Bryston BDA-1 DAC Review
The Bryston BDA-1 external DAC has been one of the most highly anticipated products of 2008. I have received countless emails asking who, what, when, where, and why all related to the BDA-1. Many audiophiles have withheld DAC purchases for several months until the release and review(s) of the BDA-1. Fortunately those patient audiophiles will be very happy they waited for this DAC. Everything about the BDA-1 is first class. Computer Audiophile is honored to publish the very first official review, anywhere in the world, of the new Bryston BDA-1 external DAC.
Bryston
Almost all audiophiles are familiar with Bryston and it's reputation for quality. What many audiophiles may not know is that Bryston is a very non-pretentious down to earth company. James Tanner of Bryston can often be found perusing Internet forums answering questions from current and potential customers. James has also been known to ask these same people what they want in a product. In the land of Oz that high-end audio can sometimes be, this is downright cool. I'm also willing to bet that James would have a beer and watch Hockey Night in Canada with a potential customer and only talk "shop" if the topic came up. Bryston doesn't have to be pushy, or make up questionable statements to sell products. Bryston products, including the new BDA-1, sell themselves.
Design
The BDA-1 has some very tough siblings to follow. The 28B SST amplifiers have received major accolades and the BCD-1 CD player was given the Golden Ear Award from The Abso!ute Sound this year. Having listened to all three of these products I know without a doubt the BDA-1 lives up to the family name. In typical Bryston fashion the BDA-1 has great specs. This DAC is not a BCD-1 with the disc drive removed. The BDA-1 has two independent linear power supplies and dual Crystal CS-4398 DAC chips. The inputs on this unit are almost endless. One USB at 16Bit 32K-48K, two coax, two optical, one AES/EBU, and two BNC all at 16-24Bit and 32, 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176, or 192K. Sure there are additional inputs Bryston could have included but this is not some sort of all-in-one digital switching box. If you can't connect this DAC to your existing computer and/or audio system you've probably got a PC running Windows 3.11 or your stereo is still a piece of furniture passed down from Grandma and Grandpa. Nothing wrong with a nice sofa-sized all wood stereo, but I think it's time for an upgrade. The outputs on the BDA-1 are Bryston's standard fare, both single ended RCA and balanced XLR. There is an additional coax digital output that bypasses the DAC completely and sends out an untouched digital stream. I used this to verify bit perfect data by outputting audio to my Berkeley Audio Design Alpha DAC. The BDA-1 passed the audio signal bit for bit every time.
Jitter is one of the more elusive concepts in high-end audio. Bryston's website explains jitter in this easy to understand way.
"Jitter is a mistiming of data being moved from point A to point B in any synchronous digital system. Think of jitter as individual ticks on a clock—however each tick is not occurring at exact one-second intervals. Some are slightly less than a second and some are slightly longer, and they average out so that no actual time is being gained or lost over a large number of seconds. Jitter is the difference between the shortest and the longest second, and in digital audio systems this specification is usually measured in nanoseconds. Both the frequency and the jitter characteristics of the system’s digital clock will affect the accuracy of reproduction. The frequency, if not accurate, can cause the pitch and speed of the music to change, and in some systems cause drop-outs if there is no data available."
To reduce jitter Bryston doesn't go way overboard and require the DAC to rest on one ton of natural granite. Bryston simply re-samples and re-clocks the input to reduce jitter to 1/1000 of a nanosecond. I use the term "simply" only as a figure of speech. There is nothing simple about Bryston's solution to jitter reduction and it works wonderfully.
Bryston's up-sampling approach in the BDA-1 is marvelous. To satisfy the "purists" I'll get this out of the way early. There is an up-sample bypass button on the front of the BDA-1. The "purists" can now pass Go, collect $200, and proceed to the next paragraph. The rest of us will be interested to know that Bryston put some serious thought into its up-sampling. The highest number is not always the best and can actually degrade the sound quality. This is why Bryston up-samples based on the input sample frequency. Multiples of 44.1k are up-sampled to 176.4k and multiples of 48k are up-sampled to 192k. This synchronous up-sampling process has at least three major benefits. First up-sampling improves processing by the DAC because it was designed for greater bit depths and higher sample rates. Second, the up-sampling process shifts noise to inaudible frequencies. Third, up-sampling produces a new clock signal that reduces jitter. The choice to up-sample is left entirely up to the listener. My preference when listening through the BDA-1 was to bypass the up-sampling feature. The major difference when electing to up-sample was very subtle but still audible. There was an almost tube-like euphonic sound that could be described as Hi-Fi with an artificially wider soundstage. Without the up-sample bypass option it would be nearly impossible to notice this very subtle difference. To put it another way, if the DAC auto up-sampled everything without a bypass feature listeners, myself included, would be hard pressed to hear anything like I described. That's how subtle the sonic difference is between up-sampled and non up-sampled output from the BDA-1.
The most overlooked piece of all DACs is the analog stage. What I mean is consumers frequently don't take the analog stage into consideration when researching a DAC. People get very caught up in the specs of the DAC chip and achieving the highest sample rate possible and forget that the analog stage is just as important. The best DAC chip in the world will be reduced to an unimportant level if the analog stage was weak. One picosecond of jitter really wouldn't mean much with the audio flowing through a flawed analog output. Fortunately many manufacturers don't overlook the analog stage and Bryston is no different. Bryston says the analog stage is the most critical part of the BDA-1. This is why it used proprietary Bryston Class A discrete op-amps rather than commonly used IC chips. This design allows Bryston to match the needs of the DAC instead of using a standard integrated circuit that would force it to compromise the design. This is somewhat similar to an active speaker that has been matched perfectly to the power amp inside the speaker cabinet. When both parts of the system are under the control of the designer the results can be very good.
