Over many decades I have owned my share of multi-thousand dollar dacs.My current is my Audio Alchemy DDP-1 + PS 5, which I have owned for ~ 4 years. I have made many changes to my system, including cables and it has shined a light on every one, so I tend to agree with the YTV . Your thoughts?
Dac & wire upgrades will mostly be meaningless until you sink some cash into treatments that actually work.
If you room doesn't start to look like some of these examples ...just forget it, i.e. if you are sitting in the living room and subject to divorce if the room starts to look like a high end studio, save your dac, wire, etc pennies and move on.
If you are a DIY/handy guy with construction & lumber, it will be cheaper.
Even the bow wow bow wow moron in the OP's video is bound to have his pants blown off in one of my rooms... But, in whatever crap room he's sitting in with speakers stacked on pizza boxes, the realtek dac in his computer and an Aavik dac shall all sound the same, that would be his unfortunate reality, whatever...
The guy in the YT video is a clown. I use a fpga dac that is highly rated and doesn’t have his so called common dac chips.
If you relate to what this clown is saying, every house that is made from lumber is the same, every car that uses aluminum and steel are the same, and every tire made out of rubber is the same. I’m glad I only wasted 15 seconds watching that video
YouTube guy’s voice grates a bit like a low-pitched chainsaw. But I stuck with it. He is not talking complete complete BS. He is not very good at math though, unless he is assuming millions of units sold to drive fixed cost per unit down to null when he extrapolates that a top-end AKM DAC should run no more than a few hundred quid despite having an excellent power supply and analog section that engineers sweated over to make sure it sounded right. Throw in a machined case and I’d put that at 1000 clams. Still a far cry from 30K though. So, like I said, not complete complete BS from him. But it is totally uncool to show any FPGA DACs in the original flurry of images if the rant is all about chip DACs.
Sorry but Harry Callaghan said opinions are like arseholes, we’ve all got one we just don’t share them with everyone! I’ve had the Hifi disease now for 50 years, and at the end of the day it’s what sound right to your ears, period
I've seen so many of these discussions. End of day, if you can't hear a difference, you are in the wrong hobby, and you are wasting your $$.
Some of us DO hear profound differences, sometimes sublime differences, and as we can afford to burn money on this hobby...we do.
Discussions like these are like arguing the best flavor of ice cream, or the 'best' color.
You need to listen and decide for yourself. And, I've found it best to not think about it too much or read too much into reviews. You have to listen. And, if you can't hear a difference, you are in the wrong hobby, and you are wasting your $$.
I can see spending maybe up to $10-$15 k is you have the funds .
these are many really good dacs under $10k . I prefer just dedicated dacs much less to go wrong .I have 2 dacs that are very good the Denafrips Terminator-15 has that R2R smoothness and detailed. and a Very musical Swiss dac the Merason dac1 Mk2 which I have compared to dacs up to $15k that maybe better in some areas but not all, natural and musical not processed the Merason does in spades No DSD,,which is no big deal less then 1% of music is in hirez and not always better .
@donavabdear do you have the avid MTRX DA conversion from DAD? That one’s actually terrible especially for the price
@jasonbourne71i’m sure some part of you has good intentions, but you’re coming across as a tool. and you’re factually wrong
As is this video, which we apparently have all suffered through
Just more Clickbait in the attention economy.
Anyone can call themselves a mastering engineer these days, but if we had a club, this guy would have his card revoked for putting out very bad information
Yes of course the chips are all good since the 90s, and it’s not relevant what matters most is the analog stage, the clock, and the filtering, which in high-end situations is done off the chip, in cheaper situations the chip does the filtering
The thing about cost is that it doesn’t always equal quality, but it generally points you in a good direction if you’re dealing with a reputable company
and it costs a lot of money to make incremental changes when you’re already at the high end
as a mastering engineer with credentials I can guarantee you that every converter has a very distinct sound when you have a very revealing chain, a great room, etc., and at a certain point, everyone has to decide what is sufficient for them, which is very similar to the audiophile world where people are basically building a musical instrument of playback
everyone knows converter chips are cheap and have been good for a long time, everyone except the gullible people he’s trying to suck into his YouTube page, if he was actually busy being a mastering engineer, he wouldn’t have time for that page and he wouldn’t say what he’s saying
My journey started with my iPhone hooked up through an adapter to a Pass Labs Aleph P. I found it almost unsuitable for even background music. When I went to a Devialet 200 set up with its built-in DAC, I could now listen to digital for background music. The next step was to the built-in DAC in a Vinnie Rossi L2S preamp which enabled me to actually listen to digital and enjoy it. My current DAC has virtually become a replacement for my analog system since the sound quality is so good and the convenience is no contest.
