Denafrips Terminator R2R Multibit, ultimate pcm redbook converter??

Here: https://www.denafrips.com/news

Email Vinh from Gingkoaudio.com He has a demo at Axpona 2018.He is a nice guy. Alvin send him four model of Denafrips , I bought the Ares, the other guy bought the Pontus....

You are welcome, Muzikmann.
I am a musician and my reference is the sound of real music... live, non amplified, acoustic instruments. If a system gets that right, then it gets it all right. After all this is the definition of ''fidelity'' in the phrase ''High Fidelity'' is it not?
In reviews (both professional and by owners) it is often sited that a system, or component, ''sounded very close to real live...''  or ''suspended disbelief...''  
I liked my AMR DP 777 SE so much that I thought I would never abandon it.  
But the Terminator simply got me that much closer to that ideal.

@lolligager ,
Thanks for sharing your impression of the Terminator DAC in your system. This DAC is on my radar, so I appreciate hearing from another owner/user.

Your statement: "That demo confirmed something that I firmly believed... price is NO guarantee of quality. It is possible to have high-end sound without paying high-end prices" is so VERY true.

Again, thanks!!

A couple more thoughts:

Last year I drove a couple of hours to hear an over $300,000 system featuring very high end costly speakers. The DAC in this system was the 4 box dCS Vivaldi system (priced at $108,000 in 2014 by Stereophile Magazine).
Not only was the sound of this system very digital, it actually was painful for me to listen to.
The demo was held in a high end store, in their best acoustically treated room and the speakers were set up by none other than the designer/manufacturer himself. So the sound could not be attributed to room anomalies or improper speaker placement. Nor could it be attributed to faulty source material. In the course of the hour long demo  the first minute of many many CDs were played and they all demonstrated that harsh digital quality that I find objectionable. 

It was something in the system itself that was the ''digital'' culprit. 

There were approximately 35 of us listening to that demo and I am of the opinion that no one was very impressed, because at the end of the demo, there was only silence. And when the speaker designer/manufacturer asked for comments or questions, no one said a word. 

I was very glad when I arrived home, fired up my system and listened to what I consider to be very a musical and analogue presentation. 

And this was before I had the Terminator and I was still using the AMR DP 777 SE.  

Of course, I could never do a comparison in my system between the Terminator and a DAC that costs $100,000. I don't have that kind of money. Hell, I couldn't do one with DACs costing $10,000 or $15,000 dollars. My limit was the AMR which cost $4995. 

But lack of direct comparison notwithstanding, the fact is that I could not stand the sound of that very costly system and, if I hadn't felt it too impolite, I would have left after 10 minutes of it. 

Of course I cannot single out the Vivaldi as the culprit... but it was an integral part of a system that, in my opinion, sounded awful. 

I guess the real point, however, is this: 
That demo confirmed something that I firmly believed... price is NO guarantee of quality. It is possible to have high-end sound without paying high-end prices. 

And the Denafrips Terminator is a good example of this... because its sound is indeed very high-end. 

Last thing:
If you use Facebook there is a Denafrips thread with 437 members that has been in progress for quite awhile. On it Alvin Chee of Vinshine (the Denafrips distributor in Singapore) today has posted a review of the Terminator by written jtl@hendy. The review is entitled ''Terminator-an End or a Start?''
The reviewer says that he has had a number of different DACs in his system. Amongst them he mentions are Meitner DAC 6 $10,000) and the La Scala.

Most germane to this thread however is that his latest DAC prior to the Terminator is a Holo Springs.... which he was very impressed with.  
However, If you are interested in seeing how he compares the Terminator to the Holo Springs, just go onto Facebook and type Denafrips Audiophile Owners in the search field.  

My system: 
MacMini running either Pure Music or Audirvana 3.0 > Denafrips Terminator via USB > Crayon CFA 1.2 > Spatial Audio M4 Triode Master speakers. 

When I went to hear the demo, I did not have either the Terminator nor the Triode Masters. At that time I was running the AMR DP 777 SE and Spatial Audio M4 Turbo S. 
Both the Terminator and the Triode Masters have brought significant improvement to my system. 

I cannot comment on how the Terminator compares to the various other R2R DACs mentioned on this thread (Soekris 1561, Holo Audio Spring Kitsune Border Patrol SE) because I have had no experience with them other than that which I have read about them... and what I have read has been very positive indeed. 

