BRYSTON …. top end build quality and top end audio performance. They have a built-in LPS as standard …a big step up in itself .
DAC That Punches Above Its Price Point
I’ll make it short. I’ve spent some hours reading the DAC threads on this forum. I am aware quality of digital matters as superior DACs usually the costlier ones will sound better than cheap DACs, making music sound more analog, lifelike, real, believable with all the soundstage and detail etc. All the good things. There are some who thought it’s the music that matters, and although different DACs may sound different it’s the music that makes the most difference. In other words, the differences that exist between DACs are not that important as it's all about the music. I can see the point that people are trying to make.
Back to the topic. I’ve read great things on the Denafrips Ares II and Pontus II, and other costlier high-end DACs. I’ve read about the Chord DAVE. I personally own a Chord QBD76 and have no urge to replace it with anything else since it sounds splendid in my system, for the money. I may be setting up another system and was wondering if there is a DAC in the lower price bracket that punches way above its price point, sounding close to if not better than the costlier designs.
I presume the Audioquest Black, Red or Cobalt are not worthy of consideration and sound noticeably inferior to the costlier options? FWIW I tried the Musical Fidelity M1 DAC and this one really sounded poor to my ears. Very digital sound and I stopped listening to it after a while. The Chord sounds a lot more analog, lifelike and real to my ears.
I would appreciate any advice. Thanks.
Back to the topic. I’ve read great things on the Denafrips Ares II and Pontus II, and other costlier high-end DACs. I’ve read about the Chord DAVE. I personally own a Chord QBD76 and have no urge to replace it with anything else since it sounds splendid in my system, for the money. I may be setting up another system and was wondering if there is a DAC in the lower price bracket that punches way above its price point, sounding close to if not better than the costlier designs.
I presume the Audioquest Black, Red or Cobalt are not worthy of consideration and sound noticeably inferior to the costlier options? FWIW I tried the Musical Fidelity M1 DAC and this one really sounded poor to my ears. Very digital sound and I stopped listening to it after a while. The Chord sounds a lot more analog, lifelike and real to my ears.
I would appreciate any advice. Thanks.
127 responses Add your response
@jerrybj.... interesting post. I am using a modded older Beresford that is around 10-15 years old. No USB, but I haven't needed one so far. Planning to upgrade server, so will likely need USB. This old DAC sounds really good. The modder, a local guy I know, sold it for $1000, but I paid half that used. But it tops out at 96/24. Also, how come no love for Schitt DACs on this thread? Thinking seriously about a Gumby. |
My Denafrips Ares 2 DAC makes my system sound like I'm there...right on stage . CD's I never play are sounding totally "alive"...My Topping doesn't do that. It also has a "phase" button that really opens the soundstage. My speakers literally disappear. For $800 you can't touch it with anything else in that price range.....If your budget let's you go to $1600....get the Pontus, but if you go to you tube and hear the Denafrips DACs compared....The Ares 2 holds it's own very nicely. One of those rare Steals in Hi Fi....speaking of punching WAY above it's cost. Happy Listening.... |
If you own a Chord DAC I can pretty much guarantee if you buy any $500 DAC your gonna hate it. I have never purchased any equipment that was let’s say off the top of my head 50% cheaper than what I owned or had owned in the same category ( amp/amp , DAC/DAC ) and been satisfied. I own a Topping E30 that I use with my headphones ( because I’m not a headphone guy and just use them late night when I can’t be playing my audio system ) and bought it when it was still $130. It is good but it’s a $130 DAC period, it’s not gonna compete in any way with a $400 DAC that’s why Topping makes a $400 DAC. I own a n RME ADI - 2 FS ( in my audio system ) and really like it , especially because of all of the features but I can’t say it’s what some of the hype made/ makes it as if it’s some end all option. Those that do I’m sure haven’t ever listened to a $2-3000 DAC. I am actually quite tempted to try an R2R DAC to compare as I own Focal 948 speakers that are quite detailed. DON’T LISTEN TO ONLINE HYPE!! Work on matching your equipment properly, that’s probably why your satisfied with the Chord DAC you own. |
I'm not strictly an objectivist (I build and use tube amps that measure horribly by todays standards) but when it comes to DAC's I think getting the one with best measured performance is the way to go. That, and obviously the one that meets the functionality you require -- Balanced or SE ? Volume control/Preamp ? Toslink, Coax or just USB? Remote? Anyway, you don't need yet another component in the system that is a tone control. There are a ton of DAC's that have a SINAD of 110dB-120dB which guarantee's a fully transparent source. You can mix and match the amp (tube / SS) and/or speakers to tailor the sound. Various offerings from Topping, SMSL, Schiit Modi/Modius or at the higher end, the okto research dac8 stereo. It simply doesn't make sense to spend more than that on a DAC. Last comment, I disagree with the Codex recommendations. It is an OK DAC (I owned one a few years ago) but it uses the ESS 9016 chip which is a few generations behind by now. The headphone output isn't too great either. Any Topping DAC at a fraction of the price will perform much better. |
