Jump to content
  • The Computer Audiophile
    The Computer Audiophile

    Audio Research DAC 9 Review

    The sound of Minneapolis can't be nailed down to anyone or anything specific, but if I had to select an artist and equipment on which to play this artist, I would likely select Prince and components from Audio Research Corporation. Prince and Audio Research provide the quintessential sound of Minneapolis. Both are originals, both have large well-deserved fan bases earned over decades, and both are at the top of their industries. Prince and the ARC is one band name that we'll never get to see officially replace the NPG, but those of us lucky enough can listen to Prince & ARC in our homes seven nights a week. 

     

    Over the last several weeks, I've combined Prince's amazing music with the Audio Research DAC 9 on many occasions. The results have been fabulous. Listening to Prince's song Avalanche from his One Nite Alone album, one can really get a sense for his talent. This track is far from overproduced with an R128 dynamic range score of 10 / 9.6 LU. The track features Prince and his piano, that's it. Through the Audio Research DAC 9, the opening notes of his piano ebb and flow from mellow taps to sudden strikes of the keys. The transients in these strikes are reproduced wonderfully in that they help each abrupt note serve up the rest of the rolling melodic beauty on a platter. 

     

    Listening to the remaining four minutes of Avalanche, Prince's main and backing vocals have an incredibly natural, raw, and unaltered sound through the DAC 9. Even if one disagrees with Prince's politicized lyrics, it's nearly impossible to not feel the emotion and conviction in his voice. Had the DAC 9 imparted an overbearing sonic signature on this track, much of the emotion would've been lost. The ARC DAC 9 provides Prince and his piano a chance to naturally aspirate and appears to be right in its wheelhouse reproducing the acoustic artistry of this Minneapolis treasure. 

     


    DAC 9 Details

     

    I certainly can't be accused of burying the lede in this review or stringing readers along like Allen Collins and Gary Rossington during the four minute guitar solo in Free Bird (link), but I should dig a bit deeper into what makes the DAC 9 tick.

     

    The Audio Research DAC 9 is a major step up from the DAC 7 and a solid step up from its predecessor the DAC 8. Whereas the DAC 8 was a purely solid state design, the DAC 9 has an advanced tube output stage with solid state regulation. This analog design was taken from elements of the ARC LS27 and LS28. This design stops short of what's available in flagship products such as the REF 6 preamp and Reference DAC, both with analog volume controls.

     

    Digitally the DAC 9 evolved from the ARC GSi75 integrated. Audio research engineers started with the GSi75 digital platform, and advanced it significantly. Of note, is one piece of technology that will frustrate some people and excite others. 

     

    There is a digital chip in the DAC 9 that is being used for purposes other than its intended design. This chip is not available in any other ARC DAC. Squeezing information about this chip from the Audio Research team is tougher than finding highly classified information online. This is the frustrating part for many people. As consumers we are just supposed to believe ARC and rely on the fact the company has a very stellar reputation. Fortunately, we can check their work in a different way, by listening to the final product. 

     

    Secret design or not, if the DAC 9 sounds good, then most people will be excited about the product. Some control freaks won't rest, or even trust themselves that they like the sound, until this secret is unmasked. Oh well, keep waiting while everyone else enjoys thousands of hours worth of great music.

     

    Before detailing some of the better features of the DAC 9's digital side, I must mention my biggest issue with this product. The USB interface used in the DAC 9 is less than great. It's the only part of this DAC that's not first class. The current DAC 9 USB interface is manufactured by Switzerland's RigiSystems. In and of itself this interface isn't all that bad, but in practice there are some serious issues. 

     

    Most important to many computer audiophiles will be RigiSystems' lack of Linux support. Several years ago this wasn't really an issue because "nobody" used Linux computers for audio playback. Now however, many people are using Linux based products from Aurender, Auralic, Sonore, SOtM, etc... None of these devices work with the RigiSystems USB interface used in the DAC 9. I tried to get Sonore to support the DAC 9 on its microRendu, but without serious assistance from RigiSystems, it just won't happen. 

