Unusual TAS bomb


Something you don't see too often in this month's issue of TAS - a truly bad component review, of an Audio Research piece none-the-less. Alan Taffell reviewing the the DAC8 said "Overall the DAC 8 is simply not as involving, musically informative, or relaxing as it must be to compete at its price point" and that might have been the most polite thing he said about it. I've gotten so used to reading fawning reviews I almost didn't think they had it in them to really pan a piece of gear.
grimace
Audio Research, they simply needed a segue to the DAC 9 Reference Special Edition.

Bashing the audio press is silly. I don't listen with my eyes so they can say whatever they need to say. For $12 a year the periodicals are great fun.
I'll start by saying I'm not a fan of TAS reviews. Not only do they frequently not compare the piece under review to anything else -- which I almost always find to be the most helpful section of any review -- but in the associated equipment area they list every piece of equipment in their system EXCEPT the corresponding component in their system. This strikes me as not only irresponsible but downright cowardly.

That said, at least in this review the writer bothered to compare the DAC 8 to something else, even if it was just a previous version of this DAC. He also took the time to take the DAC to another system to see if it might be a system synergy problem and also had ARC check the unit to see if it was up to spec. So I'm left with giving the guy credit that he was honestly conveying what he heard, and right or wrong it's at least out there for people to keep in mind when they audition the piece. I can't believe I'm sort of defending a TAS review. Ick.

Anyway, the reason there aren't many negative reviews out there is that stuff has gotten so good overall you rarely find a piece that really just doesn't at least pretty decent in many respects. So you're left with relative differences and individual positives/negatives (hence my comment above on the importance of product comparisons) that can be preference and system based. I've had lots of stuff in my system, and through it all there have only been two pieces that if I were writing a review it would be truly negative. On top of that, publications tend to pick equipment that comes from the better manufacturers who tend to know what the hell they're doing or that already has a positive buzz around it in the public domain, which further cuts down the potential to review one of the true dogs on the market.

So while I may have my doubts about the reviewer's findings, I do believe he was honestly conveying what he heard and if I were going to audition a DAC 8 I would appreciate having them as part of my frame of reference as something to at least watch out for. Ick. Now I need to go take a shower.
I still can't fathom the writer finding it unmusical, as I said above I listened to every available DAC at the time ( most at home ) and found the DAC 8 the best by far and the most musical. I found it less warm than the tube DAC7, but less colored and more natural, more like analog. Mine is hear to stay, err , did someone say something about a DAC9 Ref ?
The TAS review is the opinion of just ONE person, and is no more credible than anyone ONE else who also listens to the DAC8. Not everyone likes the same thing. That's why when you go to the ice cream shop, they offer more than just vanilla. The thing to understand is if anyone auditions any piece of audio gear and likes it, it is good regardless of the opnion of a reviewer.

As an example, perhaps a dozen years ago, maybe more, I had the chance to listen to a very costly tubed Pre-amp that had gotten glowing reviews- TAS, Stereophile, et al. I listened to the Pre amp and for the life of me didn't understand why, despite it's 5 figure price, it was considered awesome. I found it noisy, somewhat phasey, and ridiculously expensive. But mine was my opinion and I am sure many found the Pre amp to be extraordinary. I strongly preferred a Pre amp made by the same company that was far less expensive