Listening to music wouldn't be the same without the few talented individuals that put their effort, skills, and creativity into carefully voicing and designing the beautiful pieces in my system. Perfect to capture the music from different places and people.
And of course the journey wouldn't be as enjoyable without all the people and friends that I met along the way. Many thanks to everyone!
Kentchai, is your question, how does the analog system compare to the Brick?
The answer to that is easy - neither DAC comes close the analog setup right now: The detail and resolution of the analog system are in a different league. Spatial information (soundstate size, layering and instrument separation) is increased, there is more texture and detail with much more extended highs. The analog system is quicker with better decays and more natural timbres than either DAC. Surprisingly analog is also much more dynamic with better bass extension and a tigher faster bass.
Overall there is not a single area where digital is better than the analog system anymore. But then the DPS is really up there with the best turntables (also the complete analog system runs close to $10k).
System edited: Huge change, at least sonically: I added a Lyra Argo (i) which Willi of DPS recommended so much for the DPS table. The Lyra Argo very nicely pointed out the differences between my phonostages. The combination of Argo and JLTI has an incredible resolution and captures the realistic timbre of instruments more than anything I ever heard in my system. Ad to that incredible speed, dynamics, and a layering of the soundstage that I have not heard to date from very few but a few top systems. Compared to that the excellent Wright WPP200C only sounded nice, but not so special anymore.
Here are some comments on the two different DACs and my reasons for keeping both. Overall the difference reflects some of the observations mentioned in the reference DAC thread on Audiogon:
Even though neither is quite a reference DAC, according to these classifications the Benchmark is a category I and the Brick certainly a category II DAC.
Some personal experiences with the DACs: I have been running the Brick for a long time but the one thing I never quite got a grip on is the bass. Depending on the piece it even sounded sometimes a little disconnected from the rest of the spectrum. Comparing to my analog system, with my previous turntables, a Michell Tecnodec and a VPI Scout it wasn't quite so obvious, but when I got my DPS turntable, I realized how much more the my main system is really capable of.
So in an attempt to improve the bass and top end detail, I tried a Lavry DAC for a while. More recently, I got the latest Benchmark DAC1USB after a friend bugged me about it (he liked the Bechmark more than the Lavry). I heard earlier versions of the Benchmark and never quite liked it very much - strident highs, the usually glow that surrounds instruments which is so typical of upsampling. However with the latest version Benchmark really did well. It has a very tight solid sound, great extended bass, a fairly open midrange, instruments are well separated and the top end is smooth without any hint of the earlier strident highs.
After getting the Benchmark, I got to improve the Brick a little more by doing some very careful tube rolling. With the Mazda Triple Mica, flow and coherence is a little better than the Benchmark, but it still looses control somewhat in complex passages especially for classical music. With a Siemens 12AU7, the bass of the Brick is tighter and drums are as explosive as with the Benchmark.
Overall the difference could be easiest heard on a tabla piece by Zakir Hussain: The Benchmark has a very tight sound, is very lively and dynamic, the Brick has more flow. When the tabla is hit, the Brick takes longer to decay, even if the drum is touched at the edge to deaden the sound. The Benchmark stops and starts much faster as you would expect from live tabla. I think these characteristics result in the observed difference, i.e. the better transients of the Benchmark vs. the flow of the Brick.
In summary, what I really liked about the Benchmark the most was how transients and dynamics are preserved. Many CDs sound very exciting whereas the Brick can be laid back at time. The Brick has its strength in the natural decay of tones, which the Benchmark sometimes cuts to short. For spatial presentation, the Benchmark has the better separation between instruments, especially in complex passages, whereas the Brick sketches a more realistic three-dimensional picture for single instruments. The Brick did particularly well with solo piano. Overall for complex music and electronic music I would give the nod to the Benchmark, for a more natural sound and small ensembles I would prefer the Brick.