     

    The USB interface also has some issues with Apple computers. In the recent past, after an OS update, Apple computers running OS X / macOS lost the ability to send audio to the DAC 9 at sample rates higher than 192 kHz. In addition to this current sample rate limitation, the DAC 9 is also limited to PCM playback when connected to a Mac. The DAC 9 uses macOS built-in Class 2 USB drivers, thus it has to accept DSD over PCM (DoP). Therein lies the issue. The RigiSystems USB chip doesn't use a version of DoP that works with Macs. 

     

    I have a positive feeling about the long-term outlook for the DAC 9 and its USB interface. Audio Research has committed to a solution by the end of 2017. I'm unsure if this will involve a firmware update, software update, or hardware update. 

     

    Some additional nuggets of information I picked up from my discussions with Audio Research are that the USB interface in the DAC 9 is internally powered. The DAC 9 doesn't accept power over the 5V VBUS wire in USB cables. The DAC doesn't feature galvanic isolation on the USB input, but this power configuration may serve to partially nullify this need. 

     

    With respect to MQA, the DAC 9 doesn't currently support this technology, but Audio Research may provide an MQA upgrade in the future for the DAC. Any MQA upgrade for the DAC 9 would require an internal hardware change.

     

    Briefly touching on some of the specs, the DAC 9 features two distinct digital audio paths, one for DSD and one for PCM. The DAC has two TCXO crystal master oscillators from Integrated Device Technology, one for 44.1 kHz base sample rates and the other for 48 kHz base sample rates. 

     

    The DAC 9 has quad D to A converters onboard. Both the left and right channels use dual stereo DACs in a mono configuration. This is supposed to increase dynamic range, currently at 114 dB (AES17), and reduce the noise floor. 

     

    Two other features that are user selectable are native rate upsampling and digital filters. The DAC 9's upsampling can be enabled for all PCM content. It will upsample this content to either 352.8 kHz or 384 kHz, depending on the base sample rate of the original music (44.1 or 48). The digital filter can be toggled between a fast or slow roll-off, directly from the remote control for easy user A/B'ing. Upsampling can also be enabled/disabled via the remote, with only a short one second pause in playback. 

    DAC-9


    Listening Through The DAC 9

     

    I listened through the Audio Research DAC 9 with most of the same components that are in my system for all reviews. The TAD CR1 loudspeakers, Constellation Audio Inspiration Mono amps, and preamp, and Wire World cabling are all stalwarts of my system. One addition to the system was the dCS Network Bridge. I used the Bridge as an Ethernet to AES/EBU converter that sent audio signals to the AES input of the DAC 9. Given that the DAC 9 has no volume control, a preamplifier was required. 

     

    Last weekend the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame inducted my favorite band, Pearl Jam. Given this, what kind of PJ fan would I be without one of its songs in the review? I dug deep for this one and it payed off. 

     

    In 2004 ten members of the Walmer High School choir from Port Elizabeth, South Africa traveled to Seattle, Washington. During their stay, the choir recorded an album with Pearl Jam's Eddie vedder. The album is titled the Molo Sessions and it contains three Pearl Jam tracks. It's not a traditional audiophile recording, but it has a dynamic range score of 15 and the music beats out any Diana Krall piece of "muzak" any day of the week. 

     

    betterman My favorite track on the Molo Sessions is Betterman. Right from the opening chord of Eddie Vedder's acoustic guitar, the track sounds naked. I don't notice any DAC 9 flavor covering the music. The guitar sounds very natural as Eddie's fingers can be heard sliding back and forth over the frets and across the strings. Unedited and untouched describe the sound really well. 

