Review and Measurements of Benchmark DAC3

[RayDunzl]

What's the point of having such a non-standard output stage?

I'm reading that, in a professional environment in the US, a 0dBFS digital signal corresponds to a 24dBu analog level.

https://www.google.com/search?q=24dBu

I run my DAC2 (still with the original firmware version that yields only 23dBu for the calibrated output) without jumpered attenuation, and without problems, in my semi-residential environment, though I may take another look-see* on the levels and the requirements of the associated equipment.

I will "guess" that the 27.5dBu maximum output level - 24dBu + 3.5dBu = 27.5dBu - might have something to do with their handling of intersample-overs, for which they decided on a 3.5dB headroom value.

*Nope, I'm good, the preamp permits a 12Vrms/24dBu input.

 

[tobes]

What's the point of having such a non-standard output stage?

The high output +24dBu(12.3Vrms) pro level setting is useful for Benchmark's AHB2 amp, which has a corresponding low gain 22dBU (9.2dB) setting. The rationale here is to maintain a high SNR.
If you're interested you can read about it here.

 

[chungjun]

Highly anticipated review indeed!!! Will take time to properly digest the information presented.

 

[zenmastering]

0dBfs = +24dBu analogue is one of a few 'standard' output levels for professional studio use. It's not the only one. I operate my mastering studio on 0dBfs = +18dBu (because it's much less taxing on processing gear that doesn't have the headroom for *clean* +24dBu levels). Not to mention, A/D input circuitry doesn't universally support such signal levels.

I'm reading that, in a professional environment in the US, a 0dBFS digital signal corresponds to a 24dBu analog level.

https://www.google.com/search?q=24dBu

I run my DAC2 (still with the original firmware version that yields only 23dBu for the calibrated output) without jumpered attenuation, and without problems, in my semi-residential environment, though I may take another look-see* on the levels and the requirements of the associated equipment.

I will "guess" that the 27.5dBu maximum output level - 24dBu + 3.5dBu = 27.5dBu - might have something to do with their handling of intersample-overs, for which they decided on a 3.5dB headroom value.

*Nope, I'm good, the preamp permits a 12Vrms/24dBu input.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Thanks for the review. One many have wanted for some time including me.

What is the FFT size of the 1 khz tone showing the underlying noise floor at -160db on the graph?

I know the gear for measuring is different, but it strikes me both of these DACs turn in most metrics very much like what I get with my Forte or Zen Tour. I've measured a few pieces of gear with near identical results to JA so my methods must not be too far afield. If you're going to look at more DACs from pro companies I bet there are some hidden gems in the $400 to $2000 range. Which makes it a touchy area. Too expensive for you to purchase all the gear, and one where you'll only sometimes get access to one of the member's gear.

BTW, thanks much to Dallas Justice for making his Benchmark available.

Among those you compare here the RME DAC is the one to get. It does more and works about as well for less money.

 

[amirm]

What is the FFT size of the 1 khz tone showing the underlying noise floor at -160db on the graph?

You have good eye. Since these are high performance DACs, I upped the FFT to 256k and 16 times averaging. Not sure I will stay with that but thought I experiment since my new analyzer can go so much deeper.

 

[bennetng]

I know the gear for measuring is different, but it strikes me both of these DACs turn in most metrics very much like what I get with my Forte or Zen Tour.

I believe Focusrite Forte's converter quality is very similar to their RedNet series, which offers tons of channels through MADI/Dante and low CPU load/latency with the PCIE x4 interface card.

 

[Purité Audio]

Excellent review Amir as always, we have both DACs here and they are excellent perhaps the RME has the edge on versatility and price.
Keith

 

[jtwrace]

It works extremely well.

I have no doubt that it works well. The issue (for me) is I dislike having multiple boxes and power cords. The Motu above will accomplish the same thing for a fraction of the cost with likely the same result. Me buying 4 DAC3 or any other dac is not happening! The cost is secondary...it's the mess that it makes that I refuse to have anymore.

 

[Veri]

Interesting to see the RME ADI-2 (especially the newer DAC) competes well enough at a lower price point. Disappointed to see little difference in headphone load measurement with the Benchmark. just marketing after all.. (?)

 

[Kal Rubinson]

I have no doubt that it works well. The issue (for me) is I dislike having multiple boxes and power cords. The Motu above will accomplish the same thing for a fraction of the cost with likely the same result. Me buying 4 DAC3 or any other dac is not happening! The cost is secondary...it's the mess that it makes that I refuse to have anymore.

Understood.

 

[FrantzM]

I have no doubt that it works well. The issue (for me) is I dislike having multiple boxes and power cords. The Motu above will accomplish the same thing for a fraction of the cost with likely the same result. Me buying 4 DAC3 or any other dac is not happening! The cost is secondary...it's the mess that it makes that I refuse to have anymore.

We need to talk .. PM on its way

 

[jtwrace]

We need to talk .. PM on its way

Look forward to it!

 

[Dro]

Interesting to see the RME ADI-2 (especially the newer DAC) competes well enough at a lower price point. Disappointed to see little difference in headphone load measurement with the Benchmark. just marketing after all.. (?)

The ADI-2 DAC might actually be the best in this test. At least it beat the Pro by 4-5 dB THD+N with dummy loads.

 

[HifiGuy]

Hi Amir,

first of all thank you for your great review. Can you write something about the performance with the unbalanced outputs? My integrated amp just support rca and not xlr. Do you also messured with the ht bypass?

Greetings
Fu

 

[amirm]

Hi Amir,

first of all thank you for your great review. Can you write something about the performance with the unbalanced outputs? My integrated amp just support rca and not xlr. Do you also messured with the ht bypass?

Greetings
Fu

Hi there. Thanks for the kind words. I will do a few spot tests with unbalanced today but tomorrow I will need to ship it back.

 

[amirm]

can you do a -90db 1khz sine wave for these also?

Yes, thanks for asking. Here is RME ADI-2 Pro:

Pretty nice sine wave but some amount of noise is visible.

Here is Benchmark DAC3:

Definitely cleaner. WIth the -10 dB attenuation, it nicely lowers the noise.

This by the way, tracks the results of our linearity tests where I allow noise to be included in measurements.

 

[HifiGuy]

Could you please use the HT Bypass for your tests as RayDunzl wrote?

 

[amirm]

Could you please use the HT Bypass for your tests as RayDunzl wrote?

Tell which test you want me to re-run as repeating it all is many hours and I just don't have it until I return it.

 

[amirm]

Can you write something about the performance with the unbalanced outputs?

Here you go: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...easurements-of-benchmark-dac3.3545/post-85547

Sadly news is not very good in that department.