Benchmark Dac3 vs ‘Higher end’ Dacs

[Thetiminator]

I’ve tried a good few high end dacs but none have overthrown my Boulder. But now having a Benchmark AHB power amp I’m thinking of trying a Dac3...system synergy and all that. 

Specifically looking to hear from anyone who has either compared to, or moved from, another more expensive Dac....

[photonman]

Here is my Journey to the full Benchmark stack of three which happened over a two year span.

 

Chord Qutest to Pass XA30 class A

Chord Qutest to Nord MK500 II class D

Benchmark Dac3 to Nord MK500 II

Benchmark Dac3 to Benchmark AHB2 class G

Benchmark Dac3 to Benchmark LA4 to Benchmark AHB2

 

Each step of the way I just kept wondering how much better it could get and I am happy to finally say this is my end point for many years to come.  The Benchmark stuff is dead quiet and very detailed if you like that sound.  The entire stack was less then $8K and has a very small footprint and heat output if that matters to you.  The LA4 pre added very precise volume control, much better than the DAC3's.

[Thetiminator]

Thanks Photonman

That’s very interesting re adding the LA4 to the chain...

I have recently changed to an AHB2 from a much more expensive power amp and I have no regrets, hence my interest in the Dac...

 

[photonman]

4 hours ago, Thetiminator said:

That’s very interesting re adding the LA4 to the chain...

There is a thread over at audiogon that talks about the LA4/HPA4 specifically.  Doing the volume control in the analog domain is the main benefit allowing the full digital signal to the DA process or something like that as I don't understand all the EE stuff but the result is much more precise volume control and better sound at lower volumes.

[robocop]

I would be inclined to try other DAC's. Benchmark DAC3 has been superseded in sound quality and innovation. Its still a good Dac but has its limitations, no isolation on USB input, 24 bit input, 192khz only PCM. It does have minimal DSD decoding. Find a DAC which has digital volume out is better. Current r2r dacs are getting good reviews I'm not able to recommend anything myself as I have not heard recent Dac's. Read up this Dac forum there are good recommendations in this web site.

 

Check out current review in this site on the  DenaFrips Pontus Digital to Analog Converter. The Best DAC This Reviewer Has Ever Heard; Bar None! George Graves. This has got me very interested at this price sounds amazing. I use to own the original Dac 1 and 2 Benchmarks for 10 years and they were market leaders. Robert

[cjf]

A few years back I went from a Meitner MA1 to the Benchmark DAC3. The DAC3 was an eye opener compared to the Meitner.

 

The DAC3 thru a very large and detailed soundstage with deeper and more accurate sounding bass...IMO of course. It was also totally black in terms of noise/hash..etc which was noticeable in direct comparison to the MA1. The MA1 was a very "dark" sounding DAC in comparison to the DAC3.

 

I should also mention that DSD 64 sounds very good thru the DAC3 when sent via DOP. If I'm not mistaken it does no PCM conversion of that signal and thus it sounds very good.

 

If your into up sampling beyond 24/192 then DAC3 is probably not the DAC for you but it does everything right in terms of SQ within its limitations despite being "cheaper" in cost to some of the competition. It also works well with Linux in a driverless fashion up to its advertised capabilities. That in itself is a huge bonus IMO. Many DAC's puke at the sight of Linux..unfortunately.

 

I still own myself and its not going anywhere.

[Thetiminator]

Thanks CJF, exactly the kind of info I was looking for. I ‘ll give one a try and report back.

Thanks guys..

[audiobomber]

I used an Audiolab 8200CD/DAC/Preamp for several years and tried a Benchmark DAC3 L in-house for a couple of weeks. I loved the  features of the Benchmark, but I found the sound only very marginally better than the Audiolab. I then purchased an exaSound e32, which was a clear upgrade to the other two; tighter bass, bigger soundstage, smoother more revealing treble. I have since upgraded the e32 with a Teddy Pardo Super Regulator PSU for a further improvement.

 

I am told the DAC3 HGC may be sonically better than the L version but I would be surprised it if beats the exaSound.

[CheapSplurge]

On these dacs is optical or USB from Laptop superior în sound quality? 

