Jump to content

spectral7

  • Posts

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    country-ZZ

Retained

  • Member Title
    Newbie
  1. Hi Joel! Yes, I own the SDR-2000 Pro and have heard the SDR-4000 CD player on several occasions. The 2000 definitely sounds "dated" compared to modern DACs: it has a "hi-fi" sound which can come across as harsh and fatiguing on some material. Having said that, for a 13 year old DAC it's still damn fine, especially for female vocals. I'm keeping mine for a second system I'll be building in the near future. As for the 4000, if you're looking for the best CD player on the market (IMHO), look no further. My collection is all computer-based so it wasn't an option for me (at least a financial sane option). Having said that, I think it would be super interesting to compare its DAC to the Berkeley on computer media (both fed by the Alpha USB). Jason
  2. Hi Joel! Yes, I own the SDR-2000 Pro and have heard the SDR-4000 CD player on several occasions. The 2000 definitely sounds "dated" compared to modern DACs: it has a "hi-fi" sound which can come across as harsh and fatiguing on some material. Having said that, for a 13 year old DAC, it's a steal if you only listen to Red Book, especially for female vocals (it can be had on the used market for ~2k). I'm keeping mine for a second system I'll be building in the near future. As for the 4000, if you're looking for the best CD player on the market (IMHO), look no further. As for me, my collection is all computer-based so it wasn't an option for me. Having said that, I think it would be super interesting to compare its DAC to the Berkeley on computer media (both fed by the Alpha USB). Jason
  3. Sorry Mani. You are obviously a passionate owner (which I can 100% respect - both the product and your devotion) and I misinterpreted your reply. I apologize for the assumption. We are in agreement about the importance of filters. To answer your question, the Berkeley has 4. For Red Book input there are 16-bit LSB and 24-bit LSB HDCD code detect versions of each. All other sampling rates have 24-bit LSB HDCD code detect versions only. My comparison of the Berkeley versus the NOS1a was based on a long listening session two years ago during which I was very impressed. I did prefer the EMM DAC2X over it at the time, but both sounded like the top tier DACs that they are. Having said that, I'd love to hear the latest version of the NOS1a. In your opinion, how does the NOS1a sound on Red Book? The thing that absolutely blew me away about the Berkeley is just how GREAT it is with Red Book. My library consists of 99% 44.1k, so for me, it was a no brainer when I compared the Berkeley with my previous reference (DAC2X). You are spot on and I agree!
  4. Mani, I respect your product and have heard and been impressed with it on several occasions (CES '14 in particular). Having said that, you really should hear this DAC. To compare your NOS1 with the PM2 makes no sense to me - the Berkeley Reference has the PM2 filter and it sounds dated as well. Listen to filter 1.24 and you will hear the what Chris was describing. It's on a whole new level of digital playback. Perhaps rather than dissing Chris' review you should listen to the DAC and improve your product?
  5. DAMN!!! As a current owner of an EMM Labs DAC2X and prior owner of several top flight DACs (Spectral, Weiss, Chord, etc.) this DAC is finally THE ONE for me. Chris' review is spot on. And this comes from someone super skeptical of all the effusive reviews out there. I don't mean to suggest that the DAC2X isn't an amazing piece of kit (it is!), but for me, 99% of my library is red book and with 16/44 the Berkeley crushes any other DAC I've owned or auditioned - it's not even close. Of course, the Berkeley comes with limitations. If you own a lot of super hi-rez or DSD material the Berkeley isn't ideal, but for me, my DAC search is over. For now.
  6. I'm a huge Spectral fan boy after owning a lot of other gear. I own a full Spectral system from DAC, pre, and amp. I purchased a DAC2X last year and LOVED it as a replacement to my SDR-2000 (which was showing its age, but still is an amazing bit of kit given its age). The DAC2X firmware updates have each made an improvement for me, but the latest one personally was a bit of a step back for me. It made me want to reevaluate all my sources and DACS. One of the combinations was to connect my source via the Alpha USB (which I previously used with my SDR-2000) though the DAC2X. Wow! Amazing bass, control, soundstage. Never would have thought do that as the DAC2X USB implementation is highly regarded, but won't go back. This is my new reference. One caveat - I listen to redbook 99% of the time.
  7. I've had the pleasure of owning both of these amazing DACs. Unfortunately, I had to part with one of them this week and for me the deciding factor came down to soundstage - that, and my wallet. Believe me, I wish I could keep them both. If you are more of a back-to-front soundstage fan, then by all means go with the Berkeley. It is an infallible piece of kit when it comes to presenting the depth of a recording. On the other hand, the DAC 202 presents the widest soundstage I've ever heard with digital media. It's scary holographic and manages to escape the physical confines of speakers like it's employing some form of dark art. For me, I kept the Weiss. I must stress though that both DACs are unbelievable in their own right and push the envelope in state of the art digital presentation. Kudos to both manufacturers. Jason
×
×
  • Create New...