Crossroads - A new DAC/Preamp or keep DAC and buy a preamp

[DomT]

Hello everyone

My retirement hifi plans hadn't worked out as I imaged.  Now that we are settled in Portugal the realities are different that the theoretical plans.  My second system is surprisingly becoming the first system as I am spending more time listening to music on it and also because I love the sound of the P3ESRs in this room. And for the very first time I am listing to my Benchmark DAC 1 directly to the Quad 909. but I need to plug in my turntable and cassette deck.  The DAC 1 does not have analogue inputs.  (My impetuous ARC preamp purchase fell through.) So I have some decisions.

Set up.  Auralic Aries Mini streamer playing Tidal Hifi and ripped CDs on an Altair G1. Benchmark DAC1. Quad 909. Harbeth P3ESR. Michell t/t and a Dynavector P75 phonostage.

The streaming sounds really great.  Its not perfect but it has drive and great tone and is a joy to listen to.  I prefer the Benchmark presentation than the Auralic Aries Mini/909 AND I prefer the Benchmark to the DAC in the Altair G1.  Am thinking to keep the 909 and P3ESRs and just introduce a preamp somehow.

Option 1. Keep the Benchmark DAC1 and buy a preamp - maybe a Schiit Freya because I can home demo it or find another ARC that I used to own. 

Option 2. Buy a Benchmark DAC 2 or 3 as they have analogue inputs. Am nervous about other DACs due to no home demo. 

Budget c €2000 prefer 2nd hand.

I know that some people will say that a separate preamp is 'better' and others will say an integral preamp is 'better' but it would be good to hear some views that would put it in a musical context.  I literally have a few weeks experience of listening to a DAC into power amps so I have no frame of reference and home demos apart from direct sellers is a no-go.  

Thanks

 

[DomT]

ok so not the most exciting thread but would really appreciate some thoughts as I know you guys and value your comments! For example I expect @tuga and @rabski to say the opposite to each other but it's their explanations that are helpful. Thanks

 

[tuga]

Since you are happy with the sound of the Benchmark and you need more analogue inputs I would think that it would make more sense to replace it with one of their more recent pre-amplifier DACs.

There could a slight difference in sound but I would hope it would be for the better. Personally I prefer to keep away from DACs with ESS chips because sometimes there are issues with implementation (Sabre "hump") but I would expect Benchmark to have done a good job.

I believe, from my understanding and listening experience, that equipment should follow the KISS (as simple as possible) approach and strive for the highest possible fidelity or accurate reproduction of the recorded signal as does Benchmark, but others see it differently.

Adding a pre-amplifier to the playback chain could give the opportunity to experiment with "euphonic colouration" AKA moussaka and the preamp is actually the right link of the chain to do it if that's your goal. But this will send you on a spree of comparisons which may or may not be what you are looking for.

Happy shopping!

 

[zekezebra]

Maybe a Mytek Brooklyn Bridge would simplify the system taking the place of some existing components. Streamer,  DAC, pre-amp and phono input. Also they offer a 14 day, no questions asked, return policy so a chance to try it out.

 

[rabski]

ok so not the most exciting thread but would really appreciate some thoughts as I know you guys and value your comments! For example I expect @tuga and @rabski to say the opposite to each other but it's their explanations that are helpful. Thanks

I actually agree with Ric on a lot of things. The probable differences come because we may enjoy a slightly different presentation and have different priorities in terms of listening. As always, my comments need to be taken in the context of my system and tastes.

My preference is for a 'realistic' musical presentation, with particularly the soundstage, placement and tone being high up the list. I want a cello to sound like a cello, and to me 'accuracy' is a meaningless concept because what's on the recording isn't 'accurate' most of the time. It's not a question of two wrongs making a right, it's just that the whole thing is an illusion to start with, so IMO it's better to aim for a realistic sounding illusion first, and also an illusion that's pleasant to listen to at length. It seems pointless to me to have a system that is unpleasant to listen to at length with the majority of music you have, simply because it is 'accurate'.

