Thanks again for doing this. As I have said, I am just starting my search another DAC, so your timing is quite good and speaking of quite good, so is your test list!
Six DAC Comparison
I am in the middle of comparing the sound of six different DACs in my system. I own them all (I know weird) but one of them is still within a trial/return timeframe.
Not to share specific comparisons today, but a couple of observations so far are that first, they all definitely sound different from each other. On one hand, they all sound pretty good and play what is fed to them without significant flaws but on the other hand there are definite sonic differences that make it easy to understand how a person might like the sound of some of them while not liking others.
Second, raises the observation that most of them must be doing something to shape the sound in the manner the designer intended since one of the DACs, a Benchmark DAC3 HGA, was described by John Atkinson of Stereophile as providing "state-of-the-art measured performance." In the review, JA closed the measurements section by writing, "All I can say is "Wow!" I have also owned the Tambaqui (not in my current comparison), which also measured well ("The Mola Mola Tambaqui offers state-of-the-digital-art measured performance." - JA). The Benchmark reminds me sonically of the Tambaqui, both of which are excellent sounding DACs.
My point is that if the Benchmark is providing "state-of-the-art measured performance," then one could reasonably presume that the other five DACs, which sound different from the Benchmark, do not share similar ’state-of-the-art" measurements and are doing something to subtly or not so subtly alter the sound. Whether a person likes what they hear is a different issue.
- ...
- 365 posts total
@sns Just a thought…. Seeing as how you would really like to have his opinion on how it sounds directly compared with the others in his collection of dacs, maybe you would consider sending your to him so that he could conduct the review for you 👍 Just a thought. Best wishes, Don |
Hi @facten I’m not @classicrockfan but I have a similar experience. I had in my system Chord Qutest for many years. This May I bought an SMSL DO300EX built on the AKM 4499 chip. This DAC looks like a toy relatively to Hi End DAC but it sounds better in every way than Chord Qutest that cost 3 times more.SMSL noticeably more resolving, play sophisticated music, less congestion and sounds much less clinical and "digital". It also has 6 DSP filter modes. One of them "super slow" is actually NOS (not oversampling) mode like in some 2R2 DACs. The "super slow" mode is my favorite in this DAC. It sounds most analogue and natural without digital glare. Look at this: https://www.power-and-beyond.com/pcb-manufacturing-these-are-the-biggest-players-a-c38499760ae9053b34d796adf3d0746f/ Where is most PCB manufacturing today? SMSL is a mass market producer. It uses the latest PCB and switching power supply technologies that China has today. The same technologies used for high speed communication. Western audiophile garage companies can’t compete with SMSL in PCB design. OK, they can use better quality capacitors and other parts, heavy aluminium chassis. But all this increases the final cost of the product and in result you pay in number times more. Why western DAC built on the same AKM4499 chip with solid state output buffer have an order of magnitude worse distortions? Do these distortions make sound better? |
"""Curious do you have the SMSL and/or Gustard in your system? Also, which specific 10X more expensive DACs have you had in your system; and in what respects the 2 aforementioned outperformed each of the 10X more expensive ones?""" Yes I had the both performed almost identical but sold the Gustard and kept the SMSL for a couple of practical reasons. And yes I had an expensive DAC made in USA and sold it because it was totally outperformed by the much cheaper Chinese DAC in terms of sound quality and convenience but don't want to disclose the company name/brand. |
| Post removed |
- 365 posts total