High resolution digital is dead. The best DAC's killed it.


Something that came as a surprise to me is how good DAC's have gotten over the past 5-10 years.

Before then, there was a consistent, marked improvement going from Redbook (44.1/16) to 96/24 or higher.

The modern DAC, the best of them, no longer do this. The Redbook playback is so good high resolution is almost not needed. Anyone else notice this?
erik_squires

Showing 1 response by desktopguy

Wherever people talk about DACs, certain themes reliably emerge:
-- that R2R, specifically NOS, sounds better, more natural than D/S
-- D/S DACs sound way more accurate than multibit & NOS DACs, and image way better
-- that certain DACs or DAC mfrs totally suck based solely on their measurements (irrespective of multibit vs D/S)

I agree with the first (wholeheartedly), but not the 3rd (and really don't much care about the 2nd). The limitation of any "measurements are all that matters" approach is that it disregards all subtle sonic differences from components--pretending that such differences don't exist or don't matter.

I own 2 DACs from Audio GD, the brand one post above disparaged. One is multibit (DAC-19) and the other is NOS multibit (NOS 19). Both are better than any delta-sigma DAC I ever heard or owned. The NOS 19 is my day-to-day DAC (in primary desktop system w/studio monitors + sub as well as headphones); and the DAC-19 is in my secondary, headphone-only system.

I started listening to digital in the mid-1980s (on a big, high-resolution 2-channel system) and pretty much hated it. Things slowly got better, but only w/the arrival of multibit have I succeeded in forgetting the whole digital vs analog conundrum and just enjoy the music.

Both my monitors (ATC SCM12 Pro) and various headphones & amps are highly resolving, so I am basing this opinion on sonic experience, not simple prejudice.