As some people have mentioned but I would like to emphasize, the analog portion of the digital-to-analog-converter is extraordinarily important.
The expert in the video forgot to mention that it is highly recommended that a tech come out twice a year to adjust the clock to compensate for Daylight Savings Time on those expensive DACs to keep them working at peak performance. Just one more reason not to blow your money on those "high end" DACs.
Just like everything else in our society these days, many people seem to be at the extreme here. Either everything matters or it all sounds the same. Deal with it - not everything matters, but some things matter to varying degrees.
@brianlucey
Yes I have a ProTools system with a Studio MATRX, I'm sure you're right this is my worst sounding DAC, I'd love to upgrade it. Have you done this?
What would you suggest to improve the ProTools DAC but still be able to use the ProTools interface?
@limomangus $2000 is a lot of money and there are many really good DA for 2000 or less and there are also some that are not so good
it’s not a contest on expense, use your ears and find what works for you
@choiceaudio I tried to engage with the guy in a respectful way and he was just playing games with me and I said look I understand you're new to this and he said I've been doing it 20 years, and I said OK so where are your credentials? You've been doing this for 20 years, the guy has literally no credits for work accomplished, all music.com etc.… So now he's resorted to inflammatory posts and branding himself as an expert, it's very typical of this era, but he's a fucking idiot.
@donavabdearthe MTRX with DAD is for atmos ? in order to go a different direction you need external DA, there are many options, I use a combination of the merging with bricasti
--- No dac sound the same with different gear coupling
--- There is no dac scam,only ignorance about the threefold way to embed rightfully any system in his working dimensions (mechanical,electrical,acoustical) once we have decided to pick a dac. Stuck with it and work on his embedding in your speakers/room/ears. Change it only after all has been done...
--- There is difference in Dac design, quality, and synergy...
pick the right one for synergy &budget then embed it wisely...
you will be happy as i am....
Dac sellers profit from customers ignorance about the way to improve their system at low cost...No scam just plain ignorance...
I have a Dragonfly black USB DAC. I paid like $120 for it. My question is: Does a $4,000 DAC sound $3,880 better? Or would I be just as well off buying a used Topping E70 Velvet for $275? Would I even notice an appreciable difference between the Topping and Dragonfly?
A salesman at a high end audio store once told me that the reason $10,000 interconnects exist is because people who buy $100,000 systems feel weird about connecting it all together with $20 cables. I know for a fact that $10,000 cables don't sound $9,980 better than $20 cables. But rich people have to spend their money on something. Is there such a thing as night and day differences between decent DAC's, or is it just different flavors and slight variations? Is it milking that last 2% of sound quality for thousands of dollars buying high dollar DAC's?
@partslingerif you really want to know if a $4k DAC will sound better why don’t you go listen to one with your dragonfly and whatever you hook it up to in tow and do a 1 st hand comparison. That is if you really want to know vs the vieled skeptic question
What may be true to a certain degree for 20$ cable versus 10,000 dollars cable in an 100,000 bucks system,
cannot be applied for a low cost dac versus a very costlier one in the same 100,000 bucks system because the way we evaluate a piece of gear is related to the other gear parts design synergy...
Also a 100,000 bucks system will sound very different and not at his peak potential at all in a living room and in a dedicated acoustic room ... A truth no audiophile like to face...
Nobody want to study and experiment or had the time to do so, they prefer or can only pay for an "upgrade"... But upgrade may be very very rapidly illusory...
Acoustics is better than an "upgrade" because it is the root of sound experience not a "taste" or a "flavor"...
