Developing critical listening to discern differences in equipment takes time.  It requires a person to listen to performed music, both acoustic and amplified, in different venues, and print their memory of their impression of sound.  Yes, some will argue that there is much written that memory decay is quick with regard to remembering sound quality, but I still believe this is the place to start.  Then use good experimental technique in doing head to head comparisons in the same system so the only variables are the two pieces of equipment under evaluation.  Compare the equipment to your impression of how live music sounds.  Recognize, I have used the word “impression” a few times.  Impression is not reality.  It is what you believe is correct, and that is the goal.  What other’s impressions are is insignificant.  Do not focus on measurement other than for insuring system compatibility such as impedance matching.  We have not found measurements other than frequency waterfall plots that can possibly predict sound quality, but those are conducted in an anechoic chamber and do not hold in your room. 

DAC differences are always a lot subtler than speakers or rooms and a lot depends on the quality of the listener (untrained vs trained listener, older vs younger ears, etc). In many ways, the listener/test subject can be a high quality test subject or a low quality test subject.

Higher quality power conditioners can even out differences between dacs at different price points, especially if they share the same topology and are made by the same manufacturer. 

Swapping between manufacturers, topologies (DS Vs R2R), the chips in use, opamps vs discrete output stage, etc can let a test subject hear differences better.

Dac differences can become easier to hear if the test subject uses a BACCH processor... very subtle differences in the soundstage will become easier to hear with BACCH.

If the test subject processed his files with Daniel Hertz Master Class (Cwave), he may not hear many differences on some dacs at all...

etc

If it is very hard to hear differences in dacs consistently for a higher quality listener, there would be other heavier bottlenecks in the setup..untreated/incorrectly treated room, pooer setup, screwy speakers, amps, etc...

 

There's as much difference between different DACs as between different amplifiers, preamplifiers... a DAC is not just a chip. The elements around it (input chips, clock, power supply, and last but not least analogue output stage) all have an impact on the sound.

If you don't hear differences between two DACs, it may be that 1) those two DACs have very similar construction and components or 2) your system isn't resolving or 3) you're deaf.

Hi Tony,

Thanks for the considerate and detailed reply.

I have sent you a message.

Hello lemonhaze.  When you find the right DAC, you will know.  I wish you success.  With a USB capable DAC and a good streamer, I find Roon and Qobuz opened up a universe of music for me that keeps me captivated almost daily.  With some effort- due to the technology not yet being mature, you can get streaming to a level that matches CD quality and Hi Res taking it even a step further.  And so I am happy to share my set up with you.  Many roads lead to hifi so I don't stand on my way being the best way.  It is simply one way.

The springs under my amp stands are from McMaster Carr.  They are 48 lb/in springs.  The weight of the amps are about 110 lbs each if memory serves, and then the stands add some additional weight.  It is a straight forward calculation as well as measurable to find the natural frequency of the amp, stand and spring combo which is 3.2 Hz in this case.  That keeps the amps isolated from the floor.  The only thing the amp stands are going to respond to is an earthquake.  Lucky for me I live on sand in SE Georgia- so not much chance of an earthquake here.  You also probably saw that my DAC, Transport and preamps are on springs for isolation.  It is very effective.  When I first added the springs, the detail and resolution was overwhelming.  It distracted me from the music.  I wanted to take the springs out but once the genie is out of the bottle...  Fortunately, I grew accustomed to the extra detail and learned to tune it out.  Still, I can't listen to my system in total darkness.  Just too creepy hearing sounds of people moving around in the room or little squeaks and bumps that are buried deep in recordings.

Now for the digital.  Not quite three years ago I bought the Ayon CD-TII and Stealth Xs DAC.  That replaced the ARC CD Player.  The Transport does upsampling to DSD and has an I2S port out as well as another option of 3 BNCs out (CLK, DSDL, DSDR)  The Avon DAC has the complementary inputs.  This set-up revealed the full potential of redbook CD for me.  I had no idea all of the detail and resolution that was there all along in CDs.  I was captivated with my CDs for a good while.  About 9 months later I bought the RS9 music server.  I also added the Keces power supply to the music server for improved sound.  At that point streaming sounded good but I could hear a difference vs CD or FLAC files.  Changed USB cables and FLAC now matched CDs- at least to my ears.  But I also had my two sons listen and they agreed with me.