Build Quality
Bryston build quality has always been legendary and the BDA-1 is no exception. The DAC is very substantial and the solid aluminum faceplate is an eye catcher. The Bryston logo etched into the aluminum extrudes quality and attention to detail. Why screen print the Bryston name on the front when you can just carve it out of the aluminum! When many other manufacturers are seeking ways to cut costs, Bryston is insuring every ounce of quality is kept in its components while still keeping prices extremely reasonable. My favorite detail on the front panel is the sample rate indicator lights. Every sample rate from 32 to 192k is available. If you forget to set Audio Midi on your Mac to 24/176.4 when listening to the Reference Recordings HRx albums the BDA-1 will be there to remind you that your listening with the incorrect sample rate indicated on the front panel. Another nice touch is the up-sample indicator light and its color variations. When bypassing the up-sample feature the light is off. When up-sampling to 176.4k the light is amber and when up-sampling to 192k the light is green.
Now for my traditional gripes about the product I am reviewing. If I was granted one wish and Bryston would make it happen, I'd wish for a volume control. This would allow listeners to bypass a preamp & associated interconnects and go straight to their amp(s). Preamps are filters and the less filters in the audio chain the better. It would also be nice if Bryston included a minimal remote control with the DAC. But, most users probably don't switch inputs as much as I do during a review and a remote would increase the price of the unit for everyone even if they did not need the remote. A Bryston remote is sold separately and it can control a host of Bryston components. Since these are the only two gripes that come to mind I think Bryston has done a very nice job designing and building the DAC-1.
Sound Quality
All source material while listening through the BDA-1 was AIFF or WAV files using iTunes on a Mac Pro desktop.
The Bryston BDA-1 external DAC is one solid component in build quality and sound quality. Accurate is probably the adjective that comes to mind first when I think about the BDA-1. The DAC is just plain accurate. Putting the BDA-1 through the wringer of 24/176.4 HRx material really showed its worth. Crown Imperial from the Dallas Wind Symphony (RR-112 HRx) was reproduced wonderfully through the BDA-1. A sure sign that I like what I hear is when I don't get distracted and I sit through the whole performance without thinking about what to put on next. For me to sit through a complete classical performance without pain is something special. During the BDA-1 review I certainly did sit through the whole Crown Imperial album and enjoyed every note.
At Rocky Mountain Audiofest I dropped a considerable amount of money at the Mobile Fidelity booth within the first ten minutes of the show opening. One disc I purchased was Natalie Merchant's Tigerlily. I ripped it to my Thecus 5200B Pro NAS drive when I arrived back in Minneapolis and I've been listening to it frequently. Listening to Tigerlily I can get a good feel for a components sound signature on Natalie's voice. Track one San Andreas Fault and track four River sounded superb. Natalie's rich voice was reproduced incredibly accurate. Having attended many Natalie Merchant concerts and listening to her albums on every system imaginable I have a pretty good feel for what I believe is an accurate reproduction of her voice. The BDA-1 was spot on with Natalie.
One album I have been addicted to recently is Consolers of the Lonely from The Raconteurs. You wouldn't think a hard rock recording like this would really be the best test of a system or DAC's quality, but surprisingly sonic differences are readily apparent with this album. The title track has some great guitar and drums all the way through. I brought this track to many suites at RMAF 2008 and heard some impressive results and surprised many people in the room with my choice of music. Needless to say I've also heard this music on many high-end systems. The key to reproducing this recording well is the bass drum accuracy. On some systems I can't make it beyond the first minute without turning the track off because the bottom end is so loose. For example, last weekend I listened to this track through a six figure system comprised of Wilson Maxx 2 speakers and several different components from Ayre and Wadia. I played the song 1.5 times to make sure I was really hearing what I thought I was. The second time I didn't make it through the whole song. The bottom end was not doing it for me. With the BDA-1, granted in a different system under different listening conditions, I have listened to this track and album so many times I've lost count. If it was possible to wear a grove into a hard drive I probably would have done it where this album is located on the drive.
The BDA-1 is not a perfect DAC in terms of sound quality. My biggest issue is the soundstage. Compared to my Berkeley Audio Design Alpha DAC ($5000 MSRP) the soundstage through the BDA-1 is closed-in. The Alpha DAC reproduces an incredible three dimensional soundstage that I've never heard through any other component. So, for the BDA-1 it's like coming in second place to Michael Phelps at the Beijing 2008 Summer Olympics. Second is not a bad place to be considering the first place winner is the best in the world. Even though the soundstage was quite a bit more closed in compared to the Alpha DAC, I consider it right on par with the Weiss Minerva via its FireWire interface. The BDA-1 remained extremely accurate with very good upper extension and very tightly controlled bottom end. Another sound quality issue arose when I used the optical input and up-sampled. I thought the sound was a bit brittle and female voices were less appealing. Just like my other observations with up-sampling this was extremely subtle and only noticeable because I was testing every input every which way but loose. Plus I was comparing them all to the Alpha DAC.
Listening through the USB, optical, and AES interfaces brought out some subtle differences. My favorite interface in terms of sound quality was the AES via my Lynx AES16e card and Mac Pro. The AES interface in the BDA-1 accepts up to 24/192 audio. This allowed me to listen to every sample rate in my collection without downsampling at all. The USB input offered great sound as well although a little short of the performance of the AES-Lynx combination. If I only had a USB port on my computer to connect to the BDA-1 I would not hesitate one bit. The sound quality was 99% of what it was through the AES-Lynx interface. The accuracy and tightness of this DAC is all there through the USB 16 bit / 44.1 kHz input. In fact the BDA-1 is a major step forward for computer based music because of its USB interface. More and more manufacturers are talking about USB interfaces but Bryston's BDA-1 has one right now and it sounds fabulous.
