Chayro > As with anything in this hobby, everything costs as much as your ears say it costs. If one is deaf, reality costs nothing.
Blindjim > thanks for the extremely interesting perspectives. I will assume this is in the context of HD audio, and whole heartedly agree.
Otherwise, I’d not wish to bare the burden of being deaf as I’m quite able to relate to the added costs any disability weighs on a body. Trust me.
The sole caveat that looms over any exercise in system errection is there is in fact a step, an entry point, or threshold of diminishing returns, and there is where for all intents and purposes, reality rests.
Thereafter such perimeters lay only uneasy dreams of possibly scant degrees of better, and loads of sheer folly for the overwhelming majority of audio enthusiasts who attempt to pursue it further.
That is where reality truly lives. Immediately at the sign post which reads “not much past this point”. Or in plain English, ‘Stuckey’s next exit’. lol
gs5556 > The $2,300 Schiit Yggdrasil said by RH as one of the best three DACs he's ever heard
add it to an Aurender N100H playback system which would compete with anything in a Dubai penthouse
blindjim > Thanks a lot. whoa!cool.
Didn’t RH say as much about a few other DACs too? PSA, Exogal, etc. can’t recall now. Sorry. I’ll definitely look into it in any event. Thanks again.
Lalitk > The market is now flooded with plenty of DAC's under $10K
Blindjim > I sincerely appreciate your thoughtfulness and concerns, however, this is not about my situations or preffs. It is simply about OMG!! Actually OMG ‘reality’. Subjectively of course, as defined by what a particular DAC can deliver. As is EVERTHING posted anywhere about audio or for that matter anything else, apart from perhaps measured parameters, its subjective. Albeit measurements can be taken to task as well.
In this instance, as was posted above, we have on hand an exceptionally well balanced, most adequate resolving system in place already. You did read that part right? It was in the first paragraph or so.
IMHO Sources are not defined by ancillary aspects like rooms, or musical preffs, topology designs in power or even existing speakers in the system. Sources have only one duty. They must provide the signal that everything else down stream will render.
Here, DACs worth having are not one trick ponies and offer several interface and format handling options and are disqualified if said versatility and capabilities beyond PCM is not their fort.
We’ve all had those moments we’ve heard something somewhere that we just can not forget. A sound that haunts us still. Maybe, we’ve managed to acquire a DAC that elevated our system to unexpected heights.
Consequently, this is decidedly about where have you found your DAC epiphany? Or where do you presume it to be found by either model or price given what you have seen and heard in your home or elsewhere?
Hope that delivers sufficient clarity.
|
Bigkidz > Not sure what the real question is here. Cost of materials? Depends on the
Blindjim > try this: How much does DAC Reality cost these days? Or, you could actually read the introduction perhaps.
IOW… which DACs deliver reality and what do they cost? Not looking for a parts list. I Can’t make it simpler than that. Sorry.
Appreciate the interest and efforts. Thanks.
2psyop > Schiit's marketing strategy is that they will upgrade the dac you buy from them at an attractive (lower) cost than the option of buying a new DAC.
Blindjim > now that is striking. An upgrade path that is reasonable is always gonna be a huge plus IMO.
I think too, any DAC that can provide the experience of live music in the confines of one’s stereo rig should count. This is regardless if it can do DSD, upsample, etc.
Having now read thru Stereophile’s and RH’s article on the “Schiit's” DAC, the only concern I came away with is exactly how detailed and resolute is this thing?
A 15 day trial ain’t gonna be long enough given what RH said about letting it run in for 400 hours before he rechecked it for SQ and found it had gone from a cocoon to a butterfly.
RH is a real card carrying detail freak IMO. Another DAC he included in the comparison was the Berkley Ref which he accounted for using SET amps and I assume his Q7s. he has one extremely insightful and incisive system that’s for sure, though if its all about the details and leading edges , which it can well be for some, it could be much too much of a good thing for others.
|
Czarivey > And you may ask yourself, well How did I get here?
