Jump to content

Gefilus

  • Posts

    2
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    country-ZZ

Retained

  • Member Title
    Newbie
  1. You are right about the potential implications due to implementation details on the sound from a given DAC chip. I was mostly intending (by mentioning the Oversampling thread) to refer to the sound contribution due to the digital processing which are obviously quite different when comparing the solution used in BM DAC1 and inside the ESS chip. My build of the B-II is a stock one currently using IVY-III. The build was actually kicked off after I read about your positive experiences with the B-II. I am planning to try Legato too, it is still in bits and pieces though. Hope there'll be chance to read about your newest B-II build too.
  2. Hi, This is my first posting, great forum with lots of useful, entertaining and educational information from hobbyists and professional/expert contributors alike. Some thoughts on the "rolled off" sound mentioned by a couple of posters above. I haven't had a chance to hear the W4S DAC2. I do have the TPA Buffalo II and based on what I've read it is fair for me to presume here those two DACs are sonically very close due to the ESS chip. My comparison point is Benchmark DAC1. To my ears, DAC1 produces audible artifacts, especially when fed at CD native sample rate. There is mechanical brightness to the sound and female vocals sound - well, kind of "square edged" rather than smoothly curved female voices ;-) The objective/technical background for this phenomena has been discussed for instance in the "Oversampling - who does it best?" thread on this forum. Luckily, according to my experience the BM improves a lot when fed at higher sample rate. The Buffalo II in comparison sounds just transparent, so far I have not been able to attribute a particular sonic signature to it. Due to sample rate of CD format, there is a trade off to be made in top end frequency response in order not to sacrifice other qualities that count in here. Like mentioned by RFP, this slight measured drop is not likely to explain the perceived rolled of sound, which some posters have reported on the DAC2. Could it be that lack of audible artifacts (and possibly the qualities of the rest of the system) explains the "tube like" sound (to some listeners) on the DAC2. My system is very simple, the Buffalo II feeding a pair of Genelec 8050's. A CD made from analog master tape sounds just like analog master tape (the faint tape hizz is very authentic), recordings with good ambience show their ambience, warm sounds warm, cold sounds cold and overly produced stuff sounds just like that. Just my couple of (euro) cents to begin with on this forum ;-)
×
×
  • Create New...