Berkeley Alpha DAC Reference Series 2 Announced

Cycleman said:
Oh please.
I own a Berkeley, I like the Berkeley. A lot.
But I am in no other way connected with Berkeley.
Only an advocate as every person on this forum might be about components that bring them great musical pleasure.

Besides, you mean asking a question about identical looks, since I'm trying to figure out that member's perspective, is really "unfriendly" from your point of view?
Why is asking questions unfriendly?
Where I come from, not caring enough what others say so that you do NOT ask questions in order to understand them -- well, that's the real impolite activity.

And "otherwise friendly discussion," you note...
Really?
One person is "uneasy" about the upgrade.
Another person is "sad" about the upgrade.
And that makes for an "otherwise friendly discussion"?
Click to expand...

There you go..
Or read back what you wrote and examine the tone.
 
I contacted Berkeley and within 2 days heard back and am in the queue to have new ref upgraded to ref 2. I am grateful there is an upgrade path. Will happily pay $$.
 
Dpod4 said:
I contacted Berkeley and within 2 days heard back and am in the queue to have new ref upgraded to ref 2. I am grateful there is an upgrade path. Will happily pay $$.
Click to expand...

That is fantastic brand loyalty - to upgrade before details such as DXD, DSD, MQA, usb input?
Admittedly, the upgrade cost isn't much. I would do likewise if I had the Ref 1.

I am going to go out on a limb here for the lark of it that the upgrade will be plus DXD but minus DSD, MQA or usb input.
The show opens in a few hours. Can't wait.
 
Cycleman said:
Is looking alike enough to determine whether they actually are, or are not, identical?
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Components haven't changed, PCB layout hasn't changed.

Therere were only three differencies between the BADA Alpha DAC Series 2 and BADA Reference DAC:

1. Different PCB color - the basic DAC Series 2 has a regular green PCB, the Reference DAC has a skin colored one. That because they probably used ARLON or similar teflon based material.
2. Small daughterboard PCB over the digital filter.
3. Box.

That's it. This is basicly the very same design, part for part identical.

Reference:

attachment.php


Alpha:
attachment.php


The PSUs are 100% identical:

Reference:
attachment.php


Alpha:
attachment.php


As you can see, there is not much happening in terms upgraded parts for your $11k extra. It is basicly just a nicer box.

It looks like the Reference was made for a specific group of audiophiles, for whom the original Alpha was just too cheap, and too plain looking. OK, they had thrown in that small daughterboard over the digital filter section and changed the PCB material, because they HAD to make some changes to be able to claim it is a different product, not the very same DAC in a nicer box.

But trust me - in terms of BOM (Bill of Materials), those small changes didn't changed much (box excluding). If Berkeley wanted to include them in the Alpha DAC, I doubt the price would have to be higher than $6k using the same marigins they used on the Alpha.

If anything, it only shows how expensive it is to manufacture a nice box and its inpact on the retail price of the product. In case of Berkeley, it is $10k.

I think that many Alpha DAC owners would rather want BADA offered them that small daughterboard upgrade option for their DACs (for like $500 extra, as it probably cost $100-150 to manufacture).

Still it all wouldn't be possible, and Reference DAC wouldn't be competitive in the sub $20k market, if the original BADA Alpha DAC 2 @ $5k wasn't such a killer product to begin with.
 

Attachments

  • alpha-ref-main-board.jpg
    alpha-ref-main-board.jpg
    2.4 MB · Views: 103
  • 9203d1386062615-new-berkeley-digital-analogue-converter-article-implies-much-berkeleyalphadacins.jpg
    9203d1386062615-new-berkeley-digital-analogue-converter-article-implies-much-berkeleyalphadacins.jpg
    163.3 KB · Views: 102
  • 9205d1386062660-new-berkeley-digital-analogue-converter-article-implies-much-berkeleyalphadacpsu.jpg
    9205d1386062660-new-berkeley-digital-analogue-converter-article-implies-much-berkeleyalphadacpsu.jpg
    128.3 KB · Views: 102
  • alpha-ref-power-supply.jpg
    alpha-ref-power-supply.jpg
    2.1 MB · Views: 108
Jock,

As far as I know, the delay only revolved around the case manufacturing and problems with the supplier forcing them to find another supplier/manufacturer.



the professor said:
Very interesting.

Even makes you wonder more why they had long long waits for the reference.
Click to expand...
 
If I am not mistaken, wait times for the Berkeley Ref dac are still running 6-8 weeks. I have no clue why.
 
A BADR1/2 vs Bricasti M1 comparison would be interesting as both are implementations of the AD1955 DAC chip.
 
Could it be the difference is in software/firmware between BADA2 and REF1?
 
Anatta said:
A BADR1/2 vs Bricasti M1 comparison would be interesting as both are implementations of the AD1955 DAC chip.
Click to expand...

This comment got my attention, because I'm at the starting line of comparing the Berkeley Ref 1, which I've had for awhile, with a barely used Bricasti M1, which has been in my system for a week, with the Chord DAVE, which I'm super excited by (as Mike well knows), and which could possibly arrive here in the Hudson Valley -- by way of England, Canada, and Florida -- sometime around the Fifth of July.

I hope to write up my impressions, and already have the feeling that I'm looking at different flavors of love.

Dave, who will be using an Aurender as the source for all three DACs
 
Looking forward to your impression, Dave. I own DAVE's predecessor QBD76HD and at some point will look to replace it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top