My experience with separate DACs, in my system, has been primarily with the, Metrum Octave Acoustics Octave which was supplanted by the Auralic Vega which, in turn, was supplanted by the AMR DP 777 SE.

The Octave was a very smooth sounding NOS DAC, but seemed to me to be a little boring musically. The Vega was more lively, but to my ears always seemed to have digital glare.
The DP 777 SE's output is tube implemented and it seemed to completely do away with any glare while retaining a lively musical presentation. I was very happy with it... very analogue sounding and never fatiguing. 

Why then did I decide to buy a Terminator? Because I heard one. I live in Italy and there was one ''on tour'' here. I put my name on the list and has the privilege of being able to audition it for 10 days in my home, in my system.  When it arrived it had been already auditioned by others and was fully burned it (about 400 hours). 

It took me only 3 days to decide that I wanted to own one. 

To my ears, the Terminator offers me an experience of music that seems more ''real'' more ''authentic.'' 
My standard for judging the quality of a system is its ability to faithfully reproduce the sound of real, non amplified acoustic instruments... timbral accuracy, if you will. And the Terminator gives me that in spades. With the Terminator, instruments, vocals, etc. just seem so real and, as a result, the music for me is even more emotionally involving.  

With respect to the many other parameters by which we judge our equipment... sound stage, holographic imagery, analogue sounding, PRAT, transients, decay, etc. there is not a big difference between the DP 777 SE and the Terminator. The Terminator is just as analogue sounding as the DP despite the fact that it does not employ tubes. To me, it also seems somewhat better with respect to transients and decay, which adds to the ''realistic sound of the instruments, but they are both good in that regard. Also, with respect to wide deep sound stage and holographic imaging, they both excel at this. 

Overall, I think that the Terminator's ability to reproduce dynamics is somewhat superior to that of the AMR, especially macro-dynamic shifts. 

But, oh that timbral/tonal accuracy. The AMR is good at it, but the Terminator is much better. And as I stated above, this makes for greater emotional connection to the music... at least for me. 

So... more timbral accuracy, tonal density, powerful dynamics... these are the parameters in which the Terminator excels over the AMR DP 777 SE...

And this is why I decided to buy it. 

Well I recently purchased the Denafrips Pontus and so far very impressed with it. I was going to go up the Gustard chain but already had a Gustard X12 with ES9018 chip. It wasn't bad for $535 CDN but this Denafrips kills the Gustard - but it should at 4X the price. And it even surpasses my Goldmund Mimesis 10c+ (old but good) in Redbook. I have no issues using J. River and running DSDx2. I am interested to see how much more performance I would get by moving up to the Venus or Terminator but only for curiosity sake. Otherwise a great price and glad I avoided problems heard about overheating on products like L.K.S MH-DA004. I disagree with an early comment about cheap build qualify. The aluminum panels are expertly engraved and are rabbeted together like fine furniture. Only anomalies are the small LEDs and typo 'Reserval' instead of 'Reversal'.

Recent review from Srajan over at 6Moons:

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews2/denafrips/2.html

On discrete R2R: "R2R DACs aren't novel technology but the very first D/A conversion approach. Strictly speaking, using discrete R2R is no technological innovation but regression. It's the D/A integrated chip which is the embodiment of technological progress. From an audio perspective, it's simply not true that technical advances must automatically produce better sound. Sound is a simple yet complex matter. Sound is simple because it uses the most basic electronic knowledge. It is complicated because it also involves endless knowledge from outside the field of electronics where electronics suddenly become the most basic requirement. A good designer must also understand music cultivation, the recording processing, replay in a room dealing with specific acoustics and more. Good sound is about all of these intangibles. To reproduce high-quality music is not an easy task. To design good equipment, you must first know whether the sound is right or wrong; and then why it so. Playback must get as close to the recording as possible. So the designer must be able to recognize sonic differences and their poor aspects and possess the technical know-how to overcome them by electronic means.

Thank you for the strong support, much appreciated. 

Rgds,
Alvin

There's also a Facebook group:
denafrips audiophile owners .
its for members and the curious with questions about Denafrips.
The distributor,Alvin Chee is also in the group. Very nice guy. Ill answer any questions you may have or help with troubleshoot.
Guy 

Guy, great story. Unlike you, I just when right to the top and bought the Terminator blindly.  I read a bunch of reviews on the Ares which got me thinking but the hardware design is what sold me. No wires and the use of high end components.  If this DAC was made in Europe or in the US.  The labor cost alone would probably have doubled the price.  

