I own a Bluesound Node 2i which greatly improved sound after I added the Cat 6 cable. I do not own a separate DAC but am told it would be the next step improvement. I have done enough reading that it appears the two latest chips are the Sabre or ESS
ES9038PRO
and the AK4499. The brands I have looked at are Sabaj d5($469) and a Topping D90($699). I saw a great review on Audiocircle of the Sabaj D5 which is now a year old. The Topping D90 is newer and I hear the build quality of the Topping as well as customer service are both better. Other brands cost more and most don't use these new chips.
Is there a difference in how these chips sound? I would appreciate any comments.
The above R2R detractors, obviously have never A/B'ed their ESS delta
sigma dacs (listening to PCM) compared to a good discrete R2R dac
That is completely incorrect. As I said, I have owned a very good R2R dac and a number of ESS dacs and compared them. I only listen to PCM. The R2R dac was okay on its own terms but I much preferred dacs using the current generation of ESS chips.
You are over generalising about dac chips - suggesting that the chip is the only thing which defines the sound of the dac, when many other elements of the design also come into play - the filtering, power supply and analog output stage for a start. There are good R2R dacs and good ESS dacs. The chip is only one factor of many in the final sound of the dac. You are also making ridiculous generalisations about "R2R detractors". How can you possibly know whether "R2R detractors" have compared R2R and ESS dacs. As, I said, I have done such a comparison and I am sure that many others have as well.
And no one is suggesting that there are no good R2R dacs. Just rejecting your preposterous statement that all R2R dacs are inherently better than all ESS dacs merely because of the dac chip architecture, which is patently absurd.
That is completely incorrect. As I said, I have owned a very good R2R dac and a number of ESS dacs and compared them. I only listen to PCM. The R2R dac was okay on its own terms but I much preferred dacs using the current generation of ESS chips.
+1
You are also making ridiculous generalisations about "R2R detractors". How can you possibly know whether "R2R detractors" have compared R2R and ESS dacs. As, I said, I have done such a comparison and I am sure that many others have as well.
+1
And no one is suggesting that there are no good R2R dacs. Just rejecting your preposterous statement that all R2R dacs are inherently better than all ESS dacs merely because of the dac chip architecture, which is patently absurd.
Just rejecting your preposterous statement that all R2R dacs are inherently better
Didn’t say "all" sunshine, I said the better hi-end ones, now your generalizing, with that "preposterous statement".
For those interested in what the better hi-end ones are that are R2R Multibit here is a list, it’s about a year old now, there are even more now and even better ones to add to it. Trinity Dac Ypsilon Cdt-100 Phasure MSB Platinum Total Dac Audial (Peja Rodgic) AMR top dac and cdp (Thorsten Loschec) Exasound Reimyo CH precision Holo Denafrips
This is the reason why R2R is better, Delta Sigma can only give you a facsimile of PCM, where R2R Multibit is bit perfect.
MoJo Music quote:
" When a PCM (redbook) file is played on a dsd, sacd or Bit Stream converter, the DAC chip has to convert the PCM to DSD in real time. This is one of the major reasons people claim DSD sounds better than PCM, when in fact, it is just that the chip in most modern single-bit delta sigma DACs do a poor job of decoding PCM.
Don’t know abraxalito, got that list from someone else they sent me, didn’t bother to check all of them.
Also can say all the MSB’s are R2R Multibit save for the very first 1999-2000 LinkDac models that used bit stream Delta Sigma PCM1738-32’s then went discrete R2R in 2003 with the Platinum LinkPlus and never looked back at Delta Sigma again.
Can’t comprehend the Queens English either sunshine, there’s no hope for you!. Then maybe there is, after you answered this. Now you just need an R2R dac to get the best from PCM that you prefer so much.
n_brio OP12 posts08-14-2019 7:19pmrossb -> do you use upsampling to dsd?
