All:

I first would like to state to date there are no professional reviews of this DAC, so I hope my basic review is of some use to anyone interested in this particular unit or considering getting a DAC in general and just want to hear a review of a slightly unusual and rare one. I say that because this unit is designed to be added and integrated directly into the Creek Evolution 50 and 100 Integrated Amplifiers and become part of the electronics vs. the much more widely available external units.

I have now dedicated some time with the Creek Ruby Dac I installed a few days ago.. I have compared it to the PS Audio NuWave DAC, Vinyl, and the NAD 516BEE CD player.

I think it will be easiest to communicate my perceptions by splitting major notes I've made into positive and negative categories. Of worth noting, some of the observations are very trivial, while others are quite serious regarding the pure sound...which is what counts most, but I am including some trivial information which separates this unit from most others. Of further significance, I purchase the PS Audio unit pre-owned, so it was already most likely broken in; while the Creek is brand new and may indeed improve over time further.

POSITIVES
- Displays sampling rate on amp’s screen…very cool and unexpected feature. It’s just cooler to me than a simple light blinking above a printed out number on a chassis; or in some DACs, no indication of sampling rate at all! I find this feature severely useful for computer audio playback to ensure the DAC is decoding the signal correctly.
- Unit is now integrated into the chassis - one less component, one less interconnect.
- Better instrument resolution/separation
- Best system synergy… my system's digital chain from top to bottom; for better or worse, is 100% British (English & Scottish).
- Same soundstage as PS Audio NuWave (Very good)
- excellent detail in music…individual instruments are easily distinguished even in busy rock passages.
- I also gained an outstanding FM receiver which the engineers at Creek cleverly added into the design of this capable DAC.The FM receiver circuitry includes RDS: when a song is on the radio, the little Creek faithfully displays the radio station as well as artist and song information.

NEGATIVES
- only accepts 96KHz via USB?!
- noticeable reduction of deep bass on certain tracks
- there is slight background noise when volume is turned up when I am standing near speakers which oddly wasn’t there with the external NuWave. I am guessing in this case an isolated, external chassis is better because that served as a shield against the other components in the amplifier.
- very annoying skips or drop outs intermittently occurring over WIFI streaming.. I am further looking into this to see if it is not my other components and computer network. I truly hope that is the case..but it needs mentioned as a negative. And, it was never present in the previous PS Audio NuWave DAC.

NOTES: On the whole "no interconnect and one less component" thought… There are tradeoffs..I must say I am pretty certain the human ear would be hard pressed to A/B blind test this device if it were in an external chassis connected via my previous AudioQuest XLR cables. More importantly, I think an additional chassis with its shielding and isolation from the rest of the circuitry of the amplifier is a superior sonic design.

To expound further on the bass…There is this very noticeable loss of deep, powerful "analogue" bass, but gain of punchiness, timing, and accuracy. Oddly, I truly miss that deep bass…but I think this is the British sound.. and I would further hazard to guess superior. My untrained ears have just been programmed since youth to equate chest thumping bass with good quality. That is certainly not always the case..or is it? I am still learning here..

OVERALL GRADE AND COMPARISON TO PS AUDIO NUWAVE:

Creek Ruby Dac: 8/10
PS Audio NuWave: 9/10

Overall, I must confess to MY ears, the PS Audio NuWave is a superior DAC. However, in my particular case, I am going to keep the Creek unit in that it does provide me the addition of an FM receiver, and I am gambling on the fact my ears are just programmed to equate deep thudding bass with quality and that is not the case as previously mentioned. However, I do believe the very significant analog power supply in the PS Audio unit did in fact improve the signal in especially the bass department and that very very subtle but distinguishable "live" or "analog" sound that the Creek just does not have. But I have read and heard this is the "British" sound.. and that the "American" sound does in fact have more bass... I still do not again know which is "Better"..and am always learning. Plus, I have NOT experimented with changing tone controls, speaker position, or any other tweaks or room treatments to re-enhance bass as I did not want to skew the review.

Of final merit which did tip the scales in favour of keeping the Creek product: to my ears, it seems like it is literally pulling more *information* from the recorded tracks. This is a very difficult and perhaps psychological placebo effect though; as I did not mention it in the POSITIVE attributes.

Some songs played to evaluate were: The Beatles: Sun King, Supertramp: Brother Where You Bound, Miles Davis: So What, Led Zeppelin: Babe I’m Gonna Leave You (and many other songs from them), Deadmau5: My Pet Coelacanth, Peter Gabriel : entire So album, 2PAC : Keep Ya Head Up & Changes, Eminem/Rihanna: Love the Way You Lie, and many other songs.. but these were the most critically compared for their level of sonic breadth and depth of bass, midrange, treble, and in some of the songs extra effects. Oddly and regrettably I have not had the chance to play many other genres of music.

Reviewed Equipment:
Creek Evolution 50A Integrated Amplifier, Creek Ruby DAC, Epos Epic 2 Speakers, Epos ST15 speaker stands, AudioQuest Rocket 33 speaker cabling, 2014 MacBook Air, Apple Airport Express.