The performance is excellent.  No digital glare, it was like a veil was lifted.  The speed, dynamics is excellent.  Instrument separation is very good, very musical and natural.  I agree with you, I'm also happy I found Denafrips.  I plan to keep this one for a very long time.  

Hello folks . 
I saw Denafrips mentioned on this thread, so I figure that I would chime in. 
Prior to owning a Denafrips Ares, I owned the Schiit bifrost 4490 which was an upgrade from the first gen of bifrost. ( I did not care much for the 4490, I felt the sound clinical and boring ( digital_esque ).
 The Ares was a huge departure in sound. Immediately noticeable was the absence of digital glare and a sense of musicality. Very very good for the $. I believe the Ares operates in OS mode only . ( Pontus, Venus , and Terminator has option for NOS )
I got really curious as to what the level of Denafrips had to offer. 

Whitin a month I ordered the Pontus. 
The pontus is a very serious dac, it has the Ares had to offer, except that,the Pontus gives you more of everything. Bigger soundstage, better presence, more impact, it's easier to get lost in the music.

I even got more curious and I said what heck, if the Pontus is that good, what will the Terminator sounds like. 
Well, I got me a Terminator, and it's a solid DAC, very refined and composed. Natural sound. 
I'm glad I found Denafrips and at that price.
Solid performer. 
Here to stay for a long long time.

ps. Some say that the Terminator was favored over dac in the $10-15K range . YMMV 
Guy 

@kalali   Thanks,  this DIY Soekris came out in 2015... this is the problem piece that all the fuss is about.  It may be good,  but I think I'd rather steer away. 

For those of you with the DIY knowledge and skills, I noticed a discrete R-2R DIY model on the Soekris site - model dam1021, priced at 179 Euros. I don't quite understand all the technical details but it seems like it is technically comparable to their ~$800+ product that I have pre-ordered. Sounds like a great deal for someone with the right skills.... 

The 1704. There are many fakes around but have been able to find a few genuine in the UK. Use extreme caution if sourcing BB1704.

I think this could be a bit of a rumour, as there is nothing cheaper that would work with the same pinout as it, that it can sub’ed for.

Cheers George

Hi Peter,   thanks for the Advice, I saw a pair of them about 6 or 8 months ago.... What about any of the other R2R DAC chips  that I listed,  are you familiar with any of those.  Have you played with Manufacturing a DAC?  Just curious to get your thoughts. 

Tim,

The 1704 is impossible to find anymore TI discontinued it years ago.  There are many fakes around but have been able to find a few genuine in the UK.  Use extreme caution if sourcing BB1704.



Best of Luck

Peter

I have purchased and built 2 Dacs from diyinhk.com    both of these Dacs are very good.  I am currently using a ES9018K2M Dac, the only thing that I have compared to this Dac head to head is a Wadia 121, but it isn't close, the DIY Dac is noticeably better.   They offer 4 or 5 models of R2R dacs with decent parts quality and FIFO reclocking... I may fold and try one of these,  It looks like that the kit, a case and power supply may me around $300 or so.  I haven't added it up,  but it won't be crazy and right now, I'm happy with the quality... I need to research the chips that they use...They do have a 1704 Dac, but the Chip is not included,  The 1702 Dac does include the Dac chip as well as the as well as the AD1856,  AD1862, AD1865 and TDA 1540.  

You also need to mention the massive amount of noise a Delta Sigma has compared to a Mulitibit, that it needs to get rid of. Even the 6 bit hybrid Delta Sigmas.

Sorry just noticed you did.

Furthermore, as this manufacturer states 90% of the circuitry and the major part of DAC performance is all in the ANALOG design (so according to manufacturer much of the performance is NOT even related to Multibit R2R NOS vs Delta-Sigma digital conversions)

Not as far as MoJo Music thinks when doing Redbook on both.
" When a PCM file is played on a DSD or Bit Stream Delta Sigma 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 DACs do a poor job of decoding PCM."  


Cheers George

@teo_audio

Just because there are many bad sounding (screeching as you put it) Delta Sigma DACs does not mean that none of them are any good.

