pesitalia

It has been a long time since my last post and the AA DAC1 MK4 is still performing to my satisfaction. Concerning the connection between PC and DAC I still use the M2TECH HIFACE (PC USB to Coaxial) and about 6 meters of Van Den Hul 75 Ohm Digi-Coupler coaxial cable directly plugged to INPUT 3 of the DAC (unbalanced RCA). I regularly play 24/96 and 24/192 FLAC files with no troubles at all.

I managed to keep both units running in my house for more than two weeks. Now it's time to make a choice on which one to take with me. First impressions remain substantially the same although I can refine some previous comments. CD reproduction Soundstage>> BADA provides a slightly superior holografic image with more subtle details and crisper scene. You can clearly feel the dimensions of the recording room, better than the AA. Deep bass reproduction>> AA provides a warmer, more rounded bass while the BADA seems more precise in modulation, very powerful but a little dry Middle bass>> both male and female voices are better served by the AA in terms of body and finesse. They sound more real although the BADA's are slightly more focussed Middle high>> trumpets, sax, violins ecc.. are generally sweeter with the AA whereas the BADA has a better capacity to separate various instruments from a complex background but the sound is a little too cold and less attractive High>> quality looks about the same and is limited by the support, however there is more quantity from the BADA whereas the AA is a bit more gentle, although none of them sounds harsch or suffers of the so called pixellation (grainy sound) FLAC files Although the basic differences remain the same between the two, these become more subtle and difficult to judge. No mistake,they both sound excellent Which one? Considering that the new ARC DAC8 will cost around 5000 euros in Italy, thus making it a non option for me, I would recommend the BADA for tube systems (think to a cup of hot chocolate) and listeners who prioritize precise and analitical sound, while the AA remains a good option for transistor based systems (think to a glass of ice tea) where it can compensate the typical transistor sound without loosing transparency and detais I have added a couple of photos Carlo from Italy

Thanks Eduardo. I am keen to put down my listening experience with these DACs as I think it might help the community to choose among the best sounding units in the market without being robbed a fortune.. Yesterday my dealer advised me that the new ARC DAC8 should arrive by end of May, however it will cost more than previous DAC7 (thanks to the usurer distributor/importer). In Italy street prices for AA DAC1 Mk4 and BADA are about the same, around 3500 euro, equivalent to +- 4500 USD, which is almost a bargain considering that I heard much more expensive DACs (just a a few names among all: Mark Levinson, MBL, Wadia) which can hardly compete in terms of sound. So, the ARC DAC8 might be out of reach for me if it's going to cost in eccess of 4000 euros.. will see. Have a good day Carlo

Got the BADA this morning and immediately started the listening session in comparison with the Accustic Arts DAC1 MK4. Both units are quite impressive but show a slightly different character. First comparison was carried out using redbook CDs and TEAC P-30 Transport Both units provide a large, deep and sharp holographic stage: impressive. The BADA pushes everything a little bit forward while the AA scene looks a little laid back. It’s a matter of taste. The resolution of BADA seems a little bit higher however this impression might well depend on the fact that instruments sound more vivid thus giving the illusion of being more focused; the AA seems a little bit more gentle thus allowing more nuances to be heard. Again, difficult to choose. The most incredible thing is that both these DACs pull out a lot of previously unheard information from standard CDs, a more natural and realistic sound than any other DAC I have heard so far; no harschness and no granulosity at all, just a light sense of missing bits in the medium-high frequencies (missing some ambience and some body with respect to vinyl, but this is the limit of CDs) Comparison using hi-res FLAC files 96/24 and 176/24 The above differences become quite smaller making the AA sound very close to the BADA in terms of dynamics, verve and soundstage. I cannot explain this behaviour, it might depend on the fact that the AA has a better sinergy with VHD cable, Hi-Face and computer (matching impedances or other electric factors maybe) while the BADA works better with the balanced cable and TEAC Transport, who knows? Again, I am talking about small differences which can only be heard during a serious listening session. Comparison with vinyl Between the two DACs I would say that the BADA approaches vinyl in terms of crisp and detailed sound while the AA provides the warm feeling of an analog source. Again these are small but clear differences Which one? Difficult to say. If I had a transistor amplifier would have gone with the AA, but my tube amplifier seems to be better served by the BADA. I hope to have a go with the new ARC DAC 8 as my third option. Ciao Carlo from Italy