True value is out there but look at older units. Manley, Theta Gen. V or Wadia. I have a Wadia 15 that 'only' plays redbook and it is spectacular, not just for it's age but against anything available today. I also own a Bryston that somebody mentioned but hardly ever use it due to the superb performance of the Wadia! I am streamlining and trying to reduce the clutter and have on order a Mojo Mystique V3 to replace the 2 DAC's mentioned which will be for sale when I receive the new one. For the price of a DAC like this I feel nothing out there will come close, not in build quality nor sound. The 3 DACs in the first line are high-end units from a different era and are built like tanks. Think Mike Tyson 1st round knockout. PM me if you are interested in buying but I live in Ireland so postage might be heavy. Perhaps if you are lucky you can find one of these locally but getting very scarce. Also consider a CD player like Philips or Marantz (same PCB) The Marantz CD85 or CD94 use alloy transport and the TDA1541 chip, they sound great, solidly built and provide access to the internal DAC. Can find them for next to nothing and come from the same period as the heavyweights above. |
There is 2 types of dacs to get , R2R and sigma delta, the best R2R dac out there for the money is the Audio Mirror tub iii Se , MHDT also makes a good R2R tube dac ,the best sig dac for around 2 k is the matrix element M . The Chinese topping and SMSL dacs also should be up there also. RME ADi is another good sig delta. Lots of choices depending on your taste , clarity vs smoothness |
I’ve had the Gustard X16 for less than a year and love it! ($500) That isn’t a review. It is a set of measurements. He doesn’t even mention if he listens to it. If you believe as ASR does that all that matters is how something measures then I suppose it is a review. But if you care about how something sounds, and that is really all you should care about, ASR is worthless. |
Another vote for RME ADI-2. Quite close to my PS Audio DirectStream, gets even closer with an upgraded PSU. Much more transparent than the Ayre Codex I purchased as a backup to the PSA when it went for service. The Ayre left me counting the days to get the PSA back; the RME does not and I could live with it very happily. |
Yet another vote for.... wait for it.... the RME ADI-2. In my system, it's a revelation and for the money, you can't go wrong. It's certainly worth a try. For those who want to go the R2R route, it certainly sounds like their are good options on that front too for similar ballpark as requested here earlier but that also requires a preamp of unknown cost. Using the RME ADI-2 with tube amp mono blocks and no preamp. It's an astounding pairing. (I also run off battery power as others.) |
My take : I gave up on Vinyl 5 years ago and never looked back. Those LP’s are all ripped to my hard drive and on DVD discs for backup. To get that LP like sound from Digital as I learned won’t come from an AVR (Marantz SR5011) or from the DAC of a Sony BluRay player (UBP-X1000ES). DSD as I knew 20 years ago is the equal to a finely pressed LP (screw the haters). DSD over PCM to my ears doesn’t cut the Mustard (which I’m allergic to BTW). I knew not to waste my time and money on all those cheap ChiFi DAC’s being schlepped by various YouTuber’s and print magazines for that matter. I went PS Audio as a leap of faith and of course I’d already enjoyed their M700 Amps & Stellar SGCD/Preamp. I bought the PS Audio DirectStream DAC Sr. and got excellent deal via trade in of the SGCD and some secret discounts they offered me. After 30 days it didn’t go back and is still in my system almost two years later. I did a head to head Video last year against the Denafrips Terminator and my partially biased opinion still won me over with PS Audio. There were times as I mentioned in the Video where I forgot which DAC I was listening to. I’ve also listened to the Holo May DAC Kitsune Edition at two different friends’ homes but sadly not in my rig where it matters the most. I’m not a Trumper but I refuse to buy ChiFi on principle. Of course components in U.S. made are made in China 🇨🇳 and there nothing you can do about it. https://youtu.be/FHO07PFHj60 But I’d rather pay more for products designed and manufactured here that help pay for peoples mortgages, car loans, rent, and so forth. If I bought a cheapo DAC, it’d be Schiit for sure ! |
The best measuring DACs in the world based on the ESS9038 Pro can be had for less than $1k. I have an SMSL SU-9 and it outperforms basically everything that’s not based on the same chipset. Fully expecting everyone in here to only link to lower performing DACs for 4x the price though. Enjoy wasting your money! |