I heard a fantastic stereo system some years ago in Asheville, NC.  He was using an Ayon SACD player.  That stuck in my mind and that's why I went that route.  I have not regretted it at all.  I just recently upgraded from the Stealth to Ayon's newest top end DAC, the Kronos.  Love it.  The Kronos takes the sound of the Stealth to another level.  Smoother highs and stronger bass with more clarity.  The bass notes have more texture and detail.  As in it is easy to tell that the lowest notes are either from a bass violin, bass guitar, drum, etc.  In addition, the Stealth DAC responded well to a better power cord, even with the AQ Niagara power conditioner.  USB cables also have a sound.  So several small steps combined with the hardware got me to a very satisfying sound.  

From there I did some work to improve the sound of streaming.  That got me to where I am today- using silver plated Ethernet Cables, a LHY SW-8 ethernet switch and my own Modem with low noise power supplies on the modem and router.  At this point I can stream hi res or play downloaded hi res files and I am not able to tell the difference.  CD, FLAC files of my CDs or streaming 44.1/16 all sound great.  Qobuz is very good.  The best sounding files I think, are 96/24 although 48/24 sounds very good too. 

I definitely believe you can hear the difference in DACs.  In a perfect world, absolute conversion is a goal.  However, some of these DACs sound to "clinical" which is why I believe many DAC makers do "color" their units a bit.  For instance, I have always been a big Chord fan as to me they sound "warm".    imho

Hi Tony, your set up and room looks great which I'm sure is very rewarding. I hear what you are saying about progress and it to this end I needed to do a sanity check so compared my Wadia to some supposedly top DACs. Some I heard that I thought might reveal the shortcomings of my unit did not happen. We at the 'Old Farts Club' heard a comparison to Bryston, Rockna, dCS and Chord Dave. There were a few others but we ignored them. Our score sheets placed Wadia and Rockna at the top and Dave at the bottom. All comparisons at redbook standard of course.

 I was hoping to replace mine with a modern DAC that played hi-res and had USB for convenience and for the need to get rid of boxes, but not found the right one yet.

Looking at your digital system I see a few boxes on the shelves, could you please briefly list what you are using?

Lastly, what springs do you have under the power amps?

I'm sure the Wadia is something special, however the state of the art in digital audio has progressed since then.  I was using my ARC CD player from 2006 up until the beginning of 2021.  I thought it was a good redbook player until I heard my new DAC/Transport in my system.  The sound blew me away.  Until then I had no idea CDs actually had so much detail and resolution built into them.  The music from my new DAC was sensational.  Before, I would listen to one or two CDs and then switch to vinyl.  With the new DAC/Transport I listened to CDs for hours.  Then I got a streamer and my whole music world opened up to millions of songs.  It's been quite a journey.  Good thing I retired because I might never have made it back to work.  

I just recently upgraded my DAC.  Same brand but moved to their top of the line model.  I gained sweeter highs and stronger bass with more resolution.  The bass has texture and detail that makes listening even more intriguing.  Do DACs sound different?  Yeah, they do.  They do by a lot.

How easily can you distinguish between different DACs?

It depends. Listening for differences on any component will not be obvious or even heard if there are no room treatments in place and also the quality of the rest of the system.

@ghdprentice 1st post makes good sense. Quick a/b comparisons are not really helpful. Best is to ignore measurements and listen to a DAC for a week then swap over and  listen to the other for a week and you'll easily hear which one brings more fun and enjoyment.

Starting to appear on these forums is the idea or reasoning that all new DACs including the cheapest are better than anything made more than 10 years ago (some even say more than 5 years ago) This is abject nonsense.

