Article: Weiss Engineering DAC202 Review

[cfmsp]

<br />

http://www.digido.com/audiofaq.html<br />

<br />

In addition to the links Daniel provided, here is the site for Bob Katz, who literally wrote the book on Mastering (Digital) Audio.<br />

<br />

Check out his FAQ, there are several items on Jitter.<br />

<br />

It was his work that first led me to believe that use of high quality local clock as Master was the best performing scenario for DACs.<br />

<br />

Here you will learn that jitter is very important in the AC process as well, which is another reason I use Metric Halo boxes, as I am an ersthwhile recorder of nature sounds (which require absurdly high gains and very high quality mic pres, as well as high quality ADCs).<br />

<br />

You can also learn when jitter is NOT increased, ie, in digital to digital transfers.<br />

<br />

clay<br />

[barrows]

Daniel Weiss for the technical explanation of the topology of the DAC 202, it is very appreciated. I must remark that the original Medea produced one of my most memorable digital listening experiences at the time-Through a CES demonstration with Kam and Roger from Focus Audio, Canada. Thank you for doing so much, both on the recording side, and the playback side, for state of the art digital music reproduction: as a music lover, I really owe you a debt of gratitude, as many of my favorite albums owe some of their sonic qualities to Weiss products.<br />

DAC chip with an onboard ASRC, I have a pretty good idea of which chip this might be (I only know of one brand like this). I am surprised that you chose to implement the onboard ASRC, as my experience mirrors your previous experience in generally not liking them; I have not A/B compared the DAC chip I am thinking of in its ASRC mode versus non ASRC mode. That you decided to use the ASRC in this chip makes me considerably curious to hear the DAC 202, and other DACs that use this chip...<br />

Of course, in the end, Clay is correct. And I would not want anyone here to get the idea that I would choose a DAC by its technical features alone-I would listen, and always would suggest that anyone trying to choose a DAC should listen as well.

[Purite Audio]

Listening in your own system is of course essential,the design and implementation of the whole is essential, the proof of the pudding is in the eating and the 202 is the tastiest around at the moment.<br />

Keith.

[chrille]

What do you use for recording nature sounds?<br />

<br />

As a wildlife and travel photographer thinking of taking up filming again with my 5DmII, I am looking for something better than just separate mikes into my camera.<br />

<br />

A lot of nature sounds are music to my ears too..<br />

<br />

All the best Chrille<br />

[cfmsp]

<br />

Chrille,<br />

<br />

I'll start a different thread.<br />

<br />

If no one else is interested after a post or two, we can continue off-line.<br />

<br />

clay

[tresaino]

A big thanks to Daniel also from my side, and to Chris and all others who made this thread a remarkable exchange on DAC designs. I completely side with those who point out that listening must be the ultimate test for evaluating an audio product. One example: I have a small cartridge collection for my turntables, all of them with different design philosophies (different diamond cuts, shorter or longer cantilevers, damping mechanisms, coils, magnets, wirings, shells, impedances and outputs, etc.). Well I did not keep them in my harem because of their design differences but because of their sound qualities.

[weyskipper]

<br />

Chris,<br />

<br />

I have read and agreed and disagreed with many of your reviews. Importantly, I went out and listened to many of the components that you recommend. You provide an incredibly valuable service that provides guidance, insight and opinion. Ultimately, I have to make up my own mind for the system that I use. For example, I found the DCS to be lacking, I chose to use a Wadia 781i instead.<br />

<br />

I listened to the DAC202 last week and immediately ordered one. It is the best DAC I have ever heard. Period. There is no doubt in my mind that Vinyl is now finally being allowed to retire – gracefully.<br />

<br />

I cannot criticise anybody for saying this is expensive, I have many friends with Aston Martin's, Porsches and Ferraris who think that I spend too much on sound. However, I much prefer to channel my money on sound. There are no speed limits to my system enjoyment. Tastes and opinions will differ, but if you have the money, the DAC202 is the bargain of the decade. Highly recommended.<br />

<br />

---------------<br />

Wilson Watt Puppy 8, Krell 403, Nordost Valhalla, Wadia 781i, Nordost Thor, Quantum QX4. Mac-Mini - Firewire to DAC202<br />

[Andrew S.]

<i>Childish comments removed by Editor</i>

[Audio_ELF]

<em>I have many friends with Aston Martins, Porsches and Ferraris<br />

<br />

<em>Sound like a bunch of tossers to me...</em><br />

<br />

My experience has been that people who use the term "tossers" (or similar) for other people who own a particular group of products, without knowing anything else about those people, tend not to be very nice to know themselves!<br />

<br />

Eloise

[4est]

Maybe I shouldn't talk as I stirred the pot in this thread. I was looking for the truth, what was your reasoning?

[SteveS1]

Andrew, bit if a silly comment on a luxury goods forum.<br />

<br />

Steve

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi weyskipper - Great to hear you listened to the DAC202 yourself instead of listening to other's opinions and great to hear you love the sound.

[Andrew S.]

Mea Culpa<br />

<br />

silly post and well removed by the Ed. No excuse.<br />

<br />

apologies to Weyskipper. <br />

<br />

[The Computer Audiophile]

Thanks Andrew.

[SteveS1]

Nice one Andrew.<br />

<br />

Back on topic, I've had a 202 for a week now. I think Chris covers it well in his review but it has surprised me. I get used to small differences and subtle improvements at this level and had been really enjoying my DAC2 so was guardedly interested to hear what else could be achieved.<br />

<br />

As these things go, this is a significant improvement in all areas but particularly in low end detail and that crucial vocal area where poor masterings or peaky levels can test digital beyond the odd wince. It strikes you particularly on vocals and piano those areas that can often be difficult. The build quality and front panel access to settings are very welcome too.<br />

<br />

I'll be interested to see what others make of it. I think it's a cracking device, Daniel must be very pleased with it.<br />

<br />

Steve

[BMCG]

Chris - Am curious as to how the Weiss compared with the Debussy or Paganini? Are you able to shed light on the relative merits?<br />

<br />

Particularly since the former seems to have been on hand during your evaluation.