@herman, well said, I fully agree, measurements alone mean zero. ASR states that he does not need to listen because the measurements tell him what it will sound like! @romanesq For those who want to go the R2R route, it certainly sounds like their are good options on that front too for similar ballpark as requested here earlier but that also requires a preamp of unknown cost You make it seem like all R2R DACs need a preamp. Would you care to elaborate on that statement. The Wadia I mentioned in my post certainly doesn't. |
"measurements …. mean zero” ...being analog circuitry design engineer, I disagree with such attitude. if performance of audio devices cannot be measured, it cannot be designed to perform, or to be improved/manufactured as well. Good “Ole” days, “fair” sound check was done a “blind way”, where "sensitive ears and minds" didn’t know what exact device was used to produce the sound. I would love to hear “blind listening” comments on this topic. |
@westcoast, let me clarify: measurements mean zero to me. If you are hung up on measurements then measure away but ask yourself if you are measuring the right things. Please explain how you measure something that we respond to at an emotional level. Sure measurements can get you in the ball park of good performance but are no guarantee of good sound. Also explain how two different amps that measure exactly the same can sound quite different. I can swap out a cap of same value in a speaker crossover and never mind 'blind', you would have to be deaf not to hear it but the XO point, it's knee and it's rate of attenuation will be the same and therefore measure the same ... but it sounds different! |
I had a Codex… it replaced an Ayre QB-9… sold the codex and bought a QB-9 DSD… far more pleasant to me.. Last year I sent the QB -9 in for the twenty upgrade. also bought a benchmark DAC3… The benchmark is excellent, but digital to my ears. Extremely articulate with very tight and forceful bass response. However in my system the detail retrieval Comes at the expense of a relaxed presentation.. The QB-20 ayre is amazing… Very revealing and rich without loss of space and air. soundstage is definitely deeper than the benchmark too.. If you can find a used QB-9 the upgrade results in a remarkable DAC..IMO.. Beware…it’s takes forever to sound right/ break in… I almost gave up on it… SSD Mac mini..D-link switch with an LPS..blue jeans Ethernet to ether regen running in reverse to an optical rendu (Krespi LPS powering both) audioquest Diamond USB cable to the Ayre QB-20 balanced out to Pass XP-20, to Pass 150.8 to Fritz Carrera Be and an REL Gibralter Sub.. |
You almost have to try to find a bad DAC these days. I did fairly detailed listening and measurement comparisons between the Topping D90SE and Gustard X16 not long ago. With identical loads and levels matched to 0.01 dB, it was impossible for me to tell them apart. I wrote about it in several posts in this thread over on ASR. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/topping-d90se-review-balanced-dac.24235/p... The Topping is $900 vs $500 for the Gustard. While they sound identical, the Topping does have a few more bells and whistles. Much nicer display, more filter choices, MQA decoding on all inputs, lower output impedance (100Ω vs 300Ω), selectable 4V or 5V output balanced, etc. Gustard offers a NOS mode that’s not on the Topping. It’s a nice feature for the HQPlayer crowd and folks who like to upsample everything to absurd rates. Given that the X16 has virtually identical objective and subjective performance to the more expensive D90SE, I’d say that it "punches above its weight." However, if you are looking for a digital preamp that can directly drive a power amplifier, the Topping is worth the extra spend for the bigger display and lower output impedance, IMHO. Edit: Here's a link to amplitude and time-domain measurements that I took of the various filter options on the D90SE and X16. There's a comparison of impulse and step response that a few nerds may find interesting. :) https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/topping-d90se-review-balanced-dac.24235/p... |
I’ve been in love with my Berkeley version two. They have had out of version three for a while but the guys at Berkeley tell me it’s pretty tough to tell the difference. I just listen to the Macintosh DA2 and I can’t believe it but I like it better than my Berkeley, if you have an interest I thought the Berkeley was better than my last favorite the PS audio with the new Snowmass program. The Berkeley will be going ASAP |
No one mentioned the Benchmark DAC3. They have 3 levels, just a DAC, or one that you can use as a preamp, and another with a headphone amp, different combo, go to the website. 30 day trial period, 5 year warranty. Sounds great in my system. I use their line amp( preamp) and DAC 3B, all balanced. Amp Peachtree amp 500, audiolab 6000 transport, Tekton Double Impacts, SVS SB 4000 sub. RORY, Great contact. Their reputation for service is great too. Brought out more than I could have imagined. Robert TN |
