and seatment position as far as you can get it. This allows for a large soundstage with some depth to it. But that's just me.

I have tried nearfield listening and though it does better with reducing interaction with the room, it loses some of the ability to listen to soundstage and depth. The soundstage tends to be more crammed together but super sharp. Also the height of nearfield setups aren't always great - usually they aren't anywhere close to ear level. If you are listening nearfield then there is a good chance that changing it would be tough and I understand. Just my thoughts here. What are your speakers (brand/model).

Are you by any chance using a power conditioner? If so, try plugging everything direct to the wall or a non-conditioning power strip.

[tjhenry]

Thought I'd give a quick update of my time with the DC-1. I've had it for a week now and I'm extremely happy and very impressed. To my ears, in my system, it is better than the XDA-2. Smoother, more detailed, more controlled.

Also, now that I've had more time with the DC-1, there isn't a doubt in my mind that it is better than the Benchmark DAC1 I owned. The DC-1 is definitely less bright and less harsh than the DAC1. I feel like it's a win-win with the DC-1 as compared to the DAC1. You get all the strengths of the DAC1 (resolution and dynamics) without the brightness and harsh treble.

I'm still going to compare the DC-1 to a Benchmark DAC1 HDR. I think I can let my OCD rest after that.

But, all this for $ 499? The DC-1 is a steal.

[Deleted]

agreed....and i am now a believer that the dc-1 direct (by XLR) to the xpa5...is THE best possible sound..

super clear and crisp without sounding arsh. just a great piece of equipment.I am glad I took the blind jump.

I am curious if adding a xsp-1 will change the sound sig. or if going full differential from source to dac to amp would make a sound difference as well...

[KeithL]

Glad you're enjoying it...

Adding anything will alter the sound - at least slightly (I'm not sure if putting the XSP-1 in there would produce an audible difference or not).

You're already going balanced from the DC-1 to the amp; with digital audio signals the term is sort of meaningless (in terms of audio quality).
AES/EBU (which is a balanced digital connection) can be used effectively over much longer distances, but the numbers are the same and there is no difference in audio quality.

Oct 25, 2013 10:36:47 GMT -5 @bmoney said:

agreed....and i am now a believer that the dc-1 direct (by XLR) to the xpa5...is THE best possible sound..

super clear and crisp without sounding arsh. just a great piece of equipment.I am glad I took the blind jump.

I am curious if adding a xsp-1 will change the sound sig. or if going full differential from source to dac to amp would make a sound difference as well...

[KeithL]

I don't know for sure if it draws ANY power from the computer side (from the USB power line), but I don't think so; I can tell you for sure that it is functionally powered by the DC-1 (the computer does NOT "see" it as an active USB device when the DC-1 is powered off).

However, you should know that the USB interface itself "sees" when a device is "physically" (electrically) connected. In other words, the computer can "tell" whether a device is plugged into the USB interface EVEN IF THE DEVICE IS OFF. This is why turning a DAC or other device off and on again is not exactly the same as unplugging it and plugging it back in - and why, in some situations, you are actually required to unplug and re-plug the wire to get the computer to "recognize" something.

Oct 17, 2013 19:59:10 GMT -5 TheMachinist said:

Hi Keith Would you please clarify if the USB reciver chip in DC-1 self powered or pylls 5v from computer ?

[KeithL]

This (having the computer's volume control control the level on the DAC) is something that we're looking into for future products - but no promises.

The volume control structure that Benchmark uses on their new products is.... interesting.
To quote the manual: "Analog inputs are never converted to digital, and digital inputs never pass through an analog potentiometer."

As I understand this:

The volume on both types of inputs is controlled by the front panel knob (which is, in turn, controlled by the remote control using a motor).
Volume on the digital inputs is controlled by a digital volume control (the digital volume control inside the Sabre DAC).
(Presumably the volume knob is somehow tied to an encoder, which allows it to signal its current position to the digital circuitry.)
Volume on the analog inputs is controlled by some sort of analog volume control (since they specifically say that the digital audio is NOT passed through an analog pot, that suggests that the analog audio may be controlled directly by the pot).
Both then go through an analog gain stage, which includes jumper-configured fixed attenuators that provide 0 dB, -10 dB, or -20 dB of analog attenuation.
So, for analog inputs, you get analog gain control, for digital inputs you get the digital gain control in the Sabres, and you get the preset attenuators for both.



Volume control on our DC-1 is rather simpler:

We run the DACs in their highest-quality fixed-output mono mode, and then the audio from both the analog inputs and the DAC outputs is run to our digitally controlled precision analog volume control chips. Obviously, those are controlled by either the front panel encoder knob or the remote control. This gives us a much simpler signal path, and we avoid the need for motors, which can be unreliable, and tend to overshoot when you try to make precise level adjustments. It also allows us to provide another cool feature: independent control and retention of the main and headphone output levels.

Oct 17, 2013 18:18:23 GMT -5 GreenKiwi said:

As an aside I would live for future dacs to provide the digitally controlled analog volume to the computer. There are a couple dacs out there that do this. It's quite convenient to be able to control the volume via the computer.

I think that the benchmark dac2 has a rather complicated volume structure too. Something with big analog steps and small digital steps in between. Ie analog is 0,10,20... And digital is 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9

I would like to hear the bm2

[Deleted]

Oct 25, 2013 10:43:27 GMT -5 KeithL said:

Glad you're enjoying it...

Adding anything will alter the sound - at least slightly (I'm not sure if putting the XSP-1 in there would produce an audible difference or not).