The latest Delta-sigmas use multiple 1 bit converters to achieve the same as a 6 bit R2R DAC. You can understand how a ladder DAC takes output from a resistor network where a small number of resistors are exact multiples of each other (1x,2x, 4x, 8x etc). Well you can also build a network from the SAME 1x resistor but simply by using a huge number of them. This is in effect what new Sabre Delta Sigma DACs do - 64 x 1 bit DACs - and by summing them to various degrees you get up to 6 bits.

So the line between R2R and Delta Sigma is blurred when you realize that the latest Delta Sigma chips are behaving much like an R2R DAC (but only a 6 bit one). The end result is that the latest Delta Sigma DACs are extremely linear (benefit of 1 bit) and yet they also do not need to upsample nearly as much as older generation pure 1 bit DACs (without a 64 array).

Of course an R2R DAC can be designed to be NOS however this is at the expense of linearity (THD) performance.

Since multibit DACs have great low noise but poor linearity and the 1 bit DACs have excellent linearity but high noise NEITHER are purely the best approach - the 6 bit DAC with some oversampling is currently achieving the best performance.

More explanation here of how one designer has approached the challenge of noise and linearity.

https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/application_notes/inside-the-dac2-part-2-digital-processing

Furthermore, as this manufacturer states 90% of the circuitry and the major part of DAC performance is all in the ANALOG design (so according to manufacturer much of the performance is NOT even related to Multibit R2R NOS vs Delta-Sigma digital conversions)

https://benchmarkmedia.com/blogs/application_notes/149341191-inside-the-dac2-part-1-analog-processin...

Conclusion (if you buy this line of reasoning): It is far far more important how well the DAC is designed and built than the specific digital conversion chip employed (1704, 9018 etc)!!!!!!!

Excellent sounding DACs do not ALL have to use the same exact methodology and there is more than one way to skin a cat.

I can only speak for the Holo as I listened to it at the L A Audio Show. It was in the headphone lobby area and was fronted by the outstanding Headamp GS-K Mk ll. I listened through the Hifiman HE1000 V2, Audeze LCD-4 and Focal Utopia headphones (The Hifiman won ears down) so from source to headphone everything was top notch, to say the least. 

All the while I listened (about 30 minutes) the Holo output stayed steady at 44.1 and it was there and then that I decided I could easily live with a high end headphone set up, if space were a consideration or if I had more disposable income. It was easily the best sound at the show and I'm convinced that the Holo was largely responsible for the purity and quality of the sound. Nothing was amiss.

Thanks to that experience and this thread, I'm considering getting the Holo and keeping my Marantz SACD player to use as a transport. This is really a tough decision as I don't need to go down that rabbit hole again.

All the best,
Nonoise

I would REALLY like to hear comments (if not the dacs themselves) about the Holo Audio Spring, Kitsune edition vs the  Soekris 1541. Since the 1541 is just coming out it will be a while but both these dacs intrigue me. There are reviews out there on the Kitsune so if anyone pulls the trigger on the Soekris, please post comments here.

I’m guessing she’ll ’get’ the ladder dac, right from the first note.

Sometimes we can't define a thing... but we know what it is when we hear it.

Here is another one that I think is R2R and is somewhat affordable.  High praise in this review.  

https://parttimeaudiophile.com/2017/04/16/review-borderpatrol-usb-digital-to-analogue-converter-se-v...

Kalali,

Note to self: Stop reading Audiogon before I go completely broke.

Don't worry we will help you spend your money.

The 1541 or 1421 look darn good for the money.

I'm on the hunt for a good R2R dac on a budget for a friend of mine, don't know what we will end up.
I'm kinda overwhelmed with all the choices out there.

Best of luck to you,

Kenny.

Note to self: Stop reading Audiogon before I go completely broke.

The problem being is our inner audio monkey keeps getting touched in a way that makes it happy, so.....

Right in the core reptilian brain area where sex and addictions and neural re-wiring takes place.

And the audio argument is born. As big as an angry and excitable house built out of flaming dynamite.

@kalali, but we managed to not let you go broke, if typical Audiogon wisdom prevailed you'd be shelling out for a TotalDac. My dilemma is to whether order the 1541 now, or wait a bit and order the Denafrips Venus...