I have a Dragonfly black USB DAC. I paid like $120 for it. My question is: Does a $4,000 DAC sound $3,880 better? Or would I be just as well off buying a used Topping E70 Velvet for $275? Would I even notice an appreciable difference between the Topping and Dragonfly?
A salesman at a high end audio store once told me that the reason $10,000 interconnects exist is because people who buy $100,000 systems feel weird about connecting it all together with $20 cables. I know for a fact that $10,000 cables don’t sound $9,980 better than $20 cables. But rich people have to spend their money on something. Is there such a thing as night and day differences between decent DAC’s, or is it just different flavors and slight variations? Is it milking that last 2% of sound quality for thousands of dollars buying high dollar DAC’s?
@facten I'm sorry if my comment came off as a "vieled skeptic question", that's certainly not how I meant it. It's an honest question. Unfortunately, I live in a small city 100 miles away from anywhere that I might be able to listen to high end equipment first hand. I work 5 days a week and don't often have the time to go out of town.
I can't find any reviews comparing the Dragonfly to anything other than other Dragonfly models, red, blue, cobalt. I honestly have no idea how it compares to other DAC's other than by the price I paid for it. Hence the question. I'm not looking to attack anyone or be attacked, just looking for an honest answer to an honest question. Going from a cheap Chinese tube preamp to a Conrad Johnson pv10 was a night and day difference. All I'm asking is if the technology in DAC's is at a point where they are all pretty close and no real night and day differences exists.
Expensive DACs are all hype. At the end of the day, it’s all ones and zeroes and the algorithm. Save your money and put it towards great amps and speakers.
@partslingerMy apologies for reading into your post. I haven’t heard the Dragonfly so I can’t offer an opinion on it. That said I’ll offer the following. My 1st separate DAC I purchased years ago cost around $350-450. I don’t recall if it was an entry level PSAudio or Music Fidelity, regardless it sounded better or more to my taste than the DAC in my Arcam CD player. I eventually replaced that with a $1600 April Music DAC that was across the board better sounding. However, I did buy a $1200 Blue Circle DAC that I enjoyed listening to more. After awhile I decided to purchase a tube based DAC , the 3 or 4x more expensive Modwright Elysee . It was significantly better in SQ and soundstage while comparable in to the Blue Circle’s sonic tone. I then decided to try an Aqua LaVoce S2 that had an even wider soundtage than the Modwright but I found it too detailed and it left me fatigued listening to it beyond an hour and a half. I sold that off. A Mojo Evo Dac in the cost bracket of the Modwright i found hit the mark on my listening taste. Two years or so ago I auditioned a $15K Tron Signature DAC that has outstanding presentation, but has a very detailed sound that just doesn’t suit my listening taste. Instead of the Tron d I went with a Neodio Origine S2 CD player, the DAC of which more suits my listening taste. The point of all of this is from my perspective you’re not going to be able to know and decide if anything else better suits your listening tastes until you hear them for yourself. The narrative that it’s just ones and zeros so it doesn’t matter is nonsense. DACs don’t all sound the same. Ignore the cost element, how much you spend or not is immaterial. I’d suggest that you rather focus on what sound signature you prefer , seek out the ones that match that, and then decide for yourself if it is worth it to you or not to move beyond what you have.
@partslingerI have both a Dragonfly Black (V1.2) and a Red, and I have tried both with and without an AudioQuest Jitterbug. I have compared them to both Chord QuteHD and Chord Mojo2 DACs. I used these with headphones and in a near field 2.1 desktop system with modest AudioQuest and DIY cables, not high end but in near field at low to moderate volume, revealing, especially of soundstage.
The Dragonfly Black sounds nice, warm, moderately quiet, inoffensive. It was a great improvement over the sound cards typically available in most laptop computers when it was first introduced back in 2012. The Dragonfly Red was a significant step up in terms of detail on offer with it’s ESS chip, and greater amplification on tap to drive a greater variety of headphones. To me the most noticeable difference is the way the Red lays out a pinpoint soundstage. But I also find listening to the Red to be fatiguing in my system or with headphones compared to the Black. The Jitterbug scrubs off some of the edge on the Dragonfly Red, at the expense of detail. The Jitterbug with the Black is just too much softness for me.
