Life after Yggdrasil: Watering the Ash

Don'tcha just hate it when that happens?

JJ

 

Almost as much as I hate forum post-editor implementations.

 

So I asked this question earlier today but the server burp seems to have vaporized it. First of all, thank you so much @Torq for this ever entertaining and informative review of DACs. I loved the first version in the other forum, at least until it suffered its troll invasion. Now for my question. I currently have an Yggdrasil (speaker system) and a Bifrost multibit (headphone system). The Yggdrasil has been such a revelation that I'm toying with replacing the Bifrost with something else more the Yggdrasil league and rough price range. Which pretty much narrows it to the Holo Spring according to your comparisons. Given that I'm now thoroughly "earwashed" by combo-burrito sound, I could just play it safe and get another Yggdrasil, but I'm sorely tempted to broaden my auditory horizons with the Spring. It goes (almost) without saying that I won't be able to do the kind of side-by-side comparisons you've been able to do. Do I take the Spring leap?

 

If you want something different to Yggdrasil, then the Spring DAC is my current favorite in that price range. I would caveat that on either getting an audition or being familiar with how NOS implementations sound vs. OS designs (like Yggdrasil).

It's also worth noting that the majority of my listening time has drifted back to Yggdrasil.

I have both an Yggdrasil and a Spring DAC, for their different strengths and presentations, in my main rig. I have another Yggdrasil in a secondary rig. If I was going to have just one DAC, in this price range (or within the units on the main list) it'd still be Yggdrasil.

There have been some used Pavane's and Direct Stream Juniors around for about $3K lately as well, which might skew things.

I'll try and post something more coherent in the morning ... assuming no other restores or issues occur.

Hope the helps in the meantime!

 

My take is that the choice of the word "implementation" is much to generous.
And not just here or there either.

But then I got used to a well thought out and implemented post editor along with a HUGE smilie collection that was actually useful and reflective of ones intentions.
It, when used well, could really help by adding more than just the one dimension (the written word) to any exchange of ideas.

And I do understand how much of a PIA it is to 'manage' and edit a list of smilies.
Which as far as I can tell still hasn't been addressed…

Mores the pity.

JJ

 

Right, so it isn't just me having selection weirdness on SBAF! And here I was thinking that Opera was acting up yet again...

 

Have a look at the DSpeakersAnti-Mode 2.0 Dual Core while you wait.
One of the very few standalone DAC/EQ systems available for 2 channel.
No idea how this compares to the Linn's implementation, just and observation that these systems will probably become more common in the future - or maybe not. Purists scoff at these kind of EQ systems.
Maybe @Torq will have a look at these kinda systems someday.

 

Ok so I gotta ask,
to what does "Watering the Ash" refer to?

JJ

 

Yggdrasil (the "World Tree"), which grows out of the "Well of Urd" is an ash tree. From one of the pieces in "Poetic Edda", "The insight of the Seeress", one finds the scene:

"There stands an ash called Yggdrasil,
A might tree showered in white hail.
From there come the dews that fall in the valleys.
It stands evergreen above Urd's Well.

From there come maidens, very wise,
Three from the lake that stands beneath the pole.
One is called Urd, another Verdani,
Skuld the third; the carve into the tree
The lives and destinies of children."​

So, my titular intent was to portray watering this ash tree ("Watering the ash") to restore it to life and growth ...

 

It's doubtful that'll be exploring such devices myself.

Such units aren't (and can't be) compatible with the Linn Exakt setup I'm running as my speaker rig, and I'm unlikely to have space for a second speaker rig in the new place. I appreciate the vote of confidence though.

 

Merging

NADAC (-) (!) †

I found this unit to sound clean, dynamic, resolving, balanced and neutral.

It was also utterly boring …

At least via it’s conventional inputs.

Which, by the way, in the case of the TOSLINK and COAX S/PDIF inputs are limited to 24/96 signals. Oddly low limits for such a “high-end” device. But then you don’t buy this unit if you’re going to use those inputs (unless you’re a complete Muppet, I guess); in fact I’m not even sure why they bothered to include them, as this thing only makes sense when driven by its AES67 (“Ravenna”) interface (an audio-over IP standard).

Using that interface transforms the performance of the product, quite readily elevating it to the levels of the best ESS-based units I’ve heard. It might even be the best – on a technical level. But then it would have to be, because it’s almost nine grand ($8,900)!

The music, and involvement, steps up significantly once being driven via Ethernet. Yes, you need drivers to make that work, but once installed you can feed it easily with your player of choice (including my preference, Roon*).

