It’s threads like this that have continually educated me about my hobby and my system. It’s beneficial when manufacturers and dealers contribute to our forum. I now understand why my Concert Fidelity 040BD DAC doesn’t have a clock - and has only one input - S/PDIF. It sure sounds good to me. Thank you @fuzzbutt17 for joining the discussion.
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.
- ...
- 408 posts total
Every DAC manufacturers claims their implementation is the best and sounds the best. What’s new here ? Whatever Mojo Audio has stated in that post is right and wrong at the same time. Many folks already know those facts but they are all theory, however in practice they don’t really agree irrespective of what a manufacturer claims.
Talk to Taiko Audio and they will tell you their proprietary ultra high speed XDMI interface is the best for Audio with ultra low latency. Talk to MSB and they will tell you their ProISL is the best since it can completely isolate noise from the source. I have heard many DAC whose AES sounds mediocre at best. Then how come it’s the best interface for audio ? How come USB, which wasn’t even design for audio sounds the best with many DACs ? and so on…
so, who is right ? Does anybody (especially the consumers) think there is a winner ? I doubt…. |
Posts like @fuzzbutt17 's latest add a lot of value to this forum imo. Thank you for taking the time. |
Posts like @fuzzbutt17 's latest add a lot of value to this forum imo. Thank you for taking the time. Agreed! +++ |
@debjit_g +1 Exactly! Is there an objective best with streaming components and chains, streaming is the wild west these days, so many devices and ways to implement these devices. Only with direct comparisons within one's own system could we begin to develop a hierarchy for so many designs, implementation of those designs. And still, that hierarchy may only hold for that individual. I've read plenty of white papers over at Audiophilestyle forum, the rationale and logic makes sense, does it result in higher sound quality? Sometimes yes and sometimes no, and this based on anecdotal evidence from any number of users. And then we make our choices, add our voices, and so it goes. |
- 408 posts total