Next best exponential DAC quality level?

First, you should upgrade to Qobuz for a better quality source that will help you better sort out the difference between DACs.  That’s probably part of the reason you had a hard time discerning differences.  But yes, differences between DACs are more nuanced than, say, speakers, but they are still important and can dramatically affect the overall sound quality you ultimately achieve.  I’d say once you hit the $700 level you start getting into units with more accomplished designs and better parts quality, but that’s a very general guideline. 

+1 @soix 

op - you also did not mention your speakers... no idea whether they have sufficient resolution/quality to allow you to hear the differences among the dacs you are attempting to compare

I'd say you learned an important lesson about DACs, price doesn't = performance. You could spend 10x as much and still not hear differences unless the DAC has been purposely built to have a sound signature.

Every DAC I've listened to has a different sound signature.  They are subtle, but easy enough to detect, with the caveat being that the source files are of good quality and your system is up to the task of revealing the differences. 

Spending more doesn't always result in "better".  Typically for things to cost less there have to be either huge economies of scale (think McDonalds) or compromises made.  It's up to you as to what constitutes "good enough".

As to how much you'd have to spend to realize an "exponential" difference in quality", I don't think that's going to happen.

Putting performance tires on a Corolla does not make for a track demon. Now would you deride the performance tires as snake oil since it didn't magically transform your Corolla, which by the way is a great car for daily commuting, into a sports car? Same applies to audio equipment. Nothing lives in a vacuum. Everything is system/synergy dependent.

To answer a few questions:
Speakers: Kef LS50 w/ dual PSA subwoofer

Speaker Wire: Mogami DIY cables

Integrated: Hint6

AmazonHD: The source content is what they call "Ultra HD" (24/192) and I was able to verify that it was being passed at the highest bitrate.

I think I have a sufficiently capable system to discern any differences. Truth is, I did pickup subtle differences, but again the differences aren’t quite worth the cost of entry (IMO). I also fully expect that my ear just isn’t tuned properly to pickup the differences... Which might be a good thing :)

In most other upgrades: amp, speakers, speaker wire, TT cart, TT upgrades I’m able to pick out something ’better’ whether it’s more detail, lower noise floor,etc. With DACs it’s def. more subtle.

I guess I’m surprised at my observations -- and maybe lesson learned!

My next attempt will be with more capable DACs: Denafrips, Border Patrol, maybe a BiFrost2.

op i would agree that kef ls50’s driven by your hint should be sufficiently resolving to hear differences amongst dacs - do try hi-res streams from tidal or qobuz or downloaded ones - recording quality does make a huge difference in being able to hear into the music and differentiating gear

and i also agree you should go to the next tier of dacs - denafrips pontus, mhdt, soekris, schiit yggy or gumby and so on... enjoy

I have the $99 Khadas KTB. Sounds excellent in my system. I doubt spending 10 - 20 X $$$$ will yield better sound! The ESS ES9038 chip set is a formidable device!

I doubt spending 10 - 20 X $$$$ will yield better sound!

Of course it won't. It all sounds the same......🙄

Once they hit a certain SINAD all DACs do sound basically the same in they don’t contribute to the overall distortion of the system. If in doubt then do a few ABX tests.

oh man here we go again 😞

'well you know it all kinda looks the same to me' -- stevie wonder

How can one hope to hear any difference streaming from a computer?

Steve Stone did a comparison of the various HD music services and Amazon HD did not fare well.  They’re just not there yet.  Do a free trial of Qobuz and see for yourself. 

I’m always amazed how anyone can hear differences in DACS where even lousy ones will have a SINAD of -85db with background noise in most homes around 30db and the distortion from even great speakers can reach 1% . It’s a miracle on par with Stevie Wonder regaining eyesight, but to each his own.

I got a chance to talk to the CEO of Parasound.

He was extremely pleased with the DAC's they got for the original HINT, and felt it was a significant upgrade to the DAC they put in the preamp that went before.  Also, the ZDAC was one of the best cheap DACs I've heard.  It was really really good, so I'm not surprised you are happy with the performance. :)

Best,

Erik

Steve Stone did a comparison of the various HD music services and Amazon HD did not fare well. They’re just not there yet. Do a free trial of Qobuz and see for yourself.

Yep, here’s the orig. source:

https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/amazon-music-hd-wants-you-but-do-you-want-amazon-music-hd

Pretty lite on technical content though.