I have a 30 year old Wadia 15 that plays redbook only and have been biased in the opposite direction. That is to say I have been expecting to find something to equal the Wadia's wonderful redbook quality but also with hi-res capability and the convenience of USB etc. etc.  I have listened to a few including the stratospherically priced dCS and still own the Wadia. I certainly do not buy according to measurements. I do not have specs. of the Wadia and I have no desire to obtain them. I'm sure a cheap Topping will have specs an order of magnitude better but have you ever heard one in a decent system in a room properly sorted acoustically? I rest my case, it weighs 15Kg 😁

From my experiences it was easy to hear differences between under $500 DAC and $1k or higher. And the differences manifested themselves in the detail of the playback. BUT this was not the case with the grouping of $2k to $10k DACs. The only thing I was able to hear with this wide range of gear was a quieter blacks / lower noise Floor.

One of my favorite memories was a PBS concert back in the 1980s.  The concert featured a famous flautist who was interviewed by the PBS announcer after the show.  The interviewer handed this flautist a cheap plastic recorder and asked him if he could play a tune on it.  He made incredible music with that toy.  I was amazed.  It’s true:  95% talent and 5% instrument.

Good points by all. Some musicians want top notch instruments, others will perform on whatever is available and adjust their style. If any piece of equipment does something you really like, and you can manage the cost, then get it!

James Booker made some recordings at Paramount that have now become an album called The Lost Paramount Tapes. Apparently they had a bunch of great pianos for him to choose from, and he chose a little spinet that was just a set piece. In the eyes of the producers this amounted to James ruining the entire session. When I listen to those tapes it’s obvious to me that James knew what he was doing. There’s nothing inferior about a spinet. It’s just knowing what to do with it.

“When you stop hearing a difference, stop spending money and enjoy the music.”
+1, @tonywinga 

DACs do two things.  1) They decode a PCM or DSD digital stream and convert it to analog.  2) They amplify that analog signal to a level that feeds into a preamp or to a level that can feed directly into an amp.

The digital side decoding process can take many paths such as R2R ladder D/A or various D/A chips produced by various manufacturers.  Some listeners can tell the D/A chip in use by their sound.  The quality of the power supplies and noise rejection plays a role in producing these delicate voltages that are the musical signal.  And on the analog side, the design can take many paths such as tube, solid state, op amps, ICs or discrete components.  All of these considerations have an impact on the sound quality.

To say all DACs sound the same would be to say all preamps and amps sound the same.  Then we could say all speakers sound the same- and so on.  And beyond that we could argue that musicians do not need to spend thousands of dollars on their musical instruments because a $500 guitar or sax will sound just as good.

When you stop hearing a difference, stop spending money and enjoy the music.

Mhwilliford,

Thanks for sharing what you hear the differences to be.

Appreciate it.

@asctim Let's agree to disagree. I found the differences between DACs as meaningful as Ferrari and Corolla. But I was only able to hear that once my system had evolved to a certain level. However, I agree that if your modus operandi when comparing DACs is to evaluate with the help of measurements than a $1000 Topping or SMSL is just as good as Lampizator Horizon. In fact, the Lampi is far worse as per the measurements.

@asctim No right or wrong just different experiences, I have always found that DACs do not sound the same, and with some the SQ might be relatively similar while others not at all. And, they each have an impact on the overall system’s SQ. I don’t stream, but I have found that CD transports also impact the SQ performance of the DAC and hence the overall system SQ. Some transports impacting more so than others. For that matter, which connection is maximized within the same transport has a definite audible impact. All of that aside, come the end of the day everyone should make their own assessment and select whatever gear brings them the level of listening enjoyment and engagement they seek.

@facten 

Over the years I've been allowed to compare various brands including Theta, Wadia, Mark Levinson, and more recently Benchmark. These all sounded fine to my ears, but nothing has ever leapt out at me, even after extended periods of listening. I've heard some beautiful systems in showrooms, and was even allowed to bring in and hook up my cheap front end. Still sounded fantastic. I've lost track of all the different types I've heard at shows and in various showrooms. I've never done controlled blind tests because I never had a claim of a difference to make. I don't know of any controlled tests that have confirmed anything and that doesn't surprise me. Of all the systems I've heard and owned over the years, there seems to be no correlation between the dac and the sound quality. Some of the best sound I've heard at shows involved self powered speakers with their own dacs, or in one case a dongle dac from a Macbook air. I've noticed that even in the 6 figure systems, I still hear the basic issues with the standard 2 speaker configuration in rectangular rooms dominating the overall presentation. 