     

    The best part of the track is at the 2:42 mark, when the South African kids chime in singing the chorus. Through their thick accents, they sound like ten real kids singing in the room as they repeat:

     

    She loved him, yeah, she don't want to leave this way
    She feeds him, yeah, that's why she'll be back again
    Can't find a better man

     

    Of course they are real kids, but on so many recordings and through products with much less fidelity, real kids may not sound like real kids in one's room. There can be an artificial distance placed between the artist and the listener. Not so with this non-audiophile recording through the Audio Research DAC 9. Great stuff. 

     

    Moving to a bit more complex material, I tapped play on a favorite of mine, Michael Stern conducting the Kansas City Symphony in Britten's Orchestra. This is an out of print recording by Keith Johnson and Reference Recordings. Due to the agreement with the Symphony's union, RR can't sell any additional copies of this album. 

     

    Track nine, Passacaglia, is always fun and a good system test. As the music starts from a barely audible creep, the strings are very sweet sounding. One can almost smell the wood of the instruments, if the listening room lights and one's mind are turned off. As the horns slip in, they have great definition even at very low volume levels. This is always the mark of a good DAC. 

     

    One area where the DAC 9 falls short of reference DACs may be with full scale symphonic transients. Around 5:00 minute mark of Passacaglia things start to heat up with major string, horn, cymbal, and drum action. 45 seconds later when everything comes together in a big bang, the DAC 9 sounds a little slow or perhaps less fantastic on the transients than it was with simpler music. I don't sense any shift in tone of the instruments or compression of the dynamic range, just a bit of rounding of the edges where I've previously heard them as razor sharp. If anything, this may make the case for the Audio Research Reference DAC, if one is very focused on music of this ilk. 


    Before finishing up with another song from Prince, it's worth mentioning another sonic characteristic of the DAC 9. Keeping in mind that all components impart a sonic characteristic on the music, I can best explain this with a visual photography analogy. Whereas some DACs can be like glossy photos / reproductions, the ARC DAC 9 leans toward a matte finish. It's not a dull DAC, just right of center on the glossy - matte continuum. This sonic signature can be heard through Nat King Cole's music on the album The Very Thought of You (Analogue Productions remaster). 

     

    On both the opening title track and But Beautiful, Nat's vocal can be gloriously glossy. The glossy effect of smoking KOOL menthol cigarettes right before entering the recording booth, was something Nat thought he needed to perform. Right or wrong, the gloss can and should be heard. That said, without being at the recording the first week of May, 1958, I have no idea if the recording should be as glossy as I am used to hearing it or if the DAC 9 presents a more accurate picture. Like all things in this wonderful hobby, it comes down to taste and preference.

     

    Getting back to the Minneapolis magic that is Prince and Audio Research, I must also go back to the One Nite Alone album. Those unfamiliar with Prince's true artistry and musical genius, must find a copy of this album. One Nite Alone ... Solo Piano and Voice by Prince is the official title. This isn't the three disc live set from his 2002 One Nite Alone tour, it's an NPG Music Club limited release album never sold in stores. On the album, Prince's talent can be heard without any trouble or the wading through of overly sexual lyrics and a massive band. 

     

    case-of-uAs only Prince can do, he delivers a cover of Joni Mitchell's A Case of You by skipping the first three verses and starting with "I am a lonely painter, I live in a box of paints." The backing music on this track is nothing to write reviews about, but I love Prince's elegant vocal performance on this one. The DAC 9 reproduces his high, low, loud, and soft vocal swings wonderfully. His voice sounds very smooth in both the highest and lowest registers. This is a tribute to his vocal ability and the DAC 9's ability to let this through without imparting too much warmth or enhancing the edges with unnatural noise. In typical Minneapolis fashion both Prince and the DAC 9 are, for the most part, understated and comfortable away from anything that causes the spotlight to shine in their direction on this track.