My Best,

Ron

All:

I had previously experienced a slight increase of dB with the Creek DAC... which is not uncommon; however, noticeable levels of subtle to not so subtle distortion could be heard at high volume where with other DACs these artifacts of distraction were little or not present. Also, the lower bass just didn't seem to hit the lowest notes as described in my review as compared to other DACs I've evaluated. Finally, if music was not playing and I turned the volume up, I could hear an electronic hum of sorts when close to the speakers I also do not remember with other equipment.

Much to my happiness and now true contentment with the Creek Ruby, after taking a cue from Michael on past tweaks, I thought to open the case to see if there were any wires in the way or anything... sure enough, there were TWO bundles of signal wires no doubt coming from the pre-amp logic board and passing through the Ruby DAC module....so I undid them... and passed one grouping on TOP of the DAC; exterior to it, but still room to cover with the case, and I left the other strand to pass through the module; but this time there was much more "breathing room".

Every single issue mentioned is now resolved. And, I truly notice a significant enough difference where I am now truly happy with this engineering marvel. I say marvel because at the price point of $599 US, they also managed to fit in an FM tuner, from which they pass its analog signal into the DAC as well; utilizing a Wolfson DAC.

Just good news -

Ron

Simon:

If you are just needing the DAC capability and do not need or care about the FM radio feature, I would rate it just a 6.5-7 as compared to the PS Audio NuWave. The NuWave is a clearly audibly better product with low end oomph just not present in the Creek Dac.

If; on the other hand, you also desire the FM radio capability and the other pluses mentioned above, just due to these additional features makes the comparison much closer.

But note for note, the PS Audio trumps the Creek Ruby on pure musicality.

Hope that helps -

Best Regards,

Ron

All:

In spite of the sonic shortcomings of the Creek Ruby DAC, I have decided to keep it; for all of the positive qualities it exhibits for owners of compatible Creek amplifiers.

My logic is as follows:

1. DACS are ever evolving at a frantic pace, and I plan on actually upgrading next year anyway.

2. Perhaps more compelling: I have a very good analogue chain, and I own vinyl versions of all of my reference recordings which eclipse even the PS Audio DAC.

3. I thoroughly enjoy the integrated FM Ambit Tuner literally everyday.

Best Regards,

Ron

All:

I performed my initial reviews on the Creek Ruby DAC with only using the USB input..which is also limited to 96/24 resolution.

I recently ran optical SPDIF out from my music server to the Ruby which is capable of 192/24 and have noticed a significant improvement vs the USB interface.

Very long story short, after performing reference listening sessions with the same songs as before, but this time via optical and 192 capable, this DAC performs ever so nearly as well as the Bryston BDA-1!!??

Perhaps my comparatively modest Creek amplifier isn't up to the task of resolving all of the capabilities of the Bryston, but suffice it to say there is a huge improvement to the Ruby DAC's sound in every way... High frequency...bass extension ... Rhythm...timing...clarity...separation of instruments... Soundstage.. Of equal importance, the Ruby is dead SILENT on quiet passages. The problem of hum was fixed as noted in an earlier post.

Also of importance, the increase in performance is not limited to 192/24 files, but seems to be of benefit across all digital resolutions. I am assuming it's a simple matter of a better implementation of SPDIF vs. USB...as is now appearing to be much the case among DACs below $3,000.

To my novice ears anyway, I can't tell a difference now between the Ruby and the Bryston in 98% roughly of listening. A main area where the Bryston edges out the Ruby is in brass instruments on jazz recordings. The Bryston places more air around the instruments and makes them sound a little more organic...leading to less or no fatigue. By contrast, the Ruby is a little too bright..and I would imagine leading to fatigue over long listening sessions. But I am really at the upper limits of my experience here and these differences are severely subtle. They are differences never the less and are perceivable.

I only wish I still had the PS Audio NuWave to compare it as well.

Needless to say, I am increasing the judged overall performance of the Ruby from a 9/10 to a 10/10 with the caveat one needs to use the SPDIF INTERFACE as opposed to the USB to gain full sonic potential...which is a minor inconvenience at best for most audiophiles merely involving the purchase of an SPDIF cable if they don't already likely have one.

I am also raising my pure musical sound review to a 9/10... While it does appear to nearly match the Bryston on my amplifier and speakers.. I think there is room for improvement in the slam of the Bass and sibilance of vocals, as well as the mentioned rendering of brass instruments. However, this is now into nit-picking territory. Without the benefit of A/B testing against a Bryston, many an audiophile would be very pleased with the Creek setup and not left wishing for more.

I look forward to many more listening sessions and really analyzing the performance...most importantly, I need to do some critical headphone referencing before my official review is finalized, but things are looking very good.

If the Ruby continues to perform as expected, I can only conclude I have reached the sonic limits of my current remaining equipment to further distinguish the technically more capable dual-differential Bryston with the single Wolfson Ruby. Therefore, I will then have the decision of: sell off the now redundant Bryston...or upgrade the Integrated to a more resolving and revealing amplifier!??

In short, the engineers at Creek have a real hidden "gem" here..,and the value at $599 is tremendous.

For those unfamiliar with this DAC, it requires a Creek Evolution 50A or 100A integrated; as it is installed inside the chassis.

Best Regards,

Ron