Do hi-end DACs offer true value or diminishing return...
These two hi-fedelity recordings posted on Youtube allow one to audition the state-of-the-art, highly raved R2R DACs with values ranging from $850 all the way to $6,500. Please use headphone or, play back to your stereo system if you think your system is revealing enough. The question to ask to yourself is that the true hi-end (w/ high price tag) gears offer you true values or just a diminishing-return foolproof. In my system, I do hear the differences but, to me, the differences might not be that significant to justify the luxious spending. Maybe my system is not revealing enough. Maybe the recording quality through the on-line broadcasting degrades. How about you? Do you hear major differences?
It is the only serious potential problem with headphone...
Alas! i cannot go back to a dedicated room...
I take great care of the DB level... But the temptation to forgot it is always there , especially with the AKG K340...( no distortion at high level ) and the speaker like effect ask for more "sound level"...
I will be very cautious... Thanks to remind us of this fact...
You are more than right...
Please be advised that not everyone can give credence to the headphone listening system due to various reasons such as hearing health and disconfort of headphone wearing. I understand the definite advantage of no box and room effect elimination from headphone use but just do not feel comfortable wearing headphone for a long time that I usually spend with music listening.
The major reason is the impact to the hearing health from headphone wearing (even at the sound pressue level of 60-65 dBA I usually listen with). My reasoning is that wearing headphone / earbuds causes pressure change in the inner / interior ear. It sometimes produces whoosing sound / tinnitus due possibly to muscle contraction. This tinnitus can be intermittent but sometimes becomes a constant effect that will bother for a longer term. I am not sure if that makes sense to you...
Please be advised that not everyone can give credence to the headphone listening system due to various reasons such as hearing health and disconfort of headphone wearing. I understand the definite advantage of no box and room effect elimination from headphone use but just do not feel comfortable wearing headphone for a long time that I usually spend with music listening.
The major reason is the impact to the hearing health from headphone wearing (even at the sound pressue level of 60-65 dBA I usually listen with). My reasoning is that wearing headphone / earbuds causes pressure change in the inner / interior ear. It sometimes produces whoosing sound / tinnitus due possibly to muscle contraction. This tinnitus can be intermittent but sometimes becomes a constant effect that will bother for a longer term. I am not sure if that makes sense to you...
But my Sansui alpha coupled to the AKG K340 best any speakers i listened to which are in a living room...
Some vintage are always top of the chain...
No system make me envious...
There is a minimal acoustic treshold about dynamic, transients, timbre, and holographic translation with a varying soundstage according to the recording at play; this minimal treshold WHEN PASSED OVER make any upgrade preposterous... One of the reason i think that dac technology is mature , is related to my basic Hidizs dac, which is for the price more than good; if it was defective in any acoustic factors i will hear it immediately with the Sansui Alpha+K340...Then most people with an already good dac must upgrade anything but their dac....😊
Most people upgrade because there is a problem with some acoustic factors in their system...
Someone who think this is not the case must think about this : when your system is finally optimized, the music experience is so rewarding that thinking about upgrade is preposterous..
By the way the K340 surpass all headphones i ever listen to by far.... All vintage headphones are not equal...And i am pretty sure that among all headphones the K340 is among the best even after 45 years... Acoustic experience do not change ...The technology which make it possible can change , but a natural timbre experience is always a natural timbre experience, and so on for all acoustic aspects...
Today $700 can be spent wisely to attain a hi-fi bookshelf stereo system. A good example is like:
- Wharfedale Diamond 225, $280
- Smsl Ao200, $223, (50wpc 8Ω, 90wpc 4Ω, 150wpc 2Ω; 2 German Infineon class
D chips)
- Schiit Modius DAC, $230 including shipping
With corrected room acoustic, this combo will render rich tembre (Schiit house sound), decent soundstage and nimble low ends. Around this price range, the increasing return can be substantial imho.
Today $700 can be spent wisely to attain a hi-fi bookshelf stereo system. A good example is like:
- Wharfedale Diamond 225, $280
- Smsl Ao200, $223, (50wpc 8Ω, 90wpc 4Ω, 150wpc 2Ω; 2 German Infineon class
D chips)
- Schiit Modius DAC, $230 including shipping
With corrected room acoustic, this combo will render rich tembre (Schiit house sound), decent soundstage and nimble low ends. Around this price range, the increasing return can be substantial imho.
All dacs sound different like all cable may sound different, all amplifiers too...
But It is related also to their synergy together...
But there is a diminushing return ZONE...Not a point...
