No urge to debate anyone, but in any event, that bit perfect data has to be translated into analog. That's what "DAC" stands for -- "Digital to Analog Converter." My two cents is its the analog section that has the biggest impact on sound. Even on the DAC side, there are differences on the digital side between delta-sigma DACs and multibit/R2R/ladder DACs. And then there is the question of EMF generation and suppression and so on. So, yes, there will always be lots of things to discuss. Your "cousin brother" should just be happy that he has a system that makes him happy. Shouldn't that be everyone's goal?
The sound quality from DACs - is it all the same?
I've been talking to my cousin brother about sound quality. He is a self-proclaimed expert audiophile. He says that Audio Science Review has all of the answers I will need regarding audio products.
In particular, he says an inexpensive DAC from any Chinese company will do better than the expensive stuff. He says fancy audio gear is a waste of money because the data is already bit-perfect. All DAC chips sound the same. Am I being mislead?
He also said that any DAC over $400 is a waste of money. Convincing marketing is at play here, he says.
He currently owns a Topping L30 headphone amplifier and D30 Pro DAC. He uses Sennheiser HD 569 headphones to listen to music. I'm not sure what to think of them. I will report my findings after listening one day! (likely soon, once I get some free time)
- Jack
232 responses Add your response
I’m not sure about whether you are being strictly mislead, but perhaps your cousin brother is generailzing in a manner that is disingenuous. There are only specific instances of what he says that are representative of the current state of things. This is confirmed by his own proclamation that he is an expert audiophile who claims that ASR has all the answers. There is a flaw - an internal inconsistency - in that statement. Do your own research and avoid folk who generalize, however well-meaning. |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
@hilde45 +1, Inbreeding severely damages your auditory capabilities. Just ask anyone on ASR. |
I wish that site would change it's name to something other than "science" because it isn't science, it is, at best, quality assurance. My suggestion to the OP is that some people absolutely can't hear a difference, if that's you, be glad and go get something inexpensive that looks good and has a nice remote. If you can hear a difference, get something that makes you happy. |
ASR seems like an interesting place to learn from. Don't audio companies use measurements to test their equipment? For example, frequency response and other important things? I may not know that much about audio, but that doesn't make me a troll. I'm just an average guy looking for some guidance into greater enjoyment with this hobby. |
The sound of all Dac differ like differ any system sound where we introduce new piece of gear... Easy to hear... The sound we hear is not a bunch of frequencies spectrum added one to another...Sorry psycho-acoustic is not simple matter... We also hear change in phase... And we hear through the timbre experience some information related to the acoustic condition of the recording theater or room...And this recorded timbre will changed accordingly in our own room acoustic... Timbre perception change from the musician who play the instrument to any location near him around him and far from him and the room where he play will affect the timbre also...Timbre is not reducible to an objective resonant sound source you must add the environment information in the spectral envelope and in the time envelope and you must add the specific structure of our own ears/brain... I am happy then with a dac which have a minimalistic design and without oversampling...Because say Christophe Mariac the dac designer : «Let me give you a simple example: it is generally assumed we hear the spectrum of sounds, but can’t hear the phase. I prefer a natural lived timbre sound to my ears instead of a " microscope" with unnatural aura of detailed " planktons "... In particular in low cost audio system it is the better why? there exist probably not oversamplig good dac at cheap price... Then i am more than happy with my dac because in my acoustically controlled room i cannot attribute to it any defect at all... The last time Christophe Mariac sell it new his price was near 500 bucks... I pay it 20 bucks new on Ebay... And i forgot about any other dac... "microscope" at high cost have no appeal to me, and other NOS design will cost pricier and i doubt that they can beat it really... His minimalistic design and low noise is remarkable... I connect it to a non linear power supply then the internal battery are always charged and powered it very well for 6 years now 12 hours a day...I listen music even sometimes reading... 😁😊 it is the greatest luck in all my audio purchase and it is irreplaceable at this S.Q./price ratio...More a deal than my Mission Cyrus speakers at 50 bucks and my marvellous Sansui Au 7700 at 150 bucks... I consider my system in my acoustically controlled and treated room Hi-FI or not too far from anything i listen to in my life... because of acoustic method not because t my gear is well chosen, any other well chosen piece of gear would have been good IF THE ACOUSTIC OF THE ROOM IS TAILORED FOR THE GEAR...