Detail/resolution steps up a couple of notches, and just manages to surpass the more common run of ESS-based units I’ve listened to during this process – and that’s achieved without the exaggeration or brightness that accompanied most of them. Timbre still isn’t where the less conventional competition is at this price level, and is still bested, quite handily in my opinion, by Yggdrasil. Sound-stage, also, isn’t on the level of the Yggdrasil or Chord products.

If I had to characterize it in short form, I’d draw a contrast with the exaSound e22 Mk2. This is a bit smoother than the exaSound, and very slightly more involving with some tracks, but that just makes me wonder how the e22 would perform given the same Ethernet interface. And, at the end of the day, putting the e22 on the end of, say, an Auralic Aries, would get you most of the way there (the AES67 protocol has some theoretical advantages over, say, RAAT, but they not be that relevant in home use). When I say “most of the way”, I’m thinking 95-99% of the way … and for about half the cost.

Of course, you could put an Yggdrasil on the end of that Aries, which I do, and beat both of them quite convincingly for 3/5th of the THAT cost and well under half of the NADAC’s sticker.

I’m hoping Merging will put out a plain AES67 interface. While it would have to contend with other issues, not being built-in to the DAC itself, it might well prove to be THE best Ethernet transport available.

Unfortunately as a DAC, it left me wanting, despite the absolutely magnificent build quality and subdued but very agreeable aesthetic.

Using the headphone output wasn’t very inspiring … it was fine with easier to drive cans, but didn’t fare at all well with the LCD-4 or Abyss, and was nowhere near the capability of the headphone amps I usually use, nor was it in the same realm as those on the Chord units (which is both a bit surprising and rather disappointing).

Note that I did not try this unit with an external clock – at this price level, you need to get that right out of the box. I think that’s really, in this case, more of a holdover for studio applications than home-audio. Yes, sure, better clocks make a difference, especially with D/S converters, but still …

So, very cool technology (possibly a harbinger of the next practical Ethernet audio STANDARD), beautiful execution, but not at a level where the audible performance justifies the lofty price and readily outperformed, musically, by my current, much cheaper, benchmark – Yggdrasil.

It's worth noting that I'd take Yggdrasil via TOSLINK directly out of my Mac Pro over the NADAC on its AES67 input. Putting the Schiit DAC on the AES output of the Aries just puts it even further ahead.

--

*Originally, you got Roon support by running the VSC/driver on a computer running a Roon end-point, which is the same way you'd do it with a RedNet/Dante device. Since I did my audition with the NADAC unit, however, Merging have implemented the core Roon end-point capability directly in the unit. With that enabled, you simply add the NADAC to your physical network and it'll pop-up in Roon as a native player.

 

Metrum

Pavane (=) † ("Hands On")

Before getting into the details here, I should address something that those familiar with where “Life after Yggdrasil” started will, no doubt, wonder about. Specifically, why my rating of the Pavane has changed from (+) to the new classification of (=). This has nothing to do with the performance of the DAC and is not based on additional listening; it is purely a function of this cycle of “Life after Yggdrasil” simply using Yggdrasil as a common baseline, rather than something I’m trying to “better”.

Now … back to business … particularly as not much has changed here. In fact, the differences in this post, versus the original, are in my narrative and thought processes about the “whys” of things here, not the actual sound or results!

-

As clichéd as it will no doubt sound, the first impression I got of Metrum’s Pavane was of a highly musical, and very analog reproduction. It plays music, and it plays it well. Not many components “just get out of the way” and let the music flow; in my experience with this process it’s been the rare exception rather than the rule.

The Pavane is definitely one of those exceptions.

Instrumental timbre was extremely natural, separation clear and well defined, tonality was very pure with no emphasis anywhere that I could hear. Detail extraction was remarkable, among the best I’ve heard in fact, but was not accompanied by any sense of brightness or shift of balance which has not been the case elsewhere (most of the other DACs that seemed highly detailed were really just “bright”).

Attack and dynamics are startling*. Notes start and stop instantly when they’re supposed to, yet the slower more organic decay of physical instruments is preserved in an entirely natural way. Backgrounds were utterly black, and the music emerged from a seemingly untainted backdrop which has the effect of making everything seem more vivid. Rendering is incredibly delicate when it’s supposed to be, and can still slam you hard when called for.

I’ve made a comment once before, and it was about Yggdrasil, and that was that it has the ability to make everything appear emphasized all at the same time, which isn’t possible of course (emphasizing one thing would deemphasize another, and if you emphasized everything you’d be right back at neutral), but still Pavane manages the same feat. That means with something like Tune Dem, you can effortlessly follow either the entire piece, or any individual element or instrument.

