Curious about older "world class" D/A converters

rzado -

Thanks so much for the thoughtful response.  I really appreciate that.  The Spectral is the most fascinating to me, as I guess I see it as being the most "pro" unit.  And speaking of EMM Labs, I've seen that the DAC6e SE is now in a palatable range - I may need to be looking in that direction, as I've heard nothing but good things about anything they've ever done.

Have a great weekend!

- Mark

My comments would be towards the build quality of the DAC.  What is inside would be what matters.  Plenty of opinions on different products but what parts are inside and can you upgrade the units with newer parts.  Someone mentioned higher resolution but my thought is what sounds good.  For example some of the newer DACs have R2R discrete designs but they all don't sound the same.  What are you looking to improve in your system.  Soundstage, separation, instrument tone, air, etc.  IMP only a few DACs actually can do all of them.

Happy Listening.  

In real only 16 bit base TDA1541 and TDA1545
  and1545A and denser bit you are less.

bigkidz -

This is what I’m getting at: these older "world class" DAC’s were built to such a robust degree, that I’ve become curious as to whether that equated to a sound that has simply been forgotten, but possibly betters modern designs. And I don’t need or want a device that can process anything higher than 16/44.1 (when it all comes down to it).

As I said, I had the Alpha 2 (I also had the 1, for that matter, a couple years prior) - I ran some Reference Recordings through it and was actually quite shocked at the level of detail and air I was hearing. I really got the sense that the proverbial veil had been lifted - it was genuinely fascinating! However, with the other 99.9% of my material, I felt (and feel) the Transporter just sounded more real/natural - there was more of a presence, if you will. 2psyop above attached a link to a YouTube review of the latest Shiit DAC that included some of the reviewer’s thoughts on older designs. He goes on to bring up the fact that he grew up with a piano in the house and so "knows what that sounds like." We have a grand at one end of the room and our system at the other. So, I’ll put on the likes of simple solo Gould recordings and then match volume as best I can, and then take note of what I’m hearing - that is, how close is the one getting to other (relatively speaking, of course). Going back and forth I felt the Transporter had the more palpable sense of a real object in the room - pretty cool if you can get it right. Well, as much as I was able to "achieve" that (or as close as I felt I can come with the equipment I have), I feel that I just need a tad more resolution. Of course all things are subjective: Some of you might sit down and go, "What else could you possibly ask for?" Others might say, "This is pretty darn pedestrian." Now, I realize that this conversation went from "should I check out an older world class DAC" to a more general "what improvements are you looking to achieve" in a hurry. I guess I would ask, "Can I achieve what I’m looking for [in my above terribly long-winded ramblings] in one of the older ’world class’ designs? Or should I ditch any such thought and go for something modern, such as the EMM (etc) mentioned?"

Thanks a ton for the responses.

- Mark

I just read the following on another forum:

"I sold my DCC2 2 years ago and regret doing so. At the time the DCC2 was far better than any DAC I auditioned. I had both the DCC2 and my current Modwright Transporter at the same time and while the DCC2 presented more detail, I kept the Transporter for financial reasons. I doubt DAC technology has improved to the point where the DCC2 is inferior to any DAC except the most costly."

Interesting.

- Mark