Steve takes issue with the HD vs Ultra HD terms and also cites the lack of "Ultra HD" content when compared to Qobuz.  They have come quite a long way in terms of content.   

Anyway, my assumption going into this test was that a 24/192 source is good enough - no matter if it's AmazonHD or Qobuz... amirite?

@soix - I 100% agree that source content matters, but do you hear a difference between Qobuz 24/192 and AmazonHD 24/192?  (Legit question)

@fuzztone - I don't have another choice for streaming (well, maybe an iphone, but that's probably not the direction you were going).  What should I be using? 

BTW, I agree that local / ripped content is the best setup and ultimately minimizes the complexity.  But these days, music catalog selection and convenience win...  problem is:  I can't quite quantify what I'm loosing out on!   

If you are in the NYC area please feel free to bring your DAC over to are listening room to see if you can hear a difference compared to a DHT based tubed DAC any time.

Happy Listening.

Anyway, my assumption going into this test was that a 24/192 source is good enough - no matter if it's AmazonHD or Qobuz... amirite?

Well, if memory serves that’s not what Steve found.  I kinda doubt Amazon is delivering 100% HD, but it’s free to try Qobuz so why not just see for yourself?

A DAC with a tube output is like putting maple or chocolate syrup on a vanilla ice cream cone! Euphonic yes, accurate no!

I currently have access to four DACs in my home -- I own 3 and have the fourth one as a loaner courtesy of a wonderful friend.

DAC 1 -- Bluesound Node 2i (owned for more about 2 years)

DAC 2 -- Audio Mirror Tubadour III (non-SE version; owned for 1.5 years)

DAC 3 -- Luxman DA-06 (owned for 1.5 years)

DAC 4 -- T+A DAC 200 (loaner)

Please don’t listen to anyone who says there’s no difference in sound quality. There is absolutely a vast difference between DACs at different price points. The higher end DACs give you a wider soundstage, more air around instruments, better tone and timber, and most importantly a significantly darker background (compared to lower priced DACs) that results in a more detailed resolution. The better DACs also provide a sense of ease where the music just flows like liquid.

The problem is that most of the ’it all sounds the same’ crowd is too busy reading graphs and charts, and never bother to actually listen to some of the better DACs in the market. I can tell you that the differences I mentioned are not subtle at all. You will immediately hear the differences provided the rest of your gear is up to the task.

So between the DACs you have what was your favorite in priority?

I didn't say there's no difference in sound quality. I said once a DAC has reached a certain point they will basically sound the same. For instance a MHTD Pagoda injects enough distortion to have a sound signature. The problem with the DACs all sound different crowd is they have never controlled for bias or level matched properly. I have listened to a lot of DACs , some fairly cheap,  some expensive and one thing I've learned over the years is price does not necessarily equal performance. 

@arafiq  I also have the Hint 6 and am using it's DAC- the ESS Sabre32. I am still fairly new to higher end audio and I am going to dedicate myself to digital. I am streaming Qobuz hardwired through a Bluesound Node 2i. My speakers are Dali Opticon 8. I prefer the Parasounds DAC much more than the BS Node DAC by a wide margin.

No matter how much I read I have been unable to decipher what makes one DAC better than another. I understand the concept of things that cost more generally tend to do so because they are better but in the case of DACs what are the metrics? What am I looking for spec wise? Specs matter more to me than name. Also out of the DACs you named and are using which do you prefer?

I didn’t say there’s no difference in sound quality. I said once a DAC has reached a certain point they will basically sound the same.

No. Just...no. That’s like saying once amps reach a certain point there’s no difference. That’s just stupid. There are many different architectures in DACs just as with amps, and they all have their own sound characteristics. This is just an ignorant statement.

My experiences have been in the $150, $500, $1,500 and $3,500 realm and the largest quality jumps to my ears were had at the $150-$500 (65% sound improvement), then most notably at the $1,500-$3,500 (85% sound improvement). Moving between $500-$1,500 DAC’s I experienced maybe a 15% improvement which was underwhelming pressing me onward and upward.

Presently I’m really enjoying my Musetec MH-DA005, the clarity, micro-dynamics and holographic soundstage are incredible.

Hmm...where are these percentages coming from? Rough Guide, Lonely Planet? The Book of Absolutes?

I’m always amazed how anyone can hear differences in DACS

Ignorance is bliss. At least you save money by avoiding upgrades. 

