Been doing a Lot of system playing around lately. In my system, the Berkeley DAC sounds slightly better, more detailed feeding my Ayre amps directly. But to put that in perspective, I hear a much greater difference switching between Audioquest WEL and Synergistic Research CTS interconnects, as opposed to having an Ayre KX-R Twenty in or out of the circuit.
Any comments on DAC going direct to power amplifier or to pre-ampliifer?
My local retailer HIGHLY RECOMMENDS the use of a pre-amplifier. Bricasti believes that going direct to a power amplifier sounds better. And, I also know that everyone had a "different opinion" about going direct or using a pre-amplifier.
I am running my Bricast1 M1 SE DAC direct to my Hypex NCore NC400 Bridged Mono Block class D power amplifiers (no pre-amplifier) and like the sound quality very much.
For me, the sound is more natural and clearer by going direct to a power amplifier. Of course, I think the M1 SE DAC has special “custom" circuits in the analog section to make it sound so good. I returned home and listened to my system. It sounds terrific and I continue to enjoy and recommend the Bricasti M1 SE DAC.
Please note that we removed the R141 (circuit) from my Hypex NCore NC400 bridged mono blocks, thus lowering amplifier gain by 14 dB, requiring 14 dB higher M1 volume setting for same playback level. Bricasti says the goal is to have the M1 CLOSE to 0db front panel attenuation. If you reduce the volume on the M1 SE DAC, you cause more bit reduction meaning you lose sound quality. We discussed this modification with Hypex and they approved the removal of the R141 circuit. They suggested we be very careful removing the 4 R141 chips (for my 4 NC400 amplifiers) to avoid board damage.
I noticed that many of the newer DAC’s (even the new Ayre QX-5 Twenty DAC and many others) have volume controls meaning their DAC/Pre-amplifiers are designed to go direct to a power amplifier (as an option, of course).
What are your experiences of going direct to a power amplifier or using a pre-amplifier? Have you compared going direct vs. going to a pre-amplfier and noticed any sound quality differences? Have you gotten different results from using different DAC's and amplifiers? Your comments are appreciated. Thanks.
I am running my Bricast1 M1 SE DAC direct to my Hypex NCore NC400 Bridged Mono Block class D power amplifiers (no pre-amplifier) and like the sound quality very much.
For me, the sound is more natural and clearer by going direct to a power amplifier. Of course, I think the M1 SE DAC has special “custom" circuits in the analog section to make it sound so good. I returned home and listened to my system. It sounds terrific and I continue to enjoy and recommend the Bricasti M1 SE DAC.
Please note that we removed the R141 (circuit) from my Hypex NCore NC400 bridged mono blocks, thus lowering amplifier gain by 14 dB, requiring 14 dB higher M1 volume setting for same playback level. Bricasti says the goal is to have the M1 CLOSE to 0db front panel attenuation. If you reduce the volume on the M1 SE DAC, you cause more bit reduction meaning you lose sound quality. We discussed this modification with Hypex and they approved the removal of the R141 circuit. They suggested we be very careful removing the 4 R141 chips (for my 4 NC400 amplifiers) to avoid board damage.
I noticed that many of the newer DAC’s (even the new Ayre QX-5 Twenty DAC and many others) have volume controls meaning their DAC/Pre-amplifiers are designed to go direct to a power amplifier (as an option, of course).
What are your experiences of going direct to a power amplifier or using a pre-amplifier? Have you compared going direct vs. going to a pre-amplfier and noticed any sound quality differences? Have you gotten different results from using different DAC's and amplifiers? Your comments are appreciated. Thanks.