Vocals, especially female, were a real treat and hung in space in a manner in which you could almost reach out and touch the performer. And the breathy exertion audible on several intense violin pieces was unmissable (it was sometimes all but inaudible on other DACs).

PRaT was excellent … fast pieces retained their speed, slower, mellower tracks/compositions stayed relaxed. Sounds like that should be a given, but some units somehow make everything sound “fast” or “slow” even though they’re not actually changing tempo at all.

Listening to this was addictive. Whether it was Infected Mushroom, Kate Bush or Bizet, it just played music, consistently, and did so engagingly, with precision and emotion, transparency and detail. "Just one more track" syndrome was definitely well in effect.

I found it slightly smoother than Yggdrasil, in, for once, a good way. I never would have described Yggdrasil as having any grain to its sound whatsoever, and I still wouldn’t, but somehow Pavane plays a little more smoothly all the same.

Yggdrasil projects a more solid and tangible soundstage, but the difference isn’t huge.

Detail is very comparable between the two, and while I do not consider Yggdrasil to be at all bright or overly energetic up-top, Pavane seems to be able to pull the same detail, and sense of air, while having a very slightly warmer rendering (a softer “glow”, but at similar intensity, if that makes any sense). And sparkle, where appropriate, was still fully retained.

Cymbals, an area that I also find Yggdrasil excels in, particularly with brush-work, was very close. I’d still give Yggdrasil the edge here, with a more realistic sheen to those sounds, but Pavane was hard to tell apart when compared to how other units have faired.

I still find I prefer piano works, overall, with Yggdrasil. Some very aggressive pieces, which push the piano into discordancy, were noticeably more realistic to me on Schiit’s unit. And even with more seasoned pieces the tone and timbre were more natural with Yggdrasil too. But again, the difference wasn’t that large.

In fact none of the technical differences are big here, regardless of which unit is ahead, but overall this sounds just a little more refined in a musical sense. Things have a slightly more “analog” feel to them than Yggdrasil, something that I don’t think I can really explain quite why or how (or at least that was the case until I heard the Holo Audio Spring DAC – now I suspect it’s related to the NOS nature of the implementation*). And again, it was not a big difference – it’s a small increment in several areas over the Schiit DAC, and not in every area, but in enough and in the right places (for me) that it has to be taken very seriously, even given the higher price.

This was an easy and enthusiastic addition to the “shortlist” of DACs in my original “what might beat Yggdrasil” approach to this thread. While I’ve not heard one in a while, and there are new versions of the unit with the updated R2R modules that debuted in the Adagio (neither of which I’ve heard), the original was a very convincing unit. Seeing these going for $3,000 and under on the used market makes them even more tempting. Though at this stage, if I was angling to buy a new DAC, I would want to do a three-way comparison between this, Yggdrasil and the Spring DAC, before I made a final choice.

--

Interestingly, the optical input only supports up to 96KHz, which I note not because it was a problem for me (I used the AES input) but because it was unexpected. Note that this is not the only high-end DAC I’ve come across now that has unusually low limits on either its TOSLINK (Pavane) or both TOSLINK and COAX (other units) inputs.

--

*This is something that seems to have become something of a theme with the NOS (non-oversampling) DACs that I’ve heard, especially recently. Not sure if it’s actually a causative thing or just an interesting coincidence, but I was struck by the immediacy of the attack and transients with the Spring DAC as well.

 

Nagra

HD DAC (-) †

The Nagra HD DAC turned out to be a bit of an enigma. It was, at the time I auditioned it, a bit of a struggle to compose something that coherently captured my thoughts and feelings on. That was, in part, bounded by where I was narrating this process at the time. And I said, back then, that I may come back at to this at a future time if I came up with a better way to convey them …

Well, that time is now …

TWENTY EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS?!*

(You should read that in the same voice, and with the same reaction, with which “Doc Brown” exclaims “1.21 jigga watts?!”)**

Seriously … f**k me*** (well, don’t, but you get the idea) … we are most definitely not in Kansas anymore …

I’m not, historically, particularly price-sensitive (value is another matter). And, having developed products myself, I’m well aware that what goes into the engineering and R&D side of things can make relatively innocuous seeming things cost vastly more than one can really explain or justify to a potential customer. In technical and professional markets that’s a bit easier than in the consumer space, and a lot easier when we’re not talking about entertainment (i.e. entirely optional) devices.

