Article: Bryston BDA-1 DAC Review

[James Tanner]

Hi Chris,<br />

<br />

Thank you for you time and efforts on reviewing our Bryston BDA-1 DAC - much appreciated.<br />

<br />

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.<br />

<br />

james<br />

[catastrofe]

Great review Chris. <br />

I'm one of those that have been holding off on a DAC purchase. Now I can add the Bryston to my short list!

[Labarum]

<cite> Now I can add the Bryston to my short list!<br />

<br />

What else would be on your short list?

[catastrofe]

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:<br />

<br />

Bryston BDA-1<br />

Van Alstine Ultra DAC<br />

Altmann Attraction <br />

PS Audio Ultralink<br />

Red Wine Audio Isabellina<br />

<br />

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. . . ;-)<br />

[Labarum]

MM<br />

<br />

I am not a poor man, but I don't think I would want to spend that much!

[rancew]

Nice write-up on the BDA-1, Chris.<br />

<br />

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. <br />

<br />

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.<br />

<br />

Anyway, I've thoroughly enjoyed this DAC and would highly recommend it for anyone looking for something in the $2K range.

[The Computer Audiophile]

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!<br />

<br />

Thanks again Rance.

[Alan B]

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?<br />

<br />

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?<br />

<br />

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.<br />

<br />

Thanks,

[XP9433]

You mentioned it competes with anything under $4k. Is it that much better than the Benchmark DAC1 Pre?<br />

<br />

Cheers<br />

Frank

[The Computer Audiophile]

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.

[The Computer Audiophile]

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.

[XP9433]

I am looking purely for your comments/assessment on how the sound quality (for similar material played) stacks up between the two DACs.<br />

<br />

Are you able to describe briefly how the BDA-1 improves on the Benchmark's SQ.<br />

<br />

Cheers<br />

Frank

[znorter]

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.<br />

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.<br />

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.<br />

How much is "important" at the end the DAC and all its around?<br />

Where (in which section) this Bryston (not to talk about the price) "loose" against the Berkley?<br />

<br />

Anyway, thanks all...<br />

<br />

Luca<br />

[Elprior]

Hello,<br />

<br />

I doubt the Berkeley DAC being the best DAC in the world.<br />

Such statements are simply misleading people !<br />

There are far more expensive DACs on the market, with specific implementations, that surely knocks the Berkeley down.<br />

<br />

I mean it may be a very good DAC, and have an excellent PQR.<br />

I think you should just point that the Berkeley is better than the Bryston, as far as you can tell.<br />

<br />

I know I'm not being much constructive by saying so.<br />

And I certainly prefer someone standing for its point of view, rather than having to read between the lines.<br />

But still, this one is simply too big to be true...<br />

<br />

Guillaume.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi Guillaume - Welcome to Computer Audiophile, thank you very much for your honest opinion. <br />

<br />

From the review - <br />

<br />

<i>"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><br />

<br />

<br />

I do value your opinion and will not say it is wrong. however I disagree with you on a couple items.<br />

<br />

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.<br />

<br />

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. <br />

<br />

In terms of your statement - <br />

<i>"There are far more expensive DACs on the market, with specific implementations, that surely knocks the Berkeley down."</i><br />

<br />

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. <br />

<br />

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.<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

[Elprior]

Hi Chris,<br />

<br />

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 .<br />

<br />

As for the price being a clue about the sound quality, I do agree with you.<br />

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.<br />

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.<br />

<br />

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...<br />

<br />

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).<br />

<br />

Elp.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi elp - Thanks so much for the response. I think we have a lot in common :-)<br />

<br />

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.<br />

<br />

I look forward to see you around this place more often :-)

[audioengr]

James - thanks for giving me credit for the Jitter description, although I probably have better descriptions than this.<br />

<br />

The stuff about frequency accuracy is not from me, but also true.<br />

<br />

Steve N.<br />

Empirical Audio<br />

[minzyman]

Hi Chris,<br />

<br />

Great seeing you at RMAF.<br />

<br />

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. <br />

<br />

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.<br />

<br />

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.<br />

<br />

BAAS will be holding a DAC shootout in a few weeks and I will look to their site for results/observations.<br />

<br />

Best.<br />

/Lee<br />

<br />

[James Tanner]

Hi Chris,<br />

<br />

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.<br />

<br />

You ship the product into the world and sometimes get completely opposite subjective points of view on the very same product.<br />

<br />

I say TOMATO you say TOMATOE!<br />

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi James - That point can't be emphasized enough.

[minzyman]

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.<br />

<br />

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...<br />

<br />

/Lee

[James Tanner]

Hi Lee <br />

<br />

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.<br />

<br />

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.<br />

<br />

james<br />

Bryston

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi Lee - It certainly was nice talking to you at RMAF. <br />

<br />

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. <br />

<br />

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. <br />

<br />

Anyway, I respect your opinion 100% and it's good to see you around here.

[minzyman]

James,<br />

<br />

Debate is not my intention either. I'm just reporting what I hear.<br />

<br />

Respectfully,<br />

/LM