[docmark]

I own a 202, and I must say that I don't consider it "butt ugly." I like the looks of it, and the size & shape of it. I use it as my portable DAC - I take it with me for computer audio playback when I plan on sitting in, say, my favourite coffee shop for a few hours. I wouldn't want a rack-sized unit. As for the sound - absolutely wonderful both with standard CD quality & hi-res files.

[jhbpa]

Chris:<br />

<br />

Seriously considering purchase.<br />

<br />

Please provide your thoughts regarding:<br />

<br />

1. What you heard during break in and how the unit changed sonically during your 200 hours of review listening.<br />

<br />

2. You have posted reviews of the QB-9 and the Minerva/DAC2. I own the QB-9 and have listened extensively to the Minerva. I always found the Minerva to be too analytical, pro audio in its presentation.<br />

<br />

Please contrast your sonic impressions of the QB-9 and Minerva with the 202.<br />

<br />

3. Please contrast the differences in what you heard with a tube amp (Mcintosh) vs. solid state (Ayre). <br />

<br />

4. What XLR levels out did you find best suited the aforementioned amps.<br />

<br />

5. How hot does it get.<br />

<br />

Thanks, John

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi John - I wish I could accommodate your request and provide in depth answers to your questions, but I really can't. I didn't notice much, if any, difference during my use of the DAC202. I know for a fact the unit was used before me because I picked it up from Alon Wolf at Magico in Berkeley. The DAC202 should be more to your liking if you thought the Minerva was a bit too analytical. The unit doesn't even get hot to the touch. At least it didn't get hot while I had it running non-stop for weeks.

[bluedy1]

Just got my dac 202 delivered last Friday and listened to it this week-end. <br />

Good music for sure.<br />

I had the QB9 also for a week-end in February: very refined sound, very hi fi, a good Dac but to my ears the 202 delivers a fuller sound, huge soundstage and more dynamics, it sounds more like live music.<br />

In the first few hours of listening I noticed very little burning in.<br />

It sounded good from the first only marginally smoother after a few hours. <br />

Thanks Chris for your review.

[Ceroxol]

Thanks to Chris for a really nice, well written review of the DAC202. I'm looking forward to test it in my own system later this summer, just waiting for the m2Tech Vaughan to arrive so I can loan it at the same time..<br />

<br />

I have previously listened to the Minerva+Amarra, but I preferred the QB-9, especially with Pure Music. It would have been interesting with some comments about the QB-9 vs. DAC202.<br />

<br />

It would been nice if reviews here on CA had some kind of inside pictures of the equipment, just look at 6moons for inspiration. Some asian sites have posted inside pictures where you can se that the dac202 uses the ES9018 chip. It would have been interesting to see some kind of shootout between DAC202 and other ES9018 based dacs, like W4S DAC2, M2Tech Vaughan* etc.<br />

<br />

*I'm not 100% sure that the Vaughan uses the ES9018 yet, but the info on the net implies that it does..<br />

<br />

I would also like to thank Gordon Rankin, Charles Hansen, Daniel Weiss, Chris Connaker and all of you who have made this thread! This is what the forums here on CA is all about.. Wow.<br />

<br />

Thanks,<br />

C.W.<br />

<br />

PS: Sorry for my bad english

[labjr]

<i><br />

Some asian sites have posted inside pictures where you can se that the dac202 uses the ES9018 chip. It would have been interesting to see some kind of shootout between DAC202 and other ES9018 based dacs, like W4S DAC2, M2Tech Vaughan* etc.<br />

</i><br />

<br />

That's interesting. I looked at some of the pics. Not much inside. I haven't heard a product with the ES9018 yet but from what I've read the ESS DAC is supposed to be the cat's a$$. Maybe a little hype. I wonder how much of the sound of the DAC202 is is due to the ESS DAC?<br />

<br />

[Ceroxol]

@labjr<br />

<br />

Two pics of DAC202 from a <a href="http://www.hifisentralen.no">Norwegian hifi site</a>; <a href="http://www.hifisentralen.no/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=25683.0;attach=157599;image">here</a> and <a href="http://www.hifisentralen.no/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=25683.0;attach=157468;image">here</a>. <br />

(I hope that these are authentic pics of the DAC202, but to my eyes it looks like some differences between the two pics..).<br />

<br />

<cite>I wonder how much of the sound of the DAC202 is is due to the ESS DAC?</cite><br />

<br />

+1<br />

[labjr]

Interestingly, it appears to use reulator ICs and opamps. Both of which are taboo by Ayre and Wavelength standards. Yet Weiss and Metric Halo seem to get great results regardless.

[barrows]

Weiss 202 does use IC opamps for I to V and the analog output stage. Note that the top of the line DACs from Weiss (the DAC 1 Mk II and the Medea) both feature a very beefy discrete circuit for the analog output stage-so they save some cost in the Minerva/DAC 2/DAC 202 by using an IC based output stage.<br />

Opamps can sound very good, but to my ears they still do not equal the sonic performance of a well implemented discrete circuit. Remember that IC opamps rely on large amounts of feedback to achieve low distortion-most well respected audio designers do not believe that high feedback is the best way to get the best sonic performance.<br />

The ESS 9018 requires numerous voltage regulated supplies for proper performance: providing discrete linear regulation (rather than monolithic ICs) would require a lot more circuitry and expense-perhaps this could improve performance somewhat, it would definitely increase complexity and expense...