How much does a DAC do the more expensive it is?

@simao 

You're welcome! 

So many here seem to be fixated on cost rather than value when it comes to DACs.  Value can be difficult to determine when it comes to DACs since the technology is not as mature as vinyl, tape, speakers or amplification.  I don’t see vintage 30 year old DACs going for big money.  Changes in digital technology appear to be leveling off, but who knows until we look back 10 years from now.  Still, many DACs have more value than others.  It is not just about cost.  Performance, reliability, adaptability and pedigree (well known manufacturers) affect market value both as a new and as a used unit.

Someone may purchase an $1100 DAC and be pleased as punch with the sound.  After comparing some $600 DACs and $2500 DACs this purchase seems to be the best all around choice without breaking the bank.  In 5-10 years this DAC might resale for $50-$100.  Another person found his ideal DAC and paid $11,000.  This DAC, from a well known brand- and that certainly adds a little to the cost has a beautiful sound with a large airy soundstage befitting the rest of his high end stereo system.  In 5-10 years this DAC will likely fetch $5000 on the used market, baring any new significant technological breakthroughs.  Remember, high end turntables were selling for very reasonable prices on the used market from the late 1990s to about 2010.  Wish I had jumped on my dream turntable back then.  Point is that both DACs have a cost of ownership and that is the thing to consider.  So now, the person who snatches up the $11,000 DAC used will likely enjoy his purchase immensely with potentially a lower cost of ownership than the person who bought the $1100 DAC new.   And if that is the case is there really any debate needed about the sound quality expensive DACs vs inexpensive DACs?  (Other than someone must pony up the price for new gear.)

$11,000 DAC used will likely enjoy his purchase immensely with potentially a lower cost of ownership than the person who bought the $1100 DAC new.

Tony, accepting your hypothetical numbers the person who bought the $1100 dac loses $1000 in value while the person who bought the $10,000 dac loses $5000 over the same time. That does not equate with a lower cost of ownership for the more expensive piece in my book.

This whole “cost equals sound quality“ argument in hi-fi is very suspect. Here are a couple of reasons why. 

A.) In many, if not all hi-fi components, the case equals more than half the cost of the component. Thus, you are paying for looks not for sound necessarily. I believe this is typified by the value proposition. Many have acknowledged for Schitt t audio products. Decent quality in a cheap case sold at a reasonable price. PS – I don’t own any of that particular companys products. 

B) it is well known in marketing that price automatically equates with value in the minds of the majority of consumers.

C) the inability to totally characterize sound quality through measurement plays into the hands of the marketers in B. 
 

and OK I will admit that there may be some boutique brands out there, using exceptionally high component quality who have developed intellectual properties that make their products worth extravagant prices. I don’t know. What I am saying, however, is that the opportunity exist for lots of deception through effective, marketing and appearance in shiny boxes and if there are not a lot of people taking advantage of that, then I guess we don’t live in a capitalist society.

You missed my point. The person who buys the $11,000 DAC used enjoys a lower cost of ownership vs the person who bought the $1100 DAC new.

@bruce19 

He may have been describing the lower cost of ownership due to the purchaser NOT swapping in and out of gear. In other words, you don’t lose money if you don’t sell it. 

I wish I had never heard better dacs. I’ve spent a ton on the chase ever higher up the price and performance scale. If you haven’t heard better then good for you but once you have then discussions like these you will find humorous. Peace.

If that was your point, Tony, you are right I did miss it. However, I still don’t see where the cost of ownership comes out less.

I have heard extraordinary systems, and they have sounded extra ordinary with the music that was played for me on them. I have never owned one. But I have played extraordinary recordings on my more modest system, and they have also sounded extraordinary.

The original owner took the depreciation hit.  The 2nd owner can likely sell the $11,000 DAC for about what he paid for it ($5000 hypothetically)- if he holds it for just a few years.  For example, I have owned two vintage ARC preamps, one for 13 years and one for 20 years.  I sold each preamp for more than I paid.  So my cost of ownership was negative, not accounting for inflation.  I enjoyed great hifi sound from my preamps with no depreciation.  Unfortunately, I am not always so lucky.

I have never owned one. But I have played extraordinary recordings on my more modest system, and they have also sounded extraordinary.

Exactly, and that is all that matters.

In searching for a new DAC recently I was impressed with GoldenSound's review especially on his "under the hood" analysis of the electronics. He also reviews the Denafrips Terminator Plus.

