 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
108.234.77.201
In Reply to: RE: New DAC suggestions posted by tube524 on October 23, 2023 at 13:59:25
What kind of inputs do you need and do you need hires?
Cut to razor sounding violins
Follow Ups:
You would suggest that he spend $3000 and NOT have hi-res? It's not 1989 anymore.
My advice: spend a lot less and get two, and keep the one you like and sell the other. I myself use a $139 Topping E30 and I'm perfectly happy with it.
Hey pal,
I think you need to reread Dawnrazor's post to the OP. Nowhere can I find that he suggested a $3,000 dac.
Also, that remark about 1989 is below the belt. Dawnrazor is one of the most knowledgeable inmates around these parts!!
Thanks for the kind words. You are right that I haven't recommended anything to the OP and was trying to get them to figure out the requirements. Seems Zacster is a measurements guy and maybe in the "all dacs sound the same" camp. Good news is that he can just listen to the measurement graphs. :). Call me envious.
I am certain my dac measures horribly and am happy for it! Though with a press of a button you change the sound by engaging the tube rectification which shows me that a dac is more than just digital conversion and measurements.
Cut to razor sounding violins
Not everyone has hires and certainly one can do better than a topping.
Cut to razor sounding violins
I bought a Topping D70 as a result of rave reviews and the sound quality is actually quite poor with surprisingly gritty treble. Nowhere near my cheap chi-fi AK4490 DAC which I upgraded with a LM6172 op-amp in the output. That sounds so much smoother and more holographic.
I'm curious about Chord DACs myself.....
Yeah that hype train is powerful until the dust settles. IMHO there are 3 types of dacs, chip like the sabre and AKM for instance, R2R/NOS, and FPGA. Sure there are examples that blurr those lines but I think its safe to say most here will understand. So far the R2R and FPGA have been more to my liking in musicality with the chip dacs being more sterile. But the output and psu also matter and it seems that R2R and FPGA dacs tend to focus more on that than SOME of the chip dacs.
I don't doubt the grainy treble. Also my dac has a tube rectifier that you can toggle on and off, and you can hear the difference the tube rectification makes. Basically the bass is more robust and that seems to affect the whole sonic picture and makes it more musical. So that common wisdom you see here that dacs sound the same and don't spend loads of money doesn't apply to all dacs.
When you try the Cutest let us know what you think.
Cut to razor sounding violins
ARe you distinguishing R2R discrete vs. chip? Many of the newer R2R DACs are discrete designs and these I have found have quite different characteristics from Chip R2R (like those from Philips, BB, AD etc.).
Some of the old chip ones are NOS but many are with 8x OVERsampling (different from upsampling) digital filters.
Yes, that was the "examples that can blur the lines" I was referring to. I only have experience with the chip R2R (NOS Phillips) and not the discreet ones. What is the difference you notice?
Cut to razor sounding violins
THe discrete ones seem to be "coarser" and less refined. They have the grunt and drive of the discrete R2R but don't sacrifice the delicacy that the best new sigma/delta or FPGA DACs do well. That earthy grunt and dynamics from R2R sounds more realistic but only when coupled with refinement...this is where chips like the BB PCM-63 and PCM1704 and AD1865 shine. Also, the late great UltraAnalog D2400A 20 bit DAC module was otherworldly when used correctly.
I had the original Topping D90 [AKM version] which was good but the RME ADI-2 DAC FS and my current SMSL D400EX are more to my liking. The treble is smoother in the RME and SMSL for one thing.
I had the Chord Qutest and thought it was OK but I'd take the RME or SMSL over it. The Chord was detailed, transparent, resolving, and offered smooth extended treble but my personal preference is for a slightly more robust full bodied sound. The Chord was almost 'thin' in the lower mids and light in the bass so it didn't fit my needs.
Chord Qutest 2021 :
I also prefer running balanced XLR interconnects which aren't offered on the Chord and I wasn't a fan of those Chord colored gumballs. Cute but unintuitive gimmick that had me always referring to the Chord supplied cheat sheet to determine sample rate based on gumball color.
Same thing with the ifi dacs, you have to guess the sample rate by the colors.
Edits: 10/27/23
Same with the Audioquest dragonfly. Heck, my dac doesn't even tell you what the sample rate is afaict.
Cut to razor sounding violins
My PS Audio NuWave DSD DAC doesn't show sample rate either and it sounds great.
But if a DAC manufacturer IS going to show you sample rate why turn it into a confusing rainbow of colorful gumballs that requires a cheat sheet to decipher?
yeah I agree that the way they show it is problematic. My dragonfly is the same concept and I never know what is going on, but good news, the 3.5mm jack cuts out anyhow.
Cut to razor sounding violins
Once you hear hi-res DSD, it's awfully hard not to like it. DSD256 puts CD to shame. It also sounds better than my best sounding vinyl.
Happy listening!
John Elison
I don't doubt it, and the world is a better place because none of the music I like will ever be in DSD
Cut to razor sounding violins
On the other hand there are those like me who don't care all that much for DSD. I can enjoy DSD but I prefer high quality PCM. DSD to me sounds almost artificially smooth and slightly soft.... like a rock that has been smoothed over in the ocean. It's still a rock but not like God originally intended when it first appeared ;-)
Or something like that.
.
A funny thing about that "snap, crackle, pop" is that when I began recording vinyl to DSD128, the "snap, crackle, pop" seemed to be noticeably less pronounced than on my PCM recordings. I used to fade volume in-between songs in order to eliminate the "snap, crackle, pop" but with DSD128, it didn't seem all that necessary.
Interesting!
Sounds like information getting lost to me...
Sounds like the somewhat artificial smoothing of DSD to me.
Isn't that kind of the same thing?
Well, it sure makes vinyl sound better, unless, of course, you prefer a lot of snap, crackle, and pop. The music is much more prominent without it. Furthermore, I don't hear any of the "rounding" that Abe talks about. There's simply more music and more detail, which was probably originally impaired by all the snap, crackle and pop.
On the other hand, to each his own!
I've found my digital audio nirvana and it's called DSD. Everyone else has to find their own path to happy listening!
Best regards!
John Elison
That's interesting! I wish you could hear my system. DSD doesn't sound at all like your description on my system.
However, to each his own!
Happy listening!
John Elison
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