However, at some point, no matter how much it cost you in R&D, or what the effect of boutique manufacturing of low-numbers of units, or super-rare/specialty parts, does to your per-unit pricing model, things become a bit farcical and you have to question whether you should even bother.

Now, I am not questioning Nagra’s R&D costs, and I’ve certainly not broken the thing down to see if how much of that price might be in super-specific, low-volume, massively expensive parts. It might be entirely justified from those perspectives but, for me, it’s a complete farce when it comes down to how I found the listening experience …

So let’s get back to that …

Transients seemed a bit softer than I’m used to hearing. Not problematically so, I wouldn’t describe the overall sound as “soft”, but still it seemed to have somewhat less impact in that regard than most of the other DACs I’ve listened to so far.

Presentation had a sense of extreme cleanliness about it, almost bordering on analytical, but then there would be instruments or voices that were presented with wonderful lushness. In this context I mean analytical more in the sense that I was not experiencing what I would consider to be a fully emotive musical experience … it was more just that I was listening to a highly technically competent performance.

This is something I came across with other DACs when I was experimenting with DSD, and was converting PCM sources to DSD to see a) if there was a benefit to doing so and b) how the DSD performance was. And in more than one case things just seemed to get a bit softer or lose focus. This may be an artifact of that type of conversion, but it’s not a completely consistent effect, so I’m not sure. If it is, it makes sense, since that’s what this DAC does internally.

That’s just speculation, however; it doesn’t change what I was hearing/experiencing.

Generally, the rendering was smooth across the board, perhaps a little too smooth at times, though it was distinctly non “Hi FI” sounding (that part is good). I’d go as far as to describe as it being mostly rather organic, but without ever really feeling like it was analog in nature.

Tone and timbre were generally quite rich, which sort of goes against the analytical note I mentioned, but at the same time it wasn’t persuasive. That richness didn’t feel like it was coming from the recording (perhaps because it wasn’t evident elsewhere).

In the end I decided to just try and sit and listen and get lost in the music. Usually when a component has the capacity to make music on that level I don’t have to try … and with the best setups I cannot even resist it … and here, well, it just didn’t happen.

Rather than keep stumbling trying to express the contrarian, simultaneous, impressions listening to this DAC left me with, I’ll short cut things a bit … which is really what happened with my auditioning anyway …

This is a $28,000 DAC* … and there is nothing I found about it, beyond the nature of the lushness it sometimes exhibited, that I would take over very much cheaper DACs. I’ll go further than that and say I don’t think I’d buy it at all … even at a fraction of that price.

Let’s put this in perspective …

For that price, I could buy the DAVE, Pavane, DirectStream AND another Yggdrasil, and still get change out of the price of the Nagra unit.

And to focus that a bit further … from a musical perspective … I’d rather listen to any one of those than the HD DAC.

Sometimes a stratospheric price tag means nothing more than the thing is more expensive.

Here, well, maybe it measures brilliantly. Maybe I'm missing the genius in the design. Or perhaps I'm a cloth-eared, tone-deaf, audio-peasant with no more right to listen to, or comment on, such exotically priced goods than a weasel. Or could it be this is how it's all supposed to sound and everyone else is getting it wrong (a comment I think I made about the TotalDAC, also)? If so, I'm going to have to reevaluate whether I care about accurate reproduction vs. just simple enjoyment****.

So it’s less that Yggdrasil beats this thing technically, though in my opinion it does, and more that I’d just rather listen to the music that flows forth from Yggdrasil’s than try to find it in this particular DAC.


--

*Some potential confusion on price, due it not being entirely clear what PSU option was being discussed.
**Yes, I know it is giga-watts … but that’s not how he says it in the movie!
***I would feel like I’d been fucked if I somehow wound up getting talked into buying this. And not with consent!
****I'm actually well aware that my personal bias when it comes to listening to music is always engagement, involvement and, most of all, pleasure. So this is just me being an arse.

 

PS Audio †

Updates:

Some things have changed with regards to my experiences with PS Audio since I first had my hands (or ears, I guess) on them. Probably the biggest is that, beyond those initial auditions, and consequently putting both units in my auditioning “short list”*, I wound up purchasing a DirectStream Junior.

I did this on the used market where, due to PS Audio’s “trade-in” pricing options on new units, means prices take a bit more of a hit than you might expect. The deal was too good to pass-up, so I grabbed the unit and took the opportunity to spend a lot more time with it.

Another thing to note is that while these units were denoted as (+) in the original thread, the equivalent indicator today is (=). You'll see that change with some other units as well and it something you should NOT regard as a demotion in terms of perceived performance, simply a change in how I am representing things … I’m not specifically looking for something to “beat” Yggdrasil … it’s just the base line for common comparisons.

