Has anyone try the Benchmark DAC1 Preamp?

I've had the DAC-1 Pre for a couple of weeks now and IMHO it sounds excellent. Previously I had the regular DAC1 and either ran it straight to my power amp, or through my Bryston BP25. The DAC 1 Pre sounds better than either of those combinations. Needless to say, my BP25 will be on the market shortly.

Cldinsmore, was your DAC1 the DAC1USB?

I asked BenchMark, the difference between DAC1USB and DAC1PRE, other than the extra input, is the premium connectors and more use of LM4562.

Since I don't need the extra analog input, I was thinking that the DAC1USB might be all I need.

No. Mine did not have USB.

Also...It sounds like Amfibius is saying the DAC1 Pre is a digital preamp. The preamp in the DAC1 Pre is analog and so is the volume control. I'm also not sure what he means when he says "every interface you add in a digital system increases jitter." The DAC1 Pre is not adding any additional interfaces. Even if it did, the DAC1 is immune to jitter due to the Ultra Lock system. I would also think that analog signals do benefit from short signal paths more so than digital. Digital signals being '0s' and '1s' are much less prone to contamination. As far as exposing the analog signal to digital noise...the DAC1 Pre is dead quiet and has an incredible S/N ratio.

Cldinsmore I don't know what type of preamp the Benchmark DAC1 PRE is because the literature in their website does not say. Consequently I did not say if the DAC1 PRE was digital or analogue. If you say it is analogue, then you must be better informed than me.

As for "adding an additional interface", what I mean is the connection between transport and DAC. In a one box CD player the connection between transport and DAC is short, and the impedance is matched. With ANY outboard DAC, you have: output jack, cable, input jack. The length and impedance of the cable is not known by the designer, and each cable/jack interface is a major source of jitter.

"Immune to jitter from the data lock system" ... either someone has been reading too much marketing material or Benchmark is able to offer something that even Meitner can not do :)

I would also disagree with your contention that 0's and 1's are less prone to contamination than analog signal. Remember that a 16 bit PCM digital transmission is a square wave transmitted at 1 MHz (by Fourier analysis even higher than this - thanks to H3, H5, H7, and so on). Digital signal is exquisitely sensitive to impedance mismatch. Analogue signal is "only" 20Hz-22kHz. Which do you think would be more prone to degradation?