Showing 1 of 99 conversations about:
May 7, 2016
Okay, let's see if we can get the last person to join the drop and bring our costs down to target price!! Just a reminder, here are some of the things that people are saying about this brilliant piece of kit, the Nuforce DAC-80:
"'s a somewhat musical sounding DAC, very dynamic and exciting. Definitely a different sound compared to the recent trend of hyper-detailed DACs. Not that detail is poor - in fact top end air and extension is on the strong side, but it's refined enough to avoid that "digital" feel... for sheer musical, toe-tappin' fun, the NuForce/SET amp combos are tough to beat." --
"...details, while hard-edged, are never subject to bloom or tizz. It is a detail-oriented DAC, but retains a pleasant, full sound. Sound is staged wide and deep, and if your amp is up to it, capable of a very 3D-like effect. " --
" The [DAC-80] is one of those rare digital devices that is not bright sounding, but more importantly, doesn’t overcompensate by sounding too dark, bland, or dreary. This makes it a very natural-sounding digital device, at a price where such things are all too rare."
"I thought that it sounded very good, without any apparent coloration. And even though the volume is attenuated digitally, the sound is very detailed even when playing very low." --
"The DAC80 excelled with both headphones and a full-room stereo system, and whether I was playing classic rock or classical, the instruments seemed to open up just a bit more than I was used to. There was a beautiful sonic effect." --
"...the NuForce trademark is recognizable from the first minutes of listening. Immediately, we are bathed in a sound universe, mingled with happy transparency, definition, clarity and a beautiful tonal richness which is very high in the spectrum. But also striking is the density and the weight of the low registers, it seems a bit stronger than the DAC-100. Powerful and defined, it gives a great listening experience and a lot of feeling with modern music." -- [translated]
May 7, 2016
View Full Discussion