Holo Audio May Review - Part 1

Holo Audio May Review - Part 2

a DAC will depreciate much faster and steeper than an amp or preamp...lots of high quality amps and preamps will hold used price value after a few years of depreciation, not very often with a DAC...

In case you're getting the wrong idea, I don't firmly correlate money with quality. Never have, really, for audio components. Case in point; I've loaned out my Herron VTPH-2A phono stage to a friend and have substituted into my system my almost forgotten Schiit Mani. 

I mean, yes, there is a difference in presence and space, but that little sub-$200 solid state is absolutely incredible. 

If only price were a good guide. There are many DACs that will trounce your DAC, and some may cost less, I don't know about that end, but it certainly would be possible. The problem is that we have limited exposure and we don't all agree as to what we consider diminishing returns, not to mention what we precieve as sounding good. There are a lot of DACs that can better the Gungnir easily. The problem is that when someone recommends x, you don't know their taste in sound, the strengths and weaknesses of their system, etc. This renders their opinion as virtually useless to me. I have more often been disappointed in highly rated equipment than I have been pleased with it. It doesn't matter what magazine the review is in, though through the years I have found several reviewers who have high standards, and with whom I usually agree. Even if stereo shops abounded, paring this with that could negatively impact our impressions of a certain piece of equipment. This is a very difficult hobby to get to a point of contentment in. 

The DAC is important, however improving the streamer/source I think is just as important. I have owned a few DACs and they all sounded different but all were improved when supplied with a better digital supply.

I'm going to dust off my Ayre Codex this weekend and compare it with my PS Audio DS DAC.  Both will be fed by an iFi Neo Streamer due to it's fiber optic input and aftermarket LPS.  I²S out to the DS DAC and USB to the Codex.  I suspect they'll sound closer to one another than their cost difference suggests. 

and then there's this, too: a central component like a new Technics integrated, say the su-r1000 if you have the cash, or an Accuphase with the dac module, and don't add more "stuff" to your chain.  The Marantz Ruby sacd player / dac unit also sports fine dacs, and thus does double duty, if your amp is analogue.

but, I know people on this forum have fun playing around with "separates" ... but dac diminishing returns is hard and real.  usually "better" is really just "different"... and even then the differences are usually subtle.  

swapping out dacs can lead one on an endless rabbit hole with no final bottom, but again I acknowledge that's technophile fun and fine as long as it doesn't detract from a musicphile goal of enjoyment of music (if one is actually a musicphile, and if not well then have at the tech chase and enjoy the trip).  

@audiom3 +1

"I suspect they'll sound closer to one another than their cost difference suggests." 

Cost is only one of many indicators of how good something is.

Having said that, like many things in life unless someone is totally screwing you typically get what you pay for.

If you can't tell the difference between a $200 or $2,000 or $20,000 DAC then you've either been blessed with poor hearing and won't suffer from upgradeitis or you need to work on the rest of your system so that you can realize what a difference a great source can make.

@big_greg : Spot on!

It do a lot more

@simao first off, absolutely stunning listening room. Secondly, I feel like some of the focus in this thread around DAC cost isn’t really giving you all the tools that will be helpful to you in discerning different qualities of DACs at different price points, and in determining which of those qualities might be important for you. Here is a link to a recent Audiogon thread that I think does a good job describing these characteristics in higher end DACs that could be applied to DACs at pretty much any price point and could be helpful. There are a lot of comments on the thread, and I might suggest only reading those from the OP for efficiency. Good luck.

I’m on the same track as the OP. I’ve started my audiophile journey around integrated CD players, and not the expensive ones (Kenwood dP7090, Revox B226) then I moved on to the modern transport + DAC, albeit still at the "budget" level (Audiolab 6000CDT + Gustard A18). It’s around 1000$, a bit more, of digital source, which is nothing nowadays, but with a little care (decoupling, power cords, fuses...) I have a hard time trying to imagine exactly HOW this could ever sound BETTER.

Now I’m not a skeptic AT ALL, and I know the high end sounds better in absolute. Although it's hard to put words, sometimes, on the subjective differences.

But I go to my friend who has an Accuphase integrated CD player and it doesn’t sound "more analog" or "more like music". I go to audio shows and I hear 6 figures systems, and yeah, ok, it sounds nice (sometimes), but how much of that comes from the 50K digital source? Why am I not more frustrated when I come back home and listen to my budget digital source? What I mean is, system synergy is key, and it’s totally possible IMHO to build a great sounding system around a well chosen and well cared for "budget" digital source. If your feet are tapping and if your eyes are watering and if you get goosebumps, no need to be frustrated: it's not so bad after all.