I'm not going to make a general statement that nobody can hear differences. I'm just saying I can hear a lot of stuff but I can't hear a difference between reasonably competent dacs. If people can hear a difference it just means they are very tuned in to specific aspects of the sound, while able to ignore or adapt to other, louder issues. Decent dacs at all price ranges perform extremely well, and very close to the same. That's not the case with speakers and amps, which are made for all sorts of different listening situations, so they have different power and bandwidth ratings. They also just plain differ a lot in their response characteristics. 

Speakers and amp combinations and rooms and speaker configurations - those make very significant differences to me. Some pre-amps seem to do weird things too. If I go way back to the early 1990s I recall that a Theta dac had more oomph than the analog out of my Sony ES CD player, but that could have just been level matching. I bought it and enjoyed it. 15 years later I still had the dac and compared it to the analog out of a new cheap DVD player and it had nothing on the DVD player. Hard to say why I thought I heard something earlier but I could see how in some cases you could have an output/input mismatch between a dac analog stage and pre-amp input stage. 

Cases where I have heard a difference is things like hooking up a pro-level dac to a consumer level pre. Output is too hot. I then modified the output by bypassing the op-amps and using a cap and a resistor. That's not to spec, and that had audible problems, but even then, not enough to make or break compared to other factors. I was forced to use digital attenuation, which seemed to clear up unpleasant audible issues but then I lost headroom and max volume. I've also tried some crazy output filterless and non-upsampling dacs. Apparently my downstream equipment didn't have a problem with the signal and I can't hear past 20kHz so nothing about it bothered me, which I thought was interesting, supporting the idea that dacs are generally better than they really need to be. 

but long-term listening in a relaxed (not analytical) state is the real tell for me.

This statement nails it. I have often noticed that a quick switch between streaming services tells you very little to nothing. But if you relax and "take it in" in your regular listening mood, differences are easily felt OR missed. Applies to almost everything in listening tests.

@asctim - Which "Ferrari" & "Corolla" DACs have you directly compared?

@arafiq

Really? You think that’s the only thing setting a Ferrari and Corolla apart?

No, and you are emphasizing my point for me very well. There are huge and easily measurable differences between a Ferrari and Corolla. Nobody would confuse them even if they were blindfolded, riding as a passenger. The Ferrari accelerates faster, corners better, and sounds and feels and smells different in easily distinguishable ways that are very well known to be within the bounds of what humans can detect. When you get a dac that’s the equivalent of a Ferrari in terms of price and status, and compare it to a dac that’s equivalent to a Corolla, that’s where you find that there’s nowhere near the same difference. The cheap dac does everything as well as the expensive dac in any way you can measure. Often better. If you blindfold someone and have them listen to two different dacs, unless one of them is intentionally non-linear in its response, and the volume level isn’t matched, it’s going to be super tough for anyone to tell them apart. Maybe some people can, but it’s nowhere near the kind of difference you get between a Ferrari and a Corolla. It’d be more like spending 10 times as much upgrading a Ferrari to slightly increase the acceleration and braking so that you can complete a 5 mile curvy course on average 1 second faster. That might be a meaningful difference to a few very savvy drivers.

All dacs are Ferraris these days, except perhaps for some very cheap or expensive stuff that's poorly designed and implemented.

In terms of systems that are "resolving" or "revealing," those terms are not clearly defined. I can make a highly revealing system by making it ultra unstable, or accentuating its response at certain frequencies. Such a system will reveal differences in connected equipment because such a system is way out of spec. It only reveals how well some components can cope with or synergize with its oddities.

