Nitsch DSHA-3FN Review by @andris
TL;DR
On Utopia OG: Lowest noise floor I’ve ever (not?) heard. Exceptional stage width and depth, and tube-like holography. Elegant build. Warmer sound signature. Slightly softened transient response and macrodynamics.
Full Review
Chain: Roon NUC PC Server → Holo Red DDC -(optical)-> Chord MScaler → Chord DAVE → Nitsch DSHA-3FN → Utopia OG
The (lack of) noise floor on this amp blew me away the second I put the Utopias on my ears, so I just have to start here. I’ve never heard anything like it. I consider minimizing noise floor to be one of the highest priorities in my chain (hence a larger than usual budget on power products, interconnects, isolation, etc), and for an amplifier, the gap between this and anything else I’ve had in my system is meaningful. It’s even noticeably quieter than the built-in headphone amp on the DAVE, and that had been my low noise floor reference - until now.
I would also not be the first to note that the DSHA-3FN has a fairly wide and deep sound stage, with exceptional holography, and I suspect the extremely low noise floor is largely to thank for that. As I understand it, the brain uses extremely low-level cues and transient timing to reconstruct spacial images from sound, and when you allow more of that micro-micro-detail through (i.e. not obstruct it with low-level noise), instruments seem more clearly placed in space, and more three-dimensional themselves. For example, on a good recording, I can hear (and almost “see”) a whole drum head reverberating in a three dimensional spot, rather than simply processing a drum hit in a more two dimensional direction. Combining the DSHA-3FN’s incredibly low noise floor with a Chord digital front end that specializes in low-level detail resolution and transient reconstruction, and with the incredible resolving power of the Utopia, and you end up with spatial magic.
I find this amp to lean warm and soft. “Warmth” can be caused by more than one factor (e.g. frequency response and transient response), but I’m going to talk about it primarily in how this amp manifests timbre and transients. This can be a controversial and extremely subjective statement, so some context is called for. On the warm ↔ cool/clinical spectrum, what I personally am looking for is something that sounds as true to life as possible. While I recognize that I was not in the room for the recordings to judge, I am an orchestral musician, casual guitar player, and have played / listened to quite a bit of live music, so I have very good reference points for at least what timbral and tonal range an instrument should be in, and it pains me to say that, for my own preference, the DSHA-3FN leans too far toward warm and soft to be in what I consider to be the “realistic” range for most of the music I listen to - at least that which is based on real instruments (i.e. not electronic). I also would like to note that it’s a “fat” warmth instead of a “warm blanket” warmth - if that helps characterize it a bit more; It’s not muffled by any means, but the musical “strands” are just fattened up a bit. I also find the transients to be on the soft side, with not as much punch and precision as something like DAVE’s amp or the Burson Soloist 3X GT. Now, I recognize that a whole lot of people find the Utopia to sometimes come off as a bit too precise or edgy (I do not), so if you’re in the camp of people that love the Utopia, but just want to take the edge off a bit, do yourself a favor and listen to this amp. It may very well be perfect for you!
Likely related to the softer transients, macrodynamics don’t shine on the DSHA-3FN. I don’t think you’d be likely to point them out as muted without another reference, but if you listen to the Utopia through one of the Chord DAC/amps (DAVE, Hugo2 and others) and switch back, you’d certainly come away thinking that there is more immediacy on the Chord units.
I really love the build of this amp - both aesthetically and functionally. I don’t mind large amps, but the size is incredibly friendly, even if it’s going on your desk. The diffuser-like wood panels on the sides may not be universally loved, especially if you’ve got an all black and silver aesthetic going on, but in my wood rack, I think it’s absolutely perfect. The volume knob is textured so that it grips beautifully, and the knob feel is incredibly smooth with just the right amount of resistance. The only slight criticism I’ll make is that the RCA inputs seem to be slightly recessed into the unit, making me feel like I’m not getting the fullest connection I could get (but this may not matter, and it’s not like I notice some degradation from it - probably mostly psychological). They’re also a hair closer together than I’d like. The connectors on my RCA interconnects just touch, so they’re not really strained, but I’d love an extra 2-3mm of space to comfortably fit premium interconnects that may have a slightly fatter connector.
Comparisons
I do not have as much experience with solid state amplification as I have with tube amps, and the only direct comparisons (i.e. amps on hand) I have are the Chord DAVE built-in amp and a DNA Stellaris (a tube amp, which I am generally leaving out of the comparisons due to factors like tube rolling variances, a large price point difference, and tube amps generally being a completely different beast). Still, I feel reasonably confident in the DAVE as my common reference that I can give general comparison notes. For solid state amps other than the DSHA-3FN, I have owned an SPL Phonitor XE and a Burson Soloist 3X GT (pre-2023 version). The DSHA-3FN defnitely has the lowest noise floor of the bunch and is also the warmest of the bunch (including the tube amp). Sound stage width is widest on the DSHA-3FN and/or Burson Soloist 3X GT, but I can’t pick between the two - but those definitely have wider stage than the DAVE and Phonitor. Overall stage depth is also between the Burson and the DSHA-3FN. Detail retrieval is very close between the DAVE, Burson, and DSHA-3FN, with the Phonitor XE just missing out on a tiny bit of microdetail. Even though detail retrieval on the DSHA-3FN is very good, the “fatness” of the sound doesn’t let it shine as much in that category, possibly because it causes the amp lose out on a bit of separation, for which the Burson takes the cake. For holography (3D-ness) of instruments themselves, that goes to the DSHA-3FN. Basically, think of the DSHA and Burson as having similar stage and detail, but the “players” on the stage are a bit more 3D (and fatter) on the DSHA. The Burson and DAVE both nail timbre and transients for my taste. Basically, if I could combine the low noise floor, holography, stage, and build of the DSHA-3FN with the separation, detail, tonality, and energy of the Burson (WITH NO FAN!), that would be my perfect solid state amp.
Conclusion (and follow-on comparison teaser)
I very much wanted the DSHA-3FN to be my end-game solid state amp - but I don’t think it is. It’s one of those pieces of gear where I can marvel at many aspects of its performance and see why it would be absolutely perfect for many people, but it’s just not the end of the road for me. I hinted above at my affinity for the Burson, and having read reviews of the new version (with improved power circuitry), it probably achieves a lot of what I’m looking for - but it still has that damn fan, which isn’t awfully loud, but it’s massively unappealing for me to have a fan in a piece of hi-fi gear.
I have an incurable case of audiophilia, and those who were aware of this will not be surprised to learn I have ordered some other amps to compare to the DSHA-3FN in a three-way shootout. On the way are the following:
- Bryston BHA-1
- Schiit Mjolnir 3
Either I love one, and it is the one that stays, or I continue my solid-state search (and who knows - maybe I’ll just get the latest Burson and decide to live with the fan…)