81 responses Add your response
| Post removed |
I've been fortunate to know two 'direct to amp' situations well. No 1 is using a Bricasti M1se direct into a very fine amp was superior to inserting an excellent 16k preamp in terms of clarity and dimensionality. No comparison imho. The veiling using the 16k preamp was striking. No 2 is using a JRDG Aeris direct into a 625 amp vs same with a Chorus preamp inserted. Again veiled and softer. BUT in both cases don't expect any warts to be covered or softened if you go direct as above. In both cases I couldn't go back to preamp after hearing the 'direct' sound. Just my 2 cents |
If that can help,I have owned and tried two combinations. First, Burmester 001 cd and 011 preamp, for my taste it was quite obvious that it was better with preamp. My latest combination is DCS Puccini, with clock and still I like it better with ARC Ref 3 preamp, than directly. One could argue that sound without preamp is more ’vivid’, perhaps, but is lacking in size and depth of presentation, inmho. |
From my experience a Tube Pre-amp is crucial if you want a musical sounding system. With most of my personal experiences with multiple DACs directly to SS and Tube Amps never sounded good enough. The Musical Bella Pre-Amp with Tube Regulator Power Supply is an excellent example of a low cost pre-amp which can step up to the large boys. Its a simple yet robust circuit. Tube Power supply just gives you that more magical sound. The SS pre-amps could work too but I hardly ever found one i liked. They just lack that feel of listening to music with a emotional touch. |
EQ is something I would not recommend. Even in Studio Room setups I have been involved with Roger Quested. Both in UK, EU and Asia. We never EQ the system. Roger was always against it and advised to stay away from EQ as it will introduce more distortion into the system. Hans Zimmer personal studio and production rooms were all setup by Roger. Non of them required EQ of any types and we are talking about 5.1 Systems. I hardly think you need to EQ a 2 channel setup as long as you focus some attention to the room it self. Personally i have built a 24 and 16 channel room both with out a single ounce of EQ in the room. Some say it cant be done but sure it can the problem lies in how people setup the acoustical properties of the room. We did not even need to EQ 4 Large subwoofers. Phase shifts were corrected between the subwoofers and that’s about it. My advise is to get your self a decent tube pre-amp. |
If you want a better impedance match if you have a problem, this sorts it out without the need of an active preamp (tube or s/s) and their unnecessary amount of gain and colourations. It’s a discrete impedance matching active buffer incorporated within the interconnects, and has just a little gain, far less than an active preamp would have. RCA to RCA $149aud, that's around $100usd https://www.bursonaudio.com/products/cable-plus-a2r/ Cheers George |
This particular topic will likely produce some of the most inconsistent responses, with nearly all of them having some validity. The same system with two differing files at the same levels will produce two differing results. First, if the DAC is using digital attenuation to address amplitude, the ability to attenuate without loss will depend on the bit depth of the file. CD's offer 16 bit of data and LPCM files are often at 24 bit (but then we can also digress into the LSB/MSB factors as well). But lets go with the lowest factors for this example. Using red book standard, a 32-bit volume control can fully attenuate a digital signal without affecting its dynamic range. This being the most common format and the typical file format most music is published in gives it a pretty good starting point. If we move into 24 bit files, this dramatically reduces down to 44db of attenuation before perceptible loss. This can occur during high resolution playback and will be very system dependent on how much impact will occur. This by no means addresses the interaction between the analog stages of the pairing. It can be measured, but often must be done by ear to determine how well they may interact. You could even achieve differing results with a speaker change. If one is significantly more sensitive and requires more attenuation, its resulting sound may differ more so than the speaker change as the digital dither could have greater impact at the differing amplitude levels. So I don't believe any answer provided can established a preferred route. Just a demonstration that differing configuration may have varied results. |
I prefer the direct connection with my Audio Note DAC 5. It feeds my Plinius SS power amplifier via a passive pre. The line stage in my DAC is basically the Audio Note M6 pre-amplifier line stage and power supply, so no point in doubling up gain. I think it comes down to output impedance (lower the better) and current delivery (not just 2v / 6v) but have enough drive for the next stage (power amp). Keep the interconnects really short, and use an analogue passive / pot or transformer passive. A key for impedance mismatch is a tipped up balance (no real bass) and reduced dynamics. The rewards for getting it to work is less coloration and lower noise floor (especially if your pre-amp is tubed) and faster slew rates. And more 3D soundstage. If it sounds better with a pre-amp it may be the DAC is too bright already, or the impedance matching is off. I am not sure it would work so well with an SS DAC and SS power amp though.... |
