• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Review and Measurements of Benchmark DAC3

walt99

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 13, 2021
Messages
160
Likes
198
Location
DFW
My 3B is silent but I think the latest SW update addressed the issue some folks were experiencing.

VERSION 1.1 (Production Release): Summary: • Version 1.1 improves the power management and provides a very slight reduction in standby power consumption. The improvement is so small that we do not recommend upgrading from 1.0 in order to “save power”. • In some cases, Version 1.1 can reduce the slight acoustic noise produced by the on-board DC/DC converters. This noise is inaudible in most applications, but in rare cases, some users have been able to hear some noise while the unit was off and in an extremely quiet room. This version can provide a solution for these rare cases.
 

Martini

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 13, 2020
Messages
288
Likes
292
I've often considered this a superb way to get your signal to your speakers (when using an AHB2 in the chain). Do you incorporate sub integration and/or DSP to correct for room modes? Would appreciate hearing your thoughts/experience.
I do have the AHB2 as well. A Mac Mini is used as the music server. I don't have a sub, as it's not needed, my speaker go deep enough. I do use the DIRAC-Standalone (Mac) software to handle room correction. It seems to work pretty well; better than what I would be willing to work to achieve with REW.
 

ex audiophile

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 28, 2017
Messages
635
Likes
805
I do have the AHB2 as well. A Mac Mini is used as the music server. I don't have a sub, as it's not needed, my speaker go deep enough. I do use the DIRAC-Standalone (Mac) software to handle room correction. It seems to work pretty well; better than what I would be willing to work to achieve with REW.
Thanks, I hear you regarding working with REW. I suppose there is a windows version of Dirac, that would work for me. I use a Node 2i as source but it might be fun to try using a Windows setup. Happy Thanksgiving :)
 

Nkam

Active Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2023
Messages
201
Likes
164
I just read this review for the first time and to be completely honest, from the aspect of science. Amir should delete the first page measurements from error as they can be misleading to someone who doesn’t have the time or patience to read through the entire thread, and to the accurate measurements listed far into the thread.

i mean we want to be scientific here I’m assuming.

so with a bit of editing the first measurements could be deleted and have a notation that the accurate measurements are on page X.
 

pablolie

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 8, 2021
Messages
2,025
Likes
3,324
Location
bay area, ca
I have a DAC2HGC and it has some coil whine sound when its off.
Get the power supply replaced. Happened to mine as well. I sent it in to be fixed. Benchmark are good in support - I think it was around $200 to get the PS fixed and eliminate the high pitched noise. Should be completely silent.
 

Nkam

Active Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2023
Messages
201
Likes
164
OK, the DAC3 HGC that Benchmark was kind enough to send arrived today. So I put it on the bench and ran a few tests. I will be on the road tomorrow late morning so if you want to have anything else measured (hopefully not!), ask right away.

NOTE: all measurements are using balanced output unless noted, with -10 dB jumper applied as the original review.

Let's start with our Dashboard view:
View attachment 14207

Right away we see a 2 dB or so improvement in SINAD/reduction of distortion compared to the loaner unit I had from @dallasjustice.

Let's look at the contested Jitter measurements using Benchmark's own ASIO driver:
View attachment 14208

We see a substantial improvement in jitter sidebands. We went from -108 dB or so to -131 dB!

No, it had nothing to do with using ASIO4ALL:

View attachment 14210

As you see, it makes no difference which driver is used. Both generate the identical, much improved results.

For completeness, let's run through the rest of our tests:

View attachment 14211

We see a marked improvement in low frequency noise/distortion (in green/brown). Gone is also the varying channel response that I saw (in red) in the first unit I tested. This matches our dashboard view of better THD+N/SINAD.

Here is IMD vs level and comparison to some other devices I had tested later, specifically Oppo UDP-205:

View attachment 14213

The Benchmark DAC3 HGC (in red) has substantially lower noise than all the other DACs I have tested. It starts to saturate a bit at maximum level where it then runs into Oppo UDP-205. But otherwise beats it handily.

And here is the spectrum of 1 kHz distortion and noise (saved for future reference):
View attachment 14214

Distortion products are well under -120 dB, satisfying our even most conservative standard for audibility or better said, lack thereof.

Finally, linearity:
View attachment 14215

Using balanced output (which is used in all of the tests above), the DAC3 nails the performance here. There is something you don't see in these graphs which is how much my analyzer struggles to get stable set of measurements. With every DAC I have tested, it usually times out and picks the last value at lower amplitudes. Not so with Benchmark DAC3. The results instantly converge allowing the analyzer to run through all the values. There is exceptional engineering here to generate such stability and precision at such low amplitudes.

