Life after Yggdrasil: Watering the Ash

Recent review of the Denafrips Terminator in comparison to some dacs quite familiar here on SBAF including Yggdrasil and Holo Spring L3.

http://6moons.com/audioreviews2/denafrips/4.html

Coles notes:

 

One is forced to wonder how many of the "Italian" references include and are/or were driven by @Auditor and his cronies.

Otherwise, it's 6moons ... so requires several attempts to parse the commentary and follows their typical "spend more time talking about anything other than the sound" and/or "painting bizarre metaphors of and/or for ... well ... something" ... before "ranking the finalists in descending price order" format.

Can't comment on the sound of the "Terminator".

Can say I regard 6moons commentary as somewhere between incomprehensible and having a value between absolute zero and the white-hot temperatures seen in the more excitable HF types verbal-fappery-in-post-keyboard-textual-translation.

 

EXACTLY ...

 

6Moons does add too much chatter, hence the quick summary and last page posted. I found it useful, regardless of what else is in the chain, because at least I have heard the Yggdrasil and have a reference point. None of the other dacs mentioned I've heard and commonly in these types of reviews I never will as I'd rather have a new car.

But again given the Yggdrasil and Holo Spring L3 comparisons, and Yggdrasil making it down to this reviewer's final cut, I believe it will be useful to some of the community here.

 

@Torq, I was reading your review of the DS and was wondering if you managed to upgrade to Huron and if there's an update to your impressions. I recently heard it side by side with the Yggdrasil and quite liked it.

 

I thought the DS and DSJr were already, broadly, competitive, performance-wise, with Yggdrasil ... and that was on "Torreys".

Value was an issue, being 2-3x the price (or 1.5-2.5x if you take advantage of the trade-in program), but performance was, on the whole, comparable (I still preferred Yggdrasil*). I'd have no trouble living with either DS or DSJr, I'd just be irritated at having had to pay more to do so than for a similar level of musical enjoyment from something like Yggdrasil.

To your specific question ...

"Huron", which I have spent some time with (see here and here) is a useful, and readily discernible, if not dramatic**, improvement. Not a big enough change to tip the value-balance for me in PS Audio's favor, for me at least, particularly with some other, recent, developments, but they are excellent DACs by any measure - and "Huron" has made them usefully, meaningfully, better.

This is likely the extent to which I'm going to write up my thoughts on those differences at this point, so hopefully it's useful.

--

*It may be that my preferences are just slow to change. For example, I've been a long-time fan of 300B-based tube amplifiers. Recent explorations into 2A3 and 45 series tube designs are showing lots of desirable characteristics, but nothing that's "converted" me, musically, yet.

**Per the typical "Head-Fi" usage of such terms. Where various clowns say "the difference is not subtle" or "is dramatic" or "night and day". "Huron" is clearly both different and, more importantly, quite easily discernibly BETTER than "Torreys". But the net delta isn't actually very big; it just comes across in ways that, in aggregate, don't take a lot of work to be aware of.

 

Thanks for the update - From reading what you wrote and linked to, it seems that the update was in the right direction. I hadn't heard the DS before so I was unaware of how it sounded with the previous version vs the current one to you, which is good to know.

From a value perspective, I look at it from a used prices perspective where a Gen5 Yggdrasil goes for $1900 and the DS has been going for $2600 lately. The price difference isn't big enough for me personally, but of course the perception of value is different for everyone. Value can be looked at as used prices as a percentage of new prices, but I dont really care for their new prices personally.

Some of the things that I noted that the DS did better vs the Yggdrasil (which I shared with some other users here before posting my comment above) were:

1) The tone/timbre of the instruments was better and sounded more real than the Yggdrasil
2) There was more air around the instruments and the staging seemed a bit wider
3) Overall the DS was more engaging which made me want to keep listening - what specially stood out was how enveloping the sound was from the DS
4) The natural decay of instruments seemed more pronounced and natural

Overall these differences weren't "night and day", but over time they were noticeable and very enjoyable.