|
If that were the case one of the most prolific DACs would have never gone to market, The Border Patrol SE. On paper (measurements) it is awful. Listen to one and you will love the sound. The folks at ASR are sheep. Not saying measurements are not part of the equation they absolutely are in mechanical engineering and it is how we validate. In audio not so much. |
Audio science review is the antithesis of this forum. There people think the only thing that matters is the numbers--if it has the lowest THD and noise floor, it must sound best. Here people think all that matters is what they hear, even if their claims violate the laws of physics. The answer is somewhere in between. I think the DAC is very important to the sound in a modern digital system...I’ve sometimes said it is the most important component, but that is easy to say when you have the amp all dialed in...I will say that the DAC is the most expensive component in my system. His claim about a $400 DAC shows that he isn't listening at a very high level. Jerry |
The inbreeding has created so much retardation that they don't even understand that to run a commercial website you need sponsors and patrons. Honestly who will advertise there? Fluke multi-meters? I just spent two grand on fuses, yes fuses but Ted from SR pops in now and then and tells me I made a great decision. Yeah fuses are different just ask ASR. |
Sorry but price is not related in a direct way to S.Q. Acoustic science is... A minimalistic low cost design in dac can be very good... Mine is... Assuming that brand name of gear and price determine sound quality is not better than measuring piece of gear without listening them... In the 2 cases the most important factor is forgotten : acoustic methods...I prefer science to fetichisms of the gear brand name or of the measuring tools... By the way even if my gear is low cost my hearing must be good because i tuned with success my room acoustic by ears only, adjusting more than one hundred Helmholtz devices by listenings to create a timbre experience, imaging, soundscape, dynamic, clear bass experience at the Schroeder dimension and LV/ASW right ratio...Is it not a listening at "very high level" on my side ? if you think the opposite try to tune your room by your ears alone you will understand what it ask for... 😁😊 And you will never attribute to your ears the quality borrowed from a costly audio system brand name reputation ...No acoustician or musician ever concluded they have good ears because their instrument and devices are costly... This is ridiculous at best... Some people here with 500,000 audio system did not even know what a timbre perception is, they listen to the gear sound ALONE not to the speakers +room+ timbre sound, not knowing HOW to tune them AT WILL anyway ...They boast about their gear...And they attack some others who boast about their measuring tools... This is ridiculous battlefield between two erroneous positions... Acoustic/psycho-acoustic CORRELATE in an ongoing process subjective and objective measures and devices which are more sometimes than only mere tool but essential parts of the room like an Helmholtz resonator is for example... I prefer to promote acoustic training and experiments...And low cost well chosen piece of gear instead of non sense fetichism ... My perspective is listening experiments through a room...
|
That's not really accurate. At ASR, they can't be bothered to listen to some of the devices they test. For them, measurement alone is sufficient. On the other hand, I don't think most users here reject measurements carte blanche. Rather, I think most here know that measurements have their place and most understand how to interpret the essential measurements. |
I think you are right... But i will say half of the people here not "most"... 😁😊 It is the reason why "tool measuring fetichists " are the most deluded of the two groups...Some of the "gear brand name tasting fetichist" also try to pick gear with minimal specs sound numbers to begin with for sure... My best to you....
|
“I’ve been talking to my cousin brother about sound quality. He is a self-proclaimed expert audiophile. He says that Audio Science Review has all of the answers I will need regarding audio products.” Is your cousin brother by any chance @djones51 😜 In any case, don’t waste your money on $400 Chinese DAC; instead buy a DSP driven powered speakers and kick back for SOTA experience! |
What is said in this video is probably relatively true...It is a question of perspective...All is not black or white here... But the audio system of Jay is at the other end of 99 % of all users here on the price scale ... For most of us ordinary mortal, like me, the most important factor is the room acoustic...Not an upgrade of my good low cost dac to a few thousand dollars new one which will be "trash" anyway compared to a 100,000 dollars one like in this video which only prove by the experience of this reviewer the impactful importance of a dac over costly speakers and very costly amplifiers in a minimally treated and non acoustically controlled room...I dont contest that...
But i would be curious to try this dac in a nude room or minimally treated one and compared it to his working in a completely controlled room... 😁😊 People forget ALWAYS the room impact, we listen the speakers/room quatitave relation AT THE END ...Even if the source is in some case the more important component...It is not true in ALL CASE at all...You cannot pair a 100,000 bucks dac with my very good speakers for sure but which are at another level of design than Jay 100,000 bucks speakers... I am sure the difference will be staggering if we use this dac in an ordinary room and compare it to a controlled one...... Then i am not convinced by Jay about his claim that DAC is the most important factor, it is not generally true for all audio system, even if i dont doubt his complete honesty and the relative truth of what he say in the context of top high end product... In the case of products generally sold for most audiophiles, on a way lower porice scale, the most important upgrade will not be a dac but a new room... Acoustic never lie and cannot be bought...it only can be painfully installed...At no cost in my case, but with great time cost for the tuning...Most people feel that they not able or not in the situation to tune a room for sure...This fact dont change the truth of what i claim about acoustic...No more than my claim could destroy the personal experience of Jay in ultra high end costly design journey...