Overall I think there is a clear difference in presentation, whether it is better or worse depends on your taste and the rest of the system. Several friends liked the Benchmark more especially since I have an all tube system. Right now I am using both in my main system, as both are very enjoyable and I might switch based on mood.
One final comment: For the Brick tube rolling is essential. IMO it performs far from its best with the stock tubes. Try the Mazda Triple Mica or the Siemens 12AU7. Single 12AU7 NOS tubes are fairly affordable and can be found easily
I guess, I should probably post this as a review on Asylum or Audiogon sometime...
Restock , Inspiring system! I've read your old posts on the Prima and you seemed to really like it. How do your Brick and Benchmark compare to it? Also, why two DAC's? Which one do you prefer?
System edited: Now completely switched over to Mac Mini based digital replacing an Audio Aero Prima CDP. The Mini is connected via USB to the Benchmark DAC1 USB as well as the Wavelength Brick USB DAC.
Restock, great system! I also have Abbys (Super Abbys, actually in my second system), and love them; also thinking of a Fi amp possibly, at some point. Re turntables, you mention above that you considered the Nouvelle Platine, before you settled for the DPS: can you tell me what you thought of the Verdier, and why you decided against it? You also mention the Serac: is it actually in production? I don't see any clear evidence on their website... Thanks.
Wow, now we have all Audiogon DPS owners present in the same post ;): Edigio, Soliver, Gajgmusic and me.
Edigio, thanks for the nice comment. Yes that's the little Tivoli in Classic Walnut, which matches Walnut DPS plinth very nicely. Interestingly, it was the little Tivoli radio that got me interested in single-driver speakers. If that little radio could produce such nice coherent sound with a single long-throw driver, why not a much larger version. Indeed the Abbys do mimic some of the coherence of the little radio.
Gary (Gajgmusic), thanks very much for your kind comments. You wouldn't believe how good the DPS sounds in the system now ;) . Time for you to visit Toronto soon!
Soliver, I completely agree with your assessment of the DPS: I could not think of a table that I would prefer using. Incredibly well designed from the included base (no need to try ten different bases) to the record clamp, speed control and the power supply.
I considered many other tables in this class Nouvelle Platine, Galibier Serac/Gavia, Nottingham Spacedeck, VPI. After listening, the only one that came close to the DPS, IMO, is the Galibier Gavia. Thom (of Galibier) was wonderful and accommodating when I visited him in Denver, but the DPS is just much more practical in our small loft, and is at the same level sound wise.
As for the area where I believe the most improvement will be: A Schroeder No. 2 arm is still on its way ;) Although the DPS modded RB 250 is much better than expected.
I think you are on the right track using a top of the line ZYX cartridge and excellent preamps - time to enjoy some music.
The room looks great. Much better than the old place. Having listened to this system in one of its iterations, it is very special. Lovingly chosen and extremely musical. Very smart to thank your wife first, she deserves it. As for the dps, I hope I really didn't force it on you. Sorry you won't be to our regular thursday night affairs but see you soon
Soliver
I have heard and compared the 3 power supply to the 2, but I am a dps dealer so be warned. It gives you that much more of what the dps already does. I gave a customer the choice of either it or the 2, I would keep the other. Regrettably he chose to keep it. Happy to answer any questions.
I am personally loving mine from all angles, looks, sound, and ease of use.
I really like the fact that it is easy to switch records while the platter is still spinning, good on my bac, probably better for the motor in the long haul, and a touch faster.
Of course I am now lusting after a better tonearm and I would really like to hear the "3" power supply.
First of all thanks to everyone who contributed to putting this one together:
- Shohini for ears, eyes and everything else - Terry Cain for his suggestions and his never-ending enthusiasm for audio - Boa2 and Gmood1 for their comments and putting me on the right track - David for showing me what is really possible with SET and tubes - Gary (Gajgmusic) for insisting on the DPS turntable :) - Audiokiep for his pursuit of perfect digital sources - Rick for taking great pictures of the system
And all the great manufacturers and people who helped out and that I forgot to mention.
