Did they even use the same interface?
??? Of course we did.
Cheers George
Absolute top tier DAC for standard res Redbook CD
Hi All.
Putting together a reference level system.
My Source is predominantly standard 16/44 played from a MacMini using iTunes and Amarra. Some of my music is purchased from iTunes and the rest is ripped from standard CD's.
For my tastes in music, my high def catalogues are still limited; so Redbook 16/44 will be my primary source for quite some time.
I'm not spending DCS or MSB money. But $15-20k retail is not out of the question.
Upsampling vs non-upsampling?
USB input vs SPDIF?
All opinions welcome.
And I know I need to hear them, but getting these ultra $$$ DAC's into your house for an audition ain't easy.
Looking for musical, emotional, engaging, accurate , with great dimension. Not looking for analytical and sterile.
Putting together a reference level system.
My Source is predominantly standard 16/44 played from a MacMini using iTunes and Amarra. Some of my music is purchased from iTunes and the rest is ripped from standard CD's.
For my tastes in music, my high def catalogues are still limited; so Redbook 16/44 will be my primary source for quite some time.
I'm not spending DCS or MSB money. But $15-20k retail is not out of the question.
Upsampling vs non-upsampling?
USB input vs SPDIF?
All opinions welcome.
And I know I need to hear them, but getting these ultra $$$ DAC's into your house for an audition ain't easy.
Looking for musical, emotional, engaging, accurate , with great dimension. Not looking for analytical and sterile.
4,487 responses Add your response
audioengr - ....By live, I mean when I play a live track, say a jazz performance in a restaurant, can I close my eyes and believe that I’m actually sitting in the restaurant? Can I turn my back on the speakers and believe that there is a live performance behind me? Does a good piano track sound like my Yamaha Grand Piano in the other room?Hi Steve. I get what you're meaning now by live. To my understanding the audiophile term for what you've described is "suspended disbelief". True? I'd have to think the DAC design (DS or R2R) may not be the dominate factor in achieving what you describe. Big factor though, certainly. I would think the room, the speakers and the recording itself would be more prevalent. So when you state that the DS was better - at least with your designs - I would have to think your designs evolved over many years, and in that case the other variables I mentioned (room, speakers and so forth) may not have remained constant. In any case, I appreciate your clarification. Thanks. |
This shows that in this system, one DAC beat the other. Did they even use the same interface? Was it USB or S/PDIF? All of this matters. Even 2 different USB interfaces will perform differently. It does not prove that Delta-Sigma is inferior to R2R. The devil is in the details, the implementation and design details, not the D/A technology IME. Steve N. Empirical Audio |
shadorne - Even harmonic distortion is pleasing. It is higher order odd harmonics above 7th which are not pleasing and harsh sounding....Hi shadorne. Thank you. Not all that long ago, Ralph (atmasphere) provided a wealth of information regarding harmonic distortion in this thread https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/full-detailed-sound-at-30-40-50-db (probably other threads to :) ) Your response is very much in line with what I’ve previously understood in this regard. In fact I understand there is "weighting" of distortion also at play. Noting that manufacturers typically provide "total harmonic distortion" and in some cases "intermodulation distortion", I had asked in that thread if manufacturer specifications could provide insight as to where the harmonic distortion is occurring. His response led me to believe "this can be tricky". Point is one may not readily be able to determine where the distortion is occurring, and may only be able to rely on subjective listening. Your explanation certainly does make sense. Would you say then that the *implementation* is the dominant factor of listener preference between DS or R2R, or is the *distortion* now the dominant factor (again, in your opinion)? Thanks. |