|
OP:
Nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is using 30 year old measurements which are rarely compared to listener experience as the way to gauge the performance of a system. That's not science. Science is investigation and research. This is just quality assurance techniques. The best way I can describe it is this. Yes, you can measure the firmness and rigidity of a car seat using pressure sensors. It doesn't tell you if you'll want to sit in it for 4 hours unless some one actually goes the extra step of figuring out what matters. That latter step is missing with ASR's entire raison d'etre. |
Is your cousin @jasonbourne52?
|
What I want to know is if the left channel of my dac sounds the same as the right channel? Do two copies of the same design always sound the same? If your hearing is acute enough to be bothered by differences between samples of the same design you're going to have a really rough time, or a really fun time if you like buying 10 copies of the same dac and listening for the best one. It may be that cheap dacs with more variation between units have the possibility of striking up magic from time to time. If you've got the ears, money and time, then go hunt for the magical sounding cheap dac! If there's a real science to separating good sounding dacs from bad ones, that would be interesting to know. So far I haven't heard of any good explanations for why expensive dacs should sound better, other than by adding distortion that some people like. |
I assume that most of the posters on that site have never heard a high-end DAC and are fearful they will get "taken" if they buy one. All based on the "knowledge" of all the other sheep who have also never heard a high-end DAC, but insist that they know how they will sound based on measurements that one person posts. It reminds me a lot of the "fans" group on Facebook for our local football team who all profess to know more than the coach and general manager, even though many of them appear to live in their parent's basements and can barely spell. What's interesting is that Amir purports to also listen to items he measures, yet his listening impressions rarely line up with mine when I have also heard the item being reviewed. Confirmation bias? "It measures like this, so it should sound like that" and voila, it does! |
That statement says it all your expert is none of the above . hav8ng owned a Audio store ,parts quality and design are essential to good sound as well as quality digital cables which I just was part of extensive testing in our audio club ,and yes even a quality digital cable makes a audible difference . on average 25% of the price of the product goes into the build including packaging meaning your $400 dac is msybe $80 in parts = Youwill hear a pocket radio worth of digital , there are great buys like the $900 Denafrips Aries-2 which is = to a quality $1500 dac , but I feel $2k on up is needed minimum. to get true Audiophile quality digital $$5-6kk is the sweet spot after discounts .it’s just my extensive observation , I spend $1k ,and $1500 on digital cables which make a dramatic improvement in the sound of any dac , One of my favorites Very unique cables from Serbia Final Touch Audio , Lampizator uses these exclusively on their dacs. Very natural -Un digital their Callisto usb is class leading ,the best under $1k usb cable I have heard to date , the top Sinope usb cable I recently bought ,as well as Ethernet cables streaming now sounds so much more detailed and natural ,I just had to point this out. |
I am afraid Audio Science Review is a completely useless site for any useful information on actual sound quality. Having been an audiophile and a scientist over the last fifty years. Amir or what ever his name is… is a guy obsessesed with measurements and is completely clueless about musical reproduction of sound. I can appreciate his interest in measurement… but the relationship to sound quality is virtually non-existent.
I have owned DACs costing in the hundreds of dollars, $2K, $5K, $10K, $17K and $22K. I assure you theyor sound is far more correlated to price than his measurements. This is because companies that produce good DACs start by using parameters…. Then they listen to then, to make them sound good. Stuff that measures flat tends to sound terrible. Audio Science Review is really good at producing pretty charts. After put together a fantastic sounding system… go back and see what his charts look like for your equipment… oh, that is right, you will not find any… it’s all budget stuff. |
ASR is a joke. Measurements are the start of evaluation not the only thing. His frequency response measurements are just stupid. A 100hz in a sweep is just one tone. Does one instrument at 100hz sound the same as another? So how can you say the sweep represent what real music will sound like. the only noise insee is that coming from ASR site. |
À good DAC, Do what hé have to do : from digital to analog: i did à test with a dac of 1000€,10 000€ and one of 40 000€.( very popular MSB): The first ones were very good (exellent). The most expensive one was to “clean”: no sensitivity,, no emotions (flat).. the Metronome Technologie (10000) was “splendid “. The Chines one 1000€ , was practacly egal . You have to figger it out. Much ‘money “, don’t mean ,”much better. My set is: Audio Note CDT two/2. Moon Mind 2 , Metronome Technologie C6 signature. Daniël Hertz M6L, VAC phi 300.1 and the Ilumnia Magister MK2. |
I like reading ASR and I’m one who laughs at anyone who spends 5k on a power conditioner or regenerator and has literal sadness for anyone that spends more than 200 on a power cord. i started with a topping d10 DAC That ASR measures as almost perfect. Didn’t sound any better than my iPhone direct. Then I got the Ares II DAC which gets rave reviews - definitely absolutely sounded better. For 900 bucks I’d say was worth it but it wasn’t amazing difference and almost subtle in many ways. Then I couldn’t help myself and sold the Ares and got the Pontus for 2k. WOW huge difference and improvement. Couldn’t believe how much better it could be. I won’t use all the different annoying adjectives audiophiles use like “airy” and “organic” (ok maybe I will). That was just my experience your milage may vary but your cousin doesn’t sound like he knows what he is talking about.
