Article: Review | Berkeley Audio Design Alpha DAC Reference Series 3

[The Computer Audiophile]

View full article

[The Computer Audiophile]

16 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

You can sum up DSD in two words. Nobody cares.

Don't be a jerk.

[The Computer Audiophile]

17 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Chris on March 4th I made a 25 minute presentation to a Southern California marketing company about high resolution audio. Part of the presentation was the numbers aren't there for DSD.

None of that matters with respect to your comment. Ask Chad (Acoustic Sounds) about how many of his customers want DSD. In the grand scheme of life it’s a small niche, but then again so is golf, given that a tiny percentage of Earth’s 7.7 billion people care about it. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, Rt66indierock said:

 

Just the golf equipment market is over $8 billion annually worldwide. 

 

You can sum up golf in two words. Nobody cares.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Neat questions @phusis

 

4 minutes ago, phusis said:

Do you see DAC's on a broader scale ever progressing sonically over the years,

 

Yes and no. It's hard to say something for the group of DACs as a whole. 

 

4 minutes ago, phusis said:

and if so what in general do you assess to be the reason(s) for this - DAC chip development, jitter suppression, the analogue output stage, PSU, a combination of all/overall implementation?

 

In my view it's all down to implementation by talented designers. These guys can squeeze more from less than the average guy can from the newest chip or highest spec PSU available. Usually with enough time, a talented designer can dream up new ways of doing things and figure out how to make it work in a commercial product. Some times this means working with other companies to figure out how the heck to manufacture the product that works in the laboratory. 

 

It all comes down to people using the tools at their disposal and having the time to do it. 

 

8 minutes ago, phusis said:

I guess a follow-up question to this could be: would you rather acquire an older, used "reference" DAC, or a new mid-level priced DAC (that, just for the sake of simplicity and to support this thought experiment, we assume costs about the same as an older, used reference DAC)?

 

To dovetail off my previous answer. I wouldn't select anything because it was new or had the newest version of a DAC chip etc... I always look at the company and designers creating the product. Some "designers of the month" are so far off into the weeds it's crazy. I wouldn't buy a new or old version of their products. Others are magicians with the given tools and I'd buy a used "anything" from them rather than something else just because it was new. Many concepts in audio aren't new, but many ideas and the means to implement these ideas are new. 

 

I always ask people, would they rather see photographs from Ansel Adams using a disposable camera or an amateur using a 150 megapixel digital camera. While this isn't a realistic scenario, it's illustrative of my point that some people want products that are new and where the model number is 2 versus 1. I'd go with the master of his craft using whatever tools he had because much of the end performance comes down to intellectual property and know-how. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, firedog said:

Chris, I find it interesting you made no mention of MQA playback and how the DAC handles it. Berkeley were big promoters of MQA and how wonderful they said it sounded a few years ago-essentially they agreed it sounded as good as the original, or even better. Even to the extent of coming online and arguing with MQA detractors about it.

They also emphasize their implementation of MQA in the product description. 

My thoughts on MQA, both the technology and company, are well known and needn't be discussed in this review. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

32 minutes ago, bobfa said:

Chris,

 

I assume that you fed the DAC with the AES from the W20SE?  Did you use the Alpha USB from another source?  Just curious about architecture.  

 

Bob

 

PS thanks for the links to the music!  

Here are three common ways I used the RS3. 

 

Sonore Signature Rendu SE optical > USB > Alpha USB > AES > RS3

 

W20SE > USB > Alpha USB > AES > RS3

 

W20SE > AES > RS3

[The Computer Audiophile]

No comment. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

25 minutes ago, Geoff13 said:

NO I2S? strange

Given the number of DACs that support I2S externally and the benefits, I’d say not strange at all. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

16 minutes ago, bobflood said:

Someone who can afford this DAC is probably not very interested in messing around with USB to I2S converters or I2S PCie cards.

If there was an advantage I’m pretty sure all DACs would use it. Heck, even without an advantage manufacturers implement things because change = $ oftentimes. I2S (externally) just hasn’t caught on. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

13 minutes ago, JoeWhip said:

That To Rome track is awesome. Totally.

Indeed.