My system is also an important contextual factor. I've made a lot of mods to my 845 over the years, and sonically it simply works best combined with a valve preamp to drive it. Gain is not the issue, but I've tried it running direct, and it simply loses much of the magic that makes you want to listen at length. It's also important to consider the context that my preamp was glued together on my bench here and although a relatively straightforward circuit, I paid serious attention to component choice, layout and power supplies. A commercial equivalent would be substantially beyond what I would want to pay. It does not add 'colour' to any notable extent. I chose valves that are notable for linearity and run them at an operating point that is pretty much 'flat'.

The other point about a preamp (any decent preamp) is that it would give you more flexibility and would mean not having to change a load of other stuff or risk either going sideways or backwards. I don't know the 909 personally, but the Quad power amps I've had here have generally come alive fed with a decent preamp, and have been a bit lifeless otherwise. A good preamp also tends not to be too difficult to sell on at the right price, whereas the DAC market seems a bit flooded and variable at present.

In short. If it was my system, I'd be on a preamp like a tramp on a bag of chips. But it isn't my system, of course

 

[George 47]

Let me add another view.

If you like what ARC preamps do and the flexibility of a preamp is desirable I would go for a nice used ARC preamp. They are more neutral than other valve preamps and would add a little warmth to the system which a Benchmark could do with.

If you want a clean uncoloured sound then a passive transformer preamp like the Icon would be ideal. It is neutral, has remote control and the SQ matches one of the best passive controllers around but it may not be ideal with your TT depending on its output. You can get it on home trial. 

If it was me (and my tastes) it would be Option 1) with a nice ARC preamp. But I am biased as I am running ARC Ref 5 and ARC Ref 110 at the moment and really enjoying them. They do not have the warmth and weight of AN and are more neutral but have enough valve character to give great 3D images and do not descend into a thin grey transistor sound.

 

[tuga]

Let me add another view.

If you like what ARC preamps do and the flexibility of a preamp is desirable I would go for a nice used ARC preamp. They are more neutral than other valve preamps and would add a little warmth to the system which a Benchmark could do with.

If you want a clean uncoloured sound then a passive transformer preamp like the Icon would be ideal. It is neutral, has remote control and the SQ matches one of the best passive controllers around but it may not be ideal with your TT depending on its output. You can get it on home trial. 

If it was me (and my tastes) it would be Option 1) with a nice ARC preamp. But I am biased as I am running ARC Ref 5 and ARC Ref 110 at the moment and really enjoying them. They do not have the warmth and weight of AN and are more neutral but have enough valve character to give great 3D images and do not descend into a thin grey transistor sound.

You've reminded me that a stand-alone preamp has another advantage which is that @DomT can upgrade either the DAC or the preamp at anytime, and that if one breaks down he'll still be able to enjoy music.

 

[DomT]

Thanks guys. I know that there are various and sometimes opposing views but it’s good to read these from you as I am used to your preferences now and it’s far more meaningful than reading other forums.

I am genuinely torn and don’t know what would sound best. I can’t afford a new ARC and so it would be a secondhand punt (probably SP9 mk2) I would welcome the normal benefits that an ARC preamp would bring but if it would take away too much clarity from the existing signal chain I would end up then searching for a cleaner sounding power amp as the 909 isn’t the most transparent amp.

The current sound isn’t sterile (helped by the amp and speakers) but would be considered so by some and is certainly missing a little bit of magic! The Benchmark DAC2 or 3 is supposedly a bit sweeter than the DAC1 and this may be good enough but could fall short. One of the strong benefits is the small size and no fuss. 
 

Will give it some more thought. Wondering if someone will reply who has tried a Benchmark with and without preamp?

 

[DomT]

Maybe a Mytek Brooklyn Bridge would simplify the system taking the place of some existing components. Streamer,  DAC, pre-amp and phono input. Also they offer a 14 day, no questions asked, return policy so a chance to try it out.