One more point to add about the Aurender N200 as a source and what it brings to the table (I assume most mid-high and above server streamers would do the same to a similar extent).  In my response above I said "a little cleaner, a little more solid" and I'd forgotten about the subtle but very satisfying sound layer reveals that have come with the N200 replacing my PC running Roon.  A good example is the Local Hero Soundtrack (Mark Knopfler).  The very first track - The Rocks and the Water - used to be somewhat of a throwaway for me - but with the Aurender the sonic subtleties coming from the various blended synth effects is like listening to the quiet in nature - at first you hear nothing, then the sounds build in and around each other.  This is an extreme example - I am not trying to say it makes all music sound stupendous - but it certainly reveals subtleties in a very pleasing way.

I've owned the following DACs - Audio Note 1,1, Blue Circle 509, April Music Stello MK2, Aqua LaVoce S3, Modwright Elysee, and MojoAudio Mystique V3, none sound the same,  and it was easily discernible 

@audiowebe  Yes - the N200 made an audible difference, a little cleaner, a little more solid.  Particular improvement in Hi-Res (with regard to sampling rate) content for some reason. I also noticed a big jump in the playback quality of my ripped CDs - best I have ever heard them, and I did own the last of the top-end OPPO players.  The minor downside to the Aurender for me has been the UI.  It is not as feature rich as Roon and does not offer a PC-based platform.  That said, the UI (Conductor) is super-reliable and supported by real people who actually respond to your questions promptly - you are never lost in a crowd-sourced feedback morass.  There is talk of Aurender being a Roon endpoint soon, but I do not know how much of the Aurender sound quality advantage will be lost by operating in that mode.  Sorry - I went off for a while there. 

invalid

... just choose the DAC that has the output stage built on the chip because it measures great, would you buy a preamp that uses an opamp output stage because it measures better than a discreet output stage?

Many fine preamplifiers use opamps. For example, it’s how Audio Research configures its balanced differential preamps. Fully discrete. I don’t understand the prejudice against them just because they’ve sometimes been badly implemented in ICs. You could say that about virtually any audio circuit.

@ invalid, 

I offer you should rethink your chip vs discrete preamp blanket bias. It was very true back in the days of TLO72's.  By the time of the NE5558 ( POOGE, biased into class A) it got a lot fuzzier. With modern OPA series chips, it comes down to execution.  Just picking OP-Amp vs. discrete is no guarantee the discrete was well executed either. Some can be of course. So "it depends".  An inherent advantage of discrete is higher current so the possibility of cable impedance matching at the load end may have some possibilities.  Paralleling op-amps can do the same thing. 

Not sure if the hearing test question was directed at me, but in my case I did have one done a few months back.  I don't hear past 13k or so, I think.  It might have been even lower.

mhwilliford, have you noticed differences in sound after going to an Aurender?  

I didn't realize what was used as a server had an impact on the sound.

@mhwilliford

Congratulations and good call on improving the source by switching to N200. Now if you bring a high quality DAC, you should be able to appreciate the nuances (or not) over your integrated DA2. I also like your approach of long term listening before forming any conclusions.

I believe the main issue with DAC costing 2x, 3x or 4x times is not whether they sound better or not. It’s the added cost that doesn’t quite commensurate with the perceivable differences in SQ. Most folks are quite content with a $1500 DAC that gets them close to 80-85% performance of a DAC’s costing, say $5K.

I can sympathize with this question, as well as the various responses.  Because I was unable to distinguish in double-blind listening over a couple of weeks a Weiss 502 from the DA2 built into my C2700, I sent the Weiss back (shout out to The Music Room for being super easy to work with) and instead went back to the source for improvement, adding an Aurender N200 to my system (replacing my PC running Roon as digital streamer/server).  I believe this will allow easier distinguishing of DAC quality, as the rest of my system would be judged as "reasonable" by most (MC462, C2700, B&W 802D4).

One more thing - I think double-blind tests are interesting and certainly good data to have as you make a judgement about how new gear sounds (or doesn't) to YOU (even you capricious folks out there LOL) - but long-term listening in a relaxed (not analytical) state is the real tell for me.  After all, listening in that state is where most of us want to experience magic.

