Article: dCS Rossini DAC Review

[Priaptor]

I will just add to some of the comments here.  I have a very "high end" DAC a direct competitor to the dCS Vivaldi big stack.  I have had people to my listening room (which by the way is now burning in the amazing new Gobel Epoque Aeon Fine speakers that have replaced the older Gobel Fine as a friend of mine has become the North American Distributor for these) who own the full stack Vivaldi and have walked away saying they love my system BUT they like their Vivaldi better.  I ignore these comments.  Not because I have my "audiophile head" up my rear end or feel I have to defend my choice but because these kind of comments are absurd.

 

Why absurd?  First you can't do a flyby analysis of what you heard on a system that has no semblance to yours.  Second, unless you actually live with a component you have no idea what that component is all about.  Third when you hear something you are hearing the system and not an individual component.  Lastly, ownership bias, for most, takes center stage.  Personally, my philosophy is as DiNiro said in the movie Heat, "never get attached to something you can't walk away from in 30 seconds" and that is how I view audio.  I was a strict believer in tubes with my NOLA Concert Grand Golds and lo and behold, I decided to try some of the latest solid state stuff and was blown away and now have the CH Precision M1 in my system.  However, this evaluation of mine was after LIVING with the piece in my system.  

 

So I think the generalizations about the dCS being made on this thread by some, in this case the Rossini are a little absurd.  dCS makes amazing stuff and one shouldn't get caught up in the dogmatic flyby evaluation as compared to Chris who in his review has actually lived with the unit within his system for awhile.  

[Priaptor]

1 hour ago, rando said:

What might be absurd is 90% of what you wrote justifying the other 10%.  I don't need to live with a friend's wife to know her cooking is better than I get at home.  It might, and probably does, get better the more one experiences it.  Doesn't absolve that first bite  of merit.  (I get both sides married well outside this analogy.)

 

This of course assumes taste.  Which I won't go so far as to comment on the surplus or starvation ranks of those possessing it attendant to this discussion.  

I think your comparison of living with another wife to determine the merits of her cooking to that of a “component” in a stereo system is 100% utterly absurd as compared to your determination that my comments being 90% absurd. 

 

So if my comment is so absurd to you please explain how, unless you possess some uncanny ability beyond all others, you could possibly evaluate a “component” in a system that you #1 don’t own and are unfamiliar with and #2 haven’t lived with to understand that “component” in your own system instead of some foreign system. Additionally when you are doing your evaluation it’s not even in the same room or setup as you might have heard among different systems. 

 

The 100% absurd thing is your failure to understand ALL the different variables that are likely different among the different systems you are evaluating when trying to make a drive by analysis of just one component. 

 

 

[Priaptor]

3 minutes ago, amir57bs said:

 

I have no tendecy to convince you or other guys that dCS is bad. 

Please let me describe my view about scoring audio equipments.

I listen to dcs dac and audio note dac in two systems :

1. Kharma

2. Living voice

I will find more contrast by Audio Note . It means if you play Audio note then you will hear more difference between two speakets.

dCS mask low level dynamics and cause less contrast.

 

i think some audiophiles can detect sound signature of equipments and i believe it is possible to score dCS with no relation to complete system.

Give me a break. 

 

Good for your opinion and live with it but to think that your speakers are necessary because of sensitivity or some other factors to be able to determine the audio buzzwords of “micro dynamics” or level dynamics makes no sense. Or to think you can evaluate a “component” in a system you are clueless about is nonsense. 

 

I dont own dCS, but have heard it in enough systems I am familiar with to know they make fantastic equipment. 

 

Chris’s system, while I haven’t heard or experienced his setup is more than capable of hearing the sound signature and capabilities of the dCS and he had many references of which to compare. 

 

Maybe be the reason the dCS didn’t move you is because the system and setup you heard it with sucked??

 

like I said, I own the competitor to the Vivaldi stack and have no dog in this fight other than to put the drive by “reviews” into perspective which in my opinion has little if any legitimacy 

[Priaptor]

2 minutes ago, miguelito said:

And what is that? MSB?

Yes the Select II. 

 

I happen to love it. I will be the first one to critique my buying habits. The main reason I purchased it was because the V I had was a end of line product and MSB gave a great upgrade path (great in this case is relative). 