[granosalis]

On 1/27/2021 at 5:46 PM, audiobomber said:

I am told the DAC3 HGC may be sonically better than the L version but I would be surprised it if beats the exaSound

There is no sonical differences between 3B and HGC, just features.

[granosalis]

5 hours ago, CheapSplurge said:

On these dacs is optical or USB from Laptop superior în sound quality? 

I have found the DAC3B sounds at its best (more transparent) through coax, USB is a bit veiled comparig the coax.

I sold my benchmark because I think it's getting a little old in terms of features, I still think it's a show sonically.

[CheapSplurge]

3 hours ago, granosalis said:

I have found the DAC3B sounds at its best (more transparent) through coax, USB is a bit veiled comparig the coax.

I sold my benchmark because I think it's getting a little old in terms of features, I still think it's a show sonically.

How high in upsampling can coax go, is it relatively noise free? 

[granosalis]

1 hour ago, CheapSplurge said:

How high in upsampling can coax go, is it relatively noise free? 

24/192, 100% noise free (input 4)

Input 3 is less stable and good that 4, don't ask me why. 

Optical is nearly at the same level than input 4.

These tests were performed using my SMS200 feeding my modded Singxer SU1 coax out to DAC3B

 

[audiobomber]

13 hours ago, CheapSplurge said:

On these dacs is optical or USB from Laptop superior în sound quality? 

Properly implemented, USB is inherently superior to Toslink optical. See here for an explanation:

 

 

[audiobomber]

7 hours ago, granosalis said:

There is no sonical differences between 3B and HGC, just features.

That was my impression as well when I made the purchase, but I read a post by "some guy on the internet" who claimed the HGC version has circuit features that affect the sound. He provided details of the supposed differences to support his claim, which may or may not have been relevant or even correct. That is why I prefaced my statement with "I am told". 

[photonman]

I have switched back and forth between my optical and USB and can say that when streaming from my Macbook, the optical is much better than the USB.  I agree with the "veiled" observation. 

 

However, streaming from a more audio specific device may sound better through the USB than optical.

[matthias]

1 hour ago, photonman said:

I have switched back and forth between my optical and USB and can say that when streaming from my Macbook, the optical is much better than the USB.  I agree with the "veiled" observation. 

 

However, streaming from a more audio specific device may sound better through the USB than optical.

 

Thanks for sharing.

I assume you have one of the rare MacBooks with Toslink output or do you use a DDC which converts USB to Toslink?

 

Matt

[granosalis]

4 hours ago, audiobomber said:

That was my impression as well when I made the purchase, but I read a post by "some guy on the internet" who claimed the HGC version has circuit features that affect the sound. He provided details of the supposed differences to support his claim, which may or may not have been relevant or even correct. That is why I prefaced my statement with "I am told". 

Thanks for the clarification, it wasn't clear for me at first glance. 

By the way, from the Benchmark web site, this is what the claim: 

"The DAC3 B is the ideal converter to use in front of Benchmark's HPA4 headphone amplifier or LA4 line amplifier. It is also ideal for many professional studio applications. It delivers the full performance of the flagship DAC3 HGC, but eliminates the volume control, the analog inputs, the mute and polarity controls, and the headphone amplifier. "

[photonman]

21 hours ago, matthias said:

you have one of the rare MacBooks with Toslink output

If by rare you mean old :) yes I do, it is a mid 2014 Macbook Pro running Big Sur.  It still seems like I bought it new yesterday.  Mac's can run forever.

[Samuel T Cogley]

I owned a DAC3 B for several months and my impression was that ESS DAC chips were capable of a level of fidelity that I never gave them credit for.  "Sabre glare" and all that.

 

I sold it when I first heard the Topping D50 S (not the previous D50).  Was the Topping better?  No.  But it was damn close to me.  Once again, that ESS chip was delivering just jaw dropping performance and the support circuitry just did the right thing and "got out of the way", just like in the DAC3.  I sold the Benchmark DAC because a good friend really wanted it and I had borrowed a D50 S almost the same day.  I liked the D50 S so much I was willing to give up the DAC3.  I figured I sold it for more than I paid for the D50 S, so win/win.  My friend is happy, and so am I.

