I can only report some subjective evaluations taken from the Net - it's
up to you how you interpret them. As follows:
Shootouts:
1. OS Benchmark clearly smoother and more musical than the others
2. NOS Audio Mirror (DAC AH with posh parts)
3. NOS dAck!dac
4. NOS Scott Nixon
I have the DAC-AH. ORDER DIRECT! $135 base price. A TOTAL STEAL! I
e-mailed them and asked for the opamps to be socketed, I think they
only charged me another $15 or so. You can also ask for output cap
upgrades and I think they will also sell you opamp upgrades too. Even
with sockets, opamp upgrades, cap upgrades, and shipping the unit
should be under $200.
http://eshop.diyclub.biz/ You can order this
direct and specify socketed opamps and upgraded output caps. Throw some
OPA627s in there and you have an incredible DAC for under $200. I
personally prefer the DAC-AH to all I have tried but I would also say
they are a lot closer sonically than most audiophools would admit.
I don't think the Benchmark DAC1 is avaialable with a USB interface
(Apogee is). For S/PDIF they deploy two differetn schools of thought.
The main difference between the Mii-DAC and DAC1 aside from the
converter chips and output stage is the degin of the clocking cicuit.
Apogee uses an idependent local clock that is regulated by the rate of
the incoming signal.
The DAC1 uses an asynchronous sample rate converter and runs it's local
clock completely independent. Both techniques result in a low jitter
local clock. The big difference being that the Apogee will actually
convert the same samples every time you play a song, while the
Benchmark DAC might be converting different values every time. I have
heard the Apogee and Benchmark although only very shortly. I have a
Bryston SP1.7 at home and a Monarchy M22C in the office and can
probably best compare to those. I did not have the chance to A/B them
in my systems. So this is purely by memory which is of coure highle
influenced what I have read about all this equipment. I found the
Benchmark more detailed but lacking in bass compared to the CS43122 and
discrete class A stage in the Bryston. The Apogee sounded very smooth
and full. Since I am using Harbeth and Spendor speakers I am nit sure
how this would harmonize. Even if the driven by sources with very low
jitter you will find that the Apogee Mini-DAC and the Benchmark DAC1
have a different sonic signature. This becomes pretty obvious if you
hear them side by side but it does not show in the measurements.
If the server has a USB port and you intend to use it for playback
only, you can avoid a sound card altogether. Get an external USB to
S/PDIF converter, such as an M-Audio Transit ($80) to make the
connection to your preferred DAC via TosLink. Or you could get a USB
enabled external DAC, such as an Apogee Mini-DAC. There are a number of
other choices among competing products, some costing thousands of
dollars.
I'm very pleased with the M-Audio Transit feeding a Benchmark Media
DAC1, which retired my CD player and preamplifier.
consider the Brick: i haven't try yet the apogee minidac but i v got a
Cd player AUDIOAERO capitole mkII and i have compared both , first i
want to say that the cd palyer is 8OOO$
the sound of the Brick comes closed to the fantastic tube dac of the
audio aero in term of finest , and definition .. but anyway the brick
is so much natural and finest than many of the mdprice dac you can find
( famous benchmark dac1 included )
This is what I recommend - get Benchmark DAC1 rather than Apogee ( use
M-Audio as digital source ) However, please use Audigy 2 NX and power
it with battery instead of AC adapter. M-Audio getting power from PC
bus is not going to give good sound. Audigy 2 NX use external power and
can easily replace by batteries. It is better than M-Audio by miles
unless you are paying somebody to mod the M-Audio for your. For choice
of DAC, Benchmark DAC1 is sure winner.
I would stay away from the Apogee USB version if you are already using
a pro audio sound card. Sample the audio up to 24/96 via coax or AES
(best option) and you'll love the Mini-Dac. The same holds true for the
Benchmark Dac 1. Sample the audio up to 24/96 and it's a totally
different sounding dac. The Dac 1 is designed to be used fully balanced
(in/out)...if you scale back to unbalanced it sounds like
garbage...thin, unattached, etc. Balanced in/out has a ruler flat noise
free frequency response. People have complained about using the Dac 1
as a preamp....it's all non sense....it makes a for a fine preamp, but
you have to match up the output voltage to your amp. If not matched
properly you can cause clipping at the amp input and a host of audible
problems will emerge.