 

@Marvey "You can kiss microdynamics, microdetail, immediacy good by once you run a signal through that ZOTL circuit, which is like the worst of solid-state and tube worlds"

Hi there, interesting thread about some interesting DACs, but reading your comment I felt I needed to say that I have spent much time to compare a Berning Siegfried single ended 5 W 300b amplifier with a wide variety of tube amps, transistor amps, class a ,class d single ended or not over some high efficiency speakers where the 5W was not an issue, and reluctantly I had to conclude nothing can equal the Siegfried when it comes to microdynamics, microdetail. The difference was quite obviously in favor of the Siegfried and I would dare to say that it is in a different league regarding these parameters.
I dont know what ZOTL amplifiers you have heard and under what conditions, but your observation regarding the ZOTL principle is certainly not a general rule.
PS. I have no experience with other Berning products.

 

Eye candy.

Give credit where credit is due: their graphics are good, their pages are pretty. The dumb blonde of online audio magazining.

 

DENAFRIPS

PONTUS (-)

Overview

The DENAFRIPS PONTUS is a discrete, fully-balanced, 24-bit, R-2R DAC with both oversampling (OS) and non-oversampling modes (NOS) and native DSD support (up to quad-rate/DSD256). It features 0.01% precision resistors in the ladder and employs an FPGA for various filtering and control implementations.



The unit is pitched, price-wise, squarely between the Gungnir MB/Spring DAC L1 and the Yggdrasil/Spring DAC L3 and in the same ballpark as the Soekris dac1541. Comments elsewhere have portrayed the PONTUS as being a “giant killer” which, combined with interesting internal design, made for quite a compelling case to get one to listen to and @alvin1118 at Vinshine Audio was kind enough to make a unit available to SBAF for an audition tour.



Measurements & Burn-In

@atomicbob measured this unit before I received it. I have not seen those measurements as of posting this, and will not receive them until after this is published. As a result, this unit has had >800 hours of “burn-in” on it prior to my receiving it. I gave it an additional 72 hours (and change) of warm-up time in my own system before doing any critical listening.

Build

The build is tank-like with extremely substantial casework and a generally nice finish. I like the aesthetics … understated, but neat and the thing is logically laid out. Connections are solid and positive. Switch-gear is suitably tactile. It feels like a quality product.

Indicators for the various modes, inputs, etc. are very small and discrete and are a little hard to see unless you’re either in a darkened room or are looking at them straight-on. With the ARES, this isn’t much of a problem since it is small enough that it’ll likely be sitting on a desk; with the PONTUS, sitting in a rack, it's a bit more challenging. But it's definitely not going to light up the room, which is a GOOD thing.

The unit has tri-pod footing, with nicely finished "feet" (up to you if you couple it directly to your rack/stand, or extract the "cups" that stop the unit from digging into the foam packaging). I let it sit on it's unbuffered "feet" onto a Mission Isoplat (total blast-from-the-past).

Interfaces

The PONTUS DAC offers USB input (via an Amanero board), dual COAX S/PDIF inputs (one RCA, one BNC), dual AES/EBU inputs, a TOSLINK input and an I2S capability.

As usual, the first serious listening I did was to assess which input I was going to use for the overall assessment …

The short version here is that you’re going to want to use any input other than the USB input with the PONTUS. Not because USB is bad, per-se, just that it is clearly behind the other options. This was true with the ARES as well, but in the case of the PONTUS I’m finding a rather bigger impact to the sound when the USB input is employed. So, plan on adding a DDC to (Schiit Eitr, Singxer SU-1, etc.) your setup if you don’t already have a way to utilize an S/PDIF or I2S connection to the PONTUS.

Between COAX AES/EBU and I2S … I would go with whatever you have on hand that is most convenient. The only reason I found to go with the I2S interface was if you wanted double-rate DSD or higher support (you can use the USB input here as well, but I wouldn’t personally), since only 1x is supported via the S/PDIF interfaces.

My listening was conducted principally with the AES interface via my usual Auralic Aries, which is mostly about convenience and in this case did not result in any audible difference between it the SU-1 or the Eitr.

On USB, Amanero Firmware and Sound w/ the PONTUS

Using the USB input resulted in immediately audible grain and some edginess/etch in the upper treble that was present, but very much less evident, via other inputs. This was more apparent in NOS mode. Using different USB source connections (direct USB 2.0 and/or USB 3.0, and the one off the Aries) resulted in different levels of audibility here … with the USB 3.0 connection (operating in USB 2.0 mode) being clearly the most audible.