Wrap Up
Bryston has built its reputation over the years by building great products. You'll never see outrageous claims from Bryston like the BDA-1 will make you look thirty years younger. However, when you play back some old Steely Dan through this DAC you may very well feel thirty years younger and like you're at a live show. The BDA-1 does not offer a Scratch n' Sniff feature for the full live concert smell, but it comes very close to live music with great sound quality. The Bryston BDA-1 external DAC is an incredible bargain at only $1995. The sound quality, build quality, and feature set are equal to or better than other DACs I've heard at twice the price. That's not a review cliche, that's the honest truth. In private conversations during the review period I described this DAC as a giant-killer. I stand by those words and advise many DAC manufacturers to steer clear of a DAC shootout with the BDA-1. If I didn't own my beloved Alpha DAC I would have purchased the review sample in a heartbeat, and saved $3000! As I box the BDA-1 back up and ready it for the trip back to Ontario, Canada I wonder if my wife needs a DAC for her iPod Shuffle?
Look for the Bryston BDA-1 on the CASH list very soon.
Note: Bryston currently offers its products through a large dealer network. If you live out in the boonies Audio Advisor offers the BDA-1 at the same price as a local dealer.
Associated Equipment: Mac Pro, Lynx AES16e card, Berkeley Audio Design Alpha DAC, Benchmark DAC1 PRE, Kimber Select cable, Avalon speakers, McIntosh tube amplification, Virtual Dynamics power cables.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Comments
Joined: 10/27/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 8
Bryston DAC
Hi Chris,
Thank you for you time and efforts on reviewing our Bryston BDA-1 DAC - much appreciated.
One point I would like to make clear is the credit for the description on what Jitter is goes to Steve Nugent of Empirical Audio.
james
James Tanner
Bryston
Joined: 09/25/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 110
Great review Chris. I'm one
Great review Chris.
I'm one of those that have been holding off on a DAC purchase. Now I can add the Bryston to my short list!
Joined: 09/01/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 128
Short List
Now I can add the Bryston to my short list!
What else would be on your short list?
Brian
---
Beresford TC7520SE (Caiman) DAC - Quad 405-2 refurbished by 405man - Quart 980s German Tower Loudspeakers.
Virgin Cable Box - Squeezebox Classic.
Joined: 09/25/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 110
That's a great question.
That's a great question. There seem to be quite a few quality DACs in the $2K - $3K range. Here are the ones that have my attention in no particular order:
Bryston BDA-1
Van Alstine Ultra DAC
Altmann Attraction
PS Audio Ultralink
Red Wine Audio Isabellina
Some are tube, some are SS, some are NOS and the AVA doesn't have a USB input but all have received good reviews (except the PS which isn't in production yet). It's really difficult to select a clear "winner". Of course, maybe I should just pony up $5K for the Berkley Alpha DAC. . . ;-)
Joined: 09/01/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 128
Not a poor man
MM
I am not a poor man, but I don't think I would want to spend that much!
Brian
---
Beresford TC7520SE (Caiman) DAC - Quad 405-2 refurbished by 405man - Quart 980s German Tower Loudspeakers.
Virgin Cable Box - Squeezebox Classic.
Joined: 08/17/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 51
Nice write-up on the BDA-1,
Nice write-up on the BDA-1, Chris.
Having lived with this DAC for the past 2 months, I concur entirely on your description of it being "accurate" in character. Despite this, I never find it to be edgy or fatiguing. It has excellent tonal ballance with authoritative but controlled bass.
One point that I would comment on is the upsampling. Just like with an upsampling CDP I had in the past, in my system this feature consistently makes the soundstage a bit narrower (not wider), though certainly adds some depth and - as you noted - a bit of a tube-like quality. To me, on many recordings this 'holographic' effect can sound a bit processed and artificial, though on other recordings the effect is more pleasing. I've generally prefered to bypass the upsampling.
Anyway, I've thoroughly enjoyed this DAC and would highly recommend it for anyone looking for something in the $2K range.
Rance W.
Joined: 11/28/2007 .:. Online .:. Comments: 5425
Hi Rance - Thanks a lot for
Hi Rance - Thanks a lot for the comment. I love the fact that you hear the up-sampling as narrowing the soundstage and I hear it quite differently. If readers get one thing out of this, it should be that a full demo of any component is a must!
Thanks again Rance.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Joined: 07/13/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 50
Chris, thank you for the
Chris, thank you for the review of the Bryston DAC. How would you characterize the sound of the Bryston BDA-1 verses the Benchmark Dac using the USB input?
Also is it true that the Bryston USB input is limited to 16 bit verses the 24/96 of the Benchmark Dac? Any noticeable difference when playing high rez files?
I agree that Bryston is a great company. I own one of their amps that developed a problem in the left channel the Sunday after the RMAF show (switch on rear of amp that selects between bridged mode and stereo mode developed a problem). Sent an email to tech support and they asked that I return the amp to replace the defective switch). Can't complain about their 20 year P&L warranty, although I believe the warranty is not as long on a digital product.
Thanks,
Alan B
Joined: 12/12/2007 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 16
Chris, How would you rank the Bryston vs Benchmark?
You mentioned it competes with anything under $4k. Is it that much better than the Benchmark DAC1 Pre?
Cheers
Frank
Joined: 11/28/2007 .:. Online .:. Comments: 5425
Hi Alan - That's a really
Hi Alan - That's a really tough question since the two products are so different. Both USB interfaces are really good and neither one would disappoint you. If you are contemplating both products the performance of the USB interface is not something you want to over-emphasize. Both are really good. I would concentrate on the feature sets of both products because they are very different. If you need 24/96 via USB the Benchmark will handle this unlike the BDA-1. The two products really are like apples and oranges though.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Joined: 11/28/2007 .:. Online .:. Comments: 5425
Hi frank - The BDA-1
Hi frank - The BDA-1 competes with products over $4k as well! As I said in the above post, the DAC1 Pre and the BDA-1 are really like apples and oranges because of their different feature sets.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Joined: 12/12/2007 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 16
Chris, Nice sidestep!
