I was wrong about XRT 1.1Ks or DAC it

[rob725]

I have said elsewhere in other threads that the 1.1s were bright. I no longer think so. If you want to skip the journey, here are the conclusions:

• The 1.1s are neutral and revealing and will not sugar-coat any thing else in the chain.
• The DA2 module in the C53 is very capable and detailed, but the 1.1s need the D1100 DAC if staying with McIntosh.

I began with the C53/DA2 and the 1.25 amps. I upgraded to this combo mostly as a home theater upgrade. I was immediately pleasantly surprised by the 2-channel presence, imaging and detail I heard from the 1.1s. There really was only one issue and it didn't show up in movie viewing: there was a certain stridency to some vocals, horns, violins, percussion.

Where this was most obvious, was when you wanted to turn it up loud. Since I chose 1.2 Kw amps and speakers that could handle them, I wanted to be able to turn it up. Also, the McIntosh pre and amp are amazing in their ability to go loud without distortion. So, If I wanted to feel hard bass or drums that pounded my body, I either had to choose very smooth songs without stridency or suffer the assault. This made a lot of rock, especially 70's rock, when they played with a lot of distortion, fairly unappealing at high volume, and sometimes fatiguing at moderate volume. Much of this music doesn't really work if you can't play it loud.

Part of me wondered if it was simply that I had so much detail that the system was revealing some music to be not as good as I thought. Over time, several things I did improved this quite a bit. First, I wired the the upper frequency panel of the 1.1s to the 4 ohm posts of the amp, which cuts the highs 3db relative to the midbass/bass which used the 8 ohm. This helped but was hardly surgical as it attenuated everything over 400 hz. Next I upgraded all the cabling, especially the power cabling, which helped a lot (it helped everything else as well). As the cabling, speakers, amps and components broke in and settled, things continued to improve. Enough so that I moved the Highs panel back to the 8 ohm posts. I could also improve things with the equalizer on the c53. I added the Mc901 amps to drive the highs and midbass. This helped, but I got the best results by attenuating the highs about 1.5db.

When my Basis TT arrived and had a chance to break in, it was obvious that it did not suffer the same stridency and was much smoother and more musical. But hey, that's pretty much what I expected anyway. Also, every 3-4 weeks it seemed like the system smoothed out in a noticeable step. With everything new, I can't really say what was continuing to settle in.

I had been researching here and elsewhere about upgrading my dac. Often the described improvements in SQ applied to what I was hearing. So, I decided to try some out. First I tried a Mytek Brooklyn streamer dac, which I planned to use later as a source to my whole-house audio system. With roon I could easily group it and the C53, making it easy to switch back on forth on the same songs. They both use sabre audiophile dac chips and sounded more alike than different. I did feel at times that the mytek was a bit more musical, less-thin and less striden; but then, I'd flip back to the c53 and it sounded in many ways better: more clear, detailed, with more air around the notes. It was almost as if the the mytek was adding something to make it more tubey, if that makes any sense. So next, I figured I'd leave sabre chips to try a different algorithm.

Schiit yggy seemed a good choice: well rated by stereophile and high praise by many here. Also, it was reasonably priced, shipped direct, and returnable. It wasn't exactly apples/apples as the roon endpoints weren't the same, but the micro-rendu with LPS seemed to play well with the Schiit. They sounded more alike than I would have guessed, even after a 3 day constant break-in for the Schiit. Still, they were noticeably different.

The Schitt was more musical and less strident. I could play it a somewhat louder. The C53/DA2 had settled quite a bit over its several months, so I was able to dial back the attenuation for the highs on the 901s back to flat, which made the c53 and Schiit both a bit more lively. The C53 was sharper, more defined, and still a bit more strident. The Schiit more rounded and less fatiguing. My dealer dropped off the next candidate and I AB'd with him. He preferred the C53 because of the incredible clean detail. But that's the thing. If you want to listen to the system, that detail is great--incredible sound. but to live it, you want incredible music. It's kind of like how best-buy turns up the vividness on its display TVs to make them stand out. Looks amazing at first, but you need to dial them back down at home to get the best picture.

The Schiit was never going to be the solution. I have a fair amount of DSD, 64, 128 and 256. Schiit doesn't do DSD. I considered keeping both, but that seemed like a kludge; I felt sure I could better them both. I wanted to try the top DAC in McIntosh's line, the D1100.

While I hoped for the best, I did not expect it would sound much different. It uses the same chip family, but the previous generation. Communicating with McIntosh, I was told that while true, the actual audible difference between the chips was very small if any and that the real difference was in the analog section of the D1100 which was similar to and on par with their flagship preamp, the C1100. I worked a deal with the dealer to try it out for 30 days, so it could fully break in.

I installed it Friday. I couldn't really hear it until today. I tried to short-cut the driver installation on my roon end-point by not uninstalling the C53 driver. Bad idea. So, being impatient I hooked it up to the the micro-rendu. It kind of worked, but not well. They don't like each other. So I listened to the mct500 transport. Encouraging. It was the best I'd heard out of the the transport on a variety of music. Rich and clean and very musical. Not quite the magical detail I was used to, but not fatiguing and I could turn it up! So, today I got the driver fixed up and the roon endpoint working. Wow. Just Wow.

I am no longer looking for a DAC. Everything sounds better than I've heard it. The detail is there but so is the music. I can turn it up and listen far too long for my ear's health. 70s rock sounds great. Ambience is great. Everything is rich and lush yet detailed with superb imaging. Bass is tighter and smoother at the same time. Vocals, strings and horns are smoother and less out front. I am finally satisfied and imagine it will improve as things settle.