Stuff in Common:

Now … I’m going to cover a few points common to both the DirectStream and DirectStream Junior DACs first and then discuss differences and sound individually.

One of the key features of the PS Audio DirectStream DACs it that they can be upgraded, by the user, in a very simple process. Essentially, you download the new software (which is defines the configuration or programming of the FPGA, copy it to an SD card (or USB stick for the Junior), plug it in and reboot the unit.

Since the implementations for up/over-sampling, PCM-to-DSD conversion, and digital-to-analog conversion, as well as overall system operation, are implemented on the FPGA, these “software” upgrades have the potential to radically alter the performance of the unit.

This is a smart move.

Linn does something similar (although their FPGA doesn’t do the actual D-to-A part of the job – that’s done with a D/S chip, and the FPGA handles up/over-sampling, filtering, and room-correction). And over many upgrades to my Linn DSM units, there have been significant improvements in sound quality – so the feature is potentially huge.

Chord also use an FPGA implementation for their DACs, however they’ve chosen not to make these user/field upgradeable and if they ever released an update (which I don’t think is likely based on comments from Rob Watts), the units would have to be returned to the factory to be modified; so unless no updates are planned there (e.g. say if Rob didn’t think he can make further improvements), that’s a lost opportunity in my opinion.

In the case of the PS Audio units, does this upgradability translate into anything useful?

I have to say that’s a resounding “YES”!

I deliberately began my audition on an older OS (“Yale”). Upgrading to the latest version, “Torreys” brought immediate, obvious and surprisingly wide ranging improvements (not just differences).

This is very exciting feature, with huge potential. Upgradability is very nice to have and it being something that the user can do themselves, quickly and easily, makes it even better.

DirectStream DAC (=)

When running on the “Yale” operating system, I felt the DirectStream was good, but not really as competitive as it was going to need to be to warrant going on to the next round of evaluation. Detail was a little smoothed in the upper registers, there was a bit more “mass” in the mid-range than I believe was properly authentic, and dynamics were not quite on the level that I’d expect with this tier of product.

It was still an enjoyable listen but wasn’t quite good enough for me to want to take further.

Installing the “Torreys” release made a surprisingly large improvement, almost across the board. A simple software update transformed the DAC and elevated it from “good but no cigar” to fully competitive, and even edging ahead in overall musicality and emotion. The remainder of these comments are based on listening to the “Torreys” operating system release (which is the latest release as of this writing).

This doesn’t quite reach the detail levels of DAVE, which is only fractionally ahead of Yggdrasil there anyway, but the DirectStream is largely on par with Yggdrasil. They do seem to trade places here and there with different recordings. Detail and resolution are, nonetheless, very high and there’s no sense of artificiality or exaggeration to that detail, unlike, say, some of the Sabre based units (Auralic’s Vega in particular).

Tone is very pure, with excellent timbral rendering. The nemesis for most DACs in these evaluations, rending of piano, was handled extremely well with the only discernible difference coming from a sense of very-slightly (and I do mean VERY slightly) slower attack from the PS Audio unit.

Imaging/sound-stage … is taken by Yggdrasil. It yields a better sense of three dimensionality and slightly better separated 2D projection, although the DirectStream certainly projects a solid, stable and 3D image – if a bit behind in the vertical domain.

I found the overall sound to be extremely well balanced and perhaps a bit richer than Yggdrasil, particularly in the mid-range and treble. Articulation, space/air, instrumental separation were all fully competitive.

Dynamics/transients just favored Yggdrasil. There was a slightly better sense of things starting/stopping instantly with Schiit’s DAC.

Any sense of glare, harshness or artificiality was completely absent. Music was portrayed in a very smooth and engaging manner and it was hard not to get lost in it and just sit listening. Yggdrasil has sometimes been accused of being clinical, analytical or lean/bright, and while I donotshare those opinions, they’re definitely not adjectives one would apply to the DirectStream unit.

Overall this was a fabulous listen that didn’t give up much, if anything, to Yggdrasil and where it did fall short, it wasn’t buy much or in more than a couple of places. This absolutely had to go on the original shortlist, not just because of how it sounds, but also because of the (realized) potential of its upgradability.

DirectStream Junior (-) (!) (*) †

PS Audio claim this is 85% of the performance of its progenitor, at two-thirds the price. The deal is actually better than that, though, as the price of the Junior includes the “Network Bridge II” card. This would be an $899 option for the bigger DAC.