@invalid

The best way to determine the ability of the digital portion of a DAC is the signal to noise ratio. I would go with whatever DAC had the most neutral analog section be it discreet or an op amp. There are some pretty wild chips out there today and the only thing discreet will do for sure is cost you more. 

Because I require more DAC channels than most two channel people I go for digital preamps that have the DACs built in. I require 6 Dac channels. The unit that I will have shortly has 8 DAC channels built in along with room and speaker control, bass management and high resolution digital EQ. I digitize my phono stage.  

despite my having tried so so many dacs in the last few years, i would say that a decent dac in the $1000-2500 range will quite fully please most folks here with good systems in, say, the $5,000-$25,000 range... yes there are a few bad ones out there (sonically) but most sound quite good and the differences in sound between the good ones can be rather subtle to most... please see my original thread for further comments on specific dacs

i pursued the vast dac trials mostly out of interest (and sheer boredom during the covid shut-in period), and a desire for learning just what the span of sonic performance is among dacs.... in the last few months i have done no new dac trials, and i have left a gustard r26 and a chord qutest plugged in, with my high dollar dacs put aside (msb, weiss etc)... i am just listening to music, not the gear, and i am very very happy enjoying ith either the chord or the r26

i would say among good dacs, the feature set and form factor should drive the choice, once you have decided if you want a dac that is sonically in the sharper vs smoother school of presentation...

Bigkidz agree if can’t hear the difference stick on what you have, until your listening skills improve.Thats what I did by the way.

One time at Axpona , I am listening to all Denafrips DAc from Ares to Terminator. As you move up sound and performance changed. They all sound good. In that set up the Ares sound bigger, but the Terminator sounds is more sophisticated. I end up buying the Ares. I still have it.

@mijostyn  so you just choose the DAC that has the output stage built on the chip because it measures great, would you buy a preamp that uses an opamp output stage because it measures better than a discreet output stage?

The technology behind DAC is way more advanced than it was 10 years ago. You can get a DAC with a 120 dB signal to noise ratio no larger than a thumb drive. It is at the point were all dacs operating at the same rates do exactly the same thing, accurately crunch number. Any sonic difference is in the analog section and all sorts of Tomfoolery can be done there to produce a "house" sound. Personally, I do not want the house sound. I want THE sound without any pontification. 

Been listening to a Qutest compared to my other generic entry DACs for a week now.  In very focused listening for a difference, yes, there is a tiny bit of detail in the Chord.    Detail over maybe not quite as smooth vocal sibilance or trumpet glare? $1600 worth?  There by remains the questions. 

Real test on how significant: If I walked out of the room and a DAC was swapped, or not, when I came back in could I tell which was which?  No.  Even when I am just sitting my chair listening for the sake of enjoying music and not digging for differences, I don't hear a difference. Those differences are ONLY on a very few of my CD's and only in fairly quick repeating of a short segment of music.  Older DTD, some newer ones.  That extra information is flat not there on say, Rubber Soul. Probably 90% of my music was recorded pre 1980. Quite a bit earlier.  If you were streaming DSD or some newly high end mastered high bitrate, there may be more of a difference.  Some folks seem to like very bright speakers, not me, so maybe there lies more differences.  So it depends. 

Funny some recordings.  I have a Stern/Ma recording and the cello moves around with the note.  But if you just sit back to enjoy the music, it sounds fine.  Message is, after I pick the end game, I am not going listening for flaws or differences, just listen to the music. 

I find it very easy to tell the difference between DACs and I am not some golden ear guy. But as you read in several replies, some can and some cannot tell the difference. Would save me a lot of money if I couldn’t, but I can. 

Have you had your hearing checked by an audiologist.  I know I have hearing loss and have an appointment next week.  Still I can readily hear differenced in DACs.

I have found the more I invest in AC and electrical noise control the easier it is to hear the DAC's sound.  The first thing I notice is the fullness and clarity of the low end.  After that I hear the separation of notes and instruments.  And then timbre and tone.