This ZONE is determined in his area by the subjective appreciation of your system synergy with the dac and the objective qualities of the dac design in itself...This zone area is a ratio in your OWN audio history ...
The dac technology being mature, it is useless to invest in costly dac instead of investing in a complete new technology IF YOUR DAC IS ALREADY GOOD : try BACCH filters or a new upgrade amplifier or speakers or headphone with the same money ...
But everything that i say dont apply to people with an unlimited budget...My rule dont apply to them... 😊
I spoke about sound quality for the average folk... My basic system is 700 bucks and i cannot fault it on any acoustic count... Is there better system? yes... I dont need them because the ratio S.Q. /price is linked to this diminushing return zone in my own audio journey...My only possible REAL upgrade, not a side upgrade , will be BACCH filters... And my systwem is already so good i can even live with it as it is... Not bad for the price i paid ... And dont think that i may be deaf and not a so refined listener, i tuned my room myself and i can HEAR very well for my age window,,,
Anybody with no budget limit can buy a 500,000 bucks system....Very easy to do...A child can do it if he can sign a check...😁
It does not impress me ... I prefer the game : what is the best at the least price and how do i learned how to create a top system for peanuts ...
I winned at this game...And i know why...
If you never learned basic acoustic you CANNOT know how nor know why...If you did not know how to optimize your system embeddings controls, You can only own a 500,000 bucks system , thats all... Thats dont impress me...
And acoustic experience is not related to price tag at all... Sorry for the dude who own a 500,000 system that sound not so much better that the price may suggest...
😊
My post is written for normal people with not much money who dream about Hi-FI ...I want to say it is possible at low cost but with studies and some thinking...
2019 Grammy best engineering award was given to three engineers Shawn Murphy et al. for Shostakovich: Symphonies Nos. 4 & 11 performed by Boston Symphony Orchestra conducted by Andris Nelsons. You could see how the multiple microphones of different types were placed in the clip.
Beethoven sym. 9 performed by Chicago Symphony Orchestra and Riccardo Muti also used multiple microphones of different types. There must be good reasons behind why the award winning recording engineering project and famous symphone orchestra performance uses multimiking.
By one microphone hanging… I assume you actually mean two… stereo.
But! Multi-mixing completely screws up the acoutics of the space and hence the essence of the orchestra… when playing multiple instrument. Completely destroys the acoustics.
I have had season tickets to the symphony for over ten years. This is how I learned what real acoustic music sounds like (along with some smaller venue jazz and classical). I have spent hours carefully listening to how the reflections from the venue and the multiple instrument interact to cause the experience. The careful location of the different instruments and the composer has orchestrated those frequently to form huge waves of intense sound that can wash from left to right or otherwise complex pattern.
The very worst recordings I have heard have been those multimiked jobs, the very best late 1950’s with two microphones.
I wish the quality of recording for live classic music can be enhanced. Often time, you could observe only one microphone hanging from the ceiling in the middle of stage is used to record the entire orchestra. That is simply inadequate for hi fidelity sound recording and reproduction. Periodically, if you found multiple microphones were placed for each group of instruments and individuals, the quality of recording usually turns out much better in terms of separation, soundstage and clarity.
You are right for sure... The quality of classical recordings depend on microphone expertise by design and by the way they are used...
You are right for the "work routines"...
Simply, every reproduction audio systems sound veiled, bright, and un-natural.
Even many original recordings have veils/brightness depends on quality of microphones and recording machines. The idea of mic is similar to loudspeakers. Few great sounding mics are made by people who had made mics all their life in 1930~60's and found some work routines for good sound. Still they didn't know what makes good sounds. They just knew some work routines. Alex/Wavetouch
Simply, every reproduction audio systems sound veiled, bright, and un-natural.
Even many original recordings have veils/brightness depends on quality of microphones and recording machines. The idea of mic is similar to loudspeakers. Few great sounding mics are made by people who had made mics all their life in 1930~60's and found some work routines for good sound. Still they didn't know what makes good sounds. They just knew some work routines. Alex/Wavetouch
There is no "veil" in classical recorded music... We test the "timbre" of the instrument, is it natural or not, realistic or not... We dont test the "veil" rendition... There is none...
I respectably disagree. Please point me any classical music live recording of audio equipment (not dubbed) that doesn’t have a veil. Alex/Wavetouch
We cannot judge dac with popular music , pop, rock etc ...
Because of all mixing and artefacts...
You must choose non amplified classical music...