Then there’s trade-in options, which are available direct from the manufacturer, and which can reduce the price of the unit substantially. This further slants things in favor of the Junior if you want that Network interface (and I definitely would, see below). Using the same trade-in option for both units, you get $4,999 + $899 for the DirectStream w/ Network Bridge II vs. $2,999 (also with the network card, since it’s included). That means you’re paying just over half the price of the bigger DAC to get largely the same capabilities and most of the performance.

So, now on to the sound … which will be a VERY brief discussion as departures from the bigger DAC are just not that large.

This sounds uncannily like its big brother. Initially I was in doubt that, without listening the way I do when I’m auditioning, I’d be able to tell the difference at all. Ownership changes things, however, and that perception has altered in that time ... and I was ever more aware of the differences between this and Yggdrasil - and it's hard to imagine not having the same deltas become apparent against the big version.

Junior loses out a little on the detail side of things, dynamics/transients aren’t quite at the level of big-brother, with micro-dynamics taking a bigger hit than macro, and it is a little behind on imaging, but tone/timbre, PRaT and involvement are all right there with the “full” version.

Having had months with one of these, now, my feelings with regard to it vs. Yggdrasil have changed a bit as well. Just enough to warrant changing its rating though, depending on your preferences, it might well be more to your taste than Schiit’s monster. Ultimately I decided to let the PS Audio unit go and have since sold it. The differences became more apparent with more exposure, even without audition-level listening, and I was spending disproportionately more time with Yggdrasil as the source.

Really, the extra time/ownership largely wound up emphasizing my appreciation of Yggdrasil’s superior bottom-end, it’s better portrayal of piano, and generally more consistently musical delivery, while perhaps showing the DirectStream Junior to demonstrate a slightadvantage in terms of black-ground (only apparent on some recordings). Other observations remain where they were originally, other than the changed rating at least.

I had hoped that, during my additional time with the Junior, that firmware would get updated again so that it was possible to see if PS Audio had found ways to get even more out of the unit(s) … but as of today “Torreys” remains the current, latest, offering there. It's possible an update here would put it back in the (=) category, but for now I'm going to move it to (-).

On this first cycle this unit was given a (!) designation on the basis that there were cases where I found that, from a musicality perspective, I preferred it over it’s bigger brother. My feelings on that have changed as I’ve had more time with. I do think the Junior is better value, but I’d rank it behind it’s sibling now … even though the (!) has been retained due to the much better value factor.

The short version here is that I still feel the Junior is a lot closer to its more expensive relative than the 15% differential that PS Audio cite. Maybe that’s from measurements, I don’t know, but sitting and listening to them … I’d say it’s closer to 95%. I would, for example, say the Junior is closer to the full-blown DirectStream than Gungnir Multi-bit is to Yggdrasil (and they’re pretty close, even if their signatures are somewhat different).

Network Bridge II

For most DACs I was NOT comparing different inputs – I pretty much used AES/EBU if it was available, TOSLINK if it wasn’t, and only USB if it was the only option and/or I was experimenting with DSD.

With the PS Audio units, I did use both their AES/EBU inputs and the Network Bridge II.

There’s not a lot to say here … except that I generally preferred listening to both units via their Network interfaces. Detail and timing seemed improved, as did instrumental separation and layering using the Bridge as an input. And if I was buying the DirectStream I would definitely get it with the Network Bridge II option.

-

A footnote on DSD playback:

I did try DSD playback with these units and did NOT suffer any of the dropout issues that I was getting with the Chord units. I didn’t find that feeding the unit native-DSD improved its performance at all (nor pre-converted PCM content – but that’s probably because it can do its own conversion internally), but I will say that, of the handful of DACs I did bother testing with DSD initially, this pair performed the best**.

That applies in both function and sound.

Today, I’d put the Holo Audio Spring DAC (Level 3/KTE) just ahead of the Direct Stream Junior for DSD replay. Which was another part of my rationale for selling the PS Audio unit.

--

*This gives PS Audio the, possibly dubious, “honor” of being the first and, so far, only manufacturer to get two units onto my original shortlist.
**Note that I can’t count the Chord units in the comparison there because, while they did sound good when they were playing, drop-outs above single-rate DSD (which I didn’t like in comparison to ANYTHING) were so frequent that there was no way one could listen to an entire track without multiple interruptions and being jarred out of the moment.

 

TotalDAC (~) †

My original, shall we say, “encounter”, with the d1-Dual was interesting and, to be honest, somewhat perplexing. A little troubling even. While clearly different to other DACs I’ve heard, and possessing a musical, organic and even rather analog-feeling presentation, there was something at work that kept pulling me out of my musical immersion.