Full disclosure; I upgraded the C53 to the C1100 at the same time, which certainly doesn't hurt, but this is not a subtle difference. The D1100 is better in every way than the DA2 module. It's like a whole new system. Every song I avoided now sounds like I'm sure the mixing engineers intended. Nirvana.

My one issue with the 1.1s has been vanquished and they rock without giving up their magic with jazz, classical...

A word about the the C1100/D1100/MCT500 integration. Very smart, very cool. Works like one would hope.

[brownbear]

Nice post, I enjoyed reading it. Did you try the D1100 with the C53 or did you go right to the C1100/D1100?

[rob725]

Thanks. Just a bit. The original plan was to try it for a while because we were having trouble finding a c1100. Then one showed up, so I only had a short evening and ran into the driver issue.

I'm a little curious myself, just what the c1100 is adding. Not sure if I'm curious enough to swap the c53 back in. I'm a bit reticent to mess with it now that it's sounding so good.

I'll break it in this week, come up with a nice playlist with a mix of smooth and challenging tracks I can get real familiar with, and then if time permits this weekend, I'll swap them and see what happens.

[brownbear]

Fun stuff! You can also try the D1100 by itself to see what the C1100 is adding for digital.

[rob725]

True. Would be a simpler swap. I need either analog or phono inputs long term, but just to see what’s what, would do the trick. Thanks!

[j3brow]

Congrats rob725. I sure love my C1100/D1100 combo too. It really is a wonderful DAC, for the money, it’s absolutely incredible.

[Charles]

I agree that the D1100 is an incredible DAC. It is important to remember that Mac has been making digital equipment since about 1984. Mac also has an anechoic chamber. Very few high end manufacturers do. Certainly, all things being equal, there are better and much more expensive DAC's out there. I don't argue that. However, Mac has a particular sound that is pleasing to my ears. Would I want to go with an ultra expensive DAC or pre as opposed to top line Mac? Absolutely not. Mac equipment works very synergistically with each other: sources, amps, pre's. Never doubt this. I believe Mac designs their speakers to complement their sources, amps, and pre's.

My new Thors is on the way to my dealer. Wilson simply gave me a new sub crossover at no charge. I didn't even pay shipping. My new Thors is Galaxy Grey and will match my XVX. Point is there is always great room for improvement within the component line you have chosen and this improvement is often very expensive.

Mac will eventually update its D1100. I will undoubtedly buy one when they do. Just like I wanted a new updated Thors to go along with my new sub crossover and my XVX speaker.

No one has an unlimited budget. I believe Mac is competitive with any manufacturer out there regarding speakers, sources, and amplification. There is always room for improvement within the Mac line and you can be confident that when you purchase that new Mac piece, you will experience a noticeable improvement.

Rob is a wise man.

Best Charles

[rob725]

Charles, congratulations on the Thors and crossover. You have an amazing system.

I like the D1100, not because it sounds like McIntosh, but because it sounds really good: both detailed and musical. It sounds right. But it's not the chip per se, its what they've done with the analog section. I would not argue that there may be better dacs. I was about to start listening to them because I thought I would need to go there to get sound comparable to what I'm hearing with the D1100. I was totally surprised by how good it sounds. So, for this system, i will look no further. I am at the point of diminishing return. Not saying it can't be better; its just not necessary for it to be any better. I am finally realizing most if not all of the potential of my speakers and amps.

I will continue researching dacs/amps/preamps... for a future dedicated two channel system, assuming I get around to building the room. The d1100 and this system will provide a nice benchmark, a minimum standard so to speak.

I also may get more D1100s for the house. With the roon server holding my hirez music and taking care of tidal/qubuz streaming, I can add a D1100 and pc nuc roon endpoint wherever I want exquisite sound. Mix in a well-matched speaker/amp set and connect to the lan (when I built my house I wired CAT6 lan outlets everywhere). Seriously considering one to be the sound interface for my main desktop computer system.

[Charles]

Rob, the high end is a great hobby and great fun when you have the money to spend and want to experiment and want to spend it.

At some point with me at least I become uncomfortable in so doing. I don't have the time even though I'm retired to have another system. I have a hard time finding the time to listen to the one I have.

Mac does have a unique sound. I find it synergistic with AQ and Wilson. Therefore I'm not going to put an out of brand component into my mix.

There are many approaches to the high end. Mine is just one of many. I think the important thing is to be happy with your system. I know when I was young I was eager to experiment and I owned a lot of different gear other than Mac.

I really enjoyed my Krell gear. To me Dag equal the old Krell, maybe the Dag is better I don't know. Apexorca loves the old Krell as do I.

If I were going all out it would be dCS and Boulder or Constellation, probably Boulder, definitely dCS. It would not be Dag. PM me if you want to know why or send me an email.

My next purchase (if there is one) will be (3) 2.1KW's. I will wait for the new upgraded amp with the solid cinch binding posts. I wouldn't dream of leaving Mac. I really enjoy your thoughts expressed in your posts. I look forward to following you on your journey.

Best

Charles

[rob725]

It is indeed great fun with many different roads. I marvel when I look at the countless diverse combination of components people show in their sigs.

3 2.1 KWs ought to get it done!!!

I'm not sure I'll ever build that room, but I do want to travel to several shows to hear all of the different stuff. I kind of have high power, big sound covered. If I do a two channel set-up I will be going for sublime and magical.

High efficiency low-power setups intrigue me but I will listen up and down the spectrum.