The MDA1K is dead... LONG LIVE THE MDA1K!

[Alberto]

I went through a very similar experience with my MDA1000. After all, digital components are supposed to become obsoleted in a few years. I had that "new toy" desire and I was lucky to have the money to indulge in it.

I put my MDA1000 for sale on AA. Before boxing it up, I had a few last listening session for old time's sake and realized that this DAC did everything just right for my tastes. It sounds delicious with the perfect (for me) balance of detail and smoothness. Why the heck was I selling it. I was not missing anything. It gave me pleasure disc after disc and even makes Pandora and Rhapsody sound great.

Everything I said in my video review of the MDA1000 ([ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__MAuavKBj4]McIntosh MDA1000 DAC Video Review - YouTube[/ame]) still holds true.

It sounds wonderfully analog. It's built like a brick and it's beautiful to look at.

I don't doubt that newer DACs have more impressive numbers, but the MDA is staying put in my system for at least a few more years.

Alberto

[-E-]

Originally Posted by allen_bh

Different strokes...

Doesn't surprise me. There are a lot of systems out there in which the less resolving MDA1000 would sound better to the astute listener -- mostly due to a very bright presentation or other system traits that the MDA1000 tames.

Sorry, not trying to be inflammatory. The MDA1000 is a good DAC, but on the right system, it's (IMHO) way out of it's league when compared to the W4S DAC2.

Case-in-point -- you should try listening to the MDA1000 vs the DAC2 on other hi-rez music -- Roxy Music's Avalon on SACD (I have a 24Bit 96K FLAC version that was converted from the original DSD) is out of this world and the MDA1000 sounds like mud next to the DAC2. Another good example of a really good recording in which it becomes clear the DAC2 is waaay better: Lee Ritenour's Rhythm Sessions 24Bit 96K (avail on hdtracks).

Nothing inflammatory - however I certainly (and I believe Dewey will, as well) disagree. We did play a ton of high-res (and wonderfully sourced) tracks. Unfortunately, even on the 96/24 and 88/24 material the W4S was, quite simply, the lesser of the two performers. This isn't saying that the W4S was bad (it still sounds way better than many other DACs I have heard at higher price points), just that it had trouble keeping up.

I should also reiterate that the source was the same for the A/B comparisons, cables identical, system identical (even the same "input" into the C500 was utilized) - the only difference was the swap between DACs and then, as needed, between the laptop and Dewey's Sonos unit.

[-E-]

Originally Posted by cnguyen777

It's the supreme mac analog section that you were listening to. I don't care how great the dac top sampling speed is your analog section is what your listening to.

While I certainly agree about the supremacy of a solid McAnalog section, the statement doesn't necessarily apply to this context - as the differences were well pronounced going through the same analog stage and pre-amplification (even the same cables). The only difference was the DAC.

[-E-]

Originally Posted by Alberto

I went through a very similar experience with my MDA1000. After all, digital components are supposed to become obsoleted in a few years. I had that "new toy" desire and I was lucky to have the money to indulge in it.

I put my MDA1000 for sale on AA. Before boxing it up, I had a few last listening session for old time's sake and realized that this DAC did everything just right for my tastes. It sounds delicious with the perfect (for me) balance of detail and smoothness. Why the heck was I selling it. I was not missing anything. It gave me pleasure disc after disc and even makes Pandora and Rhapsody sound great.

Everything I said in my video review of the MDA1000 (McIntosh MDA1000 DAC Video Review - YouTube) still holds true.

It sounds wonderfully analog. It's built like a brick and it's beautiful to look at.

I don't doubt that newer DACs have more impressive numbers, but the MDA is staying put in my system for at least a few more years.

Alberto

I was hoping you were going to chime in, because as I was writing the original post, the first person I though of was you - and what you went through back then.

Thanks for re-posting the video.

['cisco]

Great review E......it seems you and Dewey had a terrific time.

....I sure wished you had done this A/B get-together sooner.....that item I pm'd you about is long gone now at a even lower price locally.

[dteam702]

I only been in the Hifi scene just about 2 years now, and there's much I still have to learn from everyone. Being a noobie, my mentality has been something newer has to be better sounding, but E really changed my way of thinking after A/B between the W4S vs MDA1k.

For something (to some is outdated) I was very impressed with the sound that I'm hearing from the MDA1k. The MDA might sound good in some and not in others, but for certain on mine, the MDA clearly IMO out perform the W4S.

[Jerome W]

What this shows is that there is much more than figures in the final sound of cd playback.
There are still high end companies that design cd players only with red book in mind, 16 / 44.1, and they still manage to get a wonderful sound from them.
Hi rez ability or not does not say it all about the final quality of the sound.
Moreover, there ain't many dacs on the market which upsamples everything to 768kHz. I know only the MDA1000 and the highly acclaimed, more recent Naim Dac. For some listeners, even pro ones, the Naim Dac is the best dac they ever heard,, and that is the case with some of us who own the MDA. There might be something happening with some ears at this very high upsampling thing.....?

Sent from my iPad using A.Aficionado

[-E-]

Well, just from a technical aspect - anything is going to get "resampled" when it is input and then converted depending on the DAC design.

What it does to our ears is an entirely open ended question.

What we're realizing now is that we want to do some more experimentation and see what else is offered out there that may give us the solution that fits the style of playback and budget...

[JemHadar]

I ordered a DAC less Weiss MAN 301 because the difference between the MAN 301 with DAC and the MDA1000 was too small. The MAN 301 DAC has a somewhat more forward presentation, be it very subtle. I expected the MDA1000 to be smoked...but it held up brilliantly...and on 96k material was outstanding. Could one really tell the difference between 96k and 192k material ?

[djwhog]

Great day, great test and review.

My 2 cents when I have heard the unit is that I think you would need to get into the levels of the Esoteric gear and similar units to provide the USB and related DAC support of that MAC unit. it is built like a tank. It would be amazing if there was a program offered from MAC that would alow you to send the unit back to the factory and have some minor retrofit to a few more modern chip sets.

But I have always thought that unit sounds very very good. In fact even on the noisy floor out in the dealer locations of the Barret Jackson car show in Phoenix last week a guy from a local audio store had a nice all MAC setup will that DAC, matching CD and the 2000 watt amps etc.