@rolox +1

@rolox

If your feet are tapping and if your eyes are watering and if you get goosebumps, no need to be frustrated: it’s not so bad after all.

I agree. If you reach this type of response while listening to music you’ve achieved musical engagement/involvement/connection. So regardless of cost, you’ve done something right to get there. How one reaches this outcome and the path taken will vary.

Charles

+1 for @bolong reference to GoldenSound review of the HoloAudio KTE May DAC, but I would also watch part 2 in which the reviewer tries to describe objectively and subjectively how all that technology translates into what he hears.  Spoiler alert, he uses the word “fantastic” a lot, but for me that doesn’t really diminish the value of his earnest attempts to describe what he is hearing from the Holo May.  If this is too rich for your blood, you might look at HoloAudio Spring.  I personally like Chord and Denafrips DACs as somewhat opposite ends of the audio spectrum, at least at lower price  points, with the latter like HoloAudio being a pretty good value proposition.

Holo May - The King Is Crowned

Re: Holo May DAC reviews. All of the Youtube reviews are uniformly enthusiastic.

.Whether this is a question of contagion, or a genuine indication of quality may be debatable; but these are all reviewers I have found reliable for other components in the past so I am inclined to look upon this DAC favorably and have ordered one to replace my Terminator (original one from years ago,)

Same old question gets the same old reply.  Price means nothing  design and parts mean everything.  Most people here have never had a reference component in their system.  Reviews mean nothing.  The old Marantz CD-94 still competes in sound quality to most any DAC mentioned in this forum.

Happy Listening.

A little input from the poor side of town. I have been a sound junkie since I bought my first reel to reel in Vietnam in 1966. Everthing was analog then and 30hz was 30hz so your upgrades were based on looks and build quality - or maybe cutesy tricks like speed control so you could play along with more adept musicians. I have been through all the changes since then like Dolby or DBX or 4 channel or reverb etc until bandwidth restrictions brought about digital music and people pay $20,000 to try to imitate the sound you could get from a $300 tape deck or $200 turntable with a $100 cartridge. This is a rich man site where people think buzz words and price tags rule. Most people can’t find a place to hear these brands, much less afford them and are ridiculed for not selling the farm to get a “better” something in their system. Thinking rich people have better ears is like the emperor’s new clothes. Buy steak, not sizzle and you can enjoy the music for the music rather than sit with a frown on your face because you THINK you could do better. 

@ghdprentice  I have a different option on some of the major brands you mention.  Parts quality are mostly nothing special IMO and in general I'm not too impressed with the use of circuit boards.  Most have good looks and sound better that mid- fi gear but the cost IMO does not justify the extra cost.  Upgrading some products has in my experience brought those products closer to reference levels that have surpased the sound quality oh the major brands top of the line products.  We consistently do this type of work weekly for a lot less. Money than the higher cost brand name products.  Not to say they are bad but they are not manufactured with the best parts to achieve better sound quality.  Happy listening 

@brisketman1 ++ 1

"This is a rich man site where people think buzz words and price tags rule. Most people can’t find a place to hear these brands, much less afford them and are ridiculed for not selling the farm to get a “better” something in their system. Thinking rich people have better ears is like the emperor’s new clothes. Buy steak, not sizzle and you can enjoy the music for the music rather than sit with a frown on your face because you THINK you could do better. "

Hi great responses.  From my non technical view point, I have had Sigma/Delta DAC's and new and old R2R dacs.  

I had an Esoteric N05XD which is a very high end DAC.  It didn't sound natural to me as in if you go hear music it would not sound like the Esoteric which was sooo quiet between notes that it was odd. 

I now have a Reimyo R2R that was substantially less than the Esoteric. So like others have said more money can equal an uber resolving, or some other uber thing that will color the sound.  

Money goes into programing the FPGA chips and also parts that make less noise which helps the sound. 

JH

@johnah5 I had an Esoteric N05XD which is a very high end DAC.  It didn't sound natural to me as in if you go hear music it would not sound like the Esoteric which was sooo quiet between notes that it was odd. 

I now have a Reimyo R2R that was substantially less than the Esoteric

I would also prefer the natural sound presentation over the hyper detailed type of presentation. There are definitely different niches of listerners and audio components.