     


    Conclusion

     

    The quintessential sound of Minneapolis is an apropos description of Audio Research, the company that trademarked High Definition in 1977. Its DAC 9 digital to analog converter is the best DAC ARC has released to date, short of its reference series. The DAC 7 and DAC 8 have both been eclipsed by design, technology, and sound quality. In my extensive listening sessions with the DAC 9, I heard unaltered, raw, and natural sound on some of my favorite recordings. This DAC will of course reproduce audiophile standards and performances captured by Reference Recordings, but the most enjoyable experiences I had while listening through the DAC 9 were with standard definition, "regular" music. I frequently listened through the DAC 9 while sitting at my computer working all day and while sitting in my listening chair in front of two loudspeakers. Either way, listening fatigue didn't even enter my mind. The only thing I wanted from my system during the Audio Research DAC 9's residency, was more music. 

     

     

     

    Product Information:

     

    • Product - Audio Research DAC 9 ($7,500)
    • Product Page - Link
    • User Manual - Link

     

     

     

    Where To Buy (CA Supporter):

     

     

     

     

    Associated Music:

     

     

     

     

    1-Pixel.png

    Associated Equipment:

     

     

     




    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    I know what the Yggdrasil has done to my system.   I am not remotely interested in DSD when I can listen to 44/16 that sounds excellent and closer to live than my system has ever been!

     

    And what does the pricing paradigm have to do with the whether or not I've heard it?  ARC has ALWAYS been one of the high priced component builders.  I think their stuff is fabulous but way over-priced.   I don't think they or many other high-end manufactures gives anything close to value like Schiit does.   Thats the reason for my point!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    20 minutes ago, LarryMagoo said:

    I know what the Yggdrasil has done to my system.   I am not remotely interested in DSD when I can listen to 44/16 that sounds excellent and closer to live than my system has ever been!

     

    And what does the pricing paradigm have to do with the whether or not I've heard it?  ARC has ALWAYS been one of the high priced component builders.  I think their stuff is fabulous but way over-priced.   I don't think they or many other high-end manufactures gives anything close to value like Schiit does.   Thats the reason for my point!

    Listening to well recorded and mastered music in DSD has brought me closer to the master tape than I've ever been - damn nice stuff.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    38 minutes ago, LarryMagoo said:

    I know what the Yggdrasil has done to my system.   I am not remotely interested in DSD when I can listen to 44/16 that sounds excellent and closer to live than my system has ever been!

     

    And what does the pricing paradigm have to do with the whether or not I've heard it?  ARC has ALWAYS been one of the high priced component builders.  I think their stuff is fabulous but way over-priced.   I don't think they or many other high-end manufactures gives anything close to value like Schiit does.   Thats the reason for my point!

     

    You mentioned the Yggy keeping up with it, so you should probably hear something to make such comments. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, LarryMagoo said:

    I hope the Yggdrasil messes up the entire High End pricing paradigm....$7500 when the Yggy will at the very least, keep up with it....for less than a 1/3 of the price!O.o

    Diminishing returns, and it's also important that the sound difference will be more pronounced depending on the quality of the rest of the system, the quality of the setup (room, etc), and the source files themselves. If your system is ~$10k, it would make no sense to spend $7500 on a DAC. If your system is ~$250k, then it's a different story, and you will likely hear an improvement between a $7500 and a $30k DAC.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Long time Audio reviewer Robert Harley, The Absolute Sound, just reviewed the Yggdrasil and said it ranks amoung the 3 best DACs he has every heard...PERIOD.    The other two?  A $36,000 dCS Vivaldi and a $20,000 Berkley Alpha Reference....

     

    Well I have about $35K in my system and could easily hear the addition of the Yggy....easily!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, LarryMagoo said:

    Long time Audio reviewer Robert Harley, The Absolute Sound, just reviewed the Yggdrasil and said it ranks amoung the 3 best DACs he has every heard...PERIOD.    The other two?  A $36,000 dCS Vivaldi and a $20,000 Berkley Alpha Reference....

     

    Well I have about $35K in my system and could easily hear the addition of the Yggy....easily!