I am looking purely for your comments/assessment on how the sound quality (for similar material played) stacks up between the two DACs.
Are you able to describe briefly how the BDA-1 improves on the Benchmark's SQ.
Cheers
Frank
Joined: 04/18/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 78
I'd like to know (hello to
I'd like to know (hello to EB...I'm still here:) how much the digital I/O like USB and FIREWIRE of the PC's are important at the end of the listened session, using the same DAC that for me, in the "high levels products" is a different approach to the sound.
I mean that Weiss, like EmmLabs, like Prism Sound (for me almost impossible to beat:), like Berkley and few others have a typical propetary sound.
So, with the difficult of my explaining in english, I will be another time satisfied from the readings from this forum/site, if someone (Chris?:) can use the Minerva and his Mac without DAC (only the Firewire section, like the "Vesta") connected to the Berkley or to THIS Bryston and explain us "the difference" from the listening using the same DAC BUT with its I/O like the USB for instance or with the Lynx output to DAC.
How much is "important" at the end the DAC and all its around?
Where (in which section) this Bryston (not to talk about the price) "loose" against the Berkley?
Anyway, thanks all...
Luca
Joined: 11/05/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 95
Hello, I doubt the Berkeley
Hello,
I doubt the Berkeley DAC being the best DAC in the world.
Such statements are simply misleading people !
There are far more expensive DACs on the market, with specific implementations, that surely knocks the Berkeley down.
I mean it may be a very good DAC, and have an excellent PQR.
I think you should just point that the Berkeley is better than the Bryston, as far as you can tell.
I know I'm not being much constructive by saying so.
And I certainly prefer someone standing for its point of view, rather than having to read between the lines.
But still, this one is simply too big to be true...
Guillaume.
Joined: 11/28/2007 .:. Online .:. Comments: 5425
Hi Guillaume - Welcome to
Hi Guillaume - Welcome to Computer Audiophile, thank you very much for your honest opinion.
From the review -
"The BDA-1 is not a perfect DAC in terms of sound quality. My biggest issue is the soundstage. Compared to my Berkeley Audio Design Alpha DAC ($5000 MSRP) the soundstage through the BDA-1 is closed-in. The Alpha DAC reproduces an incredible three dimensional soundstage that I've never heard through any other component. So, for the BDA-1 it's like coming in second place to Michael Phelps at the Beijing 2008 Summer Olympics. Second is not a bad place to be considering the first place winner is the best in the world."
I do value your opinion and will not say it is wrong. however I disagree with you on a couple items.
When I, or any writer, publish a review it contains opinionated statements based on our experience with the specific product(s) and based on our life experience. It would be a very difficult read if after every subjective statement I included a sentence such as "In my opinion" or "As far as I can tell." I hope it is obvious to many readers that all subjective comments are the opinions of the writer and not facts.
In addition, my analogy about Michael Phelps and the best in the world comment was not to be taken literally and in an absolute contiguous sense. By that I mean the Bryston is second place to the Alpha DAC which I have raved about frequently. The following statement about second place not being that bad is also a generalization that somewhat played off the previous sentence. Of course the Alpha DAC is not the best DAC in the world. There really can't be such a thing because listening to music is very subjective. Plus, a Pacific Microsonics Model 2 is quite superior to the Alpha DAC and I hear that daily from someone who has a Model 2 in his system. So, in no way did I mean to suggest literally that the Alpha DAC is the best in the world.
In terms of your statement -
"There are far more expensive DACs on the market, with specific implementations, that surely knocks the Berkeley down."
Yes, you are correct there are more expensive DACs that are better than the Alpha. However, the Alpha in my opinion is far better than many DACs several times its price. I'm sure you agree that price is not an indicator of sound quality just the same as price is not an indicator of automobile performance. Many less expensive automobiles will out perform a Bentley in every objective performance test.
Anyway, thanks you again for the honest comments. My response is in no way meant to sound rude or question the validity of your statements. I'm sure you'll respect my honesty as I have yours.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Joined: 11/05/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 95
Hi Chris, I certainly
Hi Chris,
I certainly understand that you can't add the extra-cautious sentence. And maybe I took the analogy too seriously, for I really felt you meant the Berkeley was The Best DAC in the world :).
As for the price being a clue about the sound quality, I do agree with you.
My own experience however tends to show that the Hi-End category, when dealt with properly, is really in another league. That's always about details and sometimes it requires the good system, and the good environment to figure out.
But you are definitely right, there are a lot of expensive units that know nothing about music at all (not to say that some brands are specialized in high-pricing together with poor sound). And that's misleading people too.
What I meant was that we have almost reached the point (as far as audio reviews are concerned) where the new 1k$ unit is blowing everything from its price tag to 10 times it. And that's becoming ridiculous. Unfortunately, that is being gold speech for forum geeks, and that's becoming ridiculous too...
Anyway, I didn't mean to be rude either. I would be a fool not to recognize the excellent work you are doing here (especially by telling people that a computer can indeed be a very good transport).
Elp.
Joined: 11/28/2007 .:. Online .:. Comments: 5425
Hi elp - Thanks so much for
Hi elp - Thanks so much for the response. I think we have a lot in common :-)
I too dislike when every component is talked about like it's worth 10x the price and like it's the next best thing. That kind of talk really discredits writers and hurts consumers & manufacturers if it is not true.
I look forward to see you around this place more often :-)
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Joined: 12/06/2007 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 394
James - thanks for giving me
James - thanks for giving me credit for the Jitter description, although I probably have better descriptions than this.