I am curious about the OP statement that he thought the Node2 sounded better with Cat 6 ethernet cable. Can he elaborate? Regarding chip quality, it really does matter about the total environment that are placed in. For a while I used the Oppo 105 as my DAC, then upgraded to a Mytek Manhatten. Same ESS Sabre chip, vastly different results.
suggesting that the chip is the only thing which defines the sound of the dac, [*when many other elements of the design also come into play*] Emphasis added.
I have had a good R2R dac and prefer my Lumin X1 with its ESS chip
@rossb Thanks for your helpful posts. With the X1, where do you 'fall' with regards: what is (may be) responsible for your preference of it, since it is more than just a DAC?
I also fall into the "implementation" camp...very impressed (an understatement) with a Delta-Sigma DAC...this coming from a R2R fan. The unit is also an 'all-in-one" which is why I'm interested in your feedback on this. Thanks.
With the X1, where do you 'fall' with regards: what is (may be)
responsible for your preference of it, since it is more than just a DAC?
I dont think any one element can be identified as the reason for my preference for the X1. It is just a very well designed and implemented unit. I know that the Lumin streamers are very good (I also have a U1 mini), the ESS 9038 dac chip is capable of sounding great (I was less impressed with the previous generation of ESS dacs), the X1 has a very high quality linear power supply, and the output stage uses the excellent Lundahl transformers. It is finished to a very high standard. All of these factors combine to produce great sound.
The sound the X1 produces is dense and colourful, perhaps slightly warm, as well as being fast and dynamic. This contrasts with the slightly thin and cool sound of the Chord DAVE/Blu 2 which I owned for a while, and which is not a sound I typically enjoy. The DAVE did have more apparent detail, but it was an illusion caused by the leanness of the sound and overemphasis of fine detail. The X1 has all the detail, but it has a fuller, more natural sound so that detail is not artificially emphasised. The Metrum Pavane I owned at one point, which is an R2R dac, was also very good, and had a similar sense of tonal density and richness. But it sounded a little slow compared to the ESS based dacs (and the DAVE) and was, to my ears, lacking slightly in dynamics. The X1 seems to combine tonal richness and dynamics in a way that is close to ideal. I'm sure that there are better sounding dacs out there, but you would probably need to spend crazy money to improve on it and achieve that last 1% - maybe.
This can also be added to that list of R2R Mutibit dacs the Audio Mirror Tubadour III It's getting raved about and uses the Analog Devices R2R Multibit AD1865N-K flagship DAC chip And is can do DSD if you feel the need to.
It's said to be "the best and most analog and musical sounding DAC "chips" ever made."I have heard this chip in other units it's very good like the PCM1704 in a Linn CD12 I have, but the new breed of discrete R2R sound even better, from makers like MSB I have, TotalDac ect ect ect. They bring life back to music, instead of being a bit of a yawn like the DS chips do.
I have the Fiio M15 with two AK4499 chips. It is better than my Fiio M11 pro was. I don't think either are better than My Chord Qutest. The M15 is less bright.
I looked back at Denafrips and the Ares is 768 USD. I forgot to convert to USD previously. If the Topping doesn't work out, I can try the Denafrips. Backordered 8-10 weeks.
As for the Deafrips, when I mentioned the "better hi-end R2R dacs" as the ones that will convert PCM better than DS based chips, it was the the Denafrips Terminator I was referring to. And also from Asia the Holo Spring level 2 or level 3 are also very good, especially in NOS (none over-sampling) mode
The Lumin X1 interests me because of that fibre optical network connection. I believe it is the only DAC that has it. Another external DAC I am interested in is the Denafrips Terminator. I am looking forward to someone doing a comparison with the Lumin X1.
With regards to ESS chips, I have not heard the Lumin.X1, but have a lot of listens to the older Mirrus DAC from these guys.