 

I happen to really like every MSB product I have ever had in my system including the Analog I got to audition, the IV plus I owned and upgraded to the V and now the Select II which is the best I have ever had in my system. 

 

One of the other nice nice things about my upgrade to the Select II was my ability to get rid of my Ref10 preamp as the pre stage on the Select II is that good. I was very skeptical before I took delivery but it didn’t take long to see direct to amp bypassing any preamp was superior to my ref10. 

[Priaptor]

1 minute ago, rando said:

 

Say I go to multiple symphonic concerts in multiple venues multiple times a month.  Lovely performances all, yet somehow I make use of what mental capacity I've been graced with and experience as a listener to overrule emotion.  To make a solid considered decision whether that performance I just walked out of was, despite the brief time I spent taking it in, absolutely spectacular or just one of many at a high level.

 

I think you see where I'm going with this and should consider expelling whatever bad air you think my previous post injected.  Fair enough?

No issue. That makes sense. At least here you are discussing the sum of the parts which includes the orchestra and the hall. I’m with you. 

 

Overreacted about the 90% absurd comment. No hard feelings. 

 

Also I’m not saying someone has to like the dCS just should judge it appropriately. 

[Priaptor]

11 minutes ago, miguelito said:

Interestingly, this is one of the features I actually ended up loving in the Rossini: The volume control.

 

My Kondo Ongaku does not have a remote, so volume adjustment - I find it critical to listen at the right volume - was a pain. What I do now is set the range of volume in Roon between -15dB and 0dB, set a moderately high volume on Ongaku, and then I can fine tune right from my iPad. It is absolutely great. And works with MQA as well since it is done after rendering. 

The MSB has a wonderful pre stage and one of the nice things about the CH Precision M1 amp is that it has adjustable gain remotely so too can get optimal output. 

 

Pertaining to your comment about live concerts I couldn’t agree more. I have been to some horrible sounding venues despite the performers being amazing. 

[Priaptor]

4 minutes ago, Ron Scubadiver said:

$24k?  There has got to be something which works as well for about 10% of what it costs.  

There are plenty of things that work well for 10% the cost. The same can be said about just about everything and hence why I think we should stick to the merits of the product under review. 

[Priaptor]

4 minutes ago, Ron Scubadiver said:

You are free to spend $24k on a DAC.  I easily spend more than that each year on things you would consider to be frivolous.   Not too many of us can discuss the merits of a product we don't have access to.

What people spend their money on is their business and none of mine so I would never consider what you or anyone else spend to be “frivolous”. I truly could care less. 

 

As Miguelito appropriately stated so what do you want to discuss about the reviewed DAC?  Only the price?  

[Priaptor]

1 minute ago, miguelito said:

No! I am asking what it is that you're saying. Can you clarify? 

I’m not sure what he is after. If he never heard one, can’t afford or doesn’t want to buy one then why bother commenting in this thread. 

 

 

[Priaptor]

34 minutes ago, Ron Scubadiver said:

You are trying to bully me.

Well since I grew up in Brooklyn 50s-70s when Brooklyn wasn’t what it is today, I consider myself fairly “streetwise” and must assume you are here to play games, bust balls and get your rocks off because you can’t be serious with your comments. 

[Priaptor]

3 minutes ago, PeterG said:

 

I do not know enough to have an opinion on Amir's critique of the TADs, but I thought his posts were relevant and interesting--if the reference system is flawed, can the review be valid?  Is any single reference system sufficient?

 

I agree that posts that are a critique of the very existence of the thread are counterproductive and should not be entertained.

But Peter, his comments were using an assumption that just aren't true.  The TADs CR1 are wonderful speakers, so good that they have stood the test of time and unlike the Magico and Wilson merry go round, haven't had to be upgraded every other month.  His preamp and amp are also top notch.  It is not as though he is testing the Rossini in a sub-optimal system where he can't extract all that the Rossini has to offer.

 

I can't speak for his setup including his room.  The TADs are on my shortlist if I were to move to smaller place as they are remarkable.  I owned early Constellation amps with Magico Q1 and while I didn't like the Constellation (or Magico), the newer stuff is totally different in the same league as the Soulutions and CH stuff.  And while I didn't like it because it didn't do the things I like in a system, it doesn't mean I couldn't appreciate the merits.

