Very nice set up Ronaldo, Though the width of most US kit can be anoying.
Theta Dac And Transport Advice
- Thread starter ronaldo
- Start date
the dac can be bought here for £699 http://www.loud-clear.co.uk/offers_1.htm
Sorry, a bit harsh. I should have omitted the utter. Your answers in order...
For every review, you will find it's opposite. One review said it has the same detail as a £10,000 zanden dac, but not quite as organic. Mind you I don't buy or rely upon glossy mag bs.
We used a CA2 ATC preamp, all the time with benchmark volume bypassed. Same cables.
I presume you equate more money spent = better performance.
You'll have to contact the ATC accounts department and TagMcLarens tech dept.
They all sound the same into a benchmark. As confirmed by a room of hifi nerds.
Please name a more revealing setup than those used to master? I wonder why they wouldn't use said system if it would make the job easier.
Wasn't it the head of Linn who couldn't hear a cheap 1980's cd player slotted into his vinyl system, on a blind A/B. Carry a blind A/B with witnesses if your so confident, like we did.
For every review, you will find it's opposite. One review said it has the same detail as a £10,000 zanden dac, but not quite as organic. Mind you I don't buy or rely upon glossy mag bs.
We used a CA2 ATC preamp, all the time with benchmark volume bypassed. Same cables.
I presume you equate more money spent = better performance.
You'll have to contact the ATC accounts department and TagMcLarens tech dept.
They all sound the same into a benchmark. As confirmed by a room of hifi nerds.
Please name a more revealing setup than those used to master? I wonder why they wouldn't use said system if it would make the job easier.
Wasn't it the head of Linn who couldn't hear a cheap 1980's cd player slotted into his vinyl system, on a blind A/B. Carry a blind A/B with witnesses if your so confident, like we did.
ronaldo said:
Hi,
Yes I have seen the add, but they have got the rrp prices of both this and the Jade transport wrong, by quite a margin.
(Pro Prime was £1500, Jade transport was £2400)
I will be after a DAC at a later date for my second system, for use with an EAD theatrevision P transport.
This will replace a Teac VRDS T1/D-T1 Transport-DAC combo.
I usualy use the Theta Data III/Pro Basic IIIa combination with a TLC in between in my main system. Which was the top transport/second from top DAC from Theta in the mid 90's.
KUB3 said:
Hi Kub,
I dont really go for the more money spent ideal, and dont think most of the newer gear is that much of an improvement over the old. I agree with personal views, no matter the system resolution they all have some character, and are usualy based on personal preference.
I myself use a Theta front end with Krell amplification and slightly modded Kef Ref 107, though I prefer Audio Research valve pre's I went down the solid state road a few years back. I'm not made of money though, so it will probably have to do me a little longer.
I am interested in the Tact 2.2 and MF passive though.
I quite like the speakers to disapear, no noise, full range, and a neutral detailed yet musical system. I have enough resolution in the system that I can hear the differences in the transports I own. (I still have most of the ones I mentioned previous)
I would like to try an Esoteric CD/DVD player with a Tact 2.2 or MF passive into active ATC.
I'd like to hear a demo of the benchmark being affected by transport, but I haven't been disproved so far. That is why I sold my VRDS mechanism tranny as it made no difference. I had an old cyrus up in the loft which does the job as well as anything tested so far. Not wasting space and money means more music 
The TacT would obviously A to D the sound then D to A it again so it is pointless using something like the Esoteric. I suppose you could use the TacT digital in and out though. Does the Esoteric have digital out AND in?
Tenson said:
This is missing the point, even Lyndorf found that the transport mechanism made a difference, and used a proper mech designed to read CD instead of a CD/DVD rom in their latest CD transport/player.
As also Esoteric/Chord do.You only have to look at the transport Esoteric decided to use with the G-Os. The problem is most use transports with CD/DVD rom mechs, which are inferior to proper CD mechs designed to read red book CD.
KUB3 said:I'd like to hear a demo of the benchmark being affected by transport, but I haven't been disproved so far. That is why I sold my VRDS mechanism tranny as it made no difference. I had an old cyrus up in the loft which does the job as well as anything tested so far. Not wasting space and money means more music
The reviews I have read talk about its slightly bright presentation, and it was said to lack some extension in the bass, overall though for a £1k DAC its bass was superb compaired to its rivals in this price bracket, for a £1k DAC its performance was above par, it was compairable to some of the good CD players in the £3k bracket.
One of the competitors in this price bracket is the Cyrus DAC-X, which is described by some as less forward and more musical, and to me this is obviously down to personal opinion and taste.
