Having been dCS user for something like 27 years I can comment from an extended perspective having owned the Elgar stack, Paganini stack, Vivaldi stack, pre and post Apex.
Every time that I changed I spent time re-evaluating filter choices. I have to say that my choice has been consistent over all of this time excepting for the later addition to Paganini of asymmetric sample rate 44.1, filter 5 , for which which I found a preference. That was not, of course, available for Elgar.
It does seem to me however that as the DACs improved the subjective impact of filter choices has become more subtle but this may be familiarity or simply that I hear less well with age . So, broadly I agree with Andrew:
Even though this involves three generations of products.
As for mapping this cannot be compared in this manner as only a single default map was available for earlier lines. I am unsure if what is now map 2 has been the same consistently. However I have not not used this with Vivaldi since v.2. introduced a choice from 3. This is also the case with Apex which came later for me ( I think). Map 1 is my long term preference but I can easily understand why others might prefer 3.
I regularly listen to both my Vivaldi stack and Lina stack (on an almost daily basis); both the Mappers and Filters are consistent across products.
Like Pete, I have a personal preference for Mapper 1, and this hasn’t changed post Apex upgrade on my Vivaldi. In my very subjective view it remains the most transparent of the three.
If we’re nit-picking, I wouldn’t say since Ring DAC inception per se as we are really going back to the 900 series stuff there, and I’m not sure how that differed.
Definitely similar in consumer Ring DACs though. Map 2 in a current product is roughly the same as what is in something like an Elgar, though of course there are some necessary differences because of changes to Ring DAC hardware - mainly the fact that there are now more current sources per channel than previous generations, with a 5-bit signal being converted instead of 4-bit.
Sonically, it’ll be doing the same stuff as Map 2 in previous products.
Is it wrong to say that the Map choice can also be very dependent on the rest of the kit being used? If I hook up my Dynaudio Confidence C2 speakers I prefer Map 1, but when using my regular system YG Acoustic Hailey speakers, I find Map 3 to be my choice. The C2’s provide somewhat less resolution than do the Hailey’s, hence the choice of Map. Again, this is a subjective judgement based on what I hear SQ-wise from my system in my room. I do have a hybrid integrated (Ypsilon Phaethon) in the middle so this materially impacts the SQ output as well. As Pete says, maybe it’s me and I too hear less well with age, but it does make me wonder how many users of Magico or YG or Stenheim (or other highly resolving loudspeakers) hear it the same way? BTW, using a Rossini APEX and Clock as the source.
. So, broadly I agree with Andrew: