[Aivaras]

First of all, a warm thanks to the original poster for taking the time to assemble and present these samples.

I’ve spent some 4 hours in my studio exploring these tracks, although I wish I could allocate more time to the task.

Needless to say, I found the differences to be very subtle (but they are there). As a result, the wording of my observations should be taken as having quite a narrow semantic range.

In an instance or two, I make remarks about the same converter but different songs that seem to be conflicting. I leave it at that for the moment. Perhaps, different performance under different conditions, or I was simply getting distracted or tired...?

Summa summarum, I prefer converters G and I. They sound better and they do so consistently.

Here are the details:

My monitoring chain: LE Lavry Blue M.DA-824 > DM Dangerous Monitor ST > 2 x Tannoy Ellipse 8 + 2 x Tannoy TS12.

Converter A:

Song 1: Very close to the sample track.

Song 2: More rounded, duller highs, worse transient response at both ends of the spectrum.

Song 3: Narrower stereo field, especially in the high-mids, some spacial dimension is lost, poorer sense of reverberation.

Converter B:

Song 1: Very similar to the sample track.

Song 2: A tiny bit more resolved, wider stereo image, overall very close to the sample track.

Song 3: Quite close to the sample track, but a dab more detailed and effortless.

Converter C:

Song 1: Hard to tell from the sample track.

Song 2: A little less resolved on all counts: stereophony, transient response, spectral detail, yet quite similar to the sample track.

Song 3: Really hard to tell from the sample track, if anything, just a slight loss of detail.

Converter D:

Song 1: The piano sounds fuller in the low-mid band.

Song 2: Broader, better transients, crispier highs, overall very nice, lacks some of the sub-lows that are present in the kick of the sample track.

Song 3: Better transients (notice the shakers during the verse), nice overall spectral balance, wider stereo field.

Converter E:

Song 1: The center of the stereo field compromized; washy, hollower mids.

Song 2: Duller and phasier high band; unpleasant widening and chorusing in the stereo field.

Song 3: Quite close to the sample track.

Converter F:

Song 1: The spectral balance is very close to the original with a little more weight in the low-mids; yet somewhat loosened transients (pay heed to the guitar strats).

Song 2: A nice balance of all the elements, sounds somewhat fuller, wider, and more pinpointed than the sample track.

Song 3: This time less of a difference, still better transients (pay heed to the shakers during the verse, and the tambourine during the chorus, here you can hear the actual attacks whereas in the sample track the tamburine's initial snap is masked by the snare’s attack and only the second part of its dynamic envelope - the rattle and the reverb - can be heard more distinctly.

Converter G:

Song 1: Exquisite, euphonic, fuller than the sample track, stereophonic stage, transients, spectral balance - everything in right measure and proportion.

Song 2: Once more beautiful performance, excellent transients, the kick is very focused, contoured, the highs more resolved, overall better sounding than the sample track.

Song 3: The differences are less pronounced, better transients, the middle band has more instrumental separation, the snare has better attacks, sounds snappier.

Converter H:

Song 1: Very similar to the sample track.

Song 2: Phasier, the transients quite smeared, the attack of the kick loses its focus and spectral acuteness.

Song 3: Quite similar, yet less resolved.

Converter I:

Song 1: Same observations as per G.

Song 2: More detailed and resolved, while retaining the timbral proportions of the sample track.

Song 3: A winner in the genre of rock, best instrumental separation, clearest highs, excellent transient response.

Converter J:

Song 1: Very close to the sample track, a tiny bit wider stereo field.

Song 2: Wider stereo field but negatively so, the sides start to overpower the center.

Song 3: Very close to the sample track, perhaps very moderately fuller than its counterpart.