Thanks Eduardo. By chance I will receive a Berkeley Alpha DAC early next week for a short trial period. So I will be able to make a comparison with the AA DAC using the same approach. Will report my impressions just in case anyone is interested. Regards Carlo

My contribution. As I am planning to replace my old ARC DAC3 MkII, have selected three models of choice with similar retail price: Accustic Arts DAC1 Mk4, Audio Research DAC8 and Berkeley Alpha DAC. So far I have only managed to carry out a listening test of the AA Dac1 at home for about one week. Digital sources were a CD Transport TEAC P-30 and several FLAC files 16bit/44KHz stored in the hard disk of an HP Compaq nc8430 notebook equipped with Foobar2000 software and connected to the DAC via M2Tech-Hiface device and RCA/SPDIF Van Den Hul M.C. DigiCoupler 75 Ohm cable. A few tests were conducted comparing digital sound to vinyl just to establish a benchmark. Test Rig Acoustic Signature Analog One MkII turntable with SME V tonearm + Van Den Hul Grasshopper III CHA MC pickup. Audio Research PH-7 pre phono. Audio Tekne TFM 8904 PCS integrated amplifier. Modified Klipschorn speakers equipped with ALK Trachorn 400 on K55 transducer + Beyma CP-25 horn tweeter and ALK Engineering AP12-AK3 + ES5800 crossover. Audio Tekne signal and power wiring. Software Clayton Brothers – Back in the swing of things (CD and FLAC 16/44 files ) Carol Kidd – Debut (CD and FLAC 16/44 files ) Patricia Barber – Modern Cool (CD and FLAC 16/44 files ) Patricia Barber – A forthnight in France (CD and vinyl) Hugh Masekela – Hope (CD and vinyl) Norah Jones – Come away with me (CD and vinyl) Bill Evans Trio – I will say goodbye (CD and vinyl) Yamamoto Tsuyoshi trio - Midnight Sugar (CD and vinyl) Chet Baker – Chet (CD and vinyl) Eric Clapton – Unplugged (CD and vinyl) The AA DAC1 Mk4 sound The AA DAC performed clearly better than the ARC DAC3 as expected; it provided a transparent and rich sound while it maintained the same sort of 'warm' timber as the ARC. The soundstage was more focused, wider and deeper, the holografic image was crisper and there was a lot more information in the background (echoes, ambience, instrument sound tail..). Notwithstanding its ability to read the smallest nuances, the AA DAC provided a pleasant sound without any sense of harshness or granulosity. Nevertheless, you could still feel that sort of CD sickness as the music came out a little flattened and somehow missing bits and pieces, to confirm once again the limitations of such support. Switching to the FLAC files there was an obvious difference in quality, more evident with the AA DAC thanks to its stronger resolving power. I only used redbook sampling rates 16/44 due to ARC DAC3 limitations, however I could clearly notice improvements on the high frequency spectrum, on the amount of information and generally speaking, on the overall musical reproduction, more vivid and natural at the same time. At this point I would like to mention the listening experience when comparing digital to vinyl. Two different worlds I’m afraid. The rythm, the musicality and the realism of the soundstage produced by a good vinyl record were still out of rich for the digital system. However, when I feeded the AA DAC with some high resolution files (24/96 and 24/192 FLAC files), the results were impressive. Unfortunately I didn’t have vinyl copies of such hires files to compare with, but I can confidently say that these hires files got very very close to best vinyl, which bodes well for the future of computer music. Conclusion The AA is a very good DAC with top class performance and solid build but with a couple of small weaknesses, at least in my rig and for my taste: the output level is a bit low for the amplifier, the soudstage is laid back although deep and wide, the music is beautifully flowing out but misses just a bit of 'verve’. Bye from Italy PS: my next test will be on the ARC DAC8 which should arrive by end of May. Berkeley Alpha DAC is not imported in Italy and I will not be able to carry a listening test on this unit I'm afraid.