I find you must use a isolation transformer to get the best out of the
Dac 1 and Mini Dac. I keep mine plugged into a Plitron NBT LoNo.
consensus from the mastering engineers was very positive. One of them
did an A-B comparison, with some other mastering engineers present,
where they recorded an acoustic guitar and voice in the room and played
it back. They did a shoot out comparison with 4 other pro DAC's,
including the Apogee PSX-100
(
http://www.audiorevolution.com/equip/index.html, scroll down to the
bottom under accessories for review) and Alesis Masterlink
(
http://www.stereophile.com/showarchives.cgi?605), the results where
that the DAC1 was THE closest representation to what they heard in the
room - with the Alesis being the worst of the bunch and the Apogee
placing 2nd. If this is your holy grail in music reproduction, then I
suggest you consider the Benchmark
There is no perfect DAC, but the Apogee Mini-DAC could fill the bill
for middle-priced digital playback. It may be more "polite" than the
norm, but also very listenable. While maybe not as "spectacular" as the
Benchmark DAC1, it has the tonal refinement which, to my tastes, was
the DAC1's downfall.
Before I elaborate on what I hear sonically that is unique to
asynchronous sample-rate-conversion (aka "upsampling"), first I want to
mention the players and DACs I've heard this phenomenon with- The
Toshiba 3950 and 4960 CD players, the Benchmark DAC1, and the Esoteric
Audio DV-50 multidisc player. (I don't recall this phenomenon prior to
auditioning upsampling players, but I will not say it has never existed
in earlier players- It's just that I never was aware the quirk before.)
The Toshibas seem to be more-offensive with the artifacts than the
Benchmark and Esoteric units, and I've not had the chance to hear the
Esoteric unit with the upsampling defeated (it's defeatable with that
particular player).
I also want to mention that my ears are *extremely* sensitive to
extreme highs in the "20-20k" audio range- I can, for example, tell if
a TV is running in the next room, just from the high-frequency whine
from the TV's flyback transformer. Those who are not so sensitive to
extreme highs may not pick up what I'm about to describe.
At first listen, a digital system utilizing asynchronous sample-rate
conversion does sound impressive. It sounds as if there is good
ambience retrieval and a sense that the music seems "less digitized"
compared to typical conversion. Then, after my ears get used to the
playback, I start sensing a high-frequency "noise" setting in- Not
unlike what one would hear with a TV flyback transformer, but higher in
frequency than a TV flyback transformer and more like a narrow band of
noise than a distinct "tone." (I don't notice this noise initially-
only after several minutes.) As my ears get further "acclimated," I
start noticing the noise kind of "riding" on the music, particularly
music with a lot of high-frequency energy. (Like a continuous high-hat
in a rock or jazz track.) This noise obscures attacks and decays in
cymbals and triangles, and robs the music of its organic quality. What
sounds spectacular at first becomes grating and fatiguing later. The
big problem I have with this HF noise is I ultimately become "fixated"
on it. After about 10 to 15 minutes of listening. And then I cannot
block it out, no matter how hard I try. As if the noise was part of the
music itself. (I can block out the flyback transformer on a TV because
it's totally separate from the TV's audio.) While this noise is not as
"offensive" with better products like the Benchmark, it still bothers
me enough to eventually have to switch to another source, be it my
other system or the tuner on the same system. And unlike other
phenomena, it even bothers me while I'm playing CDs as background
music. (This problem is not so apparent playing "mellow" music, like
soft jazz, light classical, pop ballads, or especially music that does
not contain either massed violins or high-frequency percussion.) This
phenomenon has become more apparent in its conspicuous absence playing
the Sony CDP-X707ES CD player stand-alone, the Prism DA-2 DAC, or my
new Apogee Mini-DAC. I don't hear any semblance of this phenomenon. And
none of these products use asynchronous sample-rate conversion.
I personally disagree with the premise that CD playback has been
getting better. I prefer the internal DAC of the venerable Sony
CDP-X707ES CD player over the Benchmark DAC1 and the Apogee Mini DAC.
