Obviously I can't quote the entire article here, but presumably it will be posted online for free in the near future. As many of you are no doubt aware, TAS prides itself on never measuring anything objectively and relying virtually entirely on subjective reviews, making it perhaps the most diametrically opposed review outlet to ASR.
Suffice to say two quoted sentences should give you more than you might expect from the review by Steven Stone.
And the conclusion
The telling part was the middle of the review where he went on to talk about the ESS hump and their management of it, which screamed that he's been reading ASR.
Additionally, he went on to try and do a blinded comparison with a Gustard X-16 DAC and concluded he couldn't tell them apart. Honestly I wasn't sure what magazine I was reading by this stage...
Suffice to say two quoted sentences should give you more than you might expect from the review by Steven Stone.
This is the section where I’m sure a number of readers are hop-
ing that I discover that the D90SE, despite its wonderous specifi-
cations, sounds just OK. Sorry, but that was not the case. What I
heard was reference-level digital reproduction without any sonic
bromides. If the absence of coloration, individualistic character,
or “house sound” was the goal, the D90SE has clearly achieved
it.
And the conclusion
I will go on the record that
if a neutral, high-resolution, modern,
well-configured DAC that sounds as
true to source material as any I’ve ever
heard is something you are seeking, the
D90SE could easily qualify as your new
reference DAC.
The telling part was the middle of the review where he went on to talk about the ESS hump and their management of it, which screamed that he's been reading ASR.
Additionally, he went on to try and do a blinded comparison with a Gustard X-16 DAC and concluded he couldn't tell them apart. Honestly I wasn't sure what magazine I was reading by this stage...