TotalDac (bit perfect) outperformed by the delta sigma Bricasti SE in a friend’s system I listened to extensively. .Funny you mentioned these two, we had exactly this shoot out for a whole day on a reviewers system at his place in the beautiful Blue Mtns on his Wilson Alexia MkII, Gryphon Antillion Evo Signature my passive pre. We also went direct, with the same results. The Total dac was far better than the Bricasti in every area, even the owner of the Bricasti SE conceded, and is going to sell it to go to R2R. Don’t get me wrong the Bricasti was lovely and sweet and smooth, but not exciting when compared, it had no jump factor like the Total, that snapped your head back in disbelief with some of the dynamics, and yet it still stayed sweet and smooth when needed. You could hear deeper into the music because of this expanse from quiet to loud. And it gave all this to you not from the speaker but all around it with an image and depth that washed over you instead of directed from the each of the drivers of the speakers, as if the speakers weren't there in the room. Cheers George |
Not meaning or wanting to play on words here, but for clarification purposes, by "live" do you mean "authentic"? By live, I mean when I play a live track, say a jazz performance in a restaurant, can I close my eyes and believe that I’m actually sitting in the restaurant? Can I turn my back on the speakers and believe that there is a live performance behind me? Does a good piano track sound like my Yamaha Grand Piano in the other room? Steve N. |
@gdhal Even harmonic distortion is pleasing. It is higher order odd harmonics above 7th which are not pleasing and harsh sounding. It looks like the R-2R DAC has equal amounts of even and odd harmonic distortion. The 2nd harmonic being the most important. Above 7th odd harmonics is where it becomes disagreeable to the ear. If the audio is filtered at higher frequencies (most older NOS designs have gentle roll off from analog output filters) then the lower harmonics will dominate and it could sound subjectively excellent. This might be the key reason R-2R sound could be preferred for the same reason tubes are highly regarded for their wonderful sound... A complete lack of harmonic distortion is about as dry and clean sounding as it gets - the latest ESS DS chip has extremely low 2nd and 3rd harmonic distortion (-130dB in the mid range) which is exactly where you get most of the harmonious pleasing warmth in tubes. |
George frequently to support his point says R2R is "bit perfect" whereas delta sigma is merely a "facsimile". As a listener I don’t hear R2R superiority. As a builder/designer is this claim true and if so is it an audible or meaningful distinction in your experience? I have compared D/S to R2R with my own DAC designs. The D/S is better, however my R2R was using older chip-based technology. Some of the new clever design tricks with R2R overcome some of the limitations of older chip-based technology. The accuracy of each level is still an issue however, so this causes its own distortion. When you compare these two technologies, you are comparing two different deficiencies. The question is: given both designs are excellent, which one sounds more live to you? I have personally had great results with D/S, but if I designed an R2R from scratch, it might be equally good. Steve N. Empirical Audio |
shadorne - Here is a thesis paper explaining why R-2R DACs have lots of harmonic distortion. Looks like the distortion is consistent across all harmonics..... Hi shadorne. I have no disagreement in what you are stating in your previous post. I would just like to submit as food-for-thought that Jimi Hendrix used fuzz distortion. Not quite the same as the distortion you are speaking of, nevertheless, worth mentioning, IMO. EDIT: ....that would be *intentionally* used.... |
Here is a thesis paper explaining why R-2R DACs have lots of harmonic distortion. Looks like the distortion is consistent across all harmonics. https//pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9a52/fcba6dd87371974b3c146dbb5a3a00ffee74.pdf These students were sponsored by NAIM to investigate ways to reduce this non-linearity harmonic distortion that is inherent to R-2R designs. The 2nd harmonic will give this kind of DAC a richer sound. The higher odd harmonics will tend give an R-2R a slightly harsh edgy sound in the treble. My guess is that R-2R DAC manufacturers will use filtering to roll off the highs in order to reduce the odd harmonic harshness in the upper treble. Subjectively this might be preferable to a higher performance DS DAC. |