@lemonhase: "if you are measuring the right things” agreed 100%, tests should be aligned with real sound performance metrics. "I can swap out a cap of same value in a speaker crossover” -capacitor has many electrical characteristics beyond capacitance and max voltage values, to name a few - ESR (equivalent series resistance), inductance, resonance frequency etc. In general, two identical capacitors, matched by all characteristics, will perform the same in speaker with crossover. Some type of capacitors, oil capacitors (I am using those in my speakers) for example, have less resonances, thus produce less distortions, or “coloration” in other words. "Also explain how two different amps that measure exactly the same can sound quite different” -power amplifiers mostly measured using ideal, Re-Z, loads (e.g. 4/6/8 Ohms). Real speakers with cables, crossovers, drivers, and finally resonating cabinets, never match any of ideal loads, and have complex frequency/power-level dependent impedance. |
Please point me to any of sound components “certified” by audition at the end of “measurements based” production line. I have friends who are very highly respected designers/builders of sound components who would not think of shipping a component without listening to it. There are various small shops who do this. I’m not talking about the Marantz’s of the world, I’m talking about smaller shops that care about how things sound and know that measurements can’t tell you everything. I was responding to “measurements mean zero” attitude, not specific posts. Then you were responding (as far as I can see) to an attitude that does not exist. I don’t see where anybody advocates that measurements mean zero. What I and others do advocate is the other end of the spectrum. That is... measurements do not mean everything.. a very different thing. But if you go to ASR that is what you get. If he can’t measure it then it does not exist. Measurements done with his audio analyzer are the only things that matter. He usually does not even say anything about the sound of an audio devices that he "reviews", and if he does and hears something that disagrees with his measurements he discounts it to expectation bias. so to summarize, measurements are very important. Things that don’t measure well will not sound well. However, measurements are not the only thing. The idea that we have identified and can measure everything that affects how something sounds is ludicrous. Can we definitively measure everything that affects our other senses (sight, touch, taste, smell) ?? Of course not. So why would anybody think we have gotten to the point we can definitively measure how something will sound? we can’t |
herman, I agree with you on as not all measurements, performed on not always perfect testers are telling us whole story. Measurement equipment has many issues by itself, such as temperature drifts, noise floor, sampling accuracy issues, internal reference clock drifts, calibration, user’s training, and more. I worked in recording studio on mixing some tracks in the past, and initially I was really surprised how coffee break can change the sound perfection! At some point in the studio we used simple radio to hear the sound, to make sure it sounds right to everyone. Therefore I am very pessimistic on relying on listeners type of sound quality tests. I would love again to hear “blind test” stories, with more than two people participating in component brand A/B/C/D grading sound “quality” without knowledge of unit under test. My point is very simple: excellent sound component manufacturers know how to test all components, including parts used in product’s assembly, and final product test, in production flow to ensure every unit “meets the spec”, and therefore they have in place all needed test procedures, equipped with accurate test equipment and provide training for staff. |
I highly suggest listening to any DAC that you are considering. If you can't listen to a DAC locally, perhaps consider buying one used so you can resell it if it doesn't perform up to your expectations. Contrary to what some others are saying that many DACs sound similar, I've struggled to find a DAC that doesn't induce listening fatigue for me. I think that managing EMI/RFI and the impact of both in inducing jitter is a key factor in listening fatigue. On the other hand, I have no such issues when listening to vinyl. But the convenience of listening to streaming music and digital files is difficult to deny. |
Based on my recent experience, I believe that the Maverick TubeMagic D2 DAC with the op amps upgraded with Sparkos dual discrete op amps results in a DAC that performs well above its $500ish price point. I think the DAC can be had for about $200 and Sparks accepted an offer for $65 (ea.) for three of the op amps. Because the DAC has parallel solid state and tube outputs, you are likely to find something you like and the tube can also be rolled. The Sparkos dual discrete op amps made a significant improvement compared to the burr-brown op amps that were the "upgrade" from Maverick Audio. The DAC chip wasn't changed, so this was really an upgrade of the analog output portion of the DAC. |