I dont even use jazz for my test...😊
For sure i listen only classical and jazz....The best for testing is : piano, violin, human voices, cymbal, orchestra, chorus, organ , brass ensemble with cor and tuba... Big drum as turckisch drum and gong...
There is no "veil" in classical recorded music... We test the "timbre" of the instrument, is it natural or not, realistic or not... We dont test the "veil" rendition... There is none...
I hear some major difference between 3 DACs. 1st, the listener needs to know the sound of the original music.
These recordings are dubbings. Not live recording and there is no sound from speakers. All 3 DACs have thick veils and those veils will be much thicker with using power amps and speakers. This shows the veil sound started already from the source in hi-end audio.
To my ears,
(best sound) Denafrips Venus II ($4k),
(2nd best) Terminator Plus (10k), and
(3rd) Ares II ($1k).
More expensive DAC is not the better sound because Denafrips company or any audio company don’t know what makes better sound. I hear same veils from $100k dcs DAC combo.
These recordings are dubbings. Not live recording and there is no sound from speakers. All 3 DACs have thick veils and those veils will be much thicker with using power amps and speakers. This shows the veil sound started already from the source in hi-end audio.
To my ears,
(best sound) Denafrips Venus II ($4k),
(2nd best) Terminator Plus (10k), and
(3rd) Ares II ($1k).
More expensive DAC is not the better sound because Denafrips company or any audio company don’t know what makes better sound. I hear same veils from $100k dcs DAC combo.
A good dac is to a soundcard in any cheap component as a chariot is to a car...the two moves very well and will transport you at the same place... BUT...😊
My low cost dac, HIDIZS Ap 80 pro will not beat more costly one ..It can be not too far if the synergy and if his functionalities are impactful in your system as in mine...
and as i said all is about synergy with a system...
---In my system i need a low noise floor , and this dac had a battery , then i did not connect it to the electrical grid ( only my amp is )..
---I need to go out off the computer noise floor where my files are... Now they are in the big internal micro card inside it...No computer noisy connection...
---I need an equalizer integrated to optimize the mighty AKG K340 ... It is done all that with this dac weighting few ounces..
FOR ME this dac had no fault... In another system it will stronly depend of this other system needs...
Dac technology is mature, it does not means that a single dac can meet the needs and expectations of all customers...
My point is mature dac tech . can give us something very good at low price...I cannot fault my dac on any of these points but it does not means it will the case for you, i hope to have been clear 😊:
(1) high ends are open, ary and articulated without treads of edginess or digital glares; (2) midranges are rich / full without vocal sibilance; (3) bass is weighty and nimble; (4) width / depth / height of soundstage; and (5) separation of sound sources either vocals or instruments.
By the way these 5 points are not enough...We must add two others,
(6) Holographic volume of each sound source must be there and "seen" or felt if you prefer ( i see music😁)
(7) immersiveness : the ratio between the sound source volume and the listener position in relation to them must be an encompassing relation not an excluding relation...In a word the listener envelopment factor must be felt...
But only a DAC by itself alone cannot give all that without the synergy with the other components... And the other components must be at least as good as the dac...
This dac could be upgraded but i compute a necessary investment of 50 time his price to create a real upgrade, not a marginal one... Anyway i dont need this real upgrade because i am happier than i ever was..
i know because my dac meet them at 200 bucks and so well i dont need to upgrade at all...
Why not two bucks? You have been scammed !!! Gullible fool (etc.). Sound card anyway. How much are they anyways? Like $2 (two dollars Canadian or 200 cents)
Do you have a computer machine? Hook it up to your amp and boom! DAC!
But your criteria are met with some low cost dac...
i know because my dac meet them at 200 bucks and so well i dont need to upgrade at all...
People forget that the dac is one thing but his relation with the amplifier and speakers and acoustic or with the headphone , the synergy factor and the tweaking and optimizing part MATTER the most..
Dac technology is mature now... It is better to invest many thousand dollars in amp, speakers , headphone and optimization than to buy a new dac in many case.. But most people dont know what to do, in the embeddings controls and about optimization; then they think , i must buy another dac to improve my system ... Most of the times it is an error of money placement for a marginal upgrade at best...
if not how can my low cost dac meet all your criteria?
its SQ can be assessed in several dimensions of criteria such as (1) high ends are open, ary and articulated without treads of edginess or digital glares; (2) midranges are rich / full without vocal sibilance; (3) bass is weighty and nimble; (4) width / depth / height of soundstage; and (5) separation of sound sources either vocals or instruments.