I personaly find My Theta transport blows away every other I have, regardless of the DAC I use, though my Theta DAC shows more differences than the Teac or Technics DAC.
My EAD transport is quite detailed, it was compaired to the more costly Mark Levinson in TAS, but it doesnt have the sense of space or weight to instrument, nor the bass definition of the Theta.The Technics Transport has a quite nice treble performance but its bass performance is lacking and slightly softened, Teac lacks definition in the bass, but gives a full bodied sound.Pioneer can be a little two dimensional with not as much depth or width, Meridian seemed to have a smaller presentation between the speakers.
The EAD goes quite well in the Classe/Rogers system, its lighter bass touch along with the Classe's dry bass presentation helps bring the Rogers rather full bass into line.
The Teac transport and DAC help add a bit of bass weight to the Technics/Linn Kan set up, giving a more full bodied sound to these speakers.(with the EAD these can become a little to detailed and forward)
There is not as much choice in after market DACs as there once was, around £1k or silly money are all there seems to be at the moment, and most CD transports are not made that well, and overpriced, most people are now giving opinion after reading forum views and opinion, not many have the confidence to take five Transports with different technologies/price and age with five DACs of different price ranges, and then give an honest opinion in case someone else says otherwise, I myself am happy to believe that transports make a difference, and the confirmation of this in the magazines is something I trust, they review more kit than most do.
I do think that to base opinion on one DAC which is one of the best in its price bracket, with transports with CD/DVD rom mechs, in a system with an average £3.5k per box set up, and claim it is the best with the utmost resolution is a little naive.
There is nothing wrong with the kit or the opinion, but other will prefer the way PMC moniters sound (they go lower), other Tannoy etc.
To make sweeping statements regarding £8k of speaker/amplifer/DAC and call it the most accurate you can get in a world of DCS, Halcro, Wilson, Edilion etc will always have someone question its truth, others will always have a different opinion, it doesnt make them utter idiots, nor does it make one right the other wrong.
The transports dont make a difference argument will be a continuing debate , just as mains and other cables are.
I don't know which partner equipment was used in the review you mention, however I can assure you the DAC1 has no shortage of bass depth. I have A/B'd it on systems with *extreme* extension against the competition, so I'll sleep well at night knowing there is certainly nothing missing 
Also, it's rather funny that every highly revealing piece of hifi in existence is often described as 'bright' sounding - coming from people who favour warm distorted rose tinted presentations. I really doubt companies like PMC, ATC, Wilson, Mark Levinson, Benchmark, Krell etc are producing gear which is inaccurate to the original signal somehow. More likely it just clashes with the opinions of those who personally like warm sounding gear.
Also, it's rather funny that every highly revealing piece of hifi in existence is often described as 'bright' sounding - coming from people who favour warm distorted rose tinted presentations. I really doubt companies like PMC, ATC, Wilson, Mark Levinson, Benchmark, Krell etc are producing gear which is inaccurate to the original signal somehow. More likely it just clashes with the opinions of those who personally like warm sounding gear.
KUB3 said:I don't know which partner equipment was used in the review you mention, however I can assure you the DAC1 has no shortage of bass depth. I have A/B'd it on systems with *extreme* extension against the competition, so I'll sleep well at night knowing there is certainly nothing missing
Also, it's rather funny that every highly revealing piece of hifi in existence is often described as 'bright' sounding - coming from people who favour warm distorted rose tinted presentations. I really doubt companies like PMC, ATC, Wilson, Mark Levinson, Benchmark, Krell etc are producing gear which is inaccurate to the original signal somehow. More likely it just clashes with the opinions of those who personally like warm sounding gear.
I have to agree, I have never found the Krell or Theta gear forward, though I dont think Krells pre amps are as good as their power amps.
If I ever see a Benchmark at the right price second hand (and if I have the money) I would give it a go, though I also like the idea of the Tact, it has meant to have a decent DAC also, and the room eq sound quite usefull.
Just never seem to get any usefull info on how it would compair to the Theta Pro Basic IIIa and Krell KRC-3 combo though.
A number of years ago I had thought of going the ATC route, and was told the 100's and 200's would both be quite good replacements, they were a lot cheaper back then, my new location is smaller, but I still would like to have a good listen to the active 50's some time, though PMC would give me more of the frequency extension I am used to, they dont often apear second hand and seem more expensive.
What are your own views of the ATC versus PMC ? and is the Benchmark preferable with balanced or RCA ?