The stuff about frequency accuracy is not from me, but also true.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio
http://www.empiricalaudio.com
Joined: 08/18/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 61
Bryston Dac
Hi Chris,
Great seeing you at RMAF.
I thought I would post my thoughts on the BDA-1 based on listening to it today at a dealer. The unit was hooked up to Soolos System and run thru Accuphase Pre and Boulder monos thru to a pair of Avalon Isis speakers.
Have to say I was not impressed. The sound was fine in the midband and voices seemed accurate enough. However the audio extremes seemed truncated, espec the top end which seemed as if under a blanket.
I played a track from Nora Jones then played the same track from a Redbook CD and was able to switch back and forth on the fly. The Redbook sounded more dynamic, rich, more natural from the Accuphase player. I just preferred it much more. It 's soundstage was also noticeably more enveloping, although room acoustics were not ideal.
BAAS will be holding a DAC shootout in a few weeks and I will look to their site for results/observations.
Best.
/Lee
Joined: 10/27/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 8
World market
Hi Chris,
One of the issues I find interesting from a manufacturers point of view is the widely variable subjective observations that are part of this hobby.
You ship the product into the world and sometimes get completely opposite subjective points of view on the very same product.
I say TOMATO you say TOMATOE!
James Tanner
Bryston
Joined: 11/28/2007 .:. Online .:. Comments: 5425
Hi James - That point can't
Hi James - That point can't be emphasized enough.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Joined: 08/18/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 61
Do the ears lie?
C'mon guys. A $2k DAC should sound as good or better than redbook cd. Especially when hooked up to such hi-end components and compared back and forth via A-B comparison multiple times. I heard a real difference. Sure, there are several variables involved here. But this comparison was pretty ideal.
Honestly, if you are going to charge that much for a DAC then you should be open to critique. I would hate to pay this much for a DAC and get home to realize that I preferred my redbook player. Ouch...
/Lee
Joined: 10/27/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 8
Hi Lee I guess it comes
Hi Lee
I guess it comes down to opinion. There are plenty of people out there who have the DAC (over 100 units already) and are very pleased with its performance and would disagree with you.
I really do not want to get into a debate about who's correct. A discussion like this goes nowhere. You have your opinion others have theirs.
james
Bryston
James Tanner
Bryston
Joined: 11/28/2007 .:. Online .:. Comments: 5425
Hi Lee - It certainly was
Hi Lee - It certainly was nice talking to you at RMAF.
I don't doubt what you heard and your opinions about the BDA-1. But, I stand by my praise for this DAC and I have a feeling you will see a few other reviews in the print magazines that echo my sentiments.
We shouldn't downplay the major role system synergy plays in all of this. Components sound different depending on the system they are placed in. The digital signal being fed to the DAC is very important no matter what the DAC is capable of in terms of cleaning up sloppy input signals. In addition I think extended listening periods help identify false senses of what sounds "better" or can bring out glaring flaws that initially appeared to make one component better than the other. I do understand that this is almost impossible for many consumers.
Anyway, I respect your opinion 100% and it's good to see you around here.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Joined: 08/18/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 61
James, Debate is not my
James,
Debate is not my intention either. I'm just reporting what I hear.
Respectfully,
/LM
Joined: 08/18/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 61
Guys, I guess to be fair I
Guys,
I guess to be fair I should add that the Sonos System front end could have been the culprit for much of the jitter induced effects I heard from the Bryston/Accuphase system.
Still, for me there are several alternatives to Redbook CD out there that many of us are exploring. Since we all have a cd player, one of the key objectives in investing in a digital music server/DAC is to surpass the sound quality of cd (esp. given the availability of great hi-rez recordings). Otherwise the investment just doesn't seem worthwhile. Some of my audiophile friends have suggested I just get a turntable instead, as it sounds "far better" than digital. So in my analysis of these new Dacs that are being cranked out, I hold the bar fairly high.
/LM
Joined: 04/18/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 78
Yess... ...I am sure (and I
Yess...
...I am sure (and I agree with the post you wrote) about the "real" necessity to have a PC sys in my audiophile existence:
TO PLAY THE HIRES FILE made in digital domain!
For all the rest we can afford (analog world), we have* in best quality order the:
A) reel to reel studio master
B) turntables sys
C) sacd players
Luca
*in my honest opinion
P.S. "A1" will be the category of the PC front end with digital master downloaded and recorded during these last years when it will be possible to buy some pro devices for a reasonable price because now the standard PC sys are yet too much populars. Good work, C.A.
Joined: 09/09/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 157
USB really that good?
Meaning absolutely no disrespect, Chris, I have to say that I am very skeptical of your comment that the sound of the USB input is 99% of the AES/EBU via the Lynx card. My understanding is that Bryston has not done a no-holds-barred USB implementation and I expected it to be sub-par through that input, akin to the Bel Canto. Whereas I thought the AES EBU out of the Lynx card was supposed to be state of the art. If the Bryston USB really is that good, I'll buy one.
Joined: 11/28/2007 .:. Online .:. Comments: 5425
Hi Dan - No disrespect
Hi Dan - No disrespect taken, I think it's great to hear from readers whether they agree or disagree with any part of a review. It certainly helps keep writers honest when people all over the world are free to express their opinion directly below each review.
I see where you are coming from Dan and it's a very good topic for discussion. I don't think it is as easy as your post suggests.
You suggest Bryston did not do a "...no-holds-barred USB implementation..."
and
You suggest "...AES EBU out of the Lynx card was supposed to be state of the art..."
Both of those statements could be true and I'd still stand by my 99% comment. Here is why.
1. You appear to be comparing two totally different components from two different manufacturers.
A. The USB input from Bryston
B. The AES16e digital I/O card from Lynx Studio
2. It appears that you're assuming Bryston did do a "...no-holds-barred ... implementation..." on its AES interface and that anything less on the USB interface should not sound as good? Are all AES interfaces better than less than perfect USB interfaces? It is quite possible that Bryston did any combination of good - better - best implementations on both USB and AES.