Using my lonely, “have-it-for-curiosity-only” Jitterbug and/or my special USB power-isolating cables made no difference here - so I would posit/speculate that the differences might be due to something at the driver/bus level rather than electrical noise. Post-audition, a brief discussion with @atomicbob suggests that he was seeing different performance based on different drivers in his measurements. When those measurements are posted we can dig in there a bit more.

@alvin1118 made me aware of a firmware update to the Amanero USB board during my time with the PONTUS. I should note that I did NOT apply this update as I wanted my listening to correlate with the unit as it had been measured by @atomicbob. I do not know if @Hands performed that update prior to his listening. This may, or may not, have an impact on the sound one way or another

How Does it Sound?

Overall, pretty good.

Faint praise? Well … maybe. Products billed as “giant killers” often wind up with an artificially harsh level of comparison. It’s a moniker that, in general, does no one any favors - customer, vendor or reviewer.

While no giants are being slayed here … I digress …

In general, it’s sound is on the softer, rounder, side of things with a bit more bass presence than, say, the dac1541, or an RME ADI 2 Pro, though with less impact there than a Gungnir MB or Yggdrasil. I was not struck with the level of detail/resolution and clarity like I was with the Soekris unit, nor was attack or transient behavior on the same level as the, often, startling delivery and incisiveness of the Spring DAC in NOS mode.

Musically PONTUS is quite engaging, though it doesn’t always capture the full “excitement” present in many pieces and that, often - from my perspective, comes from a more incisive delivery with a bit more, clean, edge/bite to it. I wouldn’t go as far as say it truly lacks “excitement”, but it’s definitely a more mellow presentation than is my general preference.

On detail and resolution, I feel that the PONTUS, while meaningfully ahead of the ARES here, is not quite on the same level as something like Gungnir MB, the Spring DAC L1 and definitely not where the dac1541 exhibits its biggest strength. This is more noticeable using dynamic cans (Utopia, HD800S) than it was with planar units (LCD-4, Abyss, Abyss Phi). I wouldn’t go as far as to say that detail is being “smeared over”, but the unit is not resolving at the quite same level as its principal competition.

Play “Show me the Place” and Cohen’s voice is rendered in a way that loses something in terms of its usual gravel and highly nuanced dynamic inflection. Via Yggdrasil or Gungnir MB, Soekris dac1541, or Spring DAC, you get the impression Cohen has just quaffed a less than perfectly smooth Scotch after smoking a particularly robust, Maduro-wrapped, cigar. Via the PONTUS you can tell that’s there still, but it’s subdued somewhat - as if he’d taken a tablespoon of warm honey afterwards.

This effect may, or may not, be agreeable to you, depending on your chain and your preferences. It’s not going to fix Grados or Ultrasone 10s, but it’s probably going too far the other way to pair with something like the Audeze LCD series and, especially the HiFi-Man HE-1000 and Edition X.

As someone that finds pleasure, and desirable traits, in both OS and NOS DAC implementations, units that can operate in both realms are always of particular interest to me. While my primary reference-DAC, Yggdrasil, is a pure-OS device, the other DAC I use a lot, the Holo Audio Spring DAC L3/LTE, can operate in both OS and NOS modes - and that provides an interesting point of comparison to the PONTUS (principally because I know of no DAC that is fully satisfying in both realms).

Tonality is quite good. It’s generally even across the board with, as expected, a more linear rendering in OS mode vs. NOS mode. Though, in NOS mode, the PONTUS is audibly more linear/neutral than the Spring DAC … exhibiting less roll-off at the top end.

With the Spring DAC, in NOS mode, there’s a definite sweetness to the music that is not present with other DACs. The Metrum Pavane (original/L1) I heard exhibited something similar, which I described more as the music having something of a “glow” to it. The PONTUS presents in a manner where these effects are absolutely NOT present. So, while one might describe the Spring DAC or the Pavane as being on the “romantic” side of things, the PONTUS is not.

In terms of timbre, there’s no issue determining what instrument you’re listening too. Smoother instruments sound natural, more staccato/percussive components losing a little edge. Discordant brass and aggressive piano are also softened a bit, losing some bite, but the overall tone of their presentation remains intact. Viola and violin are readily discernible (even to non-Italians).