Yes I’m familiar with MSB and have heard a few of their DACs. No doubt that they are fully committed to discrete resistor ladder R2R . I understand the supposed merits of this approach. I used to own a Metrum Octave DAC a few years ago and brought it primarily due to its R2R approach and universal rave reviews. It was in fact a good sounding DAC but preferred the Yamamoto DAC (DS) in my system. I heard the Holo Audio Spring level 3 DAC (discrete ladder design) in my system. Very good but again I found the Yamamoto YDA better sounding. The Metrum and Holo Audio are representative of "bit perfect" given their architecture. TotalDac (bit perfect) outperformed by the delta sigma Bricasti SE in a friend’s system I listened to extensively. . George it could be as simple as we heard differently. I’ve listened to a number of R2R DACs and they ranged from good to exceptionally good but did not exceed the sound quality of comparable delta sigma DACs. We both have our respective listening experiences and subsequent outcomes. At the end of the day we judge and formulate opinions based on what we have heard. Charles |
Perhaps it is the harmonic distortion from an R-2R DAC that listeners like - kind of like tubes - measures poorly but sounds subjectively better... With two types of resistor perhaps the distortion is more in the even harmonics. All I can say is that for sure the harmonic distortion is way higher on R-2R than DS DACs due to the non-linearities introduced by the finite accuracy of the ladder resistors. If true, then even low cost R-2R might sound great because higher cost R-2R will likely have less harmonic distortion... |
I don’t hear this purported advantageous asset with comparisons as stated earlier. That fine if you can't, but I do with CD's 16/44 or the magic sounding Reference Recordings 24/96 CD's that have HDCD encoded which my Linn CD12 thankfully can do with the PMD200 chip. The best which I've yet to hear from what I've been told is DXD. I've heard the defunct DVD-A which was very good, better than the Reference Recordings above it's a pity it didn't take off. This is a good read from MSB Technologies, they use R2R Ladder in their top line dacs. (big bucks) http://www.msbtechnology.com/faq/why-ladder-dacs/ Cheers George |
To be very clear I’m not disputing the notion of multibit being bit perfect but rather how is it manifested as a demonstrably superior quality above and beyond DS capabilities. I don’t hear this purported advantageous asset with comparisons as stated earlier. If I'm not mistaken , bit perfect applies to discrete R2R and multibit R2R chips. |
Steve N who by all accounts has been successful manufacturing R2R and DS DACs and is a credentialed sourceYes Charles but as I said not discrete R2R. he has to use either DS or the Hybrid. Or he could purchase "discrete" R2R made boards from Sokeris Audio Engineering but he’ll loose his dsd capability, which means nothing to me, as it was pcm before it became that. Here as of 2017 (more now) are the companies now doing expensive to produce "discrete" R2R ladder dacs for PCM (Redbook) replay. Schiit uses a R2R chip (not for audio) but for missile guidance as there are none now available for audio use, because DS was so much cheaper to make. Up to $3k: Border Patrol, Monarchy, Denafrips, Audio-gd, MHDT, Holo, Soeskris, Metrum, Schiit $5-$15K: Audio Note, MSB, Metrum, Computer Audio Design, Aqua, LessLoss, Totaldac, Lampizator $15K+: CH Precision, Aries Cerat, Light Harmonic, Audio Note, MSB, Totaldac, Lampizator **Special mention to MSB, Monarchy and Audio Note, who never gave up R2R. Even after the takeover of delta-sigma. Cheers George |
George, Precisely why I addressed my inquiry to Steve N who by all accounts has been successful manufacturing R2R and DS DACs and is a credentialed source. There are unquestionably other builders capable of using either circuit type in DACs. Since he is a knowledgeable contributor to this thread I was interested in his opinion of multibit/R2R "bit perfect " practical or real world audible attributes. . Charles |
@gdhal @sadono Yes and yes. When properly processed, 24 bit masters have greater tone, harmonics, and lower distortion than Redbook CD. Far more analog like. |
I realize that there are manufacturers who share this view but certainly not all do. Maybe it’s because the ones that don’t Charles, can’t make "discrete R2R dac’s" as the complexity is many many times higher, and they also can’t get R2R dac chips ready made any more. So they don’t have an option but to go to DS or DS hybrid, as these chips are available (and cheap) . BTW: You don’t see anyone going to the trouble of doing a discrete DS or DS/hybrid do you? Why is that? Cheers George |
