Beresford Bushmaster DAC Reviews

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StanleyB

Maybe DACs should be fitted with a switch that says 'the whole truth' on one end, and 'the sexed up version' at the other end.

---

:lol: - True though ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StanleyB

In order to achieve realistic timbre and tone in a DAC designed along the lines of a straight piece of wire, they have to exist in the original source material. But when that information is not present, it is possible to voice the analogue audio output stage to mimic those parameters. But it can also be used to accentuate parameters that would otherwise not be so prominent in the actual audio file or musical production. Previously these sort of tampering with the music was left to the end user through the addition of treble bass, and loudness controls. But such facilities would look out of place on a DAC. Mind you, DAC chip manufacturers have been adding those things to their chip and leave it up to the designers if it is used or not.

I have read many times that detail is not so important for some owners. But the side effect of extremely low jitter is increased detail. You can't have one without the other. Less detail means more jitter and blending of signals. So signal separation becomes worse. It's a question of what do we as an individual expect and what do we enjoy. Maybe DACs should be fitted with a switch that says 'the whole truth' on one end, and 'the sexed up version' at the other end.

---

The effect of bass and treble controls on an amp is far more significant than the subtle tonal differences between some DACs which, to my ears, can be the difference between losing one's self in the music, and failing to be engaged.

As I said, I absolutely respect your DAC from a technical standpoint Stanley, and you've achieved exactly what you set out to do. I just wasn't as taken with it as many folk here are, and I prefer other DACs at this price point. Not all reviews will be glowing. There's nothing wrong with this... it would be extremely boring if we all agreed and all liked exactly the same thing.;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StanleyB

What I set out to do was to design an accurate, detailed, and neutral as possible DAC that is the nearest thing to a straight piece of wire with D to A ability. In order to achieve that I had to figure out a way of getting the signal from the analogue audio output pin on a DAC chip to the RCA/phono socket with the least amount of components in that path. The benefits of such a method first came to light with the passive mod that devised for the TC-7510 etc.
The principle behind the idea is that a DAC should not add to the sound signature of the signal, but should be a neutral player in the grand scheme of things.

However, I have noticed that just about every person who has compared the Bushmaster to any other DAC, has made the point that the sound signature of the BM is down to its price :doh:.

Now, this is what now has me confused. In the threads about objectivists versus subjectivists great time was spent discussing the purpose of an audio component, and an audio equipment. People talked about designers voicing their designs etc. The BM comes from the school of thought that a DAC should not be voiced, but should be neutral accurate, and detailed.

But this brings it in direct conflict with other DACs that are not designed and built to those principles.
This is quite a bit of a shock and disappointment to me. My design parameter appears to have been associated with its low price. But do cheap DACs sound accurate, detailed, and neutral? Aren't those the parameters associated with a properly designed DAC? Could it be that a DAC with the parameters of the BM not be a good idea after all? Should it sound warmer,less detailed, not so accurate, etc? Would I be able to increase the selling price by voicing the DAC instead and adding those parameters that are associated with a more expensive DAC?
It's an intriguing option that has suddenly reared its head. It also highlights the absurdness of designing a brilliant sounding product and sticking far too low a price on it. Invariably its sound signature is put down to its low price instead of the technical breakthrough required to get the stated aims.

---

When I keep repeating the amazing price/performance ratio of this product, I'm doing it only in order to highlight my puzzlement over people's nitpicking on some irrelevant features of the DAC (such as blue LED lights, sleep mode, etc.)

I've compared your DAC with a few more expensive ones. BM wins in my book. Why? This may be down to personal preferences, but I find many high-end DACs to do a lot of editorializing of the music material they're processing. Not so with BM, who seems to be sticking to the bare facts.

Yes, it is true that such-and-such a high-end DAC sounds much 'juicier', 'wetter', delivering more 'whomp' with overblown impression of happy/shiny instrumental timber and so on. But after the initial infatuation with the seductive sexiness of such euphonic sound wears off, I find myself left with a bit of a listening fatigue. Going back to BM's bare bones presentation feels like such a relief. As you've commented, if the rich timbre is indeed present in the source signal, BM is gonna do its best to fish it out. If it's not present, BM is going to give us a leaner presentation. In this way, I think BM is being quite honest. Can't say the same thing about some other hi fi gear I've auditioned.