    Firstly, I have no opinion on the Yggy (except that I like the funny name). When Harley says what he said, he surely means "for the price". Surely you cannot compare the Vivaldi to the Yggy, especially with the upsampling and external clocks (which brings it to about $50k give or take). Diminishing returns for sure though.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, miguelito said:

     If your system is ~$250k, then it's a different story, and you will likely hear an improvement between a $7500 and a $30k DAC.

     Not in my experience... I've listened to systems that cost more then my home and walked away less then impressed.

     

    system set up is what is missing 90% of the time. Price is no measure of performance..remember the Lexicon/Oppo scandal?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    You also need to take a bit more then a grain of salt towards any opinion from a reviewer. Those people have a vested interest in promoting the companies that buy advertising and give those people essentially free equipment.

     

    the "a" list from stereophile ought to prove that point.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I am curious what Schiit has done ot make the Yggy sound so good (transient harshness or no) everyone seems ot think it sounds very good, so what are the circuit improvements?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, Miko said:

     Not in my experience... I've listened to systems that cost more then my home and walked away less then impressed.

     

    system set up is what is missing 90% of the time. Price is no measure of performance..remember the Lexicon/Oppo scandal?

    Definitely right about system set up. Plenty of systems sound terrible due to setup. But given same setup quality...

     

    As for the Lexicon/Oppo bit, that was the inspiration for my joke about an ifi nano inside the DAC9.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

    I am curious what Schiit has done ot make the Yggy sound so good (transient harshness or no) everyone seems ot think it sounds very good, so what are the circuit improvements?

    A bunch of reviews as well as the Schitt website go into details of the design. It's definitely not a run of the mill DAC.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, miguelito said:

    Firstly, I have no opinion on the Yggy (except that I like the funny name). When Harley says what he said, he surely means "for the price". Surely you cannot compare the Vivaldi to the Yggy, especially with the upsampling and external clocks (which brings it to about $50k give or take). Diminishing returns for sure though.

     When I returned to the

    Yggy I discovered a DAC

    that wasn’t superb. It wasn’t

    even good. And it certainly

    wasn’t “good for the money.”

    What I discovered, to my

    amazement, was a DAC that

    was stunningly great, period.

    Price aside, the Yggy turned

    out to be a world-class contender

    in the same league as

    cost-no-object digital-to-analog

    converters—and I’ve

    heard some good ones. How

    could this be?

    I can’t tell you how Moffatt

    did it, but I can  describe

    how the Yggy sounds, and

    why its one of the three best

    DACs I’ve heard regardless

    of price. (The other two are

    the $19,500 Berkeley Alpha

    Reference and the $35,000

    dCS Vivaldi.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

    I am curious what Schiit has done ot make the Yggy sound so good (transient harshness or no) everyone seems ot think it sounds very good, so what are the circuit improvements?

    Mike Moffat, Schiit's partner with Jason Stoddard, is THE father of the DAC.  He produced the first one for audio use 30 years ago for Theta Digital.

     

    Besides using a converter made for Medical and Military accuracy , not audio, they also build their own custom filter.

     

    But even the most sophisticated ones, using their own digital filter algorithms, don’t have what Yggdrasil has—a time- and frequency-domain optimized digital filter with a true closed-form solution. This means it retains all the original samples, performing a true interpolation. This digital filter gives you the best of both NOS (all original samples retained) and upsampling (easier filtering of out-of-band noise) designs.

     

    I don't question how or why it works....it's brought my system so close to live, it's simply startling!    All while pissing the big boys off with their incredible price!!

     

    Conclusion . (reprinted from The Absolute Sound's Robert Harley)

    I don’t know how Schiit Audio has done it, but the $2300 Yggy

    is in many ways competitive with any DAC I’ve heard regardless

    of price. In some criteria—transient speed without etch, clarity

    of musical line, whole-body involvement—the Yggy is as good

    as digital gets. Yet the Yggy’s bold incisiveness may not resonate

    with listeners who prefer a more relaxed and easygoing sound.