I find the difference between Schitt Modius and their much more expensive stuff to be marginal. Use Dynaudio speakers. Generally though it depends on your overall kit. The likes of Hegel 190 already have a DAC built in, and modern streamers like Lumin T2 have stellar equipment inside. A standalone DAC is truly becoming a thing of the past. |
@westcoast, I am not sure, beyond your fixation on measurements, what you are trying to do here. Your placatory lecture by way of circumlocution is missing the point. Lets look at the capacitor. We are talking audio here, not radio frequency. As an engineer I assume you know the difference. The ESR you mention is a non-issue so perhaps you need to educate yourself some more. The formula for capacitive reactance is: Xc = 1/ 2Pi.f.c This is a fact and as an engineer you know this, or should. There is no 'R' in the equation and therefore ESR is not a factor. Go to some of the speaker gurus like Joe D'apallito, Vance Dickerson or Sigfried Linkwitz of Linkwitz/Riley fame. Not they nor any others take ESR into consideration, why would they? it's NOT in the formula. You also throw out the resonant frequency of a cap. It will resonate mechanically, everything has a resonant frequency, but it will only resonate, electrically speaking, if in circuit with say an inductor, and behaves according to the parameters of the components and the results are well understood. The series cap in a loudspeaker XO and assuming a first-order filter will create a 6dB attenuation slope dependent upon its value. Take 3 very different caps, paper-in-oil cap, teflon film and a bipolar electrolytic of same value and the plots will be exactly the same, meaning... they measure the same, but now have the audacity to actually listen. Yes to be clear have a listen which is not an unreasonable concept seeing as it's audio. Your bloviating away about a recording studio and coffee breaks is not germane to the discussion. But cheer up old chap, old engineer, you have been promoted to the top of my ignore list. |
The formula for capacitive reactance is: Xc = 1/ 2Pi.f.c This is a fact and as an engineer you know this, or should. There is no 'R' in the equation and therefore ESR is not a factor.Mr. Lemon, this puts you at the top of my ignore list. Just because R is not a factor in the equation for reactance does not mean it does not exist and certainly does not mean it will not have an effect on how a circuit behaves. For a filter the cutoff frequency = 1 / (2 pi R C) ESR is a very real part of that R Maybe it turns out the ESR is so small that it is swamped out by other R in the circuit, but ignoring a very real, very measurable parameter that affects a circuit's performance just because it isn't part of a particular formula you have chosen is a rookie designer mistake. |
@ herman, I think you may have misread something somehow. In the audible frequencies for the example I provided, ESR is insignificant. I did provide the correct formula, or I’ve been wrong all these years 😳 Specifically for capacitive reactance, Xc is found by dividing 1 by 2xPixfxc. It is frequency dependent so it makes sense that ’f’ is in the equation. Just because R is not a factor in the equation for reactance does not mean it does not exist and certainly does not mean it will not have an effect on how a circuit behaves I am aware of the existence of ESR which I ignore for XO design but I am confused with your claim above. You acknowledge that R is not a factor in the relevant equation so how will it effect the crossover? If you quoted the formula for Xc, then I’m afraid it is wrong. Are you saying Mr. Sigfried Linkwitz who along with Riley developed one of the filters for XO’s is wrong, and would by extension would include Bessel, Butterworth and Chebychev? They are all wrong??? |
| Post removed |
In the audible frequencies for the example I provided, ESR is insignificant. in your opinion it is insignificant. You acknowledge that R is not a factor in the relevant equationin your opinion this is the only relevant equation your choice to ignore ESR therefore also ignores the fact that ESR is frequency-dependent, temperature-dependent, and changes as components age with some capacitors. I never said your formula for Xc is incorrect, but filter calculations include R, not just Xc, yet all you quote is the formula for Xc while ignoring the formula for cutoff frequency of an RC filter. I’m saying since you are deciding which factors and which equations are applicable while ignoring other factors and equations your conclusions seem correct ... to you. |
Merason Frerot is an outstanding dac $1349 you can add their power supply too which takes the SQ to a much higher level. If you want to go higher up the food chain the Merason DAC1 is an incredibly musical and detailed dac for $5500. It has transformed the sound of my system and my brother has one too and said it added as much to his system as his Vinni Rossi L2i Signature integrated and his Antipodes K50 did! Pretty amazing |
herman, for many ppl here understanding “simple” critical for sound quality path capacitor and it’s electrical model behavior, including nonlinearities, frequency dependencies, aging, dielectric loss, etc., is beyond range. pl ping me privately if you want to discuss sound engineering problem' specifics |