 

The AK chips are marketed to sound "smoother", but for me, there's just no beating a well implemented, modern ESS DAC chip.

 

Oh, and when I want to take the D50 S up a notch or two, I use HQPlayer.  One thing I almost never hear about the DAC3 is that it won't go higher than DSD64.  To me, that is the Achilles Heel of the DAC3.

 

 

[toddrhodes]

4 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

I owned a DAC3 B for several months and my impression was that ESS DAC chips were capable of a level of fidelity that I never gave them credit for.  "Sabre glare" and all that.

 

I sold it when I first heard the Topping D50 S (not the previous D50).  Was the Topping better?  No.  But it was damn close to me.  Once again, that ESS chip was delivering just jaw dropping performance and the support circuitry just did the right thing and "got out of the way", just like in the DAC3.  I sold the Benchmark DAC because a good friend really wanted it and I had borrowed a D50 S almost the same day.  I liked the D50 S so much I was willing to give up the DAC3.  I figured I sold it for more than I paid for the D50 S, so win/win.  My friend is happy, and so am I.

 

The AK chips are marketed to sound "smoother", but for me, there's just no beating a well implemented, modern ESS DAC chip.

 

Oh, and when I want to take the D50 S up a notch or two, I use HQPlayer.  One thing I almost never hear about the DAC3 is that it won't go higher than DSD64.  To me, that is the Achilles Heel of the DAC3.

 

 

 

The story of my time with the DAC3 (DAC3L in my case) is virtually the same. I can't say a single bad thing about how the DAC3 presented music. It was, IMO, transparent. And I, too, had the same sort of preconception about ESS DACs and being "hard" or having that glare you mentioned. DAC3 didn't have any of that. In a lot of ways, DAC3 kinda proved to me that a lot of what I thought about newer DACs was just poorly derived conclusions.

 

So, that DSD64 and HQP thing bit me as well. I could hear the potential in HQP but I also knew that I had the PC horsepower and technical knowledge to push that much higher, but the hard limit DAC3 imposes on PCM and DSD was why, ultimately, I went to a Denafrips DAC. NOS mode in their new "DSP" board will do 1.5 PCM or DSD1024. It's overkill of course but I had a feeling I would be able to really see what HQPlayer could do through something like that.

 

And so I did with an entry level DF DAC. And so impressed was I, that I went out and bought a higher end one. And I'm thrilled. But it was really DAC3 that kinda opened my eyes, and got me to even see how good it could sound by adding HQPlayer. 

 

I can almost guarantee - if it had supported at least DSD256 or maybe even just a much higher PCM ceiling, I'd probably still have it.

[audiobomber]

15 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

I owned a DAC3 B for several months and my impression was that ESS DAC chips were capable of a level of fidelity that I never gave them credit for.  "Sabre glare" and all that.

 

I sold it when I first heard the Topping D50 S (not the previous D50).  Was the Topping better?  No.  But it was damn close to me.  Once again, that ESS chip was delivering just jaw dropping performance and the support circuitry just did the right thing and "got out of the way", just like in the DAC3.  I sold the Benchmark DAC because a good friend really wanted it and I had borrowed a D50 S almost the same day.  I liked the D50 S so much I was willing to give up the DAC3.  I figured I sold it for more than I paid for the D50 S, so win/win.  My friend is happy, and so am I.

 

The AK chips are marketed to sound "smoother", but for me, there's just no beating a well implemented, modern ESS DAC chip.

 

Oh, and when I want to take the D50 S up a notch or two, I use HQPlayer.  One thing I almost never hear about the DAC3 is that it won't go higher than DSD64.  To me, that is the Achilles Heel of the DAC3.

It's nice that the D50S works for you but I had one on trial for a week and thought it was dreadful; good detail, good tonal balance, but very poor dynamics and PRaT, which made music sound boring. I preferred my cheaper Schiit Modi 3.

 

The Topping did not come close to a DAC3 in my opinion. Note that they both use ESS Sabre DAC chips but not the same one. The D50S uses a less sophisticated version designed for portables. 

 

I certainly didn't find the DAC3 too bright, but the exaSound e32 has a slightly warmer, more detailed treble, using the same DAC chips.