In comparing the sound that I get from the AudioQuest Dragonflies to the two Chord DACs, there is no contest. The detail on tap with both of the Chords connected to my MS Surface laptop with a decent USB cable exceeds both of the dongles and while the Chords might give up a touch of the ESS (artificial?) “air” of the Dragonfly Red, that is more than made up for by precise leading and trailing edges of notes, tonal accuracy across the frequencies, ability to distinguish individual instruments and voices, and perhaps most importantly, complete lack of listening fatigue. Both AudioQuest devices sound “grainy” in comparison to the Chord DACs, and the Red is boarding on downright edgy.
Given measurements from ASR show that the Dragonflies measure well below some of the current inexpensive offerings from the likes of Topping or SMSL in terms of signal to noise ratio, you can probably do much better than the Dragonfly Black for not a whole lot more money in desktop packages. If portability and built-in headphone amplification is important, my experience is that the Chord Mojo2 is a significant upgrade, and there may be other products that would improve your experience for less than a Mojo2 (the Mojo2 is much better than the original Mojo, so I would only consider the “2” version). If you have the budget, there are much better sounding DACs for racks at many price points, but something like the Denefrips Aries or Chord Qutest will offer you very different flavors and can be found used now for near a grand or less.
So much fail in this thread. "It's all ones and zeros". That's like saying "it's all just grooves in the vinyl" and that all cartridges sound the same. In both cases there are a lot of important parts and design choices between the input signal and the analog output that (can) have a significant impact on sound quality.
If you're happy with the sound of your $200 DAC and truly believe more expensive ones will all sound the same... I guess you should consider yourself lucky!
@ facten @knownothing Thank you both for your replies. I like the thought of a tube DAC. I don't want fatiguing anything. For clarification, I have a desktop computer feeding a Dragonfly black which is feeding a Conrad Johnson PV-10AL which is feeding an Audiophonics LPA-S500NC into KEF LS50's.
It sounds like even a $400 DAC is going to be an improvement provided I find one that suits my tastes. I like that ultra tubey sound. Euphonic is the word I hear used to describe the sound I like. Marantz back in the day used to have what was referred to as the "two martini sound". I have always been a fan of vintage Marantz sound.
It sounds like both of you liked the Chord line of DAC's, and for reasons I can appreciate. I'll read reviews and compare the Mojo's to some of the Topping DAC's like the E70 Velvet and the Denefrips Aries. I read a review that described the Velvet as sounding warm and non fatiguing, but than I read another review that didn't describe it that way.
Anyway, thank you both so much for your thoughtful replies. I may just buy several DAC's from Amazon or other outlets that allow returns and test until I find what suits me. Thanks again.
The video creator is an idiot, and I hate point blank statements like that, without inspection.....either for or against.
I have tried about 13 or so DACs in my system, with my components, with my ears. All of them made audible differences, some positive and some negative. R2R ladder DACs sound best to my ears, and Lampizators I'm extremely fond of, but I'm not exactly sure what they are yet.
When I had a $15,000 system, lot's of DACs sounded very similar; because my system could not reveal the differences. Years later I now have a $50,000+ setup, and DACs are noticeably different from one another.
I choose to ignore the hype and the ignorance, and just focus on what sounds best to me in my system. In that vein, DACs have made improvements and they don't have to cost $20,000, there are some killer DACs in the $3,000 to $5,000 range......incredible starts a bit up from there.
So much of life is suggestion and predisposition, and this, is mostly that. The video tells you the truth. But beauty matters, build quality matters, parts quality every step of the way matters. So I don't agree that in a "good" system there's not going to be audible differences between a few hundred dollar ADC/DAC and a several thousand dollar unit.
His comments about snake oil are true. Confirmation bias? True. There is no doubt other than your own, but it really doesn't matter. To the degree that multi-thousand dollar units vary in sound is either (and mostly) by design, or it's a bad design, but folks love the sound. Personally I don't believe that altering the D/A output is the way to go. I'd rather figure out what's really lacking in the rest of my signal path.