A key for impedance mismatch is a tipped up balance (no real bass)It’s more to do with the source, if it has an output coupling capacitor being too small (in uF), which yes raise the ouput impedance, when in conjunction with the input impedance of the passive. This forms high pass filter (a low frequency roll off) that can start too early and chop out some of the low bass. But it’s a simple fix, replace the coupling cap in the source with 2 or 3 x the uF (microfard) and while at it a better quality one. That's why I prefer sources with direct coupled outputs, no cap to worry about. BEST CAP IS NO CAP. Cheers George |
No matter what the manufacture claims about their volume pot in the DAC I have nearly on all accounts found them to be utterly crap. From personal experience any DAC will sound better with a transparent Pre-Amp sitting between them. Finding a Transparent musical pre-amp is not as easy as you may think. From all of the pre-amps iv owned i found the MP-1 Atma-Sphere Pre-amp to be the best for me. Dynamics improves by a large margin. |
First, you need to make sure the VC does not result in throwing away bits. Current best options include those by Empirical Audio and Metrum Acoustics that adjust the reference voltage and operate out of the signal chain. To me these still retain similar drawbacks as using a really good passive pre, unless a buffer is added. As dragon_vibe points out, a good, transparent preamp improves on a passive, DAC based, control (for most) by optimizing the signal going into the amplifier(s). In many/most cases, dynamics, tone and dimensionality are improved IME. A good unity-gain buffer will do the same thing. I recently auditioned Tortuga's tube buffer and when paired with a passive I have here, I found it to be quiet and very good sounding, particularly for the price. Anybody running a passive pre should give it a try. Empirical Audio offers their Final Drive transformer buffers, which would also be worth a try with any type of passive. One transparent solution I can recommend highly is the SMc Audio VRE-1, a buffered preamp with your choice of 6dB-gain (through the Lundahl transformers) or optional unity-gain. I use a unity-gain buffer version with a Shallco attenuator built using AN Tantalum resistors. |
Hello Dragon_vibe, I do not claim of havving heard every DAC on the market today, far from it. Hence, I am not in a position to claim that all volume control built in DACs are wonderful. On the other hand, I have solid reasons from personal experience to assert that a broad claim of all DAC VCs being worthless is equally invalid. I have been enjoying a Rowland Aeris DAC for several years. This device has a volume attenuation/gain based on controlling the reference voltage, as you can read in one of the technical articles at: http://jeffrowlandgroup.com/kb/categories.php?categoryid=205 I have used Aeris with three excellent preamplifiers: ARC LS2-B, ARC Ref3, and the incredibly transparent and resolving battery-powered twin-chassis Rowland Criterion. In the end, I determined that in my particular system, I could very well drive my Rowland M925 monoblocks into the Vienna Die Muzik speakers directly from Aeris, without an interveening line stage. Why? Because the sound I achieved even without linestage was wonderful, from both an analytical and emotional point of view. But why am I using "was" instead of "is"? That is because in the last three weeks I have replace the external Aeris power supply with the new Rowland Power Storage Unit, which feeds Aeris pure DC through a bank of ultracapacitors that isolate Aeris completely from the AC grid. And the result to my ears is... Simply mesmerizing. Will I ever insert a line stage again into my system? I have no idea.... I am not in the habit of mortgaging the future. Nor am I in the habit of claiming that what I have is "the best in the world", or other such juvenile boasts. The only thing I know for certain is that my music making system has risen to a performance level I have never experienced until now, linestages or not. Regards, G. |
I really don't see any point in continuing this endless debate that has been raging since time immemorial. Simply trust your own ears and cast aside all theory, dogma, aspersions, etc as to which should be right or wrong. As has been said ad nauseam previously here and elsewhere, there is no right or wrong answer. Let your own ears decide for you whether you should get or not get a preamp(active/passive, tube/ss, etc/etc) in your system for maximum musical pleasure. Life is really that simple. Enjoy the music! |
Let your own ears decide for you whether you should get or not get a preamp(active/passive, tube/ss, etc/etc) in your system for maximum musical pleasure.Yes get a Schiit Freya (active/passive, tube/ss, etc/etc) with remote which has a superb relay controled volume control, balanced or SE, and you can have it all, so you can see for yourself what suits. Compared to direct connection. And you can send the Schiit back, if you think the direct connection wins out. http://schiit.com/products/freya It’s that easy!!! Cheers George |