and anyone who says “ASR” is nonsense is one of those people that spends 5k on a power chord. ASR measures electrical characteristics which is real. Now how that translates to sound quality is a different story and ASR doesn’t measure that. So no. - don’t use ASR to determine sound quality. Use it to determine if a device makes any difference (like cables don’t) and if a high end device measures well as it should (and most do) as a proxy for design and build quality. |
Different types of chips, chip configurations, and most importantly output circuitry, can all influence the character and delivery of the sound. Overall quality of parts and design and overall topology all play a part. I can hear major differences with every dac in my house when swapping them out in my system (all well reviewed). And the very best one in terms of the realism and quality of stage depth, width, tonal character, clarity and accuracy happens to be the most expensive one (and it’s a $600 Chinese dac). a good system will still sound “good” with any cheap dac. But if you want to unfold dimensional and tonal potential for said system, a dac that’s designed with care (and passion) will do wonders and can even transform your system. Btw, Amir measured the Ares II as resulting in good measurements, but most modern r2r now also measure well (if that’s a concern). To my ears, a well designed and engaging dac can set the paradigm for active listening (as opposed to “doing the dishes” passive listening). |
Here are some words of wisdom from the late Charlie Hansen of Ayre ---------------- The thing that I see over and over and over in this thread is an irrational belief in the importance of the DAC chip itself. Just about everything affect the sound of an audio product, but when it comes to DACs, I would rank (in order or sonic importance the general categories as follows:
1) The analog circuitry - 99.9% of all DACs are designed by digital engineers who don’t know enough about analog. They just follow the app note. The specs on the op-amps are fabulous and digital engineers are inherently seduced by the beauty of the math story. There are minor differences in the sound quality between various op-amps, but it’s kind of like the difference between a Duncan-Heinz cake mix and a Betty Crocker cake mix. 99.8% of the op-amps are used a current-to-voltage converters with the inverting input operating as a virtual ground. This is probably the worst way to use an op-amp as the input signal will cause the internal circuitry to go into slewing-limited distortion. http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/anablog/4311648/Op-amp-myths-ndash-by-Barrie-Gilbert
With discrete circuitry, the only limit is your imagination. You are free to adjust the topology of the circuit, the brands of the parts, the active devices, the bias current in each stage - anything you can think of. Think of this as going to a world-class patisserie in Paris and seeing all the different things that can be made.
2) The power supplies - 99.9% of all DACs use "3-pin" power supply regulators, which are pretty much op-amps connected to a series pass transistor. Everything in #1 applies here.
3) The master clock - jitter is a single number assigned to measure the phase noise of an oscillator over a fixed bandwidth. It is far more i important to know the spectral distribution of the timing variations and how they correlate to audible problems. 99.9% of all DACs use a strip-cut AT crystal in a Pierce gate oscillator circuit. It’s pretty good for the money but the results will depend heavily on the implementation, particularly in the PCB layout and the power supplies (#2).
It’s hard to rank the rest of these so I will give them a tie score.
4) The digital filter - 99.9% of all DACs use the digital filter built into the DAC chip. About a dozen companies know how to make a custom digital filter based on either FPGAs or DSP chips.
4) PCB layout - grounding and shielding, impedance-controlled traces, return currents, and return current paths are all critical. For a complex digital PCB, 8 layers is the minimum for good results.
4) The DAC chip - almost everything these days is delta sigma with a built-in digital filter. Differences between different chips is one of the less important aspects of D/A converter designs. Both ESS and AKM have some special tricks to reduce out-of-band noise, which can be helpful, but not dramatic.
4) Passive parts - the quality of these can make a large difference in overall performance, especially for analog. Not many digital engineers sit around listening to different brands of resistors to see what sounds best.
These are just a few of the things that make differences in the way that a DAC will sound.
Hope this helps, Charles Hansen ------------------- Source:
|
The only thing that matters is whether a cheap dac and expensive dac sound the same to you. What we think doesn't matter. I suggest you invest in a $200 Topping DX3 Pro+ and start your journey. If it matters, ASR said it was one of the best dacs they ever tested. I own one and it is pretty darn good. Buy it, listen for 6 months and then compare it to something more expensive. Only then will you know. What we say here about our experiences with products is meaningless as it relates to your ears. |