Charles 

@simao you experience a wow moment after adding the Gungnir then pose the question, what do even more expensive DACs do better/different than cheaper ones like your Gungnir, then later you describe a listening session where an uber expensive CD player wasn't memorably better than your digital front end, which anecdote suggests you are persuaded by those posters here who state that there's no correlation in hifi between higher cost and the feeling the higher cost ALSO represents value-for-money. The Law of Diminishing Returns IS a thing in digital hifi, but the resolution of the rest of your system will determine whether you get a value-for-money feeling if/when you upgrade from the Gungnir to, for example, a Gustard R26 streamer/DAC for $2K. I guarantee you the Gustard is MUCH better sonically than your Gungnir, but whether your system can exploit that sonic improvement is something nobody here can say. You will have to take the plunge and listen for yourself in your system, there is no other way unfortunately 😕 

I guess my original question was either phrased incorrectly or has been interpreted wrongly. What I'm getting at is more technical for the most part: like, what can more expensive DAC's (which I rationally believe would have better design, parts and build) do for a signal that a much less expensive one can't? 

Also, @kairosman My system is probably well equipped to appreciate the Gustard. However, I'm quite happy with what I have. My original question was more rhetorical than applicable. 

@knownothing thanks for the thread link. What I read there corresponds to what I know about phono stages (which I'm way more experienced with than with DACs). Yet DACs, by their very nature, seem more complicated and technical than phono stages. 

@charles1dad …”I would also prefer the natural sound presentation over the hyper detailed type of presentation.”

+1

I completely agree. First that there are a lot of components with different ultimate sound goals… and consequently sound very different. Hyper detailed system unless really high quality can be accompanied by a high noise floor and distortion, higher level ones eliminate these, but frequently do not sound natural.

Second, I prefer natural sound (highly detailed… but in natural perspective) to details at all cost or accentuated chest caving bass, or super fast transients that create a cool effect, but do not sound like real music.

@simao great that you are satisfied with the Gungnir, I must admit it has been expensive suffering from upgraditis! My limited understanding of the technical design differences between expensive and cheap DACs is that power supply, isolation, and clocking are the key areas. I'm not an engineer so I can't assess design choices, but one look inside an MSB Reference was a damn convincing experience of what your money buys you when you spend $$$$. As an aside, it's interesting that "superbly" measuring DACs like my Topping D90SE don't sound as good as the more expensive DACs in my collection that measure comparatively poorly... whatever design and parts choices that lead to great measurements don't correlate with great sound necessarily.

A lot of people are missing the point about the Gumby! I own one, and bought it used for a good price.What sold me over the other DACs is it is upgradeable. I can for a price, upgrade it when Schitt upgrades it. Also, I just love the proprietairy USB  side. Unison. I found out that I was overfiltering it. I plug it right into the powerstrip with Surge protection. I know what you are thinking, What !!!!! Straight out to a protected power strip? Yes, but I live 300 feet in my neighborhood from the transformer. And all my power is pretty good. And, I have a Schitt Freya + and a Prima Luna Prologue 5. SO, my tube rolling can change the sound dramatically!!So I feel every setup can sound good if you know what you are doing, and know how to tweek,and know the synergy with other components. We all upgrade, and it does help. But Does a 5k DAC sound better? Probably, but I get 97 percent of the way there. And I am happy. For now!

@kairosman +1

I must also admit that our biases, both positive and negative biases, play a role. For instance, the fact that ASR shills for Topping negatively affects my impression of their products in much the same way if your ex-wife likes strawberry ice cream. It doesnt matter thereafter, there will be no strawberry ice cream for me. For the record, I’ve been happily married for 26 years. Also for the record, I have no idea if my ex likes strawberry ice cream…I never listened to her long enough to find out.

@kairosman

As an aside, it’s interesting that "superbly" measuring DACs like my Topping D90SE don’t sound as good as the more expensive DACs in my collection that measure comparatively poorly... whatever design and parts choices that lead to great measurements don’t correlate with great sound necessarily.

This is not a surprising finding. I have read comments from DAC designers/builders who say that even inexpensive off the shelf Op-Amps are capable of surperb measurements on a test bench. But they stated that this result is not correlated with good sound quality.

This explains why some lower cost DACs can have excellent performance numbers yet disappoint when actually listening to recorded music.

Charles

@charles1dad yes it's obvious that if measurements captured ALL sonically relevant parameters then excellent measurements would correlate strongly with sonic excellence. One such parameter is soundstage width/depth - which set of measurements reliably correlate with a wide/deep soundstage? Answer: nobody seems to know. Why is there not more curiosity about answers to these sorts of specific questions amongst the measurements-first crowd? Even I would be interested in studies done to determine the answers, so one is left to surmise that crowd aren't interested really in science as much as they are interested in being right and trolling those who aren't convinced that the current sonic measurements regime is a completed field of study.