 

I think it would be worth it for you guys at a show to go listen to dCS.  They make remarkable equipment and have been one of the pioneers in digital not just for the end-user but also in the professional world.  

 

People can have their preferences and I sure have mine, but to dismiss the Rossini and all dCS as Amir did with the assumption that Chris's system can't reveal the "deficiencies" in the dCS is to me,  absurd. Again, I can understand WHY someone may prefer a different DAC, whether it be more or less expensive than the Rossini but to dismiss outright, in my opinion, is nuts.  It's a great piece.  I think one can have preferences but still recognize something that sounds great, whether they can afford it or not and/or whether its meets their goals or not

[Priaptor]

5 hours ago, barrows said:

Nice review Chris.  What a cool system set up with the Rossini driving the direct input of the Constellation amps.  I have seen John Atkinson's measurements of most dCS DACs, and they all have very beefy output stages and driving capabilities, so I was not surprised that this approach worked, but it is always good to have actual listening confirmation that there was no loss of body/substance driving the Constellation amps through their "direct" input.  A nice simple system with just Rossini/Constellation and speakers... nice!

Hi Barrows. 

 

Same here. I love it. I’m going direct from my MSB Select II into a CH Precision and it’s fantastic, simple and one less piece of gear!

 

When Vince from MSB was bragging to me about the pre stage of the MSB I pretty much ignored him. I mean how could it beat my REF10?  Reluctantly I went direct into my then ARC GS150 and was literally blown away. The difference wasn’t close. It also pleased my pocketbook in helping make take the upgrade.  

 

For all digital system it’s a dream although MSB does allow extra inputs (at a steep price) for vinyl lovers. 

[Priaptor]

5 hours ago, firedog said:

In audio today there is fantastic relatively low and mid priced equipment.  X number of years ago it would have been considered "state of the art". Today it just very good, but not state of the art. 

There are some rip-offs in the high end. That doesn't mean all of it is a rip-off. 

 

There's no question that the diminishing return curve in audio is very steep. Just on performance. And that doesn't take into account  that in the high-end you end up paying a lot of money for looks, and for (in many cases) hand assembly in a high wage rate location. 

That pumps up the price way above the pure parts/performance cost.

 

With the very high end, you do get better performance, but the increased performance is small compared to the increase in price. Every person has their point at which they say the increase in price needed to get the next bit of performance "isn't worth it". 

 

I've got little doubt that the 24K MSB DAC is better than the 9-10K model. Is it's sound 2.5 times better? Surely not. But just as surely, it is better. 

 

No point in arguing at what point that bigger spend "stops making sense". 

Hey FD

 

i agree with you. Having been a very happy MSB owner for years now I can say my initial experience with what I was going to buy, the Analog was very positive. Then my devil pal put a IV plus in my system and I was hooked. Of course it wasn’t worth the difference in cost but no doubt there was a difference and not subtle. 

 

Having lived with IV plus and then V (not a huge sonic improvement moving to the V) I will say it was a quantum move to the Select II. Again was it worth the cost?  In my case the big upgrade expense was significantly offset by being able to sell my REF10 and to me the sonic benefits are a significant leap forward to what was already tremendous. 

[Priaptor]

15 hours ago, PeterG said:

 

Priaptor--thanks for your helpful post. 

 

One of the funny things about audiophiledom, is that we are often using different levels of scrutiny to describe things.  When Amir said the dCS was weak, I didn't think he meant that it did not sound as good as my Yggy in my $30K system.  I thought he meant it was not great for a $100K+ system.  Similarly, when you criticize Magico and Wilson, I assume you only mean they have some weaknesses relative to other excellent speakers.  I trust that all the components in Chris's system are excellent, but I also appreciate that even great systems have weaknesses when compared to other great systems.

 

Cheers

 

 

I'm not criticizing the "sound" of Magico and Wilson, whether I like them or not.  What I am criticizing is their need/desire to always upgrade in very short period of times compared to Chris' TADs

[Priaptor]

17 minutes ago, PeterG said:

 

Are you sure you mean that?  It's an unusual statement from an audiophile.  Shouldn't we applaud Magico's and Wilson's aggressiveness in pursuing the best possible sound?  If they know how to make a better speaker than the ones currently on sale, shouldn't they release it?