3. Your suggesting that there is no homogenization of the sound taking place within the DAC. For example, components all have a sonic signature. If the analog stage has a sonic signature this is likely to impact the sound by acting like a filter and bringing the sound of different digital inputs much closer together. I'm not saying this is the case with the BDA-1 nor am I saying this is always a bad thing.
Again, no disrespect or offense meant by any of my comments. I'm sure you'll respect my honesty as I respect and expect yours. As you know this is a laid back site where I expect to see skeptical comments and where we can actually discuss it in good conversations. Heck, someone else may jump in and correct both of us. Anyway, I look forward to your response Dan. Talk to you soon :-)
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Joined: 09/09/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 157
Chris, You are correct that
Chris,
You are correct that I have assumed Bryston's AES/EBU implementation is good. That's because AES/EBU and S/PDIF and Optical have been in use in DACs for as long as there have been DACs. It's not hard for a good manufacturer (and I'd certainly put Bryston in that category) to achieve excellent results. But USB for high-end audio is a new ballgame. There are a couple of standard chipsets out there that designers are using. The PCM270X, which I believe Bryston (along with Bel Canto and some others) use is not highly regarded. My Bel Canto DAC3 sounds better driven via Toslink from my Mac Mini than via USB. But Bel Canto's new USB -> SPDIF box uses the superior TAS1020 chip. I'm planning to get one. So that's the essence of my skepticism -- getting USB right is tough and I'd be surprised if Bryston has managed to get it right. But I'd be more than happy to be wrong about this.
Separate from the above, I do agree that DACs have a "sound" that will be evident across all of their inputs (what you called "homogenization"). After all, these inputs share most of their circuitry.
Dan
Joined: 11/28/2007 .:. Online .:. Comments: 5425
Hi Dan - Thanks for the
Hi Dan - Thanks for the reply. Speaking of Bel Canto I picked up the USB Link yesterday. I be writing up something shortly.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Joined: 10/05/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 9
BDA-1
I wanted to add a few comments as another pleased (amazed) owner of a BDA-1. I have had it about a week, but knew from the first few minutes that it was a keeper. My previous DAC was a Lavry DA10, which is a very musical DAC and has bested Benchmark DAC1 and other DACs in its ~$1000 price range in several reviews I've seen. It was certainly a big step up in sound quality from what I had before, analog out from an M-Audio Audiophile 192 soundcard. But in comparison to the BDA-1, the DA10 sounded muddied. Perhaps my system (Magnepan speakers, Classe amps) needs a very transparent DAC like the BDA-1 to avoid this. All the faults in my system I had previously attributed to the speakers or amp, believing the opinion that a DAC is of relatively low importance and will not have a huge effect on SQ. But now these weaknesses are gone, transients are crisp and everything is more musical. I agree with a previous reviewer that the BDA-1 has "mad PRAT" (pace, rhythm, attack, timing). I especially notice this on jazz horns which previously seemed thin, but rock and other genres also benefit.
After trying the optical and USB out I feel the spdif coax out gives best sound, slightly better than optical and noticeably better than USB. I also leave the upsampling off at to me it reduces the transparency and clarity of the sound (some have commented that it adds a tubey effect). One post said the spdif BNC is superior to spdif coax, but I have not tried BNC yet. USB also has some problems with volume control that I don't have with spdif, I can believe what others have reported that USB out can send high volume surges of sound due to quirks in Windows. Even with spdif, I get slight crackling when the audio playback jumps to a new sampling rate file, which never occurred with the Lavry. It would be nice if the BDA-1 was available with a digital volume control. Since I run the DAC's balanced out directly to my amps, I now must use digital volume attenuation within the playback program (Foobar or Xmplay). I buffer the original 16-bit file to 24-bit, and I believe this means that the program can reduce the volume substantially without altering the 16 significant bits. WASAPI output is available in Foobar and Xmplay on Vista, and to me sounds very noticeably better than ASIO (either ASIO4ALL or with M-Audio drivers). I think the redesigned Vista audio stack has a lot of potential. I use spdif out from the onboard audio chip (Realtek AC889). Realtek has been one of the first good implementations of the new audio protocols in Vista, and using WASAPI, the onboard chip sounds indistinguishable to WASAPI out through a mid-range soundcard like M-Audio Audiophile. I think when Lynx and RME release WaveRT drivers that take advantage of Vista's potential, then the gap between digital out from the motherboard vs. a good soundcard will widen again.
In any case, the BDA-1 has improved my enjoyment of the system by a huge amount and is well worth the increase in cost over the ~$1000 DACs, which is saying something in hi-end audio's world of rapidly diminishing returns with increasing price.
Joined: 02/07/2009 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 4
The Bryston BDA-1 DAC vs. the Benchmark DAC1 USB
The search for right DAC for my setup has led in many directions. But as I researched and compiled trusted opinions, the decision came to be between the Bryston BDA-1 and the Benchmark DAC1 USB. The reviews for both have ranked them among the best buys for your money in both build and sonic quality, yet to my knowledge, there are no direct comparisons between the two available. And, regrettably most retailers do not sell both, let alone have demos of both for comparison. Fortunately for me I was able to come across one dealer that not only does, but one that was also able to set up an A/B listening session. For that, I have to take a quick minute to thank the people at Westlake Pro Audio (www.westlakepro.com) for allowing me 2 hours use of one of their professional mixing studios filled with some of the finest audio gear as well as one DAC1 USB and one BDA-1.