While that is not a good thing from my perspective, I don’t want it be something that suggests that I haven’t liked the TotalDAC units I’ve heard. In raw terms they sound really good. Excellent in fact. But an inability to maintain immersion is pretty much a deal killer for me (lots of DACs fail to get me immersed in the music at ALL, in this case it’s just that something kept pulling me out of it once I was there).

I got a lot of feedback on this from the original thread. A lot of it was the usual butt-hurt pissing and moaning because I hadn’t lavished unbounded praise on someone’s DAC-du-jour, with remarks covering the gamut from my parents never being married, to my ears being located up my arse (along with the rest of my head and most of my shoulders).

In a few cases, some constructive suggestions were made– at least in terms of trying to figure out what the “something” at work in distracting me was. Suggestions here ranged from one channel in the overall system being connected out-of-phase with the other, to power issues and/or warm-up and burn-in. While the latter two issues were definitely not factors, I was not able to test, myself, the phase-inversion possibility as I no longer had access to the DAC to try it. However, that was eliminated as a possibility subsequently by the DAC’s actual owner.

Since then I’ve had a few occasions to listen to other TotalDAC units (not all the “d1-Dual” configuration), albeit in a variety of different systems, none of them mine, and none of them involving Yggdrasil. But one thing has been constant here …

This mysterious “something” remains.

As such, I’ve moved this commentary up to the general “TotalDAC” block rather than keeping it in just the “d1-Dual” specific section.

I do not know if this is simply a product of my preferences. Hell, at the time I didn’t know if the effect was even “real” (vs. a product of expectation bias/observer-expectancy). I’ve not been able to arrange any kind of “blind” test to see if that changes things, which would help a lot here. But, ultimately, it could be any number of things, up to, and including this being the only DAC that does things “right” and literally everything else being some level of “wrong”. Now, I do NOT believe that for a moment, but, still, I have no idea what is causing this effect when the thing otherwise sounds so musical and smooth.

Anyway … back to the unit, and there’s not much in the raw narrative here that’s going to be different from before …

d1-Dual (-) (~) †

Build is neat, simple, and perhaps not what you might expect at this price level. You can look at that as being “cheap” … which is how it would feel if you compared it to, say, the Merging NADAC, or “pragmatic”, which is where you wind up if you’d rather the costs were allocated to making the thing sound good rather than look/feel good/expensive.

I’m going to go with “pragmatic” here.

Waffle over … now onto how TotalDAC sounds …

The moment you start to run music through the d1-Dual you know you’re listening to something different. Considering everything I’ve listened to so far, this is easily the biggest departure in presentation from what I’m accustomed to. The sound is very musical, organic and it is uncanny as to how much like analog reproduction it is. By which I mean it’s probably the closest thing I’ve heard to my (modest) turntable in terms of “analog-ness”; something that I expect will be subjectively either very good, or not so good, depending on preferences. That’s not to say it specifically sounds like vinyl … just the nature of the analog presentation.

While I appreciate analog-like sound, it’s not because I want to replicate the sound of vinyl. It’s because it feels closer to the way I perceive sound in a purely analog environment.

I found a richness to the tone of the unit which I don’t interpret as being entirely neutral but, at the same time, I can’t point to any obvious emphasis in any point of the frequency spectrum. I also found that music felt very slightly “slower” than with other DACs, including Yggdrasil. Not that I consider these items to be problems, just part of the signature I heard. Detail (or, at least, micro-detail)/resolution seems a little behind my benchmark and both the Chord and ESS-based designs. Transparency was excellent, that tonal richness I mentioned somehow not detracting from my perceptions here.

No glare, no fatigue, no hot-spots.

Imaging, which as has been the case elsewhere, I principally evaluated via speakers, was not quite where I expected it to be. It was a noticeably less precise and stable sound stage than Yggdrasil or DAVE; often expansive, but not as solid. Not what I've read elsewhere, but it is what I experienced.

Attack seemed a little subdued with percussive instruments, and the leading edges of notes on plucked strings and brass also felt a little reticent. Not a lot … it wasn’t a huge thing, just noticeable because I was listening in a manner that would make it more obvious than if you were just playing music for pleasure (one of the pitfalls of active auditioning). For example, when I first walked in and heard it playing all I heard was music. Expressive, emotive, sonorous …music. And that certainly hasn’t been the case with some of the other DACs here!