Gdhal, I cited George as he has repeated this often on this particular thread/site. I realize that there are manufacturers who share this view but certainly not all do. Given that Empirical Audio has produced both I was interested in their opinion regarding the multi bit/R2R "bit perfect" claim. More importantly how relevant is it ultimately to actual sound quality. Charles |
@sadono You write with wisdom like a child, directly to the heart. I trust you will interpret my questions as genuine. Simple yes/no questions if I may... no need to elaborate beyond yes/no but by all means do so if so inclined... - does this 16 vs 24 bit "difference" effect your enjoyment of listening to music? - are you able to discern a difference between 16/24 in a blind test (assuming you’ve tried)? Thanks. |
@fuzzbutt17 Benjamin, I just skimmed through your article, "The 24-Bit Delusion" and I see we will not agree. You article is full of untrue claims, IMO. 24 bits are not just about dynamic range. Higher bitrates properly used in recording are for greater headroom, to avoid digital clipping, or unneeded processing. Higher bitrates also provide for greater S/N levels, lower digital distortion, reduction of noise from processing, and eliminating unneeded processing. "In contrast, some of my favorite digital recordings were digitally mastered from 1950s analog recordings. Many of these recordings were done as a group of musicians playing in a room with one take per track and a minimum of post-production editing. Though these recordings have a much higher background noise being limited by old-school pre-Dolby 60dB dynamic range master tapes, they retain an organic character that can't be duplicated any other way. When you hear the organic character and coherent in-the-room harmonics, it is clear why so many audiophiles prize these recordings." You conclusion is incorrect. Your preference has nothing to do with dynamic range, but with the use of tube mics & gear, RtR analog recordings, as well as the recording style. Digital masters can retain many elements of analog recordings, and higher bitrates are much more capable. Remove the filtering from your DAC, and see how you like 16 vs 24 bits. |
@fuzzbutt17 Victims of marketing. This is a faulty test, IMO, as most people do not have experience with 24 bit music that is dithered down and converted to Redbook CD. If you do not know what to listen for, this is a difficult test. There would likely be many more correct answers if you played each song at 16/44.1, and then a 24 bit version, in random order. If you disagree, please feel free to hold this contest at your next show. I agree that current technology does a great job with Redbook CDs. However, there is no replacement for 24bit masters, IMHO. |
charles1dad - Hello Steve N, George frequently to support his point says R2R is "bit perfect" whereas delta sigma is merely a "facsimile". As a listener I don’t hear R2R superiority. As a builder/designer is this claim true and if so is it an audible or meaningful distinction in your experience?@charles1dad With do respect, I would just like to point out that not only does George make the claim as stated in your quote, but so too do many DAC manufacturers. |
This is exactly the chip I used in my Spoiler TubeDAC. Sounded really lifelike, but the Overdrive SE and SX using D-S left it in the dust for weight, detail and dynamics. Steve N. |
Honestly he lost me again when he said something about Schitt beimg an expensive discrete.....:::: BTW ct, Have to correct you here as well, I didn’t say that read again. Expensive was in reference to "discrete" R2R dacs And "chip" versions which if you know are cheaper, which Schiit Yaggy uses, and the best bang for buck you can get, for converting PCM Redbook. Cheers George |
Thanks for the info George. I'll still let my ears make the choice for me like most do. Both can sound great and that's all that matters. There is no one is better than the other right now. Good DAC's on both sides of the isle as has been pointed out by Matt and many others of us who have or still do own both types. |
Look at Steve and others who can and will use any tech if they feel it can be done right. He can't go 24bit multibit converters as there are none made for him to buy, so he has to go DS or get the newer hybrids as shadorne bought up. He uses Analog Devices Delta Sigma chips and one of his quote was "we can select the digital filter with this chip, we can essentially make this Delta-Sigma sound a lot like a NOS R2R DAC" "Because we can select the digital filter with this chip, we can essentially make this Delta-Sigma sound a lot like a NOS R2R DAC, but also supporting hi-res files" Cheers George |