I brought with me my MacBook Pro with 25 records of various music stored as AIFF 44.1K 16bit files, a mini-to-toslink fiber optic cable, and a USB 2.0 cable. All Midi Controls were set using that timesaving application, CA-Sample Rate, provided by the people at Computer Audiophile (www.computeraudiophile.com) with everything set at 44.1K and 16bit, except for the when using the Benchmark, which forces 24bit. My salesman joined me as well as the Manager of the studio who was also interested hearing what the two had to offer.
As we began A/B’ing between the two from song to song, it was instantly apparent how much louder the Bryston was then the Benchmark. According to the decibel meter on the mixing board, it was approxiamtely 3db louder! To my knowledge the Benchmark does has level adjustments on the back that could easily fix that, if its volume is an issue to you.
Utilizing the USB connections of both units, we all appreciated the stronger treble and tonal balance that the Benchmark had over the Bryston. Voices were slightly fuller, symbols were crisper with a longer finish, and keyboards and synthesizers had more impact and vigor. On the flipside, we also noticed that the bass was stronger and more controlled with the Bryston. The difference was equally as dramatic as the Benchmark’s strengths in higher frequencies.
In terms of sound stage, the Bryston was slightly wider and a tad more room filling. The Benchmark tended to be more forward and central. Separation and definition were about the same on both units with some songs from Thom Yorke’s The Eraser Rmxs album sounding better on the Benchmark while others from Animal Collective’s Merriweather Post Pavilion sounding better on the Bryston.
Unlike the Benchmark, the Bryston allows for the control over the up-sampling feature. Throughout our tests, we almost always preferred the up-sampling to be on. The difference between the function being on and off was miniscule, and I liked the fact that we had the ability to turn it off or on with the push of a button.
After and hour and a half, both the manager and I preferred the Benchmark simply for its clarity and balance, with the salesman preferring the Bryston for its “pleasing scoop” that he felt evened out the balance with the midrange at higher volumes. With my mind made and as we were packing everything back up, I remembered the mini-to-toslink cable that I had brought. Knowing that the Bryston functions differently via USB then it does via its other inputs, we decided to switch the cables and do another quick test to see it there is a noticeable difference. And, yes, there was a noticeable difference.
The Benchmark sounded very similar to an almost unnoticeable degree, but the Bryston opened up revealing much of the lost highs that it lacked via USB. It was not 100% at the level of the Benchmark, but it was 95-97% there, creating a very natural and full sound. The Bryston’s bass also improved in tightness, which could be a result of the pairing with better higher frequency resolution or that over the optical pathway, the Bryston’s processing was better as a whole. Playing the Isley Brothers song, “People of Today”, the BDA-1 provided a much more musical experience then the Benchmark did, even evoking some head bobbing. That is to say that the DAC1 USB sounded fantastic as well, it is just that the combination of the Bryston’s newfound clarity meshed with its already large sound stage, made for a more pleasing experience.
The cable switch also improved on Bryston’s imaging, making for much sharper and more defined reproductions. This was a noticeable difference over the Benchmark. Via the BDA-1, on Henry Fiol’s Fe, Esperanza y Caridad, the background vocals in the song ”Ven y Baila mi Son” were distinct and clearly separated in space from your left to slightly right of center, and when played through the DAC1 USB, the same separate voices merged into a group, and the space narrowed to a range slightly to left and right of center. We played a few other songs with similar results. On Heat Miser’s Mic City Sons, “Rest My Head Against the Wall”, the Benchmark had a very pleasant range with all of the instruments sounding as unenthusiastically energetic as I assume Elliot Smith had wanted them to be. But when played through the Bryston, each of those instruments took its place within the soundstage, filling the room, and essentially making the whole expirence more lifelike.
Given this large gain in performance, I had to reconsider my decision made 30 minutes earlier. If I had only the option of USB, I would have gone with the Benchmark without much of a thought. It has a wonderful, clear, and balanced sound, that is sharp without being harsh or hard to listen to. It, in fact, was a pleasure to listen to. It is a unit that is worth every cent. But, since the use of an optical cable is an option for me, I ultimately chose the Bryston. The gains by using an optical cable, were in our opinion’s game changing. Its’ soundstage was wide and spacious, its’ ability for separation and definition was amazing, its’ control and authority was impressive, and its’ sound, for lack of a better phrase, makes you want to dance to the music; all making the Bryston BDA-1 an easy choice as my DAC.
Wes Katzir
Joined: 11/28/2007 .:. Online .:. Comments: 5425
Hi Wes - Wow, thanks very
Hi Wes - Wow, thanks very much for spending the time to write this very detailed post. I think you covered some of the differences very well and just as I expected. The USB implementation in the Benchmark is one of the better ones around and as you suggest it handles 24 bit audio natively. I also like the ability on the BDA-1 to turn of upsampling. It's pretty cool.
Thanks again for spending so much time to help all the Computer Audiophile readers with your detailed account of your experience.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Joined: 02/07/2009 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 4
Only Trying to Help
Chris-
It was my pleasure. I am only trying to help out people in a similar situation to myself, who haven't had the opportunity of demoing both at once. It is a tough choice since there are no truly right or wrong ways to go, only ones that might suit your situation better. And since most people on this website have their speakers placed only a little further then arms reach away, like I do, I felt that the more suitable choice would be to go with the unit that provided a wider sound stage. Anything that would help to further emphasize that nice "sound envelope" I am listening for, would be a welcome addition to my rig.
I will be getting the BDA-1 sometime this week or next. I was lucky enough to have the DAC1 USB in my house for a few before nights demoed the two units , so after I am done setting everything up, I will reply with my thoughts on the in home comparison. Things are always different when you don't have 4 Bryston 7BSST amplifiers or the custom Westlake Audio studio monitors that they were powering.