One thing I've noticed about BM -- it really rewards any and all efforts to clean up the upstream signal. I've been doing a lot (and I mean a LOT) of tweaking upstream from the DAC, and any time I manage to lower the noise and deliver cleaner signal, BM would convert it to analog with such panache, resulting in a much more musical overall sound. Worth every ounce of effort:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StanleyB

I have read many times that detail is not so important for some owners. But the side effect of extremely low jitter is increased detail. You can't have one without the other. Less detail means more jitter and blending of signals. So signal separation becomes worse. It's a question of what do we as an individual expect and what do we enjoy. Maybe DACs should be fitted with a switch that says 'the whole truth' on one end, and 'the sexed up version' at the other end.

---

To say that detail is not important doesn't make any sense. It's like going to see Cezanne's masterpiece and claiming that the lighting in the exhibition hall is not important. What, if not light, matters when attempting to experience a visual masterpiece? In the same regard, what, if not detail, is important when attempting to experience music?

I believe the Bushmaster is able to be priced low due to the limited number of components used, however in Hi-Fi this can work to advantage with a more direct signal path and through careful component selection you can end up with great results as we have here. Audio wise the bushmaster is a fine choice along with plenty of inputs(exc USB!) and an enjoyable headphone amp. Had I not had my disagreements over the sleep feature I'd still have one today. I liked the sound that much(see my earlier review) that I even ordered the Mark Grant psu within a few days!

I now have my m-dac so from memory I'm comparing a Bushmaster at £335(Inc linear psu +extra S-Booster) For those who have not upgraded the psu I think it really is an essential upgrade. The extra S-Booster also helps - once I'd heard it I couldn't be without it. Out of the box the m-dac sounded more neutral and impressive but I had a feeling I was hearing a veil due to all those extra components - there's a lot crammed in there! Have to admit I was a bit worried but after more running in it has really opened out and is a clear upgrade imho over the Bushmaster. I got the mdac at a promo price of £500 so at £165 extra I'm very happy. This was hifi choice's best DAC and best product of the year for 2012 and I can see why. It extracts an amazing amount of detail.
(And yes Hifi choice have heard the Bushmaster)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StanleyB

In order to achieve realistic timbre and tone in a DAC designed along the lines of a straight piece of wire, they have to exist in the original source material. But when that information is not present, it is possible to voice the analogue audio output stage to mimic those parameters. But it can also be used to accentuate parameters that would otherwise not be so prominent in the actual audio file or musical production. Previously these sort of tampering with the music was left to the end user through the addition of treble bass, and loudness controls. But such facilities would look out of place on a DAC. Mind you, DAC chip manufacturers have been adding those things to their chip and leave it up to the designers if it is used or not.

I have read many times that detail is not so important for some owners. But the side effect of extremely low jitter is increased detail. You can't have one without the other. Less detail means more jitter and blending of signals. So signal separation becomes worse. It's a question of what do we as an individual expect and what do we enjoy. Maybe DACs should be fitted with a switch that says 'the whole truth' on one end, and 'the sexed up version' at the other end.

---

Fantastic post. People want to be excited and PRated all the time and when faced with neutrality and correct timbre they can't handle the truth. The recording is what it is and anything else that's added is coloration. The BM shows the truth of the recording imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by magiccarpetride

Yes, it is true that such-and-such a high-end DAC sounds much 'juicier', 'wetter', delivering more 'whomp' with overblown impression of happy/shiny instrumental timber and so on. But after the initial infatuation with the seductive sexiness of such euphonic sound wears off, I find myself left with a bit of a listening fatigue. Going back to BM's bare bones presentation feels like such a relief.

---

Our experience during the review was the exact opposite regarding listening fatigue.

I can't wait, I should be getting my Bushmaster tomorrow :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete_mac

Our experience during the review was the exact opposite regarding listening fatigue.

---

So much depends on how the system used is voiced. If the cabling or even amps are setup to favour a specific DAC then a DAC with different set of characteristics will unbalance the system. I spend ages auditioning and adjusting my system to give my review units a decent shot at sounding good. This is really time consuming and needs long term listening to get right, maybe I'm just slow..... That's why I won't review a product in less than 3 weeks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xaval

Fantastic post. People want to be excited and PRated all the time and when faced with neutrality and correct timbre they can't handle the truth. The recording is what it is and anything else that's added is coloration. The BM shows the truth of the recording imo.

---

Funny you should type that. The BM is the first DAC that I have designed that has been bought by quite a few people within the recording studio and audio equipment manufacturing, and lately also from broadcasting. Some world renowned big name companies have ordered the BM for monitoring purposes.
Mind you, many of them have an additional list of options they would prefer to see in a future version such as XLR sockets and network linked controls. One company even asked if I had a mod and an app so that it could be controlled via an iPAD :eek:.