 

Also, I'm not saying we shouldn't applaud a product that has stood the test of time, such as Chris's TADs.  I'm just saying that the test is that it has to keep holding its own against the competitive onslaught.

Sometimes the enemy of good is better. 

 

No I personally do not applaud Magico and neither do I applaud some of the practices of Wilson.  When Wilson releases an Alexia, then goes to the usual sources to get the "best ....." reviews only to within an inordinately short period of time release an Alexia 2 TOTALLY replacing their originally Alexia with NO upgrade path to the original Alexia owners, I think that sucks with no concern for the enduser.  But that's me.  Now they have their new great Alexandria.  Will that also soon be replaced within a very short period of time with no upgrade path like they have started doing recently with Alexia 2?  

 

Magico is the worst violator of this.  Their Q series, the best best best.  Soon the S series which "in some ways are better than the Q" but much cheaper.  Then the Q MKII.  Then the S MKII.  Then the M Project, only 40 to be made for some very special customers.  Then the M3 at a cheaper price better than the M Project.  Then the king of them all the M6 better than the Q7 MKII.  And the merry go around goes round and round and Magico users, fall into two camps, happy with what they have no matter how "outdated" which is a minority or the other, who want the newest and "best" and wind up going through the inordinate costs and hassle of upgrading. 

 

I have no patience for companies like this.  In my decision to choose a solid state amplifier and DAC the company's obsolescence time and manner of upgrade paths is very important to me.  The same with DACs.  I understand companies "upgrade" their products BUT churning is another story and I ignore those companies.  The other thing to remember is that when there is a "dealer" as in the case of Magico or Wilson or any other company like D'Agastino, there is already a built in consumer base, namely the dealer, who must upgrade to the latest to show the customers so all the onus is on the dealer with little risk to the manufacturer. 

[Priaptor]

4 minutes ago, firedog said:

Agree. But at least with a Lampi they would give you full value on a trade-in and trade up if the device was relatively new, with a reasonable sliding scale after that. Takes a bit of the sting out.  And he does seem to be stabilizing his product line somewhat, with fewer models and few options. 

FD,

One reason I could never get into the Lampi is I can't even understand their page.  Also the upgrades every other month just turned me off.  And while he may give lenient upgrade paths, it is still a hassle to pack stuff up, send it back only to engage in the same activities over and over again.  Now granted a box is much easier than a huge speaker in the example I use but it is still a pain nonetheless.  

[Priaptor]

16 minutes ago, Mercman said:

The Wilson Alexia Series 1 was "current" for 5 years. There was no way to upgrade an Alexia Series 1 to a Series 2 since the Series 2 had completely redesigned bass and midrange cabinets.  

 

But I don't think that any Alexia Series 1 speakers stopped working after 5 years.

 

 

My bad, you are right that they were on the market that long.  It seems much shorter. 

 

Not arguing that the originals stopped working but when you release a Series II of the same speaker it greatly diminishes the inherit value of what you bought.  What makes the policy, IMO, relatively unsettling is that as you indicated it is a total redesign with no upgrade path yet maintains the same standing in the Wilson name, sans series II.  When I owned NOLA Baby Grands, "new" Baby Grands that went by the Baby Grand name were upgradeable at a very reasonable cost.  While the originals haven't stopped working as you state, I think the number of Alexia series 1 on the market for resale speaks to my point.  

[Priaptor]

33 minutes ago, Dr Tone said:

 

There actually kind of is an upgrade path, "The Wilson Certified Authentic" program.  Dealers move the owners original speakers prior to bringing in the new one.  I would think physically upgrading might be impossible in most cases.

I actually owned many Wilson speakers in the past and their “upgrades” used to most often be a field upgrade that were not to difficult. The biggest issue I had with one of them was I had to solder a new lead to a driver on my X1. I probably shouldn’t put Wilson in the same category as Magico as the latter really is in a class of its own in what I label churning but I am starting to see a pattern emerging that is varying with past Wilson practices. Not that it effects me as I was just making an example. 

 

While I recognize both Magico and Wilson for being excellent products they just aren’t my cup of tea and was just illustrating the “upgraditis” built into both manufacturerss.