Dynamics were, I think, the biggest shortfall compared to Yggdrasil, with Schiit’s unit delivering more low-end slam, and a generally more driving and forthright performance. Micro dynamics were further behind than macro, with some areas in which I’m used to hearing very subtle volume modulation sounding flat and even.

Now, this is where things got (and seemingly stay) a bit weird …

As previously mentioned, something, very subtle, I think mostly about the timbre of instruments and tone of voices kept distracting me throughout much of my listening. Whether it was a feeling or something specifically audible, I am still not 100% sure. And I cannot come up with a meaningful way to express exactly what I was hearing/perceiving, but it’s different to what I’ve experienced with every other DAC I’ve heard so far (both in terms of the first round of auditions, subsequent less-disciplined listening and, well, ever).

I am NOT saying that this is an issue in, and of, itself. I don’t even know if it’s a real effect, though it was a consistent perception. Again, it might be that this is the only DAC that is capable of that sort of reproduction and everything else is missing something somehow. It might be some level of expectation-bias.

I just don’t know.

I do know that it sounded different to the piano (it’s a vintage baby-grand Steinway built well before I was born and in a time when ivory was what your keys were made of whether you liked it or not) I am used to the sound of in ways that, say Yggdrasil, doesn't. Whatever it was, it wasn’t apparent with other DACs in otherwise the same system and environment. And I’ve never had quite this experience with any other DAC in any other system either.

And neither of my friends that were there for part of my listening had any idea what my problem was … they certainly weren’t experiencing it. It could “just be me”.

But the effect of this was that it kept distracting me. To the point that while it wasn’t stopping the conveyance of emotion in music, it kept pulling me out of the moment and stopped me fully immersing myself in the overall musical experience, as I was trying to figure out what I was experiencing. I was not able to let go of the feeling and just get lost in things.

So … sonically, it is best to say it trades blows with Yggdrasil but mostly it's just meaningfully different. To be fair, in places in some good ways – but as of this experience it’s not a device I can use to lose myself in the music the way I want and need to.

I think the biggest problem I am having here is that for myriad reasons (hype, respect for Vincent and his work, a genuine like of the “slap you in the face” analog-sense it portrays, etc.) I really want to like this thing more than I actually do.

As different as it is, I think this is one unit/brand that absolutely warrants doing your own audition with, because I’d hate to nay-say the thing and find out it was JUST ME that wasn’t getting on with it.

I’m not soured on the TotalDAC at all … I’m highly intrigued and rather impressed (on several levels), anxious to explore more in fact, but it’s not going to work formeas things stand. I'll still need to reach out to Vincent to see what he thinks and if he's ever had similar comments from elsewhere.

Another FORMAL audition (not just the scattered additional listening I’ve had since the first round) is likely but, again, not as part of this cycle.

 

PS Audio Stellar Gain Cell looks pretty interesting, but reminds me of LHLabs with the pre-order schtick.

 

General Updates:

I finished re-posting the content for the main impressions and index posts that was lost during the restore/rollback. This brings the thread current with all originally auditioned DACs impressions posted (excepts the Wagner Audio Lab Series II*)

Some of the subsequent inline discussion is gone - so if you asked a question and still want a response, please re-post it.

Next up:

• Add the remaining playlists and albums/works to the "Audition Materials & Playlists" post.
• Complete, and post, the Linn: Klimax DSM/3 "Katalyst" write-up (listening is done, write-up is at 70%).
• Write up the four-way Schiit multi-bit comparison (the comparison itself is done).

When that's all done, I'll start in on some of the other DACs.

--

*I've moved this back to the "Pending" list, as there were enough issues in that audition that I do not want to post my findings without re-auditioning it, and I am not sure how likely that is to happen.

 

If you wanted it as an all-in one unit I can see it being potentially interesting. I'd bet it loses favor for not having balanced-output for headphones. And the DAC looks to be a relatively pedestrian ESS-based job (with basic 1x and 2x DSD support).

That said, if it's as easy to get hold of for demo as the other PS Audio units have been, I'll give it a go.

Except that a) they're not billing you before it ships and b) they start shipping this Wednesday*

--

*This is a far-cry from the LH Labs M.O. of "it'll ship on Wednesday ... we're just not telling you which Wednesday".

 

Thanks for your effort Torq, its really nice to have many dacs filtered through the same ears. Please carry on

Ferrum

 

Ugh... You're not going to make me regret getting rid of my Klimax DS/1 a few years ago are you? Upgrading to the newest version is pretty "reasonable" if I recall...certainly less than I've paid for the two DACs I've owned since...