Logically speaking (neither objectively nor subjectively), if a DAC is neutrally transparent without any particular "sound", its SQ can be assessed in several dimensions of criteria such as (1) high ends are open, ary and articulated without treads of edginess or digital glares; (2) midranges are rich / full without vocal sibilance; (3) bass is weighty and nimble; (4) width / depth / height of soundstage; and (5) separation of sound sources either vocals or instruments. I think most of audiophiles should have the caliber to differentiate the high-end DAC from average DACs in these dimensions. I believe the price point of deminishing return for these DACs will be high (like a few thousand dollars), depending on quality of components like capacitors, transformers, wires, casing and craftmanship. Beyond this price point, a DAC that costs $10k, $20k or close to $100k will most likely belong to the class of so-called premium pricing imho, i.e., setting a high price tag to yield an impression that a product should have remarkably high quality such that the product is well suited only in a premium stereo system.
I am not an " objectivist", but in spite of some difference in sound between all dacs, the industry being mature now, the diminushing point is here very soon...
My low cost dac can be upgraded but what it gives already to me : a battery low noise working then no connection to the grid, an equalizer i need, a big files bank, and decent good dac operation if i trust my highly sensitve AKG K 340, then any real upgrade, not a marginal change in sound with a tube dac or whatever, will cost me 50 times his price at the least ...I can live with " the out of the head", clear three-D speaker like soundfield from my headphone i enjoy now without any upgrade of the basic dac payed 200 bucks ...
@mahgister+1! A DAC is essentially a sound card. That’s all! Put it in a fancy machined-from-a-solid-billet case and you can charge $50K for the same parts as the $100 KTB DAC. Nobody will be able to tell the difference from, say, the real expensive Audio Note DAC! Because Hi-End DAC’s are a good example of confirmation bias!
@mahgister+1! A DAC is essentially a sound card. That’s all! Put it in a fancy machined-from-a-solid-billet case and you can charge $50K for the same parts as the $100 KTB DAC. Nobody will be able to tell the difference from, say, the real expensive Audio Note DAC! Because Hi-End DAC’s are a good example of confirmation bias!
I don’t wish to offend anyone, but in the case of DACs, I would have to say that there is certainly a point of diminishing returns. I’ve heard some epic sounding systems with rather modest DACs. But it is all a personal choice. Those with unlimited disposable income will swear up and down that the über expensive components generally sound ‘night and day’ better. That has not been my experience at all, especially with respect to DACs. After around 10k let’s say, you can spend 40k and that DAC may show very slight differences that one has to really listen for.
Maybe I'm off but my experience skews your scale a little bit
Entry Level can be as little as $100 but to move to mid tier it's more of a range from about $700 to $2500 for with the a few standouts in there but typically the more expensive DACs sound significantly better.
Top tier doesn't seem to have a price range. It's a whatever the market will bear kinda thing and I haven't got there yet but when I spent $1000 on a DAC I t was really naïve thinking it was a end point not a entry point. YMMV
When I move up from entry level (under $200 but well rated) DAC to mid-tier (under $500), the sonical improvement is really significant. At that price point, I really think I was getting the best bang for the buck. From mid-tier to higher end under $1k, the improvement is audible but not in the same magnitude. More airy, spacious SS, darker background, not necessarily punchier bass. I would say the sonical improvement justifies the increase in the price. Beyond that, I am not sure at least to my ears.
Diminishing returns; worse than any other individual component; and so quickly obsolete
I don't understand trying to make sonic comparisons from a Youtube video, so I didn't bother watching the video.
It's weird, I don't have a single DAC that's "obsolete" and I've had some for quite a while. I think we've seen DSD and sampling rates and goofy compression algorithms (MQA) go about as far as they can go. Many DACS (FPGA) can be upgraded if something new does come along.
I have owned many DACs and no two have sounded the same. If you can't hear the difference, find the cheapest one you can or get the one that ASR says "measures the best". Lucky you for being able to save some money!
Not that price always equates to sound quality, and of course there are diminishing returns. A $50K DAC isn't going to sound 10 times better than a $5K DAC. However, just like most things, if you're trying to eke out that last little bit of performance, it's probably going to be expensive.
Lastly, don't even get me started on the person who got mad at a dealer because they spent 4 hours of time switching DACs around for their personal listening experiment and charged him for that valuable time. Good grief!
If someone wanted me to pay to listen to something they already had set up to demo, that would be one thing. I would walk out the door though, not hand them my money and cry about it later or "punish" them by not buying anything from them ever. As if you were going to in the first place.