To the folks trying to inject common sense, forget it. It won't take.

@martinman I also suspect that Amazon HD in general isn't up to par with Qobuz, but I'd suggest playing music on Amazon via a Qobuz trial that there's clarity on what the provenance of the recording is. Rumors abound of services upsampling redbook masters to higher bitrates and marketing them as hi-rez. If tracks you're testing with are subject to such shenanigans, that would muddy the waters about the dacs. 

You could also try downloading free known superb recordings from the labels 2L or Blue Coast and see if you hear the same results comparing the DACs. Cheers,

Spencer

Diminishing returns applies to all components in the audio chain. Where you stop is up to you. A small difference can be a very significant difference, or not.

Op, do you want a real answer, or a made up one?

Does that sound silly? This whole thread is silly.

DAC chips are so good today, that you can make a DAC for a few hundred dollars that is better than human hearing will ever be. Add another few hundred dollars and you can isolate that from any noise source. Add in a low volume premium and for under $1,000 you can have something perfect.

Now if you want something that is not perfect, that will cost you big bugs, because then you are paying for art, not reproduction.

Are we supposed to take people seriously that compare highly distorting tube outputs to no distortion solid state? Seems silly. Changing a setting on a DAC for the output filter and a multi-thousand $$ DAC will create more difference between it and itself than it will with similar filter setting between it and a much cheaper DAC.

You are asking a group of people for an opinion who have never compared without looking at whats playing, without ensuring the volume is exactly the same, or learning what the filters do and why they may impart a sound, hence DO sound different, and who think NOS is the be-all, when it is just a noise mess, but sure it does sound different.

Good luck on your quest, but these are not the droids you are looking for ... I mean the answer to the question you seek.

A DAC has to translate digital to analogue with leaves a lot of room for interpretation.

No, it leaves no room for accurate interpretation and can be done today with near perfection, at least as far as any human can tell. However, some companies do "interpret". That is art, not reproduction. If it suits your desires, it is worth the money to you.

DAC 1 -- Bluesound Node 2i (owned for more about 2 years)

Known poorly performing DAC with performance < human hearing range, and some noted issues where performance drops.

DAC 2 -- Audio Mirror Tubadour III (non-SE version; owned for 1.5 years)

Tube DAC, of course it is going to sound different.

DAC 3 -- Luxman DA-06 (owned for 1.5 years)

DAC 4 -- T+A DAC 200 (loaner)

Set to play back accurately, with the same filters, you would not be able to tell these apart without knowing what is playing. They both have controls that let you stray from accurate reproduction in which case you could tell them apart. They are no longer "state of the art" in that instance, they are just "art".

seems like we have some same ol same ol losers back with yet another username, post-expulsion for the umpteenth time... oh well... the holidays’ grace period was nice while it lasted -- trolling / argumentation for its own sake is back in full force...

let's watch 'cindy's' post count skyrocket in the next week or two after 'she' joined, er, today... 

A tech rep from the Harmon Luxury Group came out to our house to diagnose my system.  While he was there he played my system at 35% volume and compared a song played on Tidal and Qobuz.  I couldn't believe the added detail when hearing the same song on Qobuz.  The volume increased when he switched to Qobuz.  I asked him why and he told me the increased resolution acts like increasing the volume because of the added resolution.  I am now researching Qobuz to see if they offer the libraries offered by Tidal.  So far, most of what I have in my Tidal library is available on Qobuz.  I have a few hours left to continue my research then decide.

DAC chips are so good today, that you can make a DAC for a few hundred dollars that is better than human hearing will ever be. 

Rrrrriiiiiiight.  Maybe better than your hearing, but not most humans.  Plus, for a few hundred dollars you’re gonna get a crap power supply and output stage, but I guess those little details don’t concern you at all.  Go figure.  Please go back to ASR where you clearly belong. 

Those who don't use tubes assume a tube DAC, or tubes in general, are always syrupy and full of distortion. Topology and tube selection matter; it's very possible for a Dac using tubes to sound detailed and neutral.  I've heard some SS Dacs that have a warm presentation, not reproducing music realistically.

What should be compared is sound signature of a Delta Sigma Dac vs a multibit or ladder Dac. Not tubes vs SS. 

I couldn't believe the added detail when hearing the same song on Qobuz.  The volume increased when he switched to Qobuz.  I asked him why and he told me the increased resolution acts like increasing the volume because of the added resolution.

