DA converter test - cheap CD player vs. Benchmark

[WideGlide]

Wow... for the heck of it I just did a quick A/B test... compared a good
Denon CD player with a Benchmark DAC1 hooked up to it, to a $129 Sony CD
player from 1991. I had two identical cds for the test (not CDR copies).
In sum, by comparison, the cheap Sony had a noticeable lack of "dimension".
The Benchmark sounded "deeper" and "wider" in terms of space. The Sony also
seemed to have a reduced upper top end, the Benchmark seemed to have more of
an ultra hi-end "edge" if you will... a bit more "sparkle". The Sony had a
somewhat "stuffy" and seemingly compressed upper mid range. The Benchmark
was more "spread out", just seemed to have more frequency separation, as if
the different frequencies were coming at your from different places... the
Sony sounded like everything was kinda smashed together and coming in at you
from a small area of the center. In sum, the Benchmark just sounded BETTER,
more rich, more realistic. So, just a note to anyone who might be comparing
CDs to vinyl or whatever, don't waste your time unless you have a really
good cd player with good DAs, because it apparently makes a pretty big
difference, especially with regards to this issue of "dimension", "depth"
etc. I am now wondering how all my other converters compare and I'm getting
a bit worried. Hope my 8-channel RME can hold it's own here, because I
don't think I can afford a Prism right now. I am getting more and more
sensitive to this issue of "dimension", and certainly don't want to think
that I'm robbing my recordings of dimension via inadequate converters.

[Scott Dorsey]

WideGlide > wrote:
>Wow... for the heck of it I just did a quick A/B test... compared a good
>Denon CD player with a Benchmark DAC1 hooked up to it, to a $129 Sony CD
>player from 1991. I had two identical cds for the test (not CDR copies).
>In sum, by comparison, the cheap Sony had a noticeable lack of "dimension".
>The Benchmark sounded "deeper" and "wider" in terms of space. The Sony also
>seemed to have a reduced upper top end, the Benchmark seemed to have more of
>an ultra hi-end "edge" if you will... a bit more "sparkle". The Sony had a
>somewhat "stuffy" and seemingly compressed upper mid range.

Yes. It's not very subtle.

You should just audition the Prism and compare it with the Benchmark, just
to see what else you're missing...
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Kurt Albershardt]

WideGlide wrote:
>
> I am now wondering how all my other converters compare and I'm getting
> a bit worried. Hope my 8-channel RME can hold it's own here, because I
> don't think I can afford a Prism right now.

The A/D on the RME is pretty decent, especially after a few simple mods. The D/A is serviceable.

[WideGlide]

<< You should just audition the Prism and compare it with the Benchmark,
just to see what else you're missing...-scott >>
-------------------

Scott, I know you have some experience with the RME. I have the 48k version
(not the 96k version)... I record mostly in 44.1k anyway. How would you
compare the RME to the Prism 8-channel unit... how much of a difference is
there in your opinion? Are we talking somewhat subtle, or does the Prism
really blow it out of the water? In what ways specifically would you say
the Prism surpasses the RME the most? Satisfy my curiosity until I get a
chance to hear all this stuff. I am using a system where I need an
8-channel unit which connects via ADAT lightpipe... so I am a bit limited as
to which units I can use. If I am not mistaken, I can't use the Lavry's. I
wonder how "middle of the road" units are like the Apogees, etc, or perhaps
the RME can hold its own in this category?

Scott, any opinions on the Prism verses the Myteks?

By the way, there is a check in the mail to you for a copy of the RAP vinyl
disc... thanks!!!

[Scott Dorsey]

WideGlide > wrote:
>
>Scott, I know you have some experience with the RME. I have the 48k version
>(not the 96k version)... I record mostly in 44.1k anyway. How would you
>compare the RME to the Prism 8-channel unit... how much of a difference is
>there in your opinion? Are we talking somewhat subtle, or does the Prism
>really blow it out of the water? In what ways specifically would you say
>the Prism surpasses the RME the most? Satisfy my curiosity until I get a
>chance to hear all this stuff.

I can only compare the 48k RME (the ADI-8) to the older generation Prism
like the AD-124. And I find there is a much better sense of presence and
detail with the Prism. I can only suppose the newer Prism is even better
but I have not tried the newer ones.

>I am using a system where I need an
>8-channel unit which connects via ADAT lightpipe... so I am a bit limited as
>to which units I can use. If I am not mistaken, I can't use the Lavry's.

Well, if you get the RME, you can always use it in the future as a device
to convert T-DIF to ADAT and vice-versa. as well as an ADAT or T-DIF
distribution box. Or you can get the RME conversion box.

> I
>wonder how "middle of the road" units are like the Apogees, etc, or perhaps
>the RME can hold its own in this category?

I think the RME does hold its own surprisingly well compared with the older
Apogees.

>Scott, any opinions on the Prism verses the Myteks?

I can't say since I have not used any of the newer Mytek stuff, only some
stuff a couple generations back.

>By the way, there is a check in the mail to you for a copy of the RAP vinyl
>disc... thanks!!!

Don't thank me until you've heard it!
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Mike Looijmans]

There's only one problem with your test: You don't know which of the two is
better. The best player is the one with the sound closest to the original
recording. Maybe the original is what the Sony is playing, and the Benchmark
is "enhancing" the sound.

What you should do is:

Take a known source, such as a DAT tape recording. Record it and transfer to
a CDR.

Compare the sound of:
A - The DAT itself
B - The computer sound card playing the recording
C - The CDR in the Sony
D - The CDR in the Benchmark.

