Answer the question: is a $2 DAC transparent enough? Thank you
Audio Science Review = Rebuttal and Further Thoughts
@crymeanaudioriver @amir_asr You are sitting there worrying if this or that other useless tweak like a cable makes a sonic difference.
I don’t worry about my equipment unless it fails. I never worry about tweaks or cables. The last time I had to choose a cable was after I purchased my first DAC and transport in 2019. I auditioned six and chose one, the Synergistic Research Atmosphere X Euphoria. Why would someone with as fulfilling a life as me worry about cables or tweaks and it is in YOUR mind that they are USELESS.
@prof "would it be safe to say you are not an electrical designer or electrical engineer? If so, under what authority do you make the following comment" - concerning creating a high end DAC out of a mediocre DAC.
Well, I have such a DAC, built by a manufacturer of equipment and cables for his and my use. It beat out a $9,000 COS Engineering D1v and $5,000 D2v by a longshot. It is comparable to an $23,000 Meridian Ultradac. Because I tried all the latter three in comparison I say this with some authority, the authority of a recording engineer (me), a manufacturer (friend) and many audiophiles who have heard the same and came to the same conclusion.
Another DAC with excellent design engineer and inferior execution is the Emotiva XDA-2. No new audio board but 7! audiophile quality regulators instead of the computer grade junk inside, similar high end power and filter caps, resistors, etc. to make this into a high end DAC on the very cheap ($400 new plus about the same in added parts).
@russ69 We must be neighbors. I frequented Woodland Hills Audio Center back in the 70s and 80s. I heard several of Arnie’s speakers including a the large Infinity speakers in a home.
326 responses Add your response
I did a little research. I have heard the Genelec 8351b. One of the best speakers I've ever heard no matter the price. Purely subjective opinion. They used an AKM chip that cost around $3.50 in bulk? Not sure if they still do since the fire at AKM, so I can say a $3.50 DAC Chip is transparent enough for me and thousands of audio engineers worldwide. |
You never answered the question. Which is fine. I know your answer. You just don’t want to sound ridiculous. I understand.
I can’t really imagine how anyone who has ever pressed “play” on a digital system can take you guys seriously. Absurd
So it’s $3.50 now? Three American dollars and fifty cents? Yup. Your original two dollars two year ago adjusted for inflation 🤦♂️ |
Yes, inflation hits hard, who knows those AKM chips might have been $2.00 then. I answered the question, not about that particular chip but I am sure there have been $2.00 that were transparent enough for me since I don't know every chip used in every device. Those PCM 1704 chips audiophiles wet their pants over were about $10 in bulk. |
What is interesting is there is no published standard I am aware of in what listeners prefer in a dac. You can argue all you want for a $2 dac or a $4 dac, I know of no published studies. The links you posted @djones51 are anecdotal and appreciate you at least getting something. |
You are. Whether in Audiogon or not. You are. These dudes are everywhere. In every single audio forum. Their raison d’etre |
@thyname a DAC needs a DAC chip and a few other chips, case, power, etc. The cost of gasoline and DAC chips seem to have tracked in price increases over the last couple of years. As well as food and valve/tube prices. |
Ballpark? Bare bones $130 Schiit Modi 3e, $140 Topping D10 balanced. There could be cheaper ones, I don't pay a lot of attention to DACs anymore. I would prefer the Topping only because it's balanced. I use the DAC in my Rotel preamp I think it's some TI chip . It has the features I need, balanced out, 12v trigger, volume control. |
Really? Took me 30 minutes to get them to understand I didn’t need a network player with a DAC since I was using it with active speakers with DSP. Kept telling me their 680 would sound so much better. They eventually had a light bulb moment and agreed the Mind2 was all I needed. Waste of time anyway I returned it. |
@djones51 |
@djones51 so you only needed a streamer but bought a $10k DAC. So you are not real smart or not well informed. Topping vs 680 LOL. ASR pinhead. |
Yeah @djones51 speakers usually seem to make more of a difference than the DAC for me. |
No they tried to sell me a $10K streamer/DAC instead of the Mind2 streamer. It took me 30 minutes of explaining basic audio conversion before they got it into their heads the $10K DAC wouldn’t do anything the $2000 streamer could do. Reading comprehension wasn’t a priority in school? |
I agree that you should get a flat frequency response in your room, mine is posted in my profile if anyone cares to check. There is 35 years worth of published research that listeners prefer a flat frequency response. Do I win a pink panther now? BTW, DSP is very limited in what it can correct and if you want to discuss room treatments we need to start a new thread.
|
@djones51 your dealer sucked and clearly you did not communicate your needs to them. I will leave you with that or did Amir tell you what to buy? |
I have heard several CD players with DAC chips originating in the 1980s to 2020s. I can’t tell which one is preferable because there is so much more to implementation of the DAC process and machines. JGH article was welcomed by many of my engineering friends who said digital is near or perfect whereas analog will always remain imperfect. I did not enjoy listening to CDs at all in the 1980s due to the lesser machines I heard them on and a mixture of the quality of the CDs. I know that some of my finest jazz CDs were made/transferred in the late 1980s by the 1990s newer machines. Also, some of the worst pop CDs at the same time (and continue to now due to compression, frequency manipulation such as restricted bass and boosted highs/classical reissues and vice versa/pop, etc). Overall, the average CD in my 7,000 collection maintains a high sound quality whereas maybe 35% of the 28,500 LP collection sounds good to great. So many LPs are earlier recordings and have mastering anomalies and limitations imposed by the producers (like modern pop recordings) for cheaper analog playback (low end record players) regardless of vinyl pressing quality. JGH did mention that cabling can make a difference back in 1985 in his test. I think it is marketing folly to provide so many filters and adjustments to the DAC. I I just read a review of the latest Bartok DAC (compared to the Rossini and Vivaldi). They are chock full of filtering and timing adjustments, with more offered as the price and complexity of the DAC goes up. I am extremely satisfied with the Benchmark HDR-1 DAC (as modified but for the digital system). It complies with most of the modern understanding of what a DAC should do and be capable of. As to Jitter and Digital Ringing, in none of the high end DACs (above $1000) I have encountered or been able to hear those affectations to the sound, in good quality audio systems. Maybe I did hear them in run of the mill 1980s CD players. I don't know when I've heard filter and time manipulated DACs. |
I extracted this from Archimago's Musings - However, there is one situation where upsampling makes sense... The same reason Benchmark chose to use ASRC (Asynchronous Sample Rate Conversion) for the DAC1 and DAC2 - jitter reduction. Although by no means high, the sidebands are more pronounced using coaxial and TosLink interfaces. The sideband peaks around the primary signal clearly were reduced with 24/192 upsampling using the TosLink input. As usual, whether anyone can actually hear this difference in properly controlled testing is another matter! And this - For years we've been worried about the "dreaded jitter". However, we know that these days, with asynchronous interfaces like USB and ethernet, there's nothing to be concerned of. Sure, we can see jitter anomalies with old S/PDIF, but I doubt anyone should purposely not use the interface for fear of audible issues assuming otherwise decent gear. I use SPDIF/Coax digital cabling only. Also, I loved the sound of DAT tapes after leaving behind R2R (Tandberg 900 and Technics 1500). |
You said the following:
Although the EQ part was missing from the original post, you immediately added the EQ part after my reply. From my experience, people who slap the "room" stuff in your face and dismiss the importance of anything else, tend to have zero room treatments for themselves. That's all.
|
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
You know, some of the nasty, snippy, sniping on this thread has made me tired. It's actually embarrassing. Rude, snooty, snobbiness is exactly what can give audiophiles a bad name. It's what I ran into in ASR, and now I'm seeing it here, too. I thought we were in this hobby to relax and enjoy our gear and the music it reproduces. I opted out of the "audiophile" world some years ago, and simply enjoyed my gear and music, but have dipped my nose back in here because I was curious about recent "progress" or not of new tech and designs. I think I'm about ready to opt back out again because I really don't feel good about hanging out with rude, snobby people... for some reason, this hobby seems to attract 'em. Why is that? It's not everyone, and I've gotten some good and friendly advice and insights, but I think I've gotten what I need now and I'll likely be saying sayonara otherwise (at least that's how I feel at the moment, having just read some of the nastiness in this thread, though I've seen it in other threads too). I work at a college, so I see enough snobby, and misguided, nerdy nastiness as it is; I have a hobby to relax and get away from that crap. |
My impression was that on a practical level the DAC problems were solved between 2007 and 2009. Several chips were introduced around that time, which made their way into professional studio gear I still encounter these days. As to nowadays, more DAC distortions were introduced for audiophiles since then, to fight alleged "dry" and "analytical" sound typical of highly accurate DACs. One example is modern R2R DACs. I'd say instead of using R2R and hybrid DACs, do what professionals do: if you are unhappy with a dry sound, just crank up your Culture Vulture, and enjoy "warm", "meaty", "weighty" distortions. Those professionals who prefer mixing and mastering exclusively "in a box" - that is, inside a Digital Audio Workstation software - employ all kinds of distortion plugins, adding "meat" and "warmth" to sound. Worth trying too. |
Audiophiles are über sensitive nerds. They all want to be an authority or just being right. Therefore, other people must be incompetent. Having the 'best' sound system is just a representation of competiveness. I went recently to an audio show and all I got was belittling. I don't care, I see it as an act of brittle ego's. At the end it just the music what matters. |
@djones51 latest AKM AK4499EQ chip (2x in my DAC) cost is in-between $100-$200, depending on purchase quantity. |
please forgive me for stating the obvious:
Anyone can google the part numbers of the parts in the Benchmark (or any amplification) and see what they are exactly, and how they are specified to perform.
The Mouser or DigiKey descriptions should explain why the designer's choose it.
I do this all the time especially with power-transformers
hr |
@herbreichert : could you please elaborate a bit more on what you said above for those who don't have the patience to google Benchmark parts by part number? By the way, are you THE Herb Reichert? |
Absolutely! I feel sorry for those who don’t get this pretty simple fact. I will copy / paste below what Charlie Hansen (Ayre) said before he died: ———- The thing that I see over and over and over in this thread is an irrational belief in the importance of the DAC chip itself. Just about everything affect the sound of an audio product, but when it comes to DACs, I would rank (in order or sonic importance the general categories as follows:
1) The analog circuitry - 99.9% of all DACs are designed by digital engineers who don't know enough about analog. They just follow the app note. The specs on the op-amps are fabulous and digital engineers are inherently seduced by the beauty of the math story. There are minor differences in the sound quality between various op-amps, but it's kind of like the difference between a Duncan-Heinz cake mix and a Betty Crocker cake mix. 99.8% of the op-amps are used a current-to-voltage converters with the inverting input operating as a virtual ground. This is probably the worst way to use an op-amp as the input signal will cause the internal circuitry to go into slewing-limited distortion. http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/anablog/4311648/Op-amp-myths-ndash-by-Barrie-Gilbert
With discrete circuitry, the only limit is your imagination. You are free to adjust the topology of the circuit, the brands of the parts, the active devices, the bias current in each stage - anything you can think of. Think of this as going to a world-class patisserie in Paris and seeing all the different things that can be made.
2) The power supplies - 99.9% of all DACs use "3-pin" power supply regulators, which are pretty much op-amps connected to a series pass transistor. Everything in #1 applies here.
3) The master clock - jitter is a single number assigned to measure the phase noise of an oscillator over a fixed bandwidth. It is far more i important to know the spectral distribution of the timing variations and how they correlate to audible problems. 99.9% of all DACs use a strip-cut AT crystal in a Pierce gate oscillator circuit. It's pretty good for the money but the results will depend heavily on the implementation, particularly in the PCB layout and the power supplies (#2).
It's hard to rank the rest of these so I will give them a tie score.
4) The digital filter - 99.9% of all DACs use the digital filter built into the DAC chip. About a dozen companies know how to make a custom digital filter based on either FPGAs or DSP chips.
4) PCB layout - grounding and shielding, impedance-controlled traces, return currents, and return current paths are all critical. For a complex digital PCB, 8 layers is the minimum for good results.
4) The DAC chip - almost everything these days is delta sigma with a built-in digital filter. Differences between different chips is one of the less important aspects of D/A converter designs. Both ESS and AKM have some special tricks to reduce out-of-band noise, which can be helpful, but not dramatic.
4) Passive parts - the quality of these can make a large difference in overall performance, especially for analog. Not many digital engineers sit around listening to different brands of resistors to see what sounds best.
These are just a few of the things that make differences in the way that a DAC will sound.
Hope this helps, Charles Hansen
|
My friend who "re-engineered" parts (analog section) and upgraded & added so many caps, regulators and resistors to the Benchmank and Emotiva DACs said the DAC chip were fine but that some are better than others. He also suggested changing/upgrading the op-amp. My electronics engineer neighbor said his friends all recommend the Burson op-amp. Charles Hansen was right, it's not so much the DAC chip but the implementation of the entire DAC unit. |
@fleschler, I hear you. First generation DAC1 owner, turbo-modded in 2007 by legendary Steve Nugent of Empirical Audio (accomplished DAC, USB, and Ethernet designer.) Even after extensive mods these older Benchmark DAC's still benefit from a re-clocked data stream. |
@fleschler +1 "it's not so much the DAC chip but the implementation of the entire DAC unit” I prefer DACs with: 1) separate DAC Chip for left and right channel, two or four in parallel for each for better interpolation 2) avoiding OPAMPs in signal path, ideally class-A discrete output (Gustard A-22). 3) separate digital and analog power supplies, and ground 4) at least two stage linear power supply, with lowest possible ESR capacitors 5) low noise discrete transistors 5) decent clock generator 6) at least four layer PCB |
Add to Charles Hansen’s list the quality of the USB implementation. While asynchronous USB can be the preferred connection, much depends on the RMI/EFI rejection of the USB port. And not to forget: the clocking accuracy of the USB connection. If I may, a little hint: anybody who hasn’t regenerayed the 5V USB connection from the streamer hasn’t yet heard what their DAC is capable of. |
@westcoastaudiophile My COS Engineering D1v $9K DAC is built like the DAC you prefer, exceptionally well. https://6moons.com/audioreviews2/cos/3.html (innards) However, it lacks body in the midrange compared to the D2v, my modded Benchmark and my friend's modded Emotiva. C'est la vie! |
| Post removed |