Blindjim > I could have a prime time HBO special movie that tells that tale. Ever see ‘Raising Arizona”?along those lines, just more dramatic.
r_m > …. Building a system… keep us posted. Tim,
blindjim > yep. And making as much headway as a blind centipede with 98 broken ankles.
jl35 > super deals Exogal Comet … Aesthetix Romulus Eclipse with NOS tubes.
Blindjim > if they were selling new BMWs on the corner for $1500 a piece, all I could do today is tell other folks how great a deal they might be missing! This will change soon, but obviously not today.
the Romulus intrigues me as does another DAC posted into this thread previously.
|
blindjim > thanks. I kind of like it as it is in that all in one configuration pretty much. I’ll have to investigate it. I plan on buying another Oppo anyhow.
as much as dynamics and transparency are important to recreating sensible staging and musical involvement, they aren’t the end all be all properties source units MUST contain.
reality delivered as naturalness is the key for me. Always.
I’ll reiterate, which DACs outside this list, possess the high end credentials Digital converters are required to have so reality can then be achieved downstream?
As inexpensively as possible doesn’t mean merely the cheapest, it means what ever brings home the bacon and the associated expense for the ‘bacon’ to wind up in the bag.
What is your pick for a new DAC?
Oppo 205?
Modded Oppo 205?
Oppo DAC?
Berkely Reference DAC?
EMM Labs 2X?
|
david_ten > What is ahead of the DAC is as important as the DAC
blindjim > I’m fast coming to the same conclusion. On several planes. See current threads I’ve posted. Thanks. Your input is greatly welcomed.
Agitater > System synergy is everything.
Blindjim > you nailed it right there. Pretty much.
Despite the properties any DAC displays including the system of course, the variable no one accounts well for, or at all at times, is the owner’s preffs and how they hear the music.
That’s quite a DAC ology, thanks.
Lalitk > ….only DAC I care to recommend is Meridian Ultra
Blindjim > I’ll look into that one. you’re too kind, and my system’s present circumstance is pitiful by any account.
Whenever I figure out how to navigate this site better, I’ll update everything. I can’t even see how to PM someone or search the listings well.
In essence, I’m pretty much starting over, hence the various threads for acquiring current info on 2017’s more important items. Sure, I have enough to arrange a rudimentary outfit that is pleasant but nothing near any of my previous stereos. In due time, this one should easily best anything I’ve owned previously.
… were it only that if’s and but’s were candies and nuts.
|
Desktopguy > The NOS 19 in particular has ended my "digital journey" for the time being, probably for quite awhile.
Blindjim > … and that is what this topic is all about. Many thanks.
Shakira > Mojo Audio Mystique V2+
Dac From Benjamin
Blindjim > cool. Thank you.
Gdhal > are said to sound somewhat more "accurated" and "detailed" than other R2 R DACs.....
Blindjim > got it. THX a lot.
A note on the $2300 West coast DAC. In an article I read from Comp Audio (I think) said the Ygersol was the best DAC for acoustic music the reviewer had ever heard. Other articles intimated the degree of resolution was high indeed.
There is no abject dissolving of system synergy and everything in a system matters for a resolute engaging audio rig is the culmination of all of its parts.
That said, and as vital as is a source which reveals it all, this topic’s aim originally
Was to unearth those DAC whose subjective performance rivaled reality on its own merits. In essence a digital converter or digital conversion arrangement, now that renderers and servers are taking on greater roles, which can stand alone in ANY stereo that will undeniably lift the presentation demonstrably and quite substantially without a subjective appraisal.
Perhaps the Yggersol is that capable all by itself, in any context. As a converter of CD data, or via various file formats playback, regardless how they are conveyed.
I’m leaning hard on the Aurender A10, or another Aurender iteration and the EMM labs 2x DAC as my AFL (Audio fantasy League) selection.
Albeit the yggersol and Exogal Comet aint out of the picture by a long shot either IF an Aurender Box is in the mix which reclocks and avoids the USB interface.