@kdude66

Here in this Thread are Many Dacs listed...
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/r-2r-ladder-dacs-in-production-2015.451852/
@georgehifi
Yes..i love this Chips combinated with a Tube Output stage.
Best Regards,
Stephan

I wonder if somebody has a list of the different R2R multibit dacs and maybe average price and or links.


Thanks,

Kenny.

Ultra Analog/  PCM 63 Dacs

Ther are also R2R Multibit dacs.

Cheers George

So the unknown question is how good is the Terminator compared to everything else?  Not enough people have it yet, but from reading Headfi, there are some people with it on the way.  The lower end Denafrip is getting high praise though, so it would stand to reason the Terminator is pretty good based on how good the lower end model performs

Hello,

the best Machines for Red Book is Ultra Analog/ PCM 63 Dacs from the 90th.
Sonic Frontiers /Spectral/Theta /Monarchy...etc sounds really good to my Ears.


Best Regards,
Stephan
P..S The Soekris is real good for the Money...

@jaybe , the T+A dac isn't R2R, it uses Burr-Brown dac chips, it's a delta sigma dac.

Good article on NOS vs OS (all delta-sigma dacs oversample):
https://kitsunehifi.com/2375-2/

the Soekris 1541 should be badass.

"This is the lowest priced discrete ladder dac with high bit rate ability--- that exists on the planet right now. I don’t expect the price to ever get any lower".
  The Terminator is a dac R2R with four counters of 500 high-precision 0.005% laser-cut resistors, with a nominal resolution of 26bit, capable of reproducing both PCM format up to 384khz and DSD up to 11.2Mhz (DSD256) in native mode.

Holo Audio Kitsune edition..($2499)...https://i0.wp.com/kitsunehifi.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/KitsuneTuned-Edition-%E6%B3%89SpringSpe...(

Soekris Engineering DAC 1541..($1190)...http://www.soekris.dk/dac1541.html

I agree with George. I was letting shadonre wear me down a bit via repetition..., but I have to say that R2R is correct and delta sigma screeches, it is not lean and truthful, and it is not neutral. It is grungy and dirty, it adds noise, and it is in error.

Everyone knows that, except those who have to build dacs and CD decks and dvd/sacd/blu-ray decks--- with modern delta-sigma dacs.

They can never talk about this simple truth. They can only work with what they’ve got.

Most of the time it’s fine, it’s great, in fact -- in the best examples.

But it is not the pinnacle. The pinnacle is owned by R2R dacs.

that subtle screech, noise and tonal coloration ’lie’ is also happening at the input of a system (with the delta sigma dac designs) and it is skewing the entire audiophile enterprise and overall expectations in balance and other choices... It is subtle, but it is definitely there, as issues go.

People who listen to a lot of analog source and analog gear, tend to get this as an understanding.

People brought up on pure digital...many times don’t even know it exists as subtle but important flaw in their given firmament.

That is what the cost savings of delta-sigma dacs has done to the audio world.

It is also, if one goes through the logic, part of what is causing less audio people to appear ’out there’. It’s not just all the other forces, it is also the inherent flaws and compromises in modern digital signal reproduction. And one can’t talk about the ability to get ’good sound’ being more universal than ever before.

Ubiquity does not equate with quality that is complementary to how the ear works at it’s most deep and human levels. (with regard to attracting people to the idea of quality sound reproduction in their homes)

We're just hoping that one day the headphone crowd finally realizes that the same money can bring the same quality or close..to a room sized reproduction system.

euphonic (tube or R2R)

These really should not be grouped together, ever!
As they are nothing alike.
If anything I would class R2R as being more like this, 
http://www.hifisentralen.no/forumet/attachments/hi-fi-generelt/30855d1335552744-krell-master-reference-amplifier-mra-750_2.jpg
than soft euphonic tube.

Cheers George

R2R
T&A DAC 8 $3995
Holo Spring $1499 - $2499
Metrum Hex $3500

@kclone

It depends on the particular DACs you are comparing but let’s say early Delta Sigma implementations had a reputation for hashy highs or digital glare. Recent implementations like the Benchmark series of DACs sound very clean articulate and neutral. They do not suffer from lack of rhythm or bounce (quite dynamic and punchy) but they are thinner or leaner sounding (neutral is probably a good description) than a DAC with a slightly more euphonic output (tube or R2R).