Piano …the nemesis of so many DACs in my experience, is a bit of a mixed bag. The instrument presents at about the right size (vs. the exaggerated scale on the Spring DAC). PONTUS’ rendering is entirely lovely from mezzo-forte on down. From forte, and upwards, the progressively edgier tone natural to the instrument (and my personal recording of choice here), feels a bit rounded-off.

Now, with all this talk of a slightly (and I do mean slightly) softer presentation from the PONTUS, it’ll perhaps be surprising to find a somewhat less-than-perfectly-smooth top-end when compared with the dac1541, Gungnir MB or Spring DAC. In fact, it seems that there’s an increasing level of grain as we go further up the sonic registers. Music with a lot of high-frequency content, and in particular some of the more shrill/energetic higher female vocals, this becomes more obvious.

Julia Fordham’s “Woman of the 80’s” is uncomfortably on edge here. Enya’s “Orinoco Flow” is, on the other hand, melodious, rich and sonorous. Spin up the intro to the extended version of Queen’s “One Vision” and the initial build-up starts off rich but as it peaks exhibits some noticeable harshness. Not that the PONTUS is harsh overall, but in places there’s a lack of refinement that is sometimes audible and other times is rendered moot by the generally mellow and agreeable presentation of the thing.

DSD vs. PCM

Like it’s simpler sibling, the PONTUS exhibits noticeably better performance when fed DSD content rather than PCM. This remains the case regardless of whether the source material is native DSD or if you’re doing on the fly conversion with something like Audirvana+ or Roon.

Dynamics, here, improve, as does resolution, and the softer nature of the rendering retreats and the general sound becomes rather more incisive. While it is rare that I find software-upsampling/format conversion improves matters, this IS what I find with the PONTUS DAC.

If your setup allows for PCM-to-DSD conversion without jumping through hoops, then this is probably the best way to experience the PONTUS and, if you’re willing to play this way, elevates i’s performance to being properly competitive with other units in this tier.

I still regard the Spring DAC as delivering the best DSD performance I’ve ever heard. The PONTUS isn’t far behind there, at all; however. And if you have a meaningful library of DSD content then the PONTUS is going to do a better job of rendering that than, say, using PCM conversion to feed a purely PCM DAC.

An interesting musical adventure here (worthwhile even if you don’t give a toss about DSD) was the Dutch “8 Ensembles in 1-bit” album. The Spring DAC does an excellent job with this album. And it’s very immersive even after DSD-to-PCM conversion into the two top-tier Schiit DACs, but the PONTUS delivered a particularly enjoyable rendition here.

Summary

In aggregate the PONTUS is broadly, if not directly, competitive with the most obvious options in it’s respective price range. It doesn’t quite rise to the level, on technicalities or musical engagement (or, at least, excitement), of each of them, individually, at their best. But then those units either can’t all operate in the same modes (OS vs. NOS vs. DSD) and with the same sources as the PONTUS, or when they do so they are giving something up.

For example, Gungnir MB beats the PONTUS when the PONTUS is in OS mode. The Spring DAC edges out the PONTUS in NOS mode. The PONTUS in OS mode beats the Spring DAC in OS mode. And the PONTUS can handle up to quad-rate DSD, which is where it turns in it’s best performance for me, while the Gungnir MB cannot do that at all (if you care about such things).

Or, in other words …

Gungnir MB (OS) > PONTUS (OS) > Spring DAC (OS)
​

... if your focus is resolution/detail over raw musicality then:

Soekris dac1541 > Gungnir MB (OS) > PONTUS (OS) > Spring DAC (OS)
​

... and …

Spring DAC (NOS) > PONTUS (NOS)​

With DSD:

Spring DAC (DSD) > PONTUS (DSD) > General DACS w/ software DSD-to-PCM Conversion​

And just looking at the PONTUS in isolation:

PONTUS (DSD) > PONTUS (OS) > PONTUS (NOS).​

This puts the PONTUS in an interesting position.