I have settled on a balanced DAC with a good tube DHT output stage.  I am looking for a relaxing sound.  Along the way I have learned to recognize the fatiguing digital characteristics of DACs with jitter issues.

I will say 5 years ago I could hear differences in DACs but maybe couldn't readily tell which I preferred.  I would listen to one DAC for a few weeks then change to another for a few weeks.  Eventually after getting over chasing the shiny stuff like low end clarity or soundstage or midrange presence and holography I would find I just liked listening to one DAC over the other because it was more relaxing/engaging.

As I moved up the DAC ladder price-wise I got more of the shiny stuff and more engagement at the same time.  However,  I am not sure I would appreciate a lot of the differences without the level of AC noise control conditioning I have.

I have found with each addition of noise control the performance of my system improves readily and changes in gear becomes easier to hear.

So the difference would be that the cornering somehow just feels better in the Ferrari and so is a more enjoyable experience that justifies the cost.

Really? You think that's the only thing setting a Ferrari and Corolla apart? I don't have the means to own a Ferrari but I have driven one on a track every time I get a chance to go to Vegas. The acceleration, the way the steering wheel communicates the road to the driver, the way it sounds when gathering speed, the braking ability, and the overall exhilarating feeling you get every time you get behind the wheel ... there's nothing even remotely comparable to a Corolla.  All these are factors (or nuances) that collectively contribute to making the whole greater than the sum of the parts. The same holds true for higher end DACs as well. You simply cannot isolate a few measurements or one or two aspects of performance. You have to evaluate them as a complete package.

Compair them on a very revealing system.  In  some systems, you may not notice and significant differences.  

Compair them on a very revealing system.  In  some systems, you may not notice and significant differences.  

It’s about quenching your listener satisfaction and it’s about self-control you only live once. 

I have found that DAC useage is just another overkill like cables and wires. It’s about quenching your listener satisfaction and it’s about self-control. Can you be satisfied? And… save your money.

Reminds me of a story. My wife was rummaging around and found a bottle of wine. Opened it and I suppose enjoyed it. I noticed it on the counter and let her know this was a grand reserve 20 year old Rioja. 50 bucks a bottle. After that she just went on and on about how delicious it was and how much she enjoyed it.  I don’t deny it was good but if she didn’t know would it have been all that memorable? Having heard lots of systems, most sound mediocre to me.  If one change or another makes it sound less mediocre, so what? I think the room, the speaker placement changes everything, so why leave that in place and mess with one part?

@ghdprentice +1

@lalitk +1

@sudnh +1

 

@duckworp  - Thanks for the streamer breakdown, now again what were the DACs?

Well this appears to be going well? Is the OP satisfied yet? 
For me it’s easy…

Money

Magnitude

Margin

Synergy

PRAT

Soundstage

Timbre and tonality.

Significance

Value

Judgement,  mine or yours?

Cost

Logistical challenges

Connectivity

Implementation

Design

Materials

Parts

Components

Room

Nah there’s more

Lots more, but hopefully, you get the idea.

 

@mapman - the A/B test I did was not from two vanilla $500 streamers.  The actual SOtM streamers were both SMS-200 neo SE ($1000) both connected to a Sean Jacobs DC3 dual-regulated PS ($2000). Both streamers connected to an SOtM sCLK-0CX10 ($4000) (it has 4 outputs) itself powered by a Farad Super3 PS ($700). So, if using $ as a measure of quality each streamer cost around $8000.  This is a good piece of streaming kit. It should be capable of discerning differences between an expensive and cheap DAC, if they exist. 

It is necessary to have the good audio gear to begin to hear differences in DACs easily. Common audio gear like Denon, Pioneer, etc do not have the resolution to bring out the differences that we can hear.

If music is background then common audio gear is sufficient for enjoyment of music and most DACs produce decent enough sound.

But if you are really into music and listen to music as a main activity (not doing anything else and focused on listening to music) then it is worth it to seek out better audio gear and better DACs.