"ScottW" <ScottW48@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:5918de0a-cbd1-44f4-b1c0-19889d3b853e@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
May 3, 6:01 pm, "Soundhaspriority" <nowh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "ScottW" <Scott...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> news:7965a02e-4a03-4e8d-bd96-d6d1a0f8480c@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On May 3, 2:16 pm, Clyde Slick <Mr.clydesl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> [snip]
>
> What did you get for a DAC? On my list of stuff to consider.
> I'm intrigued by the Behringer 2496 and my AMCs analog out is hosed so
> that would be cheap fix but I'm also inclined to just get a Benchmark
> and be done with it.
>
> ScottW
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The Benchmark is on the cutting edge, but there are new AKM DACs that
make
> an equal or better device relatively easy to achieve.
I'd be interested in products that incor****ate the new DACs. I've
seen precious few and I've looked.
ScottW
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott, maybe I'm wrong, but I thought I had you down in the DBT
contingent.
But you're showing the same preferences that I have, for perfection at all
costs. Yes, I'd go for the Benchmark, but Arny and Graham would probably
show, by methods I consider flawed, that the Benchmark is a waste of money
in pursuit of inaudible perfection.
I don't have a DAC that good. My two "boutique DACs" are Musical Fidelity
A3, and a Perpetual P3A. I also have a Sony EP9ES, which though an HT
device, incor****ated Sony's best DACs circa 2003. My theory about CDs is
that there isn't enough in a 16/44 recording to require an instrument of
the
caliber of the Benchmark. Hires masters are another story.
Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511
|