As I mentioned on another thread - if you 100% love the sound of your speakers then a neutral DAC will work. If you don’t 100% like your speakers then some slight coloration in the source may be beneficial holistically.

so in general terms, is the  sound difference between delta sigmas and R2R  have to do with one sounding digital (glare) and one sounding more smooth?

regardless, as an R2R discrete dac, to take a shot ’get into it’ and see what is going on, it is probably the only way one can do this today.

No other R2R discrete dac exists at this price point today, that I am ware of. At least with this level of implementation.

Best quality, that’s up to the buyer to discern. It’s an easy choice when it comes to the idea of trying to find out what is going on with the R2R vs ’delta sigma’ question. Then, if one finds it to be of good potential, consider looking at the $15-20k+ R2R discrete dacs that are out there.

This one can probably be sold at it’s buy price, or at extremely little loss, at such point.

So, as a personal question to one’s self goes, it’s a no brainer.

Shardorne’s points are pretty well all valid, but we digress in the idea of what is best. Well implemented delta-sigma, or well implemented R2R.

How the resistive ladder is executed is critical to R2R dacs. The ’Total Dac’ and the MSB dacs cost what they do, partially for those very reasons.

Each type of dac the delta-sigma or the R2R, has their Achilles heel. I can’t listen to or consider Delta-sigma when I’m trying for ’best’. Shardorne seems to feel otherwise.

Most reviewers and buyers seem to feel the best implemented R2R ladder and similar designed dacs (specifically not delta-sigma) are the pinnacle of digital audio.

Point is, that a 0.01% accuracy set of resistors for the ladder is far from perfect enough to get to those pinnacles, and can barely make it there for redbook 16/44-48. But what tricks it may do for redbook 16/44, those may be more than good enough for most people to discern whether the tricks that ladder/R2R dacs do for music, this thing ’heard’ when one tries such a dac.... may convince one to go onward and upward in the world of R2R dacs.

Think of it as a valid ’test’, to take a look-see and dip into that world.

R2R dacs are just barely coming back into the digital fold ...from the desert created when delta-sigma became the big deal, due to costs. discrete Dacs are just barely coming back into being. Or, coming into being for the first time, depending on your view of the history of dacs.

This is the lowest priced discrete ladder dac with high bit rate ability--- that exists on the planet right now. I don’t expect the price to ever get any lower.

economies of scale won’t drop the price down.

Quality demands will force the price UP.
Demand will force the price UP.
Rising costs will force the price UP.
Labour and such in the far east will force the price UP.
Coming decay of the us dollar hegemony will push the price UP.
Success for this company will push the price UP.
And a few other UP’s.

And there’s nary a single DOWN force on the price in sight -or on the crystal ball of the future.

I hope you are getting my point.

What would make this the "ultimate" PCM DAC?

Plenty of other high-end  ladder DACs. The unknown reviewer is hardly impartial, as he bought the DAC unheard so of course his expectation bias is quite high.

Not to say it doesn't look interesting.
 
A comparison with other DACs would be in order to provide readers with a baseline for buying decisions.

R2R iv found always sounded smoother.

Delta Sigma chips - had what people called "digital glare".

I wouldn’t say that, if anything TOO smooth and lacking impact, rhythm and drive, I call it the bounce factor.
They all have this signature to me, when trying to convert Redbook (pcm) 16/44 24/96 or DXD, regardless of who makes them.
As for dsd or sacd they may be good with these, but I don’t listen to those formats.

Cheers George

thanks guys.  

@kclone  

R2R requires a ladder of very highly matched resistors as each 16 or 24 bit data point (at whatever the sample rate) is decoded to a discrete voltage from the ladder.

The advantage is no conversion of the digital data.

The disadvantage is that digital converters are mathematically extremely accurate and can achieve better performance if done properly with proper dithering to eliminate quantization error.

It is like DSP done with analog filters versus doing the filtering in the digital domain. Cheaper and greater accuracy can be achieved in the digital domain.

The problem of R2R is maintaining accuracy of a super accurate R2R ladder as resistors will drift with temperature and the tolerances required are extremely tight to achieve desired performance. Generally you get more THD and noise with R2R vs modern Delta Digma.

That said - a lot of Delta Sigma chips were used incorrectly by many manufacturers that did not understand how to implement conversion accurately - so many Delta Sigma chips - especially the early Sony ones did not sound good and had what people called "digital glare".