-Wes
Joined: 09/09/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 157
Great review, Wes
Thanks for doing this, Wes. And very interesting. I have not heard the USB version of the Benchmark, but my brief audition of USB into the Bryston suggested that Chris's finding --he felt that USB was excellent on the Bryston -- may be correct. So your experience clearly differs. What I will say is that the Bryston is extraordinary via SPDIF using an Empirical Audio Offramp.
I'm surprised the Bryston is not getting more buzz.
Joined: 02/07/2009 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 4
USB
Dan-
Please don't get me wrong, I thought that Bryston had plenty of strengths via USB as well, I just enjoyed the experience of the Benchmark better in that situation. In regards to "buzz", I think it is just a matter of time. I have already started seeing more reviews released on it, with WhatHiFi just recently giving it 5 stars, and I believe that stereophile will soon release its' review. If you have any suggestions on how I can improve the connection with my Mac Mini, I would be grateful for the advice.
-Wes
Joined: 09/09/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 157
Suggestions with Mac Mini
If you have any suggestions on how I can improve the connection with my Mac Mini, I would be grateful for the advice.
Wes, I haven't used my Bryston with a Toslink connection, but that's how I connected my Mac Mini when I was suing a Lavry DAC. I don't recall if you said which Toslink cable you are using, but I definitely found there to be a difference. I used the Wireworld, which I found to be better than the Kimber, and used a mini adapter with it. Van den Hul's OptoCoupler can be ordered with the mini-Toslink on one end, but I haven't tried it. Both are reasonably priced as cables go (< $150).
My second suggestion is to play with the Audio Midi settings for sample rate and word length. See which you prefer.
There are a few USB-to-SPDIF converters on the market. The best of them, such as the Empricial Offramp, which I own, and the Bel Canto, which I know only by reputation [hey Chris -- where's that review?], support 24/96 via USB and also approach it in a more advanced fashion than the built-in USB in the Bryston. They should elevate the performance above what you will get with Toslink, but the results you will get with Toslink will be excellent, I'm sure.
Joined: 02/07/2009 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 4
Source Chain
Dan-
Thanks for the reply. I believe in adhering to the shortest signal path when possible. Keeping that in mind, do you think the benefits of adding an additional element to the source path in an effort to improve jitter reduction, ie. utilizing an Offramp to act as a "peacemaker" between the Mac Mini and the DAC, would outweigh the additional "color" gained simply by adding that extra unit in the signal path? And if so, why?
Thanks again-
Wes
Joined: 09/09/2008 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 157
Shortest signal path
I wholeheartedly concur when it comes to analog signal path. But for the digital signal path, I think it's not hard to add devices and retain bit perfection. If one of the those devices improves overall jitter performance, then you should be ahead of the game.
Joined: 09/01/2009 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 2
Optical at 24/192
Hi Everyone
I read in the article
The inputs on this unit are almost endless. One USB at 16Bit 32K-48K, two coax, two optical, one AES/EBU, and two BNC all at 16-24Bit and 32, 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176, or 192K.
I have some doubts, I agree that the limit of USB is 16/48, but I believed that for the optical was 24/96, not 24/192.
In the article I understand that every input except USB can reach 24/192.
Sorry if my English isn't very good
bye
Mauro
Joined: 11/28/2007 .:. Online .:. Comments: 5425
Hi Mauro - Using Mac OS X
Hi Mauro - Using Mac OS X the optical limit is 24/96. Using Windows Vista the optical limit is 24/192.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Joined: 09/01/2009 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 2
laptop
Thank you Chris
So a laptop with optical output and Vista or Windows7 (I imagine both), Can I read waves at 24/192 without any down sampling?
With WD media player the player downsamples the files at 24/48.
bye
Mauro
Joined: 11/28/2007 .:. Online .:. Comments: 5425
I haven't tried this one
I haven't tried this one Windows 7 or with Windows Media Player. I know it works on Vista with MediaMonkey.
Chris Connaker
Founder
Computer Audiophile
Joined: 10/05/2009 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 9
Is the Bryston BDA-! too tempermental?
I have a BDA-1 and I'm having a %^#&*&@ of a time getting it to keep a solid lock on the SPDIF signal from my PC.
See my thread here:
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/content/DAC-losing-SPDIF-signal-when-I...
In short, it loses it's lock on the signal whenever I spark my stove or when my furnace kicks on. See the thread for deets.
Has anyone else had interference problems with their electrical system in their house? How about with the BDA-1? My old DAC (MSB link DAC) played right through anything although it was maybe making stuff up during the times of noise. Dunno. I didn't hear anything obvious. It certainly didn't sound as good as the Bryston (inbetween it's dropouts, that is).
I'm starting to think I need a tinfoil hat!
Cheers
Dave
Joined: 03/27/2009 .:. Offline .:. Comments: 27
Bryston Does It Again
Great review from the latest edition of Stereophile...
Conclusions
The Bryston BDA-1 let me enjoy the best-sounding digital playback I’ve ever heard in my listening room, outshining even Bryston’s own BCD-1 CD player. This might be related to the fact that the BDA-1 has two Crystal CS4398s vs the BCD-1’s single chip.
The Bryston BDA-1 has become an essential part of my listening expe- rience. Mated to my Quad ESL-989 loudspeakers and used with Bel Canto’s USB Link 24/96, the BDA-1 let me enjoy hi-rez files downloaded from the Internet, producing open highs, de- tailed imaging, deep soundstaging, and well-defined and authoritative bass that connected me to those crucial elements of music: pace, rhythm, and emotion. And, yes, the BDA-1 also let me enjoy a higher level of musical dimensionality and realism. As Bob Reina did when he added the Audio Research Reference 110 amplifier to his reference system, at the end of my listening sessions for the BDA-1, I put down my notebook and picked up my checkbook. I give the BDA-1 my heartfelt recommendation for the highest rating in Stereophile’s “Recommended Components.” ■■