I do believe that above a few thousand dollars, you're getting into more art than engineering -- and yes -- it's mostly in the looks. Spending $20 or $30k on a unit is not buying better sound. You may like one top-flight Cabernet Sauvignon over another, but it's not better-than/worse-than -- it's just your taste.
This hobby/love is loaded with BS -- but then again, so are countless others.
After a quite long time experience with DACs of different categories and prices I'm convinced that they make minor changes in overall sound reproduction and quality. I suggest all of them use similar kind the conversion methods, whereas the hardware perhaps doesn't matter so much. I cannot explain more technically why this happens but I am convinced about the outcomes.
I believe any component is "tuned" by the designer. So that DAC chip can have it's sound manipulated by how all the other pieces are put together. Power supplies make a huge difference, in my experience as well. Two different car models may share the exact same engine. However, all the things around it (chassis, transmission, etc), will determine any differences the driver my experience.
After a quite long time experience with DACs of different categories and prices I’m convinced that they make minor changes in overall sound reproduction and quality. I suggest all of them use similar kind the conversion methods, whereas the hardware perhaps doesn’t matter so much. I cannot explain more technically why this happens but I am convinced about the outcomes.
... And, with all due respect, those of us who’ve experienced significant differences are just as "convinced".
@stuartk We are talking about the importance of a DAC compared to the other components of a system, comparing the impact of a descent DAC on a system. An impact of an amplifier or a speaker on the SQ of the system is drastic . All modern decent DACs reproduce the digital recording more or less in a similar fashion. The quality of a particular recording affects the overall SQ much more than a particular DAC: Take a well recorded CD and paly it on an inexpensive DAC (with cost < $1K), and take then a little worse recording and play it an a $15k DAC. The first option will give you a better SQ. Of course, if you "invest" your money on an expensive DAC you should be convinced that you made a good investment.
Of course, amplifier and speakers have a greater effect.
I would have to hear a demonstration of what you consider to be "more or less similar fashion".
For me, tonality and musicality are first and foremost and in terms of these factors, I’ve heard fairly dramatic differences in presentation that are most definitely not adequately described as "more or less similar". Variations in recording equality are another variable in the equation. I’m talking about what the DAC itself contributes, all other things being equal.
@stuartk , My point of view is that we all depend too much on the quality of recordings we are listening to. Even on a poorly recorded music, the amps and speakers make huge difference, whereas the differences between DACs are much less. I do not count really bad DACs which do exist (some time I was using Blue note Node 2i but just which is not bad as a streamer, but its DAC is really bad). At the same time, I still use a $130 ifi zen DAC for streaming from my lap in my studio system, and I have a T&A $7000 DAC with a Melco streamer in my main system. I still prefer the latter combination, but I do enjoy streaming in my studio system as well, the SQ is not really bad. I do hear more distortion there, but all recordings and audio gear have some degree of distortion. When I am completely dedicated and concentrated to the music I am listening to, I do enjoy more clear and clean sound in my main system, but this does not demotivate me to listen to my other audio system.
You mentioned about the differences in "musicality and tonality". What differences in tonality or musicality you can hear listening to Led Zeppelin I-VI with different DACs or to Miles Davis Kind of Blue (which is one of the best recorded early albums of Miles Davis)? Can you be more specific on differences in "musicality and tonality" that you note, on which kind of music? How you perceive the "musicality and tonality" in Jimi Hendrix albums, or take much better quality recordings on ECM or more recently on ACT jazz, or on the classical music (which was always recorded much better than the Rock and perhaps also the jazz)?
If ya can't hear any differences stop barking like Barky Bark in OP's video, delete the hifi forum accounts, stick the bose earphones in and walk the dog.
I've seen so many of these discussions. End of day, if you can't hear a difference, you are in the wrong hobby, and you are wasting your $$.
Some of us DO hear profound differences, sometimes sublime differences, and as we can afford to burn money on this hobby...we do.
