I recently got a Derek Shek d2 DAC, direct from the seller via ebay, total cost £184. Having run it for about a week, I have now settled down to some critical listening.
Background: my main system is a Shanling CDT100 (Chinese valve CD player about £1,500, UK version), EAR 859 (13WPC single-ended valve amp about £2k), Living Voice Auditorium II speakers (nice and sensitive, about £2k). I use mains conditioning for all units. The CD player is connected to the CD input (gold-plated) via a Nordost interconnect (no idea which; it cost about £100), while the SB3 (whether using the d2 or not) was into the 'phono' input (not gold-plated) using the stock SB interconnect. Levels were matched by ear. My music taste is at least 80% acoustic, so a natural timbre and believable acoustic are paramount for me. Music included Rebecca Pidgeon, Ana Caram and Fred Hersh from the Chesky demo disc, Quartetto Italiano playing Beethoven's Harp quartet, Nitin Sawhney Beyond Skin, Talk Talk Spirit of Eden, Philip Glass Glassworks, Kate Rusby Hourglass and Dinu Lipatti playing some Chopin. The reason I bought the Shek DAC is, quite simply, the stock SB3 was well short of the Shanling. While the SB3 is nice and detailed, it fails comprehensively to present a believable representation of real music. It's not actually bad, just not a patch on the Shanling. For example, the soundstage in the Rebecca Pidgeon track is tangible and it sounds very alive; on the stock SB3 it sounded much more mixed, less like people playing together. Ditto for Fred Hersh. The Harp Quartet is very dynamic and urgent, really got me conducting using the Shanling, but the stock SB3 failed to engage in the same way. Not close. If anyone knows Audiolab equipment, I find the SB3 to be similar in its presentation: there's plenty of detail, but it's not really brought together in a musically meaningful way. It's hard to criticise in hi-fi terms, but it just doesn't really engage me or make me want to play lots of music. The SB3 into the d2 was much more interesting. What was initially apparent was the presentation of a proper soundstage; this imaging really helped to add some 'realness'. Ms Pidgeon sounded really good and I was conducting Ludwig again. The step-up over the SB3 was huge: while different from the Shanling, it was properly listenable and enjoyable. It was chalk and cheese, and as much of a bargain as the SB3 was. It differed from the Shanling mainly in its intensity and dynamics. The Shanling is often quite powerful and edge-of-the-seat, while the d2 is much more delicate. The d2 makes a slightly more distant soundstage, drawing you into the music and allowing you to enjoy each note as it is plucked (I'm on the Harp Quartet again), while the Shanling actually gets you to play it. I felt the Shanling was more proactive where the d2 was reactive: I enjoyed what the d2 played after it happened, whereas the Shanling made me want to make it happen. It's an interesting difference, and both presentations are thoroughly enjoyable. In terms of bass, the Nitin Sawhney has stacks, and the Shanling really energises the room; much more than the d2 (or the stock SB3). Similarly drums and cymbals had slightly less impact using the d2 (it was no better than the stock SB3 in that respect). To conclude, I felt that the d2 was a massive benefit to the SB3. It makes it much more believable, albeit with a very different presentation to the Shanling. Tragic opera sounds lovely - Puccini's Suor Angelica really hits home. -- adamslim SB3 and Shanling CDT-100, Rotel RT-990BX, Esoteric Audio Research 859, Living Voice Auditorium IIs, Nordost cables ------------------------------------------------------------------------ adamslim's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7355 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30034 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