especially the hybrid designs that have 6 bits in depth. That's right, the last great full 24bit R2R chip was the PCM1704 and is unobtainable now because of massive manufacturing costs, having to laser trim those resistors. The competition to them is now coming from these newer hybrid dacs with 6 or so bits, a lot of the top end guys are using them, maybe one day they'll be able to make full 24bit again like the PCM1704 as cheap as the the DS from ESS and others, and we'll get back to proper conversion of PCM again, instead of a facsimile of it with DS. Cheers George |
Thanks Shadorne, but George will now come back and tell you that you are incorrect. Honestly he lost me again when he said something about Schitt beimg an expensive discrete.....:::: they aren’t in this conversation if too DAC for anything. Nice in their price range but many of us like others in the just over 2k. That’s another topic though. He forgets about implementation being much more important since the new ESS chips are so good. Both can sound great. None of of us have ever said the old tech can’t sound good when it’s done right. Great designers stay open minded. Look at Steve and others who can and will use any tech if they feel it can be done right. Others who aren’t open minded can’t be taken seriously. That’s the reality. |
@audioengr +1 Yes it is the filtering that creates the dead effect. Still one of the most problematic issues with any DAC. Marantz house sound is dark and dead. I have heard plenty of great sounding SACD but Marantz is not to my taste. @georgehifi DS or R-2R can both sound fantastic if done well. DS currently has the edge in performance especially the hybrid designs that have 6 bits in depth. Old DS with only one bit depth suffered from high amounts of noise but was besutifully linear. R-2R has much less noise but suffers from linearity issues. The hybrid designs that are in the all the modern ESS chips are a great blend of the positives from both - they are highly linear and low noise too. Modern DS chips are basically akin to a 6 bit R-2R - they function just like R-2R with their output level a function of the number of selected individual DS that are summed up to make up the output - exactly like a ladder DAC. Noise is what drives the need for heavy filtering.... |
That fine for you, but sorry it's what I've heard with many A/B's in my own system and with others. To me PCM done with DS is akin to amplification being done with Class-D I'm with fuzzbutt17 (Benjamin from Mojo Audio) and yet to hear different, to me the best pcm conversion is not done with DS. You have to ask yourself why are there so are many (expensive) discrete and "chip versions (egSchiit)" R2R lader dac's now being made that are made in Europe, GB, China, US ect, just to do PCM with, and not even able to do DSD, crazy marketing if it had nothing to better to give. Why go to that bother and expense with a "so called" dying Redbook format. When these guys can get say the top line ESS Sabre dac chip for a fraction of the price, with digital domain volume control and all sorts of other goodies, and be able to do DSD. Cheers George |
Can't wait for Matt to get back from his vacation and get back to auditioning, lol. Once I'm out of the hospital and get a couple more weeks or rest, I'll be heading down to his place (if my ride comes through, lol). I can't wait to hear his system and what he thinks of the Shun Mook Footers he finally got in before he left. |
Charlie Hansen also agrees. He disliked DSD personally. He also knew how to filter properly. George it's absolute statements like your's that turn many off. Many of us listen to all designs and products and we use our ears. There are great designs on both sides. The way you post, you are saying that any R2R design sounds better than any DAC that is D/S. Teh only absolute in the discussion is that you are plain wrong. No one is dismissing the R2R being able to sound world class. How about speakers George? Are you going to tell us a certain crossover design being better than another? Again, totally subjective. As Charles and nearly anyone else who has any audio sense will say, it's all about implementation. If you disagree with that, then you lose any credibility with most folks I would think. Your constant R2R gets old. Very dismissive of even a designer like Steve who most of use feel makes one of the best DAC's available. I've owned and loved his DAC that was R2R and have been told by many I trust that his new DS DAC is a lot better. One designer, builds one of each and implants them both in an outstanding manor. He chose DS for his top design. I realize you will dismiss him by staying on your R2R platform, but that's not cool as he's ever said that R2R can't make a great DAC. |