@kairosman 

Good observations. I would bet a paycheck that your Topping DAC measures better than your LampiZator Baltic 4. I’d also bet that it doesn’t sound nearly as good as the Baltic 4 DAC.

Charles 

@charles1dad

please come over this weekend, i am hosting a listening party using oscilloscopes only... we will look at sine wave traces at varying frequencies of a dozen dacs --- be prepared to be impressed!  we can sit outside on the deck enjoy the crisp winter air!!

oh yes, several of my deaf friends will be in attendance...😂🤣😅😆

@jjss49 

Well, you certainly have the appropriate friends for such a gathering.😊😊

Charles 

The one thing no one has mentioned (as far as I have read) is service and support after the sale.  Good customer support and service is a hallmark of the high end hifi industry.  It has a lot to do with good gear keeping its resale value because people know certain brands are still supported years after the original sale.  That service can also include in home setup and adjustments from specially trained individuals.  A lot to be said for good customer service.  We Americans have grown accustomed to seeking out the best deal so much that now we have to pay for service and support after the sale.  Apple, Best Buy, et al have set up a nice side income with their monthly payment plans for warranty support.  So for those looking solely at the bottom line point of sale, they prefer to spin the roulette wheel in hopes that their new component never fails.  The other problem is that many things we buy today are no longer supported after just a few years.

I'd love to see the look on my grandparents faces if I could have told them that one day people would pay $1500 or more for a telephone and then throw it away in just a couple of years as it becomes obsolete.  Not to mention the $17/month extended warranty fee.  We have given away so much with respect to customer service.

Most fun I have had with my Terminator lately is fabricating various brass "drains" of the pointy and sometimes not so pointy varieties to replace the rubberized feet that came with it. I am astonished at the different ways a DAC can be made to dance by modifying its supports.

@charles1dad wrote: "Good observations. I would bet a paycheck that your Topping DAC measures better than your LampiZator Baltic 4. I’d also bet that it doesn’t sound nearly as good as the Baltic 4 DAC."

Charles 

I bought a D90SE soon after it first came out.  I think it's still the highest measured DAC on ASR but I haven't been on there in a while to verify.  Anyway, I was looking for a new DAC for my PC setup.  I had an older Ayre Codex and my PS Audio Stellar DAC was away for warranty issues.  Bottom line, I sent it back.  It sounded low-fi and cheap, probably on par - or maybe a tad better than my Schiit Modi Multi-bit 2 DAC.  I put up a more descriptive review on Amazon at that time.  I gave it 3 stars, which surprises me.  I must've been in a great mood that day.

Interesting thread. I’m an audiophile voyeur but a mid-fi owner…and think my hobby benefits measurably from many threads here. From the perspective of available time, budget and living space size, I’m locked into making the most from digital sources, so DAC talk matters to me…followed by cable info :)

FWIW, the quality of my listening has gone up a lot by using the Auris Audifi WiFi Receiver, an amazing device for micro-dollars. The interface is phone based and can handle many hi-res music services at lossless file size. The ESS Sabre DAC inside seems to push a dynamic range that matches the potential of my AE Techron serviced 1984 Crown PS 200 (155 WPC into 4 ohm Wharfedale Lintons and a REL T5i with Mogami cables and interconnects.)

Thanks all for helping our household “listen way above our budget.”

Much of what is praised over at ASR is mediocre Chi Fi .    My former DAC , the RME adi2 was the darling of ASR until some cheap Chi Fi DAC bettered it's specs....and then that was the favorite of ASR

My current DAC is completely void of features , the only thing it does better than the adi2 is sound better.   That RME is good but the  excellent sounding LAB 12 DAC is much more engaging to listen to. 

@oddiofyl 

My current DAC is completely void of features , the only thing it does better than the adi2 is sound better.   That RME is good but the  excellent sounding LAB 12 DAC is much more engaging to listen to. 

Understood.  However, for some, it seems that sound quality and listening engagement/enjoyment are secondary concerns.

Charles 

@oddiofyl What else could you tell me about the Lab12? I've been intrigued by their products for a while. 

Here's a tangential question: Why does Tidal Master quality streaming through my Oppo/Schiit combo sound so much better than playing a CD through the same combo? I'm talking of identical releases of CD and streaming selection.