Thanks for the thought but I haven’t liked what I have read about the Brooklyn sound. I also can’t find where I can get a free trial. I am in Portugal. 

 

[DomT]

A good preamp also tends not to be too difficult to sell on at the right price, whereas the DAC market seems a bit flooded and variable at present.

In short. If it was my system, I'd be on a preamp like a tramp on a bag of chips. But it isn't my system, of course

Really good point about resale. And I love the chips comment; going to steal that one!

 

[rabski]

Additional and specific thought. I have heard a few ARC preamps over the years. They do not necessarily always have a 'house' sound. There are some who might suggest that some, if not all, the reference models may well be significantly better than some of the standard range. Such people might well further suggest some in-depth review reading of certain models before making a substantial investment...

 

[rabski]

Really good point about resale. And I love the chips comment; going to steal that one!

Where do you think I got it

 

[DomT]

Additional and specific thought. I have heard a few ARC preamps over the years. They do not necessarily always have a 'house' sound. There are some who might suggest that some, if not all, the reference models may well be significantly better than some of the standard range. Such people might well further suggest some in-depth review reading of certain models before making a substantial investment...

Very good point. There seems to be a divide between the earlier models and the later ones and certainly the Ref Series as you say. I used to have an LS25 mk2 that I bought after trying a few others at the ARC dealer. But I can’t stretch to that and I was hoping to get a phonostage included. I did try to by an SP17 from a dealer but it’s a commission sale and the owner doesn’t seem to want to sell it. The SP9 mk2 seems to represent the more tube but not too euphonic ARC sound. The very recent stuff higher end stuff I don’t like at all. 

 

[DomT]

Am also conscious that it’s Christmas Eve and you guys are probably wrapping up socks etc to give to your loved ones. I really appreciate your thought especially as I am watching two items online that I might now pounce on after lunch @tuga Bacalhau com natas!!

 

[tuga]

Am also conscious that it’s Christmas Eve and you guys are probably wrapping up socks etc to give to your loved ones. I really appreciate your thought especially as I am watching two items online that I might now pounce on after lunch @tuga Bacalhau com natas!!

We're having bacalhau espiritual on this first of our 10-day self-isolation period.

Feliz Natal!

 

[DomT]

We're having bacalhau espiritual on this first of our 10-day self-isolation period.

Feliz Natal!

Feliz Natal

 

[Bazzer]

wrapping up socks etc to give to your loved ones

One receives socks with a smile , one does not give socks if you want to see the new year .

 

[Lawrence001]

One idea would you to use a good quality passive pre. That way you can select between sources and attenuate the output of the phono stage. If after trying both you prefer the volume control of the DAC you can switch the passive to full volume when playing digital so it's just a "pass through" device.

If you want remote volume there are options (ag. Akustyk of Poland which I've always liked the look of and the BTE guy).

If you want a stepped attenuator (my preference) be sure to get one that allows you sufficient fine control at low volume. I see 40 steps as the minimum.

I'm not an expert on the compatibility of passives with the Quad amp but others may be able to chime in. There's always the option of a buffer either after the phono stage or after the passive depending on where works best. By choosing a passive you have lots of tweaking options you don't get with an active. It's all swings and roundabouts at the end of the day.

Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Chumpchops]

I made my views on the other thread.  I have heard Both the DAC1 and DAC1Pre 1, and am in favour of the integrated Pre design. Benchmark imo have matched the two very well.  The remote is good and the alps potentiometer motorised volume knob always entertains.  It’s one less box to match, to power, to cable and integrate, as it’s done for you

But I do not recall any sonic difference in the two.  So I went for pre.   Pre has more facilities and inputs.  I also would not worry about obsolescence any more than I would the Harbeths or Quad becoming obselete .. it sounds good and a good design lasts.  
If you think about it the DAC1 is obselete and relatively old, but sound good.

you might get a trade in deal against a 3 HGC.