Alas, the small blemish on unbalanced output remains.

Summary
This second loaner unit of Benchmark DAC3 (HGC) finally lives up to the standard and reputation of Benchmark as a company. Measurements are exceptional with no faults found anywhere. OK, there is a setback in linearity for unbalanced output but otherwise, this is as good it gets guys.

It is a puzzler as to why the previous loaner did not generate as exceptional of results as this unit. I hope Benchmark works with the owner of the other unit and investigates.

amir can you please explain to me the linearity measurement with the unbalanced where the line drops at around -100db?
does that dip downwards mean the highs roll off?
if it rose would it mean the top end would be higher in level a bit?

much obliged
 

Rosenbloom

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2022
Messages
79
Likes
101
Location
London
My DAC3 just arrived this afternoon. My first impression is very, very good. Worth the money.

IMG_7263.jpeg
 

audiopile

Active Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
161
Likes
125
  • Been using the DAC-3HGC for a few years -musta missed the plugs in headphone jacks issue ? Why would you do this ?
 

little-endian

Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2023
Messages
52
Likes
46
Given that Amir's original posting in the review of the DAC3, while taking light differences between the DAC3 models into account, still mentions those side-band oddities and witnessed "less-than-expected" performance from Benchmark, I wonder what is the consensus now (on an academic level of course as even considering that some measurements would in fact be worse, it will hardly have any audible impact but rather a psychological).

John Siau from Benchmark argued that all bets would be off if one tried to measure something beyond the measuring equipment own capabilities as reference. Well, so far so much making sense, but whose measurements now weren't up for the task - Benchmark's or Amir's and how does this go along with unremarkable measurement results using the same methods here when testing other devices?

Also, all good now and we can rest assured that the DAC3 is as "flawless" as expected from such a pricey product or is it still "beaten" in a some aspects by some way more affordable products?
 

RichB

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
1,946
Likes
2,611
Location
Massachusetts
Given that Amir's original posting in the review of the DAC3, while taking light differences between the DAC3 models into account, still mentions those side-band oddities and witnessed "less-than-expected" performance from Benchmark, I wonder what is the consensus now (on an academic level of course as even considering that some measurements would in fact be worse, it will hardly have any audible impact but rather a psychological).

John Siau from Benchmark argued that all bets would be off if one tried to measure something beyond the measuring equipment own capabilities as reference. Well, so far so much making sense, but whose measurements now weren't up for the task - Benchmark's or Amir's and how does this go along with unremarkable measurement results using the same methods here when testing other devices?

Also, all good now and we can rest assured that the DAC3 is as "flawless" as expected from such a pricey product or is it still "beaten" in a some aspects by some way more affordable products?

I don't think we can rest assured that any product is as flawless as expected.
A second DAC3 measured better, and the DAC3 linear phase fast filter is well implemented, though I don't see it measured here.

- Rich
 

Nkam

Active Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2023
Messages
201
Likes
164
I don't think we can rest assured that any product is as flawless as expected.
A second DAC3 measured better, and the DAC3 linear phase fast filter is well implemented, though I don't see it measured here.

- Rich

im , let me rephrase that for you

Benchmark sent a second one , which was measured correctly and the first one was sent to benchmark , where they did not find fault in it.
which means that either the first measurements were not done properly or there was a ghost in the machine that day.
 

Nkam

Active Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2023
Messages
201
Likes
164
Given that Amir's original posting in the review of the DAC3, while taking light differences between the DAC3 models into account, still mentions those side-band oddities and witnessed "less-than-expected" performance from Benchmark, I wonder what is the consensus now (on an academic level of course as even considering that some measurements would in fact be worse, it will hardly have any audible impact but rather a psychological).

John Siau from Benchmark argued that all bets would be off if one tried to measure something beyond the measuring equipment own capabilities as reference. Well, so far so much making sense, but whose measurements now weren't up for the task - Benchmark's or Amir's and how does this go along with unremarkable measurement results using the same methods here when testing other devices?

Also, all good now and we can rest assured that the DAC3 is as "flawless" as expected from such a pricey product or is it still "beaten" in a some aspects by some way more affordable products?

even the second measurements weren't correctly portrayed

in the picture attached we can see that the graph starts from +20db

and then the quote is to the point of , there was a substantial difference of jitter from -108db to -131db.
wheras the graph clearly shows that it should have read
we went from -128db to -151db.

either we are scientific or not.
 

Attachments

  • 47F7A176-72D9-43E7-A4AE-7ADDAB27C297.png
    47F7A176-72D9-43E7-A4AE-7ADDAB27C297.png
    802.2 KB · Views: 73
Top Bottom