Steve N, Thank you for your reply and I see the common ground of SET and the D’Agostino amplifiers. Speed and transparency as a shared trait. I find SET unsurpassed in terms of "naturalness ". George it’s comments such as yours that prompted my DAC comparisons mentioned above regarding R2R vs delta sigma. I respect your perspectives but my direct listening did not match your assertions. IMHO either approach can yield superb results. I don’t hear the delta sigma limitations/flaws as you describe. Steve N puts the blame on digital filtering and power delivery quality and this makes sense to me. This would cause effects for both DS and R2R for better or worse dependant of level of implementation and execution. Charles |
There is something missing with DS when it has to convert PCM, it's not just an emptiness, but missing a bogie factor that gives excitement to the music, and a snap your head back slam, even though the DS measurements show better sn/dr figures. I don't experience any of this with my D-S DAC. These are more a result of poor digital filter and poor power delivery IME. Steve N. Empirical Audio |
I can speak for my own modified SET amp. Very fast and great bass control. Same with D'agostino amps. Some of the best I have heard at shows. I am a fan of tube SET amps though and would not have SS for myself anymore. Tubes are just more linear and less prone to temperature and dynamic effects. Steve N. Empirical Audio |
| Post removed |
With all due respect to George I’m inclined more toward Elizabeth’s explanation in attributing the void or black hole effect to the recording method or process. I love the fact that there are so many manufacturers now bringing back R2R Multibit, even though many are now mostly discrete ladder, and expensive to make, and shrugging off dsd, for better pcm replay. It says to me there was something about PCM conversion that was not quite right when done with DS conversion. Owning and doing many mods for myself and customers on both with I/V stages and output stages from the very first DS mash players and R2R players And listening to many. There is something missing with DS when it has to convert PCM, it's not just an emptiness, but missing a bogie factor that gives excitement to the music, and a snap your head back slam, even though the DS measurements show better sn/dr figures. It's as though DS converting PCM is most of the time too polite, eg: boring. But it does do dsd/sacd well, but I still find it lacking in excitement with these formats especially sacd.. Cheers George |
Steve, thanks for speaking up about 'the best way to build a DAC'. For those who say one is superior to Delta Sigma, you can't make that statement. It's just not true. If you feel that way for YOUR DAC's that's fine, but personal. Many of us have owned both and liked the D/S ones that we've purchased better. Implementation. Many other factors. |
My strategy is a bit different, and I have attained audio nirvana I would argue. No personal attack here, just different. 1) go for the most jitter immune, cleanest, lowest distortion and highest SNR DAC available. This would obviously be a new DAC within the last year or two. It might be too lean and analytical for the desired goal of “musicality” and engagement tie tapping but you start with the bare truth and a reference signal. I am almost never impressed with the quality of the master clocks inside DACs. They are almost never good enough. This includes power delivery and associated dividers and buffers/selectors etc.. I would much prefer to sell to a customer that has a DAC with NO reclocking or jitter reduction, at least on the S/PDIF coax inputs. 2) Get the most resolving SS power amp - Benchmark ABH2 looks impressive. Again the power amp should be powerful and transparent - a Bryston, Pass Labs, Krell - there are plenty of choices. I would pick Wells Audio, Merrill Audio, D’agostino or get a good SET tube amp. I have been auditioning amps at shows for 20 years, as well as speakers. 3) Roll preamps and roll preamp tubes until you find the desired sound I would eliminate the active preamp and drive direct from the DAC or use a passive transformer linestage. Preamps are the worst offenders for coloring/distorting sound quality. Just get rid of them unless they are $10K+ tube preamps. I do agree on tube rolling. Critical step. Be prepared to spend some time and money and resell the rejects on ebay. Steve N. Empirical Audio |