The BEST player (C or D) is the one that sounds most like A. A and B should
sound equal (you can't distinguish in blind listening) for this test to
succeed, otherwise the sound card is not up to the job (AD/DA conversion not
good enough).

For the best CD player, you are unable to distinguish between the CD player
and the sound card or DAT in a blind listening test.

And that proves the CD player to be the best FOR THIS RECORDING only...

> Wow... for the heck of it I just did a quick A/B test... compared a good
> Denon CD player with a Benchmark DAC1 hooked up to it, to a $129 Sony CD

[Another Mike]

"Mike Looijmans" > wrote in
:

> Take a known source, such as a DAT tape recording. Record it and
> transfer to a CDR.
>
> Compare the sound of:
> A - The DAT itself
> B - The computer sound card playing the recording
> C - The CDR in the Sony
> D - The CDR in the Benchmark.
>
> The BEST player (C or D) is the one that sounds most like A. A and B
> should sound equal (you can't distinguish in blind listening) for this
> test to succeed, otherwise the sound card is not up to the job (AD/DA
> conversion not good enough).

This will only show you which D/A converter sounds most like the one in the
dat recorder.

[Mike Looijmans]

> This will only show you which D/A converter sounds most like the one in
the
> dat recorder.

That's why A and B (DAT and Sound card) are REQUIRED to be
indistinguishable. If you can distinguish between the two, the conversion is
flawed to begin with, and you can forget about the rest of the test.

The first test therefore is to check whether the sound card used in the
digitizing accurately reproduces the sound. Many low-budget sound cards
would already pass this test. That is why we transfer a known source to the
computer and verify that the results sound equal. Using a DAT is no
requirement, you may use any source you like.

The most important point is that if you just blind compare C and D you can
never tell which is the better one in terms of reproducing the sound. You
need a reference source. Then the test is not "Does C sound better to me
than D" but the test becomes "Which sounds closer to A: C or D?"

Mike.

[chetatkinsdiet]

I totally understand what you were trying to do here, but I just
wanted to add a few things as well.
First, you're using a cheap sony player from 1991. What would a new,
say one or two year old cd player sound like? I'm sure that the low
end converters have had considerable improvement in the past 13 years.
I'm not saying that they'll be in the same league with a benchmark or
other hi end unit, but still, probably much better than a 13 year old
low end sony. Also, you make mention of comparing high quality
converters to vinyl. That's the point. You can spend a fortune on
external AD converters for a hi fi system and take a mid priced
turntable/analog system and probably be just about equal. You don't
have to spend the big bucks to get similar results.
I think that's what the whole analog vs digital in the studio boils
down to. At the upper end of equipment, digital is/sounds great.
Granted it sounds different than analog, but still good....too good is
the case more than not. We've grown accustomed to the "flaws" that
tape imparts on recordings. But, a lot of us are using semi-pro gear
and therefore aren't using the absolute best quality AD/DA converters
in our gear. But, then again, we were probably the same guys that
were using semi-pro analog tape machines as well.
later,
m

[Mark]

That's great that you can hear a difference.

Now why don't you get one of those test tone discs and some equipment
and try to measure and quantify exactly what is causing the difference
that you are hearing.

For example, find out that the "good" player has +1dB response at 20
kHz compared to the "bad" player or less intermodulation distortion or
whatever you might find that would agree with what you hear.

Mark

[Arny Krueger]

"WideGlide" > wrote in message
t
> Wow... for the heck of it I just did a quick A/B test... compared a
> good Denon CD player with a Benchmark DAC1 hooked up to it, to a $129
> Sony CD player from 1991. I had two identical cds for the test (not
> CDR copies). In sum, by comparison, the cheap Sony had a noticeable
> lack of "dimension". The Benchmark sounded "deeper" and "wider" in
> terms of space. The Sony also seemed to have a reduced upper top
> end, the Benchmark seemed to have more of an ultra hi-end "edge" if
> you will... a bit more "sparkle". The Sony had a somewhat "stuffy"
> and seemingly compressed upper mid range. The Benchmark was more
> "spread out", just seemed to have more frequency separation, as if
> the different frequencies were coming at your from different
> places... the Sony sounded like everything was kinda smashed together
> and coming in at you from a small area of the center. In sum, the
> Benchmark just sounded BETTER, more rich, more realistic. So, just a
> note to anyone who might be comparing CDs to vinyl or whatever, don't
> waste your time unless you have a really good cd player with good
> DAs, because it apparently makes a pretty big difference, especially
> with regards to this issue of "dimension", "depth" etc. I am now
> wondering how all my other converters compare and I'm getting a bit
> worried. Hope my 8-channel RME can hold it's own here, because I
> don't think I can afford a Prism right now. I am getting more and
> more sensitive to this issue of "dimension", and certainly don't want
> to think that I'm robbing my recordings of dimension via inadequate
> converters.

Looking at the respective specs...

....the Benchmark DAC puts out -10 dBv (0.316 volts) on its unbalanced
outputs, and +22dBu (about 8 volts) on its unbalanced outputs.
http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/digital/dac1/DAC1-Manual.pdf page 5

Looking at a typical Denon CD player, its output is 2 volts fixed and 0-2
volts variable. http://www.usa.denon.com/catalog/pdfs/DCD1650.PDF

No way do these products have any fixed mode of operation where they put out
anything like comparable signals, level-wise.

So how did you match levels within say, 0.1 dB?

Another requirement for doing a careful comparison it to keep the two
players synched within say, a couple-5 milliseconds. How did you get them to
start up at identically the same time and make them stay synchronized?

Finally, nobody is unbiased. In this case its easy to say that being highly
impressed with the specs and rep of the Benchmark DAC (I am!), you were
biased in favor of it. How did you control your bias in this listening test?