Yes get a Schiit Freya (active/passive, tube/ss, etc/etc) with remote which has a superb relay controled volume control, balanced or SE, and you can have it all, so you can see for yourself what suits. Compared to direct connection. Great suggestion by @georgehifi. The Schitt Freya sounds like a truly amazing product for $699 with a return policy to boot. Anyone in the market for a preamp should most certainly give it a home audition. There seems to be nothing at all to lose here. I wish more companies would come out with such a preamp with all these selectable options at various price points to suit different systems. |
In my experience you can get very good results going from a digital source w/ VC directly into an amp, but the quality of those results very much depends on the design and implementation of the digital VC. I find that even the best digital components with well executed designs (dCS, Berkeley Audio Design, Bricasti, Weiss, etc) are still no substitute for a well designed, quality analog preamp. |
I find that even the best digital components with well executed designs (dCS, Berkeley Audio Design, Bricasti, Weiss, etc) are still no substitute for a well designed, quality analog preamp.Yes, they can be, and better, but you must use them in the top 25% of their full output, if below they can strip bits of the music and reduce resolution. Bricasti, know this and on their vc they give you internal total gain adjustment to lower the gain so you can use their vc the the top 25% of full. Wadia, Mark Levinson, and others also knew this years ago and here is Wadia’s instructions for this on three of their units, other had it too. Page 6 of the first two pdf’s. http://www.wadia.com/ContentsFiles/20ef6f0f-c959-4e83-87a8-42526b37becf.pdf http://www.wadia.com/contentsfiles/25401fda-06b6-4c3a-e028-47fdfed426ba.pdf Page11 https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwio2MLrmZbUAhWHLpQKHa5DBGIQFgg2MAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fpdfstream.manualsonline.com%2F2%2F2318835c-2846-49ef-a25a-21ac9649bd17.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHBroBScCMkOBNe5ThVpdLFA8idJA Cheers George |
Yes, they can be, and better, but you must use them in the top 25% of their full output, if below they can strip bits of the music and reduce resolition..... So, we can easily compare direct to power amp at top 25% of full output of dac’s VC vs with preamp and then decide with our own ears. This is a very simple A/B and we can all share our experience with any of the dac’s listed above. J. :) |
Yes it’s a common big mistake when owners use their CDP/DAC internal vc well below 50% of full and say it’s rubbish compared to a preamp, what their hearing is only maybe 10 or 12bit resolution instead of 16-24bit. If you have too much gain and it’s way too loud so you can’t use it at no less than 25% of full, then the best option is to leave it up full and use a passive preamp after it to the poweramp. Cheers George |
Okay. I changed my mind about having my DAC going direct to my power amp. The volume control in most DAC's (including my DAC) is indeed implemented in the digital domain and, therefore, when adjusted down, bits are lost AND so is the sound quality. This is a fact of digital volume controls. In other words, reducing a DAC's volume causes bits to be dropped resulting in reduced sound quality. As an experiment, I discovered that my 2nd DAC sounded better than my first DAC both going direct to my power amplifier. My assumption is DAC #1 was dropping more digital bits then DAC #2 causing the sound quality differences. Based on this experiment, I am now considering using a pre-amp. I also continue to believe that everyone has a different opinion on going either direct to a power amplifier or using a pre-amplifier. I believe these differences are because we all hear differently and different equipment sounds different in different conditions. Some DAC's may drop bits in different increments (I do not know). I plan on adding a preamp/DAC to my audio system shortly. |
As Wadia and Mark Levinson say with their dacs/cdp players with digital domain volume controls. Is that they must be used in the top 25% of their range to get the best sound from them, that is why they put adjustable output links inside in the analogue stage to give different gains, so then the digital volume control can be use in it’s top 25% range. Bricasti do this also with their M1, it’s done different but the end result is the same. If you can’t do this with your dac or cdp, then the next best is to do it with a passive volume control after the dac, set it, so that then you can use (the digital volume control) in the top 25% of it’s range. No need to buy an expensive preamp, because you’ve already proved your dac has more than enough gain, too much in fact because you can’t use the digital VC in the top of it’s range. Cheers George |
Something about going DAC-direct, or using a passive volume control behind the DAC is simply not satisfying to me in the long term. I have had good quality resistor-passive volume controls, transformer/autoformer passive controls, and even the highly regarded Metrum Adagio DAC that changes volume by adjusting the reference voltage so no bits are lost. All of these approaches resulted in a clear, natural sound without bloat but, for me, having an active (unity gain) buffer or a low gain preamp in front of the amplifiers, restored the punch, dynamics, and full-sounding tone I hear from live music. In my system, a high quality unity gain buffer/preamp is the ticket. However, I recently auditioned the Tortuga
tube
preamp buffer that does pretty much the same thing, at not quite the same level, but for a lot less money. |
|