My experience with DACs a is that a very well-designed unit can be had for under 2K and the real performance differences come from the choice of power conditioner, cables, isolation and system synergy. Are higher priced units potentially better? I would say that they represent greater potential, which may or may not be realized through the choice of the other components in the system.
Funny. When you call professionals, and ask about adding more DAC, changing a DAC, etc. … they’ll usually ask the question: “Well, can you REALLY tell the difference?”
And I’ll have to say, “No”
There are just too many variables which have even more opinions. There are no facts. Your ears and your room are the only facts… but they cannot be compared to another’s… same deal.
there is a correlation with the price... do you want to understand it? - a good analogy - drive a cheap Korean or American car ... and then try a BMW 750 Li or a Mercedes S class ...
of course, all components of the path are important - high-quality recording, a special room, good electricity, other devices and their synergy ...
Do you need it? - it will be expensive and long - but you will get an illusion that will bring joy ...
You can also get by with less money and get acceptable sound quality.
You can’t get by with small funds - this is a lie ... start from 10 K
I jumped from a midrange DAC (about $2k) to a much more expensive one. But of course I didn’t trust myself so I asked two professional level musicians to be my judges. Took about 12 seconds for both to describe 1/4 and 1/8 notes on a bassoon that I didn’t have a clue about. My point being that bias is huge. You really have to get a neutral involved to get rid of the bias.
Someone said a $17K. Man oh man oh man. I have a Schiit Modi 3 and Gustard x26 pro. The differences are there, but not as noticeable as one would think.
I forgot to mention the $250 is a store credit for any purchase. They can F off as I will never spend another cent there or recommend anyone shop there. Won't effect their petty cash but I feel better. Way to treat a customer.
It was a stern shock when the audio store I returned to asked for $250 before they would allow a listening session comparing most of the DAC brands mentioned already. Turns out I was a petty cash customer since my prior purchase was only 5k. In the end it was worth every dollar spent.
They obliged a blind test of each DAC shuffling my own into the mix at random. Even better was the component and speaker match with Roon as the source. Nearly my exact home setup. I settled in after selecting four tracks that were played on each DAC. Songs chosen had familiar details and is where I focused listening when those details arrived during playback. Each DAC struggled through some parts but excelled at others. All were chip based DAC’s. I kept notes and this went on for nearly four hours.
No surprise. the 12k DAC was the best. Second was my own (2.5k) and that was a surprise. Third, fourth, and fifth were 3, 5, 8k DAC’s and scratched from consideration which was surprising considering all the published review hype I spent months pouring over. I went home to review my notes and ponder what just happened, especially after scoring my own DAC second. It was obvious. My ears were accustomed to its sound after two years of listening, so of course I liked it. Conclusion: My 2.5k DAC is a Streamer/DAC/Pre that sounds like an 8k DAC. Well that doesn’t help my end goal of seperates. Starting over.
R2R DAC’s were not auditioned since the store owner had a bias against them and is where I turned, Unfortunately I had to buy one to audition so more research and I settled on a Holo Spring 3 without the pre amp option. Yep. My best value selection and in the budget. My onset goal was 3k per piece/component and in my opinion I’ve done well achieving desired SQ.
After letting power heat up through resistors for a few days I selected the same tracks used for the shootout. My hearing immediately sensed a familiar past. I was hearing tape again. Immediately transported back to the late 70’s, early 80’s when tape was my preferred medium. I feel so old and rejuvenated at the same time. What is more interesting to me is whenever Roon pops a 44.1k track my head snaps to the display for confirmation. To me it sounds better than upsampling every time.
The ear knows what it likes and if you are able to remind it of whatever you trained it on your whole self will be happiest.
I only use the CD9se as a DAC. I have of course tried CDs… red book CDs and streaming sound exactly same, streaming better when higher resolution from Qobuz, which is common.
I have owned a number of very good DACs… Sim Audio and Ayre… others. I have auditioned many high end DACs. The Audio Research is among the very best and exhibits tremendous synergy with the rest of my equipment (all ARC).
I use a Aurender W20SE streamer through the DAC and have used the Berkeley Alpha 3 DAC as well (the $22K). The ARC DAC is as good, for me, better. Almost no difference between the two (takes very critical listening to hear any difference. I had to give the nod to the ARC… slightly more musical with a touch more midrange bloom. The Berkeley a tiny itsy, bitsy nearly undetectable extra detail. The musicality of the ARC definitely won. Also, the ARC $5K cheaper.
AR CD9se is also a CD player too and that would justify its price point. Have you tried the SQ of the internal DAC and transporter individually just curious?
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.