    I, however, have no such reservation; this is a DAC I could

    listen to and enjoy for a long time. In fact, there was something

    different about the Yggy that pushed my buttons—I felt a musical

    exhilaration that was experienced not as some intellectual

    abstraction, but at a more fundamentally visceral level.

    If you’re looking for a DAC that does quad-rate DSD, decodes

    MQA, offers a volume control, and includes a headphone

    amp, look elsewhere. But if the very best reproduction of PCM

    sources is your goal, the Yggdrasil is the ticket. It’s a spectacular

    performer on an absolute level, and an out-of-this world bargain.

    The Yggy is not just a tremendous value in today’s DACs,

    it’s one of the greatest bargains in the history of high-end audio

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Thx Larry - that makes one suspect that the interpolation on other DACs is not sufficiently accurate.  But that seems odd to me.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I thought the guy from playback design was the grand wizard of DAC's... certainly Ed Meitner is up there in that list too no?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 4/20/2017 at 8:44 AM, The Computer Audiophile said:

     

    Have you heard both DACs? Or, are you going by anonymous internet opinions. 

    If you're referring to my comments, having owned both, I'm happy to stand by them.

     

    Chris (no longer anonymous) Gossard

    Seattle, WA

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    19 minutes ago, ChrisG said:

    If you're referring to my comments, having owned both, I'm happy to stand by them.

     

    Chris (no longer anonymous) Gossard

    Seattle, WA

     

    Nope, not referring to your comments :~)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 20/04/2017 at 10:49 PM, LarryMagoo said:

     When I returned to the

    Yggy I discovered a DAC

    that wasn’t superb. It wasn’t

    even good. And it certainly

    wasn’t “good for the money.”

    What I discovered, to my

    amazement, was a DAC that

    was stunningly great, period.

    Price aside, the Yggy turned

    out to be a world-class contender

    in the same league as

    cost-no-object digital-to-analog

    converters—and I’ve

    heard some good ones. How

    could this be?

    I can’t tell you how Moffatt

    did it, but I can  describe

    how the Yggy sounds, and

    why its one of the three best

    DACs I’ve heard regardless

    of price. (The other two are

    the $19,500 Berkeley Alpha

    Reference and the $35,000

    dCS Vivaldi.

    I agree with you but I would add the TAD D1000 mk 2 DAC to that list. Expensive but up there with the best. I'm afraid ARC products (especially their dacs) just don't deliver for me personally.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Chris...

     

    I know this is a slightly older thread, and I very, very rarely weigh-in with opinions that contradict your thoughts (I tend to agree with the large majority of your opinions and approaches, and I read and value a lot of them).  However, to your comments on what a DAC review should or shouldn't try to accomplish (or any review, for that matter)...

     

    From someone sitting further on the consumer side of the equation, and living in a smaller market that doesn't have most brands locally represented, the opportunity to "compare" DACs in my own system is nearly impossible without a) having somewhere in the neighborhood of $20-30K of "investible" income to buy used examples of the "best" DACs;  b) finding used examples of those "best" DACs and purchasing them to have in my system at the same time;  c) holding my own extended "shoot out" in my system; and d) selling off the "losing contenders" hoping for the same used price I bought them for to recoup the remaining parts of that "investment."  While that's doable for me (fortunately), it's hardly practical, and certainly not a convenient financial way to finally decide whether an upgrade is "worth it or not."  Many fans of this site do not have the means to do that, so they look for all trustworthy, useful comparative info they can get their hands on (so do I, btw).  Surely that is understandable.  Yes, YMMV comes with the territory, but used properly, all of this information is nonetheless an extremely helpful tool in searching out what might ultimately be a "gamble" worth taking on an unheard piece of equipment that can't be easily demo'd without owning it.