This is poppy cox. Odds are it was a different mix, the TIDAL levelling is lower than Qoboz or set lower or your DAC is doing something due to the MQA of TIDAL. The added detail is because Qoboz was louder. When you play louder, there is more detail as there is a bigger difference between the signal and noise.

 That’s like saying once amps reach a certain point there’s no difference.

Once they do, there isn't. 

What should be compared is sound signature of a Delta Sigma Dac vs a multibit or ladder Dac.

Once you reach a particular level of accurate reproduction and you use the same reconstruction/analog filters, there is no sound signature for Delta-Sigma, multi-bit or ladder DACs. Differences in reconstruction filters/analog filters that take the result away from an ideal response will have more difference.

There isn’t a person in all of this site (or any other site) that could tell the architecture of the DAC if designed to be accurate just from listening.

 That’s like saying once amps reach a certain point there’s no difference.

Once they do, there isn't. 

@djones51 — you’re absolutely delusional.  ASR is calling. 

 That’s like saying once amps reach a certain point there’s no difference.

Once they do, there isn't. 

@djones51 — you’re absolutely delusional.  ASR is calling.

Why this toxicity?  This is easy to show.  @djones51 is correct. That does not mean you can pop out one op amp in a circuit and just replace it with a "better" one. The circuit must match the op-amp for best performance.  Within the limits of their performance envelope, you would never be able to tell many op-amps aparts, even some relatively inexpensive ones.

So many love the old pre-digital recordings. Do you know how many cheap 5532 and 5534 op-amps were in the signal chain before you got that record?

@phill55 My preference is in the following order ...

Luxman DA-06> Audio Mirror Tubador 3 > Node 2i

It's too early to comment on the differences between T+A and Luxman yet. 

One thing I did not mention earlier was that right around the time I bought the Luxman DAC, I went through a number of DACs in a 6 month period. Based on stellar reviews and great measurements, I bought the Topping D90. It seemed to do everything right ... on paper. Probably my least favorite DAC, despite it measuring better than many others. At first it impressed, but I just couldn't connect with my music emotionally. It never moved me. I would get bored after maybe 30 minutes of listening. 

Then a used Luxman DA-06 showed up in the used market and I decided to give it a shot. Now mind you, the DA-06 is at least a 6-7 year old design. Within the first 30 seconds, I knew it was a keeper. Sold the Topping within a week, no regrets. There's a reason DA-06 still commands $2k or more in the used market.

However, the best DAC that I have heard in my home is the one that is included in Audio Research GSi75 integrated amp. The level of finesse and balance on that DAC was outstanding. I ended up selling the GSi75 for other reasons but sill miss that DAC.

At the end of the day, it really depends on what one is seeking. If specs and measurements are the end all and be all for you, then more power to you. I see the usual suspects - the graph-readers, the 'everything sounds the same' crowd has raided this thread in full force. The rest of the discussion will only go one way now. No further comments from me. Good luck!

I listened to a DAC for the first time in 1984. That was two years after the arrival of the first CD player to the USA - the Hitachi vertical-loader. In 1983/84 Adcom came out with the first made-in-the-USA audiophile CD player, soon followed by the Adcom  DAC. That's what I listened to in a high-end store. Sounded pretty good - but no cigar! I went back home to my turntable and LP collection. I waited until 1992 to buy my first CD player - a Technics using the MASH circuit. Up till then I didn't think that digital could compete with analog - the reason that I waited ten years to get into digital playback.

That first Hitachi CD player sounded good in 1982 - and at a retail price of $1000 it should! But no cigar! That high-end store had the TOTL Denon TT/arm/mc cartridge into the Levinson JC-1 head amp clone. No.contest - LP playback was clearly way better! I think it took about 10 years for consumer-level CD playback to challenge the LP (1991/92).

There isn’t a person in all of this site (or any other site) that could tell the architecture of the DAC if designed to be accurate just from listening.

That’s absolutely correct. Then why do you and others keep insisting that a tube based DAC is inferior, has poor SQ compared to SS? Oh yeah, it’s the specs.

An example of a well built, well implemented DAC is made by Audio Note. The designer has said they measure and spec the device, then they tweak it during a listening session until it sounds like real music. They use masters as their sources.

How long do we think cindyment has really been on this forum? Maybe 1 day + 4 years? She's really taking a hard stand for a new member.