You're already going balanced from the DC-1 to the amp; with digital audio signals the term is sort of meaningless (in terms of audio quality).
AES/EBU (which is a balanced digital connection) can be used effectively over much longer distances, but the numbers are the same and there is no difference in audio quality.

Oct 25, 2013 10:36:47 GMT -5 @bmoney said:

agreed....and i am now a believer that the dc-1 direct (by XLR) to the xpa5...is THE best possible sound..

super clear and crisp without sounding arsh. just a great piece of equipment.I am glad I took the blind jump.

I am curious if adding a xsp-1 will change the sound sig. or if going full differential from source to dac to amp would make a sound difference as well...

great! thank you for that...so with the risk of a slightly off topic question...what then, in my case would the benefit(if there is one) to using monoblocks?

thanks!

[danny01]

Keith, quick question:If one must use a long(25 ft) digital connection to the DC-1, which would be better:an active USB extender to the USV input, or short USB to to MF VLink 192 then a 25 foot AES/EBU TO the DC-1?

Sent from my HTC6500LVW using proboards

[Poodleluvr]

Oct 25, 2013 10:36:47 GMT -5 @bmoney said:

agreed....and i am now a believer that the dc-1 direct (by XLR) to the xpa5...is THE best possible sound..

super clear and crisp without sounding arsh. just a great piece of equipment.I am glad I took the blind jump.

I am curious if adding a xsp-1 will change the sound sig. or if going full differential from source to dac to amp would make a sound difference as well...

I recommended to you to try that on 10/20/2013: "I suggest you give another set-up at least a shot. I suggest that you take your USP-1 completely out of your stereo 2-channel set-up and hook the DC-1 directly to your amp like that of a preamp. Then set your DC-1 to variable out.-- You may be surprised."

IMO, an outstanding preamp offers inputs of additional selection via switching, and after switched, the preamp then becomes "straight wire" with gain.

The XSP-1 is an outstanding preamp, much better than the USP-1. The XSP-1 also offers home theater bypass that could be used in conjunction with the future Emotiva XMC-1 HT Processor. The XSP-1 also offers a phono input, and sub controls.

I've been using my new DC-1 this whole week w/o using my XSP-1 preamp and I think it sounds wonderful. I'll soon go back and hook my XSP-1 preamp back into my system including my DC-1 DAC.

Maybe I will experience no difference in 2-channel stereo or a very slight difference in sound quality when using my XSP-1. Even if their was absolutely NO difference, psychologically speaking, I feel more confident not using a preamp because it is one less audio component used in the signal path.

As far as the DC-1, I can honestly say that on a price paid per the performance level gained, the DC-1 is the wisest use of $499.00 I've ever spent on an audio component.

If anyone is thinking about starting a second "dedicated"  2-channel audio system, buying the DC-1 DAC now would be a good place to start.  I think you would be very happy using the DC-1 paired with  XPA-1Ls, a pair of XPA-1s, or a pair of XPR-1 mono block amplifiers making a fully balanced 2-channel stereo system.  

When Emotiva comes out with a more user friendly DAC with at least the same SQ performance of the DC-1, that includes a 12 V trigger, a remote control for low light conditions, and the form factor of my other Emotiva components in my rack, I'll purchase the new DAC,  and relegate my DC-1 to other duties and portable duties, and use the headphone amp.

[Deleted]

Oct 26, 2013 10:49:34 GMT -5 Poodleluvr said:

Oct 25, 2013 10:36:47 GMT -5 @bmoney said:

agreed....and i am now a believer that the dc-1 direct (by XLR) to the xpa5...is THE best possible sound..

super clear and crisp without sounding arsh. just a great piece of equipment.I am glad I took the blind jump.

I am curious if adding a xsp-1 will change the sound sig. or if going full differential from source to dac to amp would make a sound difference as well...

I recommended to you to try that on 10/20/2013: "I suggest you give another set-up at least a shot. I suggest that you take your USP-1 completely out of your stereo 2-channel set-up and hook the DC-1 directly to your amp like that of a preamp. Then set your DC-1 to variable out.-- You may be surprised."

IMO, an outstanding preamp offers inputs of additional selection via switching, and after switched, the preamp then becomes "straight wire" with gain.

The XSP-1 is an outstanding preamp, much better than the USP-1. The XSP-1 also offers home theater bypass that could be used in conjunction with the future Emotiva XMC-1 HT Processor. The XSP-1 also offers a phono input, and sub controls.

I've been using my new DC-1 this whole week w/o using my XSP-1 preamp and I think it sounds wonderful. I'll soon go back and hook my XSP-1 preamp back into my system including my DC-1 DAC.

Maybe I will experience no difference in 2-channel stereo or a very slight difference in sound quality when using my XSP-1. Even if their was absolutely NO difference, psychologically speaking, I feel more confident not using a preamp because it is one less audio component used in the signal path.

As far as the DC-1, I can honestly say that on a price paid per the performance level gained, the DC-1 is the wisest use of $499.00 I've ever spent on an audio component.

If anyone is thinking about starting a second "dedicated"  2-channel audio system, buying the DC-1 DAC now would be a good place to start.  I think you would be very happy using the DC-1 paired with  XPA-1Ls, a pair of XPA-1s, or a pair of XPR-1 mono block amplifiers making a fully balanced 2-channel stereo system.  

When Emotiva comes out with a more user friendly DAC with at least the same SQ performance of the DC-1, that includes a 12 V trigger, a remote control for low light conditions, and the form factor of my other Emotiva components in my rack, I'll purchase the new DAC,  and relegate my DC-1 to other duties and portable duties, and use the headphone amp.

Yup. Thanks for the tip. Im loving it and im gonna dave money (gonna sell off the usp)