It’s a reality that some recordings will never sound very good, no matter how expensive the gear. In fact the more resolving the gear, the worse such recordings may sound. It seems a waste of time to me to focus gear upgrades on trying to garner improved sonics from such recordings but then, if much of one’s favorite music is poorly recorded/produced, I suppose it’s understandable. Thankfully, I don’t find myself in such a predicament.
Differences I’ve experienced in DACs:
1) Tonality -- some emphasize the upper mids and highs while others are more rolled off and emphasize the lower mids/upper bass. I happen to be very sensitive to highs/forwardness. I’ve played guitar for 50 + years and tonality has always been a top priority in choosing guitars. I don’t like muddy sounding guitars or bright sounding guitars. Same with audio. It’s not easy to build a guitar that is both warm and clear sounding. Many overemphasize upper mids and highs and truncate bass in an effort to improve clarity and so-called "balance". Much current audio gear, to my ears, sounds like it's voiced to sound "lively" or "energic" and to me this typically translates to fatiguing.
2) "Organic" vs. "Clinical" or Natural vs. Analytic: Some DACs I’ve heard have sounded "dry" while others are more ’liquid". I lack the vocabulary to explain this further, except to say that I associate leaner mids and tipped up highs with the clinical sound. Some DACs have behaved more like lab equipment, akin to a microscope. They’ve emphasize resolution above all else, which sounds very unnatural to me. Not my cup of tea.
3) Bass and 4) Soundstaging
There are other categories I’m probably forgetting. The above are the most obvious to me and reflect my particular priorities. As always, YMMV. I’m more of a music lover than an audiophile so there are factors to which I pay little attention that might figure largely in your gear choices.
We all have different ears (hearing) and sonic priorities. Some may say natural tone or body of sounds and the attack and decay are most important, others will say soundstage and imaging. Some want it all, if they can get it at a price they are willing to pay. We choose our priorities.
@stuartk We all may perceive the sound differently. I just like tube sound and prefer my tube DAC over all other ones. I am just now comparing two class D amps. One has a notably less distortion than the other, while the second one has much wider upper mids and highs, as you like. I still prefer the first amp, but it's really difficult to choose. Different DACs may sound differently, it is a matter of a taste who likes what. And not necessarily a more expensive one dominates a cheaper DAC in all aspects, in fact, I did not have a DAC that dominates in all aspects other DACs that I have/had (the $130 ifi DAC has very notably wider high mids and highs than much more expensive Chord, though the latter one gives less distortion (so you may lake the ifi more than the Chord). Take two women, both beautiful in a different way. Some people would choose one of them and some other another one. Overall, the differences between two decent DACs would not be so notable than the differences between different amps and speakers. One may spend the difference in the cost of two DACs for a better amp or a better speaker. Of course, one with an unlimited resources may spend his money on a most expensive DAC (which, still may not be dominant in all aspects).
How two people perceive the actual differences between two DACs will definitely be impacted not only by their respective priorities in terms of sonic factors but also by their hearing. And of course, this is not even considering differences in ancillary gear and listening spaces!
As it happened, the particular group of DACs I auditioned in the past spanned a very wide spectrum, in terms of musical vs. analytical/warm vs. bright. If I’d chosen a different group of DACs, the differences might’ve been far less evident and I might well have determined that one DAC pretty much sounds like another.
First, AP Mastering posted another YouTube regarding the fact that the viewers who took his test could not tell the difference between the different portions he was playing. He had over 1,000 responses and his results are extremely statistically significant. That doesn’t mean his test proved what he set out to test, only that viewers who tried to determine how many cuts were in his loopback were unable to do so.
Second, my own opinion is that there are small differences between DACs that may show up on a particular system set up in a particular way. I think the biggest differences are the different types of conversion be it what kind of chip vs r2r vs fpga. I heard a friend playing a very cheap DAC which sounded alright but adding a more expensive (not that much more) DAC opened up the soundstage significantly.
I A/B’d a T+A Dac vs an ifi iDSD pro and couldn’t really tell the difference. This was not a blind test either. I think AP Mastering has it correct that most people could not tell the difference between dacs if they are volume matched and in a blind test if the dacs use the same conversion method.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