The Mirrus was an incredible sounding DAC. They currently do not have the latest ESS chip (not sure why) and they are dragging their feet getting ROON READY support. However, they may feel the ESS9028PRO chips is more than adequate compared to the latest ESS9038PRO chip. Benchmark Media told me that the difference between their DAC2 (ESS9028PRO) and DAC3 (ESS9038PRO) was negligible. I ended up upgrading from the DAC2 to the DAC3 but I could not tell a difference.
The key point for me with regards to resonessencelabs is that they know the ESS DAC architecture better than anyone in the world. The engineers at resonessencelabs were formerly with ESS and designed the ESS DACs. Darko.com mentions this in one of their reviews.
I met the resonessencelabs guys at an audio show and they played the Mirrus DAC with a 20 year old $500 eBay speaker. Just to prove how amazing their DAC implementation was. A highlight for me at that audio show.
I would be surprised if the Lumin X1 was better than the latest top end resonessencelabs DAC just because of the ESS engineering background of the DAC designers.
Saying all of this the DAC I am currently thinking of getting is the Mola Mola Makua with internal DAC option. It is supposed to be even better than the external Mola Mola Tambaqui mentioned a few posts above. It also has RJ45 streaming and ROON READY support.
It seems the ESS and AKM chips are meeting somewhere in the middle. The ESS chips were maligned for glaring, too analytical, etc. The AKM had a darker sometimes murky sound. Reviews I see say both of them have solved the criticisms. I know this can be a debate but I can only go by what I read since I can't A/B them. The new AK4499 is supposed to be more open and has "slam" I will find out by Friday. The Topping is kind of heavy so the power supply should help?? Not an EE.
Even in George's list of R2R dacs which he claims are superior (I also have an R2R Audio Mirror T3-SE), it really is the implementation that matters. The dacs on that list are going to sound very different from one another. I'd contend that many would be judged as sounding just as different from one another as they would vs a dac based on a different chip/methodology.
Finally, although I do believe in measurements, it's definitely not everything. I demoed the top measuring dac in the world for a month (as tested by audiosciencereview) and it did not impress. It was the worst sounding dac among the bunch (Audio Mirror, Matrix, iFi, & Lampizator).
It's an aural hobby, be guided by numbers, but the ears are the final judge.
Depends on what filters they use or if they build their own out board filter, even R2R dacs use filters. You didn't like the Mola Mola Tambaqui at $11,000 ? That's the top dac tested by ASR.
In high end audio, it is always about the chef, not the parts. The Ayre Codex is still the most musical Dac I've heard under $5k. No two R2R Dacs will ever sound the same - they are based on the ridiculous premise that it is possible to find two resistors (in the real world) which are identical. I suppose I've contradicted myself, because R2R Dacs are bullsh** because of the nature of parts, however, if one has listened to Dacs made by DCS and Ayre, it is hard to take most of the stuff posted about here seriously.
DCS Ring dac converters are also similar to the newer top level stuff from Burr Brown and Analog Devices, being hybrid, which are part R2R and part DS, (Delta Sigma, 1bit, Single Bit, ESS, Bitstream) or whatever other pseudo names DS has.
Burr Brown/ Texas Instruments, Analog Devices now are doing "hybrids" with their better d/a converters, 4 or so bits of R2R and the rest DS. This makes them more expensive to make than DS but said to sound better, yet still no where near as expensive to make as full R2R was, the reason R2R was dropped in the first place and 1 bit DS (delta sigma) took over, because it was very much cheaper to manufacturer than R2R.
But things seem to be going full circle again and R2R is being shown for what it is, bit perfect for converting PCM, where DS is just a facsimile.
And many Dac makers are now doing full R2R again in "discrete form", and the results of the good ones are better than the last of the great full R2R converter chips from AD Texas/Burr Brown ect ect
With bandwidth and sampling limitations, ringing and aliasing artifacts, all digital is only a facsimile of the original. R2R is no better than delta sigma in this respect, and has technical limitations of its own.