The Sony to me simply sounds more like living, breathing music. (With
all the comments about the Benchmark's near-absolute performance, in
spite of my disdain for the product, I expected the Sony player to
sound like crap. I only played it as a stop-gap between when I sold the
Benchmark and attained the Apogee, hence the discovery.) The only
recent products of note that I really like are the ART DI/O DAC, the
Ack dAck DAC, and the Paradox-modified JVC XLZ-1050 CD player. These
products gave me the false impression, for a while, that at least
budget products were getting better. I prefer the APogee to the
Benchmark- Mainly because that fatiguing HF noise problem of the
Benchmark is absent in the Apogee and the Apogee has a much-cleaner
top. The Apogee is not finicky with transport like the Benchmark was.
The Apogee does have an upward tonal balance, maybe even more so than
the Benchmark. (But the presentation is very clean, the tonal balance
is not really bothersome.) So if the HF noise of the Benchmark does not
bother you (it does not bother everybody), and you want a more-neutral
presentation, you might prefer the Benchmark. My primary objection with
the Apogee is that upward tonal balance- When I play recordings with a
lot of cymbal work (like Charlap's "Somewhere"), it could sound
"etched" in a benign sort of way. But in spite of the objection, this
DAC is *very* listenable. (It almost sounds like vinyl with the VTA set
a little too high.) Like may other DACs, the Apogee does not have the
absolute resolution and gestalt of the Prism DA-2. But the flaws are
rather benign, and like the Ack dAck, a good choice in the $750 to
$1000 price range. I prefer Digital Renaissance over both the
Benchmark and Apogee Mini DAC. The Digital Renaissance is simply more
transparent and dynamic. It also is neutral in tonal balance relative
to the two pro units. It's still a tad "upward" compared to the Prism
DA-2. (Only because the Prism has more deep bass extension.) But the
transparency and resolution are in the Prism's league. The only thing
this DAC lacks relative to the Prism is the clean HF presentation and
long-term listenability.
I put a ceramic/ferrite ring around the cables at the output, and it
knocks down the "digital fatigue"... (It did not knock down the "HF
noise" problem with the Benchmark.) The HF "grain" (from it being
non-OS) is still there, but it seems more benign now, a la the original
dAck. Although still not quite as listenable as the dAck. I do think a
non-OS design with insufficient post-filtering could benefit greatly by
using ferrite rings or clamps at the output. I will continue with such
experimentation. This is a DAC that could be a real winner, not to
mention one of audio's great steals, if its HF problem could be
ameliorated. For it otherwise delivers the goods of the mega-DACs.
apogee mini dac, i am using one and i like it better than the benchmark
dac.
second the apogee mini. unlike the others mentioned it also has an
optional usb input which is ideal for computer audio.
second the apogee, i like it better than the benchmark. benchmark has a
huge 'wow factor', but it also makes long term listening unpleasant
unless it is paired up with some crazily colored gear. OTOH my apogee
minidac has no such wow factor, but it makes long term listening much
much easier without apparent sonic compromises.
The Benchmark is basically a pro dac / preamp. The Apogee DA 1000 sound
quality is far superior. I know the sound quality of both products
including your DA 1000, I use a Rosetta 200 / Big Ben combo in my
studio rig, and it's hard to beat the Apogee sound quality. The
Benchmark is not bad for a sub $1k component, but it does lack tonal
purity in my opinion. In the sub $1k market it's hard to beat the
Apogee Mini-Dac (non-USB version) for sonic purity. The one thing the
Benchmark has going for it is the volume control. The quality of the
volume control is far superior to the Mini-Dac.
The benchmark has a much drier sound with a lot of detail in the treble
region. I am not sure what the magazines touted it as the best thing
since sliced bread. It is a great DAC, but not the last word. The
Apogee Mini-DAC is based upon the larger multichannel DACs and offers a
USB port. I find it similar tonally to the Benchmark, actually. I am
not sure what makes it "far superior"
I use the Rosetta 200 in my home rig, and the Mini-Dac and Benchmark in
my portable. The Rosetta 200 is one of the best bargins in the digital
market today. Have you tried pairing up t6he Rosetta with the Big Ben.
The external work clock steps up the dac's performance several notches.
I have the Benchmark and the Apogee, the two are very good, but the
Benchmark have better headphone amplifiers (The Apogee sound harsh).
Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
Hybrid Mode