AFL… lol…. well, its almost football time, right?
|
gkr7007 > there are sure a lot of low cost DAC units out there right now that really kick…
blindjim > the ongoing caveat for superlatives in this hobby is the inherently subjective content.
Reality can be spun to mean personal preffs, although when a mandolin sounds like a mandolin is playing the room but isn’t visible, I’d say that is reality. Likewise for all the other instruments including voice.
Being able to discern which ‘mandolin’, piano, or guitar is being played… without looking at the album notes or pics, now that thar is true reality. Kind of Twlight Zone reality, but real nonetheless.
I’m very happy settling for knowing what instrument is what , not necessarily ‘which’ piano is being played by brand and model. Sheesh. I’d go crazier. Although it might come in handy with Power ball choices. lol
Yes. You are right thankfully. More less costly over achieving DACs are available today than in past years. There always seems to be a few very high value performers in most categories. It sure helps anyone who is restless or is looking to actually upgrade their outfit rather than to simply swap in and out ‘different’ sounding pieces.
I’m very likely going to move ahead in one of these less costly choices initially.
Soundsrealaudio > My landing point is the Bricasti M1. I have loaded all my CD's on my Melco N1 library/player.
Blidnjim > Congrats!!!
Neutral, quick, transparent speakers is the supposed objective, isn’t it?
Nordicnorm > The challenge for us audiophiles is to find components that match our systems synergy. The trick is to find the one that matches the rest of your system.
Blindjim > I appreciate the thoughtful insights. Thanks much. But let’s agree to disagree philosophically on what actually is synergy and the priority a source device should be held too.
Although one doesn’t ALWAYS find more expensive items have as well commensurate performance, it is usually the case that they do more often than not.
I totally feel and fully believe the ‘source’ is the whole shooting match. Numero uno priority! In my system as per certain preffs and constraints, the digital conversion is it for me. Period and paragraph. No tone arms no more. Possibly tuners and tape decks, maybe.
If a source, or DAC in this instance does not provide every ounce of musical information available, and demonstrate it in a manner which displays a refinement resembling truth and propriety, the downstream result often finds itself less than convincing regardless how great the rest of the arrangement.
Secondly nothing downstream from a source unit, in spite of what it may be, can ever make up for what is not there to begin with, although downstream components are most capable of detracting from the purity of the signal if not managed thoughtfully.
Synergy’ is a result not an approach. It is as well, a subjective appraisal. It might be a consensus of many opinions, yet in all it remains subjectively arrived.
It is why I felt the topic here of ‘reality’ should always be the common denominator for affecting a stereo system.
The term ‘synergy all too often is the result of previous and regular intentioned compensations.
1. that thing is sort of bright, so another less bright thing comes in to compensate somewhere else.
2. This tweeter is too strident it should be run with tubes in the mix.
3. That speaker is too analytical and too detailed so use a PP tube amp on it.
4. Glorious sound extremely lush, but not very honest.
5. Gee, that rig sounds like it has too much of a good thing going on.
Why do any of these things? If… IF… the items we buy are well balanced, high quality devices that deliver the truth in the first place, why then worry later about what goes into the system thereafter?
An all too general note would be it ain’t a perfect world.
An accurate, real, tangible thought could be some things are better made than others. Another tact is some things dictate certain considerations if you want to have them in a system and they usually tell you this tid bit beforehand.
Works best bi amped, or tri amped.
Needs more power.
Wont’ do well in a large room.
Is better suited to ???
Isn’t going to give you that bottom octave.
If reality remains the target all along, how do you ever miss the destination?
Again, if we chose things which demand various considerations, it ain’t their fault its ours, and our duty to placate or attend to those outlined or implied restrictions are duties we foist upon ourselves by making poor decisions.
A huge diff in 2017 is a DAC now must take on more responsibilities than ever before. They aint just here to make CDPs sound better any longer. Much more is being shoveled onto their plates and new tech is saying we need to refine what we are transmitting to these new age DACs as well. Some current DACs attempt to eradicate the need for a preamp completely.