If you know what you like, in terms of OS vs. NOS, then I suspect you’ll be happier buying something dedicated to that mode of operation. If you’re on the fence, well, now the PONTUS becomes a more interesting proposition. Particularly if you prefer a more neutral vs. sweeter or glowing presentation. At present it exhibits the best, overall, set of compromises in an OS/NOS switchable discrete R-2R DAC that I have had my ears on. It’s not the best in either domain, even if we step down a bit in price, but if you want both, then it’s a pretty reasonable proposition.

Would I buy one?

No, alas not.

At least not as the current DAC landscape, and my musical leanings, play out.

I know my preferences and biases well enough that I would (and have the ability to) spend the extra and either deal with two DACs rather than compromising to address both OS and NOS desires in a single unit, or move further up the gear-ladder to something that exhibits better overall performance in any mode. Maybe the VENUS or the TERMINATOR would upset that balance, but I'd have to hear them to know for sure.

I’m also not a heavy DSD user, which is, ironically, definitely a strong point for the PONTUS. Feed it native, or up-sampled/converted, DSD content, and it delivers a much more convincing performance.

A combination of HQPlayer and the PONTUS DAC might well change opinions here. And this is the first time I can honestly say that there are definite improvements to be had with software oversampling/format conversion as opposed to just “differences”.

So ... worth an audition if you're on the fence with regards to OS vs. NOS (or want a good rendition of both in a single unit), have a preference for a softer presentation, and/or have a DSD-bias (or preference for DSD output via software conversion), but otherwise not quite at the level of the class-leaders for dedicated OS or NOS application.

 

That was a lot of listening @Torq . Nice report.

Guess I will have to organize and post the rest of the Denafrips measurements. There are 366 measurements through which I need sort. Over the next couple of days.

 

You definitely have the harder job, here. I just have to listen and make notes.

Very interested to see where what your measurements have to say about performance with USB/non-USB inputs and with regards to the distortion/frequency profile.

 

While savoring a rather rare Claret, I still find myself pondering the inordinately impressive clarity and resolution of the Soekris dac1541. Still wish it was available as a pure-DAC, but my resolve in this regard is weakening. Bloody marvelous little unit. Almost good enough to warrant doing more DAC reviews just to include it as an additional reference.

 

I was impressed enough to get in the queue for the DAC1421.

Interesting that the measurements demonstrate clearly USB on both Denafrips measures inferior to the other inputs. That is the TL;DR version of the upcoming posting of measurements. You didn't see them, so you weren't listening with your eyes.

 

Nice to know I wasn't imagining things there, then! (A perennial pitfall/risk with raw, pure-listening, evaluations).

 

Thanks @Torq (Retired) for the details impression of the Pontus!

I noticed your nick changed.... retired ?

 

I for one would like you to buy it so we can get an idea how it fares in NOS mode...

Do you think the lesser "musicality" could be addressed with a good tube amp (or other outboard gear)? What was the outcome of your WA234 vs EC Studio & Stellaris dilemma, anyhow?

 

So I finally had a fairly long time with DAVE and Yggdrasil together in a quiet area. I had my Utopia and there was a speaker set up with Focal Kantas and a bunch of expensive nonsense hooked up to them (10,000 dollar power cables and other ridiculously priced gear like that). Anyway point is the system did sound excellent even if a lot of it may not have been influencing the sound all that much. Sole difference was the dacs though using AES on both.

I couldn't believe how different they sounded on the exact same song... The Yggdrasil was very very forward and "attacky". The sound was detailed and in your face. The DAVE was a bit more backed up staging wise on the speakers (but certainly not laid back) and had a more natural tone to it. I can see why people really like both of these products, but the real shocker to me was how obvious the difference was... Switching the cables from one to the other was a joke to tell apart. I expected like subtle nuanced changes that would require extensive listening to notice much, but the changes were larger than I anticipated.

I also did feel the DAVE drove Utopia when compared to Ragnarok. I love raggy it's awesome, but the DAVE wasn't really lacking in enough power to drive Utopia they still sounded excellent. This does not extend to other headphones... DAVE would suck with the harder to drive planars like LCD-3 or Susvara and probably even HD800. I'm not saying DAVE is even close to a better amplifier overall, I just meant I hear people say it's crazy to drive something like Utopia out of them directly, but to my ears that wasn't the case.

Anyway was a fun day.

 

@Galm Did you have a preference or think one DAC was ahead of the other overall in some area? (Leaving value out of it for the moment)