![]() |
Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
What is the best?
There is someone that have heard both? Thanks |
Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
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
Andy Evans ha scritto: I can only report some subjective evaluations taken from the Net - it's Thanks!! |
Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
"herr dirigent" wrote in message oups.com... : : Andy Evans ha scritto: : : I can only report some subjective evaluations taken from the Net - it's : : : Thanks!! : I have just been through this and nearly bought the Benchmark unit myself. I've ended up with this http://www.cec-web.co.jp/products/dac/dx71mk2_e.html I am extremely impressed with this unit. Regards TT |
Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
I've ended up with this
http://www.cec-web.co.jp/products/dac/dx71mk2_e.html I am extremely impressed with this unit. It looks great. To my mind this really is the way to go - the DAC-Preamp. All your digital sources go into it and there you are. Can you give us a fuller description of how it operates and sounds, and in what ways it was better than the other equipment you had before or tried out? I can't find any reviews of this, so the above would be welcome. |
Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
herr dirigent wrote: What is the best? What do you mean by 'best' ? Graham |
Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
Eeyore ha scritto: herr dirigent wrote: What is the best? What do you mean by 'best' ? Graham the DAC more precise,linear,full of detail,realistic,with a really wonderful stereophonic image. |
Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
herr dirigent wrote: Eeyore ha scritto: herr dirigent wrote: What is the best? What do you mean by 'best' ? Graham the DAC more precise,linear,full of detail,realistic,with a really wonderful stereophonic image. Precisision and linearity can be measured scientifically and objectively. The remainder are in the ear and brain of the listener. Graham |
Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
Precisision and linearity can be measured scientifically and
objectively. The remainder are in the ear and brain of the listener. So? The purpose of the DAC is to listen to it. |
Apogee mini dac or Benchmark DAC1
Andy Evans wrote: Eeyore wrote ! Precisision and linearity can be measured scientifically and objectively. The remainder are in the ear and brain of the listener. So? The purpose of the DAC is to listen to it. Listening will only tell you what *you* think of it, i.e. subjective evaluation. That is no reliable measure of 'goodness' whatever as easily can be seen from those who think SET tube amps are great despite shocking failings wrt precision and linearity. Graham please learn to quote properly btw |
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:06 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk