Better desktop DAC

I like the Schiit Bifrost 2/64 for your parameters. About DSD, I'll quote from this forum and perhaps it will relieve you of that requirement. "Here are Mike Moffat's comments on DSD from a Headfi article. Mike is the cofounder of Schiit and developed the first ever standalone DAC back in the 1980s.  
   
"I have never published my DSD opinions. Here they are. I say opinions because the design of audio gear should adhere to hard science. The user's response however, is totally in that user's psyche. When I worked in Peru, there were tribes in the Amazon region who spoke in vocabularies limited to grunts and delighted in eating insects they found under logs. Then there are people like myself who prefer meat, coffee, dairy, sometimes things green or fruity, starches, and lots of salt. 

In the early days of digital audio, multibit reigned. It was suitable, but expensive, derived as it was from weapons guidance and medical science. Note the use of the word science. Analog numbers were converted to digital, and the reverse yielded the same number. Nothing was averaged, no noise was added, no economic engineering geniuses were allowed to make anything cheaper with smoke and mirrors.  

The earliest DACs were pretty marginal, but natural selection led to the Burr-Brown PCM-63, an amazing multibit DAC, still pretty good today. About that time, Burr Brown was sold to Texas Instruments. There began to appear delta-sigma dacs, which is a fancy name for reduced bit width DACs which used the above alluded to tricks of averaging and noise shaping to make up for the data they threw away. Soon we had TI, Wolfson, Crystal Semiconductor, Phillips, and many more manufacturers of these (now marketed as audio - read dogschiit) DACs. Why stoop to make them?? Simple - they're cheaper! Never mind they can't be used in medical imaging or defense applications because of their inherent data loss/hallucination. Too late, the audio customer had far cheaper gear. The chip makers sold lots of parts.  

Enter DSD, the ultimate extension of this idea. More noise and less bitwidth. You get for free with the bargain, the elimination of the nasty anti-alias filter effects used in the recordings. Cool, huh. This idea works well just as soon as every recording studio on the planet switches over. When that happens (right), what about the old recordings like all of those from SACD days of yore!! Oops, they are already recorded with the filter in place... Unfortunately, they are the bulk of the current DSD catalog available. Can you get DSD from iTunes?? Download DSD from Amazon?? Oh... 

What about 1, 2, 4, or 87.6x native DSD recordings. Yeah there's a few - I really loved the Folsom Prison Castrati Singers doing Handel soprano motets. My all time fave is the Orkney Island shepherd's Poems and Cries of Ecstacy with the sheep. The plaintive cries and bleats of all involved were immaculately suspended in perfect panoramic image. Even the subtle sounds of the shepherds gently placing the sheep's rear legs in their boots were clearly audible.  

Nobody ever explained to me how to design a multi-rate 1x, 2x, etc DSD DAC without a real expensive adaptive filter. Do you optimize it for 1X? 2X? 5.76X? Trouble is, then all of the other rates are compromised. Maybe the over $10K DACs do that. I haven't figured out how to make an over $10K DAC yet, maybe someone will teach me.  

In conclusion - this is opinion, mine with respect to DSD: How can I express just how underwhelmed I am. Adjectives such as stillborn, faith-based, and ludicrous come to mind.  

But wait - I actually built the Loki DSD DAC! How can I be such a hypocrite! The answer is that I will try almost anything once. If I don't like it, I won't do it again. But I could be wrong - if servers ever get big/cheap enough that iTunes and Amazon offer DSD downloads AND major label music providers begin to provide native DSD recordings in substantial numbers - then I will cook and eat a crow at RMAF. Meanwhile, all you DSDers - enjoy the grubs!! Buy a Loki!" 

Hi @Hilde45

Discussing DSD versus PCM is interestering, but off topic here. I just want the DAC to do the job for DSD as well as PCM. I am not so interested in DSD versus PCM filters etc. I have fifteen years experience with DSD recordings. I know the faults and benefits.

Forget DSD?

The above discussion maybe illustrates a broader point.

To get a good-sounding desktop DAC for a reasonable price, I should drop the DSD requirement. This is still a somewhat new and niche thing. 

If I keep to DACs with acceptable 192-24 PCM resolution, the range will be much larger, and the chance to get a very good-sounding DAC will be higher.

Yet - it wont do the best format (to my ears) - DSD.  A dilemma, since I have many DSD files.

Comments?

I would contact Apos Audio. They sell topping and a lot of other desktop dacs, so they might be helpful in narrowing your search. 

With most fairly new DACs I can play DSD files packaged to PCM using DoP. How much do I need the true / direct DSD capability? I've thought, maybe not so much, since I can play direct DSD in my main system with my Teac NT-505 - no problem. But I have found that the ability to play direct DSD makes a big difference also in my low cost office system. A low cost DAC can sound much better, with pure or native DSD playback compared to standard PCM. 

.

Total budget; low to medium.

That means absolutely nothing to anyone but you.  Just give us a number please. 

Here is the best option you can get, buy my exaSound. No bias at all :) 

Quad DSD capable, headphone output, 800 US for you to match the price of another one in there 

 exasound e22

I dont know much about dac being satisfied by the two i owned...

But check my last one a very small dap i uses as a fixed battery dac  at 200 bucks which read dsd  :

https://www.hidizs.net/products/ap80-pro-fully-balanced-lossless-music-player

I spoke with someone on DM who plans to sell his PlayBack Designs Merlot DAC. The guy at PDB, Andreas K, is considered the father of DSD. The seller is moving up the line. I think he is selling in February.

That Schitt Loki mentioned above may meet the small form factor requirement. I do now that my best DAC is from Schitt. They do know digital.

I appreciate all the suggestions, very interesting, I look at their manuals and reviews - Bifrost 2-64, exaSound, Hidizs DAP.

@soix asked about budget. Maybe max 1200 USD. Depends on the sound quality. The Topping e30ii is an over-achiever at its low price level, especially when playing direct DSD with the pc volume disabled. Yet there is a huge gap to Teac NT-505 in my main system. The Teac sounds better in most ways. I want a new DAC to sound clearly better than the one I have, with the Teac NT-505 as my reference level. Up there, or above.

One more test - what exactly am I looking for, with a better DAC? Point of interest: testing two DACs playing pure / direct / native DSD. The low priced topping e30ii and the mid-priced Teac nt-505 dac-streamer. Testing my own DSD files, in this case: Traffic: John Barleycorn must die, recorded from my original 1970 Island LP. So the two DACs get the exact same DSD input.

Result - both sound quite good. But it is only when listening to the Teac that I come fully "into it" as a listener, tapping my feet, appreciating what the band tried to do, in this innovative recording. Wow! He MUST die!

Testing some more today, Steven Wilson: What life brings, in Nightowl headphones from Teac Nt-505 in main system vs Topping e30ii in office system. Streaming from Qobuz. - No contest, Teac is better. No surprise. But it is a gradient. Not night and day difference.

Maybe my budget should be 600 usd. This is still ca four times the price of the Topping. With a clear sonic improvement. If this is too much to ask for, maybe I should wait.

My office system is my secondary system. I dont want to reinvent the whole system, invest in a streamer, power conditioner, top grade cables, better speakers, amps or whatever. I like it as a modest system, specialized to my liking (single driver speakers, OTL sound etc).

Yet I do want to consider good-sounding DACs. This is also based on my experience from developing the analog chain in my main system, starting from the source (there, the cartridge) and going from there.

Since you like it so much, why don't you just watch the used market until another Teac NT-505 shows up?  

Yes, its a possibility. However it is a bit big for my desktop. And still quite expensive. And I am not sure I need the streamer part, since my ethernet connected laptop seems to work ok. Both streaming and playing DSD native from my hard disk. Not sure, what would be the typical symptoms that the streamer function needs upgrade?

@chayro - I looked at the Apos audio site, interesting, many options. Anyone you would consider?

I asked

what would be the typical symptoms that the streamer function needs upgrade?

this is much debated, on Audiogon and elsewhere...

I come to this digital debate from analog. There, also, opinions have been very divided, maybe the only thing that matters is the correct vinyl record speed, the pitch stability, or also the weight and timbre of different platters, the function of tonearms, and so forth, not to speak of diamonds and cartridges. You can't really stop. There are hundreds of maybe-relevant variables. But you have to stop somewhere - what are the main things that matter, to get excellent vinyl record playback.

So - is there a main rule? If you have acceptably good streaming (no obvious problems with hires pcm or dsd), what is the benefit of investing in better streaming, compared to a better dac? Like 10 / 90 percent? 30 / 70?

@o_holter -  not really. I’m not a desktop dac person, but I did buy my Topping from them and I thought they were helpful. They seemed to carry a lot of lines, so I figured they could help you out. They really have no incentive to recommend something you’re only going to send back.  Personally, I gave up on hi rez years ago. I found that I got better sound by concentrating on maximizing CD quality sound, but that’s me. 

@chayro - thanks. They are on the other side of the globe (I live in Norway) but I will check them out. Qualified impartial advice is very valuable. And I've actually bought from Oakland before ; - )

I finally got around to disconnect the Teac NT-505 from my main system, carried it to the office system, and connected it there. The difference was larger than I had imagined, compared to my current solution (Thinkpad T14 laptop + Topping e30ii). My small office system sounds much better with the Teac. Both PCM streaming and DSD file playback. Not even a close match, compared to the Topping. In a way, not strange, considering the cost and effort involved.

I have no idea, how much is due to the improved streaming, or the better DAC, but I think it is both. The music both sounds better (I associate to the DAC) and seems more undisturbed (I associate to the streamer).

@o_holter - Norway?  I was there two years ago. You should visit Audio Consult in Denmark. They’ll get you set up. 💸💸💸

Maybe check Headphonia here or Headphonics here

Thanks for advice, everyone. I am studying the links.

@mlsstl - yes another Teac NT-505 is an idea, since it matches my 'inquisitive' desktop system quite well, with its akm 'velvet' sound. I hesitate, regarding ess based dacs. However the Teac is not so easy to find around here, and still quite high in price.

We really need to read between the lines, now, in all the dac promotion texts that pose as reviews. I read one of my Topping e30ii. Yes good for its price level, but good, in an objective sense? Not to my ears. I could get a used Topping D90 for a fair price, but fear that it would be money out the window. Good measures dont neccessarily translate to good sound.

Regarding ess DAC's: and the implementation:

The exasound I mentioned is a wonderful DSD player- DSD on this unit "seems" to sound as good with DSD as DSD through my Weiss 501, I think that is because the exasound's engineer Klissarov made DSD a strength, whereas Weiss focused on upsampling. I am not saying the exasound is a better player, but playing DSD files definitely sound better on the exasound vs. other formats, whereas a DSD file on the Weiss don't jump out as a level up, but just sound no better than redbook. Yes, the Weiss digs deeper into the recordings regardless of format. So now I am rethinking "DSD is king" that I thought before with my previous DAC. I see you currently have the same priority I had.

Interestingly, and my point: they both have the same Sabre 9018 chips. While their sonic signatures and soundstages are similar, the implementation of the DAC is the key. Daniel Weiss has all the knowledge and tools to utilize whatever strategies he feels is best, and yet he chose ESS chipsets over other options. There is a much more extensive (and thus expensive) DAC build in the Weiss than George did with the exasound- built in streamer and power supply in the 501 vs. wall wort for the most obvious examples, and many other topologies that are beyond my knowledge level, but there is alot of this "ess vs. r2r/fpga dac's" going around the forums, and others have mentioned perhaps that is not the right first question to ask. 

@mclinnguy - thanks, very interesting. I think you are (mostly) right. The implementation means a lot.