At the end of the day, only one opinion matters and that’s the one paying the cost to be the boss.
|
david_ten > If it's only about one's opinion, which you state "only one opinion matters" ...why go through this exercise? …. Opinions do matter and is why we seek them out.
Blindjim > Hi david_ten sorry for the confusion. I believe my statement “… paying the cost to be the boss” is being taken out of contexst. Or at least its intended context, or reference.
The short answer: and I hope I’m not missing your point
You are right. Other people’s appropriate input and opinions do matter.
Here’s my inference… another person’s input, concerns, experiences, etc., are not paying for the device, nor will they suffer either benefit or consequence from my selection.
But, I will. I’ll be paying and living with ‘whatever comes later. Elation or regret. It is my province in the end.
I read or generate threads only because I do not know it all.
I’ve no argument regarding the validity of another’s experiences, product knowledge, or technical expertise which has a specific bareing on a given topic. Indeed very often a good choice follows from gaining more germaine knowledge and outside opinions doing exactly that.
I had never heard of the Schiit Audio Yggdrasil DAC among others, prior to this thread, and now it is a very viable option.
In replying to Nordicnorm I wanted to make the point that ‘synergy’ was a result and not a compromise, or at least should not be a compromise, especially in a source device if at all possible.
Too often we are forced to fit this or that into a system because some component’s sonic attributes can not stand alone and need enhancement or ameiliaration.
My point was or is, that a solid, refined, excellently performing DAC (in this instance) should be ‘synergistic’ in any system. This is of course, If all else in the outfit is on a commensurate level of performance.
To that end, and as reality is the key topic herein, I could not dismiss the fact, far too often reality gets defined by subjectivity and not purely on its actual merits.
Since we are not all able to drop six digit money on our stereo’s we often find ourselves forced to mix in an appliance that is not nearly perfect now and then and as we add more and more less than outstanding things into the array, we do two things. Compensate, and use our best judgement which necessitates a subjective assessment at each interval of adding in or taking out this or that link from a audio rig.
Sadly, due predominately to costs, each of the decisions we make on the devices we buy and what we feel is important in the audio presentation that butters our bread, floats our boat, or simpler put, makes .us happy, is all too often a personal preference fuled by means and not solely based on sonic purity, integrity, and candor of the component itself.
Despite the facts based on the concensus of any thread asking for experiences, it will inevitably come to what a person can afford and the sonic qualities they are trying to maintain or develop.
Consequently, with that ‘subjective’ icon so glaringly affixed to so many audio systems, I said, ‘at the end of the day, the only opinion that matters is the one whose interests are being served for it is ‘they’ you or ‘me’ that will pull the trigger on this one or that one, regardless the instructions, experiences and feedback from other interested parties to the contrary.
50 members could all say get the XYZ DAC!!! 50 more might say get the ABC DAC!!! 40 could say something else. Or it could be a very mixed bag with one or two items, often the less costly ones getting a few more votes amidst a list of other votes for different DACS as is the case here.
So far the few I have on my list have not yet been mentioned by anyone except by me.
Then what does a person do?
IMHO Be completely humbled by the influx of feedback by other members, and remain ever grateful for it, aspiring thereafter to give back in likewise fashion whenever possible.
Yet, as in this instance, ‘I’ll’ do what I feel is best for me and the outfit I want to build, because… I’m paying the cost to be the boss. Lol
Despite this particular decision more opportunities for other concerns will get posted and read, and choices made. Way too often if you look at the threads and the end result, you’ll chuckle about the final selection of the OP in the thread and how it differs so vastly from its generated concensus, if in fact there was one, and the OP follows up.
|
@David
Too kind. Thanks.
It never hurts to be kind. It costs absolutely nothing.
I don't believe brevity is a fashionable or even useful way of life. Obviously. to that end. one might as well fully engage what is going on.and at least attempt to convey accurately what is on their minds. It may not be without errors even still, yet it seems a more personable manner of communication, … in a very very, impersonable world.
|