Since most studios use Delta Sigma ADC's to create PCM I'll guess the best way to convert it back is with Delta Sigma DAC's. The process used whether R2R, Delta Sigma, Proprietary doesn't matter as much as how well the DAC is at getting a nice quiet accurate signal at the analog output.
Most all music we listen to is recorded to PCM. https://ibb.co/Gv2G6LB Quote from the DSD guide.com last year. " Try teaching DSD recording to a PCM engineer... even the best... and you’ll find roadblocks and complaints of how hard it is to record in DSD."
Despite the marketing hype, there are almost no pure DSD recordings available to consumers. This is partially because up until quite recently there was no way to edit, mix, and master DSD files. So most pure DSD recordings that are commercially available are the rare DSD recordings made from a direct-to-analog recording, or those recorded direct to DSD without any post-production. There are some new studio software packages that can edit, mix, and master in DSD, but these are quite rare in the industry, and mostly used by small boutique recording companies. Most DSD recordings are, in fact, edited, mixed, and mastered in 5-bit PCM
Here are some statements from recording engineers.
"Recording in DSD and then converting PCM is only introducing noise into the PCM signal."
" Recording in DSD for a DSD only release, get the best from DSD." There are almost no pure DSD recordings available to consumers.
" Recording in DSD to later convert to PCM, doesn’t make any sense"
Yes some DS dac lovers here are going to get testy over this post, but there it is.
Really! this once again because you missed it, as I posted way back.
" When a PCM file is played on a native DSD single-bit converter, the single-bit DS DAC chip has to convert the PCM to DSD in real-time. This is one of the major reasons people claim DSD sounds better than PCM, when in fact, it is just that the DS chip in most modern single-bit DACs do a poor job of decoding PCM."
George, all of your quotes are about recording in DSD. They say literally nothing about DACs. They certainly don't support your conjecture that delta sigma chips "do a poor job of decoding PCM". You will need to come up with something else.
Uh, yes most recordings are n PCM, what type of modulator do you think they use when they are making these recordings? For example what do you think a TI PCM Audio ADC uses? They use delta sigma modulators.
Just have a listen to any PCM redbook 16/44 24/96 or DXD through a "good" R2R dac and be amazed, then play the same through any Delta Sigma dac and hear what you get, it’s a yawn.
George, you keep saying the same thing, and getting the same response. I'm sure most of us have done this. I used to own a "good" R2R dac. I was not amazed. I prefer my current delta sigma dac.
Saying a R2R DAC somehow manages to more accurately convert PCM which was made with a Delta Sigma ADC than a Delta Sigma DAC doesn't make much sense. The topology of the DAC isn't that important what's important is how well it's implemented they can all do a great job.
Think about it. This is 2020. Since all of these are computer chip based regardless of R2R, hybrid or DS. Shouldn't we able to get it right? It is starting to sound like a tube vs SS argument. I just read a review of an owner who had a Denafrips Term and a D90 and liked both of them. "Why can't we all just get along" Bill Clinton. Me being rather frugal AKA "not rich" I would go with the d90, which I did.
I have a Bluesound Node 2i and purchased a ProJect S2 DAC and added it to my system and found I liked the Bluesound played better by itself. I stream Tidal and when I connected the DAC to my Bluesound using Audioquest Carbon digital coax, it does not allow MQA to unfold completely. There is something about MQA that is difficult to explain, but for some reason I hear something different when I listen to MQA, I ended up selling the ProJect DAC and the digital coax cable on Audiogon for half the price I paid for it.
Yes, George. I started the thread. The comment I made referred to discussions getting personal. I don't understand that I guess. I asked for differences between the two brands of chips. It is ok that we talk about R2R also. I have learned much in the last couple months about DACs. I bought the D90 for numerous reasons: in stock, good reviews, cost vs benefit. The Denafrips would have been good except it is out of stock for 10 weeks. Most of the DAC mentioned, which I am sure are good, are simply not in my budget. Thanks for the help on me understanding this topic. Not as simple as a turntable, receiver and speakers.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
