DAC's from the past, are any of them really worth much today?

I could not found any defects at all with my very resolving speakers of the NOS battery dac S.P.S. with a single TDA 1543 chip ...

The only people who criticize it speak about more "details" with other more complex architecture and i know for a fact that i hear all details there is with this dac but the organic musicality, the soundstage and imaging and timbre naturalness is spot on also ...

Then why these people spoke so much about way better dac than it because it lack "details" ?

I believe that most people with costlier system had forgotten that the house/room signal ratio level matter , EMI shielding matter too , that speakers resonance is there even if you dont know it and vibrations control is madatory , and i believe that they own system in a living room with not much acoustic controls if there is one ...

In the opposite all that is adressed in my system then i hear what this simple dac is able to do in optimal environment without the need to buy a more resolving useless dac... If i could and want to buyone i will buy only a more musical one and this will be hard and very costly ...

Upgrading often appear silly ...It is often the case when all three embeddings are relatively under controls with a relatively already good system ... I own one ...

There are other companies that build modern DACs around very old vintage chips because they sound better with such chips.  Most of the advancement in chip design has been to make them smaller, make them utilize less power and offer more functions that support there use in mobile devices--sound quality is hardly a priority.  Companies like Audio Note, Naim, and Lampizator horde old chips because they deliver the sound these companies seek.   Whether or not that is your sound too is a matter of personal taste; but one really has to hear such machines to decide this.

You are right in my book in spite of my  limited experience with dac ...

Current lower end DACs almost definitely have eclipsed a lot of the high end offerings from the past decades. The DAC is absolutely the wrong piece of gear to consider using most anything from the past unless one of the really high end and well reviewed pieces show up as a drop-dead cheap bargain ;-

 

 

Excellent post and i concur with your experience...

Most people had no idea about the acoustic concept of timbre for example and the conditions of his experience in a room ...

Then when we dont know by understanding and experience what is "timbre" acoustic definition and perception what can we do ?

We focus on "details" for the sake of details as a alleged  meaningful artefact induced by the dac superior design ,  not on our controlled experience of "timbre" in the relation between our ears/speakers and the room and we forgot that the dac/ amp is only a small part of this experience so important they could be for sure  ...   ...

We focus on gear then  and on upgrade at all costs and we are the ideal candidate victim of mass market because the price tag  will  always tell the story for us , not   the acoustics basics and learnings and experiments so impactful they could be  ... And anyway other embeddings control may impact way more than a  dac, if this dac is already good to begin with , as the ratio of signal/noise in the house/room or the speakers vibrations and resonance ...

Lots of DAC threads recently. I agree, the better new cheap DACs are better than the esoteric from only a few years ago. Much has been learned in the filters implementation. Based on my listening, all the Chinese mass-produced DACS are excellent and all sound almost the same. Splitting hairs. Just returned a Qutest as it is more detailed on only a couple tracks, but edgier than my JDS, Topping, Schiit, SMSL, and Sabaj DACs. I don’t know what is different if you jump to the $4000 and up range or if you have access to true DSD or ultra high bit rate that actually has more information, not just the format. Almost all of my music is old enough to have been mastered on tape, so there is no such thing as highly detailed. The above is for just listening, If you want to get your microscope out and look for the tiniest of details, then you will find them. I have a new test. If I listen to a piece, walk out of the room and something is changed, or not, and I come back in, do I hear a difference reliably? If not, any difference is irrelevant. If you goal is ultra perfection, audible or not, or bragging how much you paid, then none of this matters. If I had to buy another DAC, PS: Older DACS with only SPDIF rely on the host clock. Newer DACs with USB, if well done, use the DAC clocking which can be far more accurate. A "good" DAC will have a galvanic isolated USB to prevent any host or cable interference. The Qutest does, as do the newer Schiits.

 

 

 

I must add that for sure you are right ... Any high end system will operate from a file bank in a dac not from the computer...Once this is said ...

My point is that at low cost an audiophile experience is possible even from a USB connection from the computer ...😁

The electrical noise floor level of the house for example can be also a factor more impactful than the computer noise... The speakers resonance can also be way more impactful ... The room acoustic can be way way more negative too ... Each case differ ...many factors are at play ...

My USB computer connection is not ideal but the acoustic experience is so good already i cannot even think of upgrading it ...

I can’t think of why anyone interested in high end audio would want to have anything to do with USB. It was brought on board because of the PC. No high end system should have a computer in the loop… hence no use for it.

My main system for music listening is connected on only one point on the wall electrical plug with a recent dac ( Hidizs AP 80 pro) which i use as a bank and which is only battery powered ...It is a very clean dac ...

It contain a fraction of my many thousand music files ...

For my casual music listening all day exploring all my files i must use my active speakers , which i modify, in their acoustic corner , because it is where all my files are in a bank connected to the computer ...

i use an USB connection shielded with my homemade "golden plates" to my french battery dac TDA 1543 a minimalistic more than good dac Starting point systems, which is very organic and match more than well with M-Studio AV40 speakers...

The sound is so good that it beat all headphones for intimacy and details anmd imaging i ever listened to save my actual modified one the AKG K340 which beat them on timbre naturalness and bass (25 hertz/50 hertz)

Now my question is : why claiming that audiophile experience is impossible for a system connected to a computer ?... you may be right for almost all systems but there is exception ...My embeddings controls are so well done that upgrading appear ridiculous or too costly with my 700 bucks system... I compute that a real upgrade will cost me 15,000 for my speakers system ...Less for my headphone system because i cannot change my headphone nor my amplifier , they are optimized old unique design in the world with a SPEAKER-LIKE soundfield and natural timbre ...there exist no other hybrid as the K340 ...The Sansui alpha just beat the tube ZOTL amp i tried to upgrade it with ... synergy matter ...This is the lesson ...

Now my question how do you use 10,000 musical lossless files without a USB connection ?

I did not use cd for a decade and i transfered automatically all i had owned for a decade ...

Price tag dont define the sound quality of most average system here on display ... Synergy and acoustic,electrical and mechanical embeddings do ...

There is a minimal acoustical satisfaction treshold where i am...

There is an optimally higher acoustical satisfaction threshold where you probably are ... Marc Lavigne system is more certainly there ...

But the difference between these two acoustical experiences is more defined by synergy and embeddings controls than by price tag in my experience for most people ...

High end system definition imply an acoustical dedicated room in my book ...This cost much money when done by an acoustician than most audio high end system cost ...😁

Am i deaf?

I consider my system audiophile experience not top high end experience for sure ...Cost : 700 bucks...Sorry if my post is considered insulting for some ...😊

From all the time i had been here , i advocated about synergy and acoustic , electrical, and mechanical embeddings knowledge over price tag or mere separate component design ... most people advocate here for miraculous branded name new component, being it a cable, a new dac, or some speakers or amplifiers , always more costly ......😁

The only miraculous component i would buy someday will be the BACCH filters ...

Psycho-acoustics and acoustics rule the gear experience not the reverse ...

It is fascinating to read audio threads... All is about the gear proposed to the consumers not so much about the way to use it for the optimal results... i know because i learned it the hard way ...Nobody said to me 10 years ago what i just claim in this post as a result of my experience ...I learned it ...

 

 

 

I can’t think of why anyone interested in high end audio would want to have anything to do with USB. It was brought on board because of the PC. No high end system should have a computer in the loop… hence no use for it.