My kit is fully balanced XLR from beginning to end. I wouldn't use single ended RCA on principle as it's just not the correct way of doing things imho.
I nearly bought ATC, so they are good speakers. I was considering the active 50's but I really would need a sub to reintroduce the missing lowest octave, which rolls off. I was recommended to get the velodyne sub, which I didn't get around to trying. I suspect those two would work well, judging from other's experience. I decided against this route as I hate integrating subs. I spent three years trying to do so before! The larger ATC models like 100 don't seem to add any more extension over the small 50's, just more volume. (PMC IB2 has over double low end output extension of ATC100 on A/B in same room, for example).
For a little more outlay you could go the PMC passive route with a pair of Bryston 7B SST mono's, or one 4B. This will give you sub levels of extension, but without the hassle. I feel passive PMC is smoother, but not quite as detailed as active ATC on highs, which seem brighter
I left this route to go active PMC, which I feel is the best of all worlds: sub levels of extension without the hassle, smoother sounding, but with ATC active levels of upper detail. It really does have all the bases covered, which is unique in my experience. The only trouble is the cost. You'll get off lightly if you only need to fill a small/normal size room as the AML1 are a silly bargain. If you need to fill a massive room, you'll be requiring BMW M3 money for a fully active new MB2 setup, and no girlfriend.
I nearly bought ATC, so they are good speakers. I was considering the active 50's but I really would need a sub to reintroduce the missing lowest octave, which rolls off. I was recommended to get the velodyne sub, which I didn't get around to trying. I suspect those two would work well, judging from other's experience. I decided against this route as I hate integrating subs. I spent three years trying to do so before! The larger ATC models like 100 don't seem to add any more extension over the small 50's, just more volume. (PMC IB2 has over double low end output extension of ATC100 on A/B in same room, for example).
For a little more outlay you could go the PMC passive route with a pair of Bryston 7B SST mono's, or one 4B. This will give you sub levels of extension, but without the hassle. I feel passive PMC is smoother, but not quite as detailed as active ATC on highs, which seem brighter
I left this route to go active PMC, which I feel is the best of all worlds: sub levels of extension without the hassle, smoother sounding, but with ATC active levels of upper detail. It really does have all the bases covered, which is unique in my experience. The only trouble is the cost. You'll get off lightly if you only need to fill a small/normal size room as the AML1 are a silly bargain. If you need to fill a massive room, you'll be requiring BMW M3 money for a fully active new MB2 setup, and no girlfriend.
KUB3 said:My kit is fully balanced XLR from beginning to end. I wouldn't use single ended RCA on principle as it's just not the correct way of doing things imho.
I nearly bought ATC, so they are good speakers. I was considering the active 50's but I really would need a sub to reintroduce the missing lowest octave, which rolls off. I was recommended to get the velodyne sub, which I didn't get around to trying. I suspect those two would work well, judging from other's experience. I decided against this route as I hate integrating subs. I spent three years trying to do so before! The larger ATC models like 100 don't seem to add any more extension over the small 50's, just more volume. (PMC IB2 has over double low end output extension of ATC100 on A/B in same room, for example).
For a little more outlay you could go the PMC passive route with a pair of Bryston 7B SST mono's, or one 4B. This will give you sub levels of extension, but without the hassle. I feel passive PMC is smoother, but not quite as detailed as active ATC on highs, which seem brighter
I left this route to go active PMC, which I feel is the best of all worlds: sub levels of extension without the hassle, smoother sounding, but with ATC active levels of upper detail. It really does have all the bases covered, which is unique in my experience. The only trouble is the cost. You'll get off lightly if you only need to fill a small/normal size room as the AML1 are a silly bargain. If you need to fill a massive room, you'll be requiring BMW M3 money for a fully active new MB2 setup, and no girlfriend.
Ive already been down the massive room, ridiculous amount of boxes, system first route, though the girlfriend wasnt bothered back then.
The system I use is fully balanced, apart from the phono side, most of my kit is still Mid-late 90's, £7k+ of Theta with £7k+ of Krell all on Mana supports with Chord Anthem XLR and Signature speaker cable, into around £4k of full range Kef speaker. (flat to 18hz) This isnt including the rack of AV kit.
I now have two kids, and a smaller house, and the wall of equipment doesnt seem to fit in with family life, hence me daydreaming of active speakers with a digital pre and CD/dvd transport. (I dont have the income I once had)
That said, I love the sound of what I use, and most of the kit I have tried has still not displaced it, it realy is just the amount of kit which can get intrusive.