     

    Chris, on the other hand, you have the opportunity (well-earned, I will add) to get a lot of really, really nice contenders into your home and compare them first-hand, using a lot of other associated really, really nice equipment (all of which I understand you've paid for with your own hard-earned and well-deserved dollar, which makes me think even more why you would understand my position). 

     

    What attracted to me MOST to this site from the beginning was its (and yours, really) ability to help me try to sort through the insanely long list of "noise of opportunity" that today's growing DAC and Digital market have to offer.  One of the most useful tools are head-to-head comparisons, which like it or not, is how I and others likely view the CASH list, for all intents and purposes.  I view them as comparisons based on value...an even MORE valuable set of info, as I can look "up market" at more expensive DACs and imagine to myself "I might hear some improvement from a more expensive yet also great DAC on this rather exclusive list"...otherwise why would it be a CASH list DAC at $20K if it didn't sound better than a phenomenal $3k DAC or a great $7K DAC...because it didn't suck?  Looks nicer?  I'm sure some of that plays in, but given the importance this site puts on SQ, I think you can understand how most interpret your CASH designation.  I can remember thinking that the CASH list was literally one of the greatest things to happen to me in my slightly painful journey up the stereo system growing path...it was a really nice benchmark to ground a number of additional sets of research.  (Ironically, I went to a to-remain-nameless large city high-end store to hear the original CASH list Berkeley only to have it sound mediocre in the mediocre system they had it set up in...without the CASH designation, I may have walked away and thought Berkeley was a mediocre DAC manufacturer, but I knew otherwise).

     

    So with due respect, it's with regret that I read your comments here on not really wanting to compare DACs.  A feature review of new DACs is only marginally interesting to most.  If there's no way to know how it really sounds, especially compared to other top-end, really expensive stuff, then we could just read feature lists off of manufacturers' websites and build our own comparative feature spreadsheets.

     

    With respect to ARC, I'm sure that it is a great sounding DAC.  Ironically, my local ARC dealer doesn't have one that I can demo, and similarly can't get me any of their higher end (or Reference equipment) of any type.  Apparently a lot of people buy their higher-end stuff that way anyway.  I also guess many never know if they're getting the value from those higher-end purchases relative to other brands because they've never heard the other brands, either.  That's unfortunate for all--except maybe for ARC.

     

    Respectfully,

    Jay

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hi Jay - Thanks for the kind words and for such a well worded and respectful post, even though you disagree with me. If your post doesn't make someone at least reconsider his approach, I'm not sure what would do the trick. 

     

    I take your comments seriously and will consider making changes. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Thanks for reading and considering my thoughts, Chris.  I'll respect your choices regardless of your approach going forward...you have a long and very well-represented track record of being as objective as a reviewer as you can be, and that's hugely appreciated sitting on this end of the chain.  I'm certain the manufacturers appreciate and respect that too.  Thanks for the continued service you and this site offer us.  The breadth yet simultaneous focus works very well to help advance and positively promote "the cause" of great digital SQ for everyone...I don't think I'm overstating that.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 4/14/2017 at 1:57 PM, mrvco said:

     

    Well hopefully they get the USB issues addressed in a timely manner.  I do find it interesting that AR used a "not designed for audio" chip in their DAC.  Other than the Yggy, how common is this approach?

    Well its April 1st 2018 and they still don't have a fix ... got tired of waiting and sold mine. So long ARC!!!

     

    George

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    11 hours ago, gadawg58 said:

    Well its April 1st 2018 and they still don't have a fix ... got tired of waiting and sold mine. So long ARC!!!

     

    George

     

    Bad news for sure, and really bad news for ARC.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I don't know if this had an impact on their product designs or updates but last year they lost their senior design engineer to a sudden heart attack.  You would think they would have a few engineers on hand that could handle the this but maybe it's something they've been trying to fullfill since this happened. 

     

    http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/audio-research-mourns-the-loss-of-ward-fiebiger/

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now




×
×
  • Create New...