What makes a DAC so expensive?

Power supply noise will show when THD+N is measured. There could be a lousy power supply which would be audible. All DACs will have noise from a power supply but do they effectively deal with it. If a DAC is audibly transparent , distortion and noise is below the threshold of human hearing, I'm not sure I understand the point. 

I will add you might be able to tell the PS Audio garbage from other DACs they measure like crap. 

If 2 DACs are to the point of transparency then how can they be told apart? You can't get more transparent, it's like infinity there isn't infinity and more infinite. 

To me, in order to get guitars that sound like guitars then the DAC does not add or change anything when it reconstructs the waveform. DACs that are capable of doing this can be bought for a few hundred dollars. Some like DACs that deviate from this by playing with filters or adding and changing things that do not adhere to the sampling theorem and that's fine but don't claim they are transparent DACs or better because they can create a "sound". 

If the $200 DACs filter doesn't alter reconstruction of the waveform or cause a deviation from the sampling  theorem so that the measurements on the analog outputs are so low in distortion and noise it's not audible to humans then the DAC is doing its job properly and it's not relevant how the output stage is constructed since it's not doing anything humans could hear.

There are basically two types of DACs those that adhere to the sampling theorem and properly reconstruct the waveform. Which means the waveform going out of the DAC has been reconstructed to match the waveform that went into the ADC. The other type of DAC doesn't adhere to this basic principle and goes off creating a sound either through filters that maneuver the waveform or just out right changing it on purpose. Now one may prefer a DAC that has a sound signature but it is not a transparent DAC that is reproducing the file accurately.

Capitalism, marketing,  playing on the notion if it costs more and looks prettier it must be better. Toss all that sciencey word salad in there and you have a 5 figure DAC. Very few if any could pick a $700 DAC from a $10000 DAC in a blind listening test. 

Of course PSAudio DACs measure so bad they aren't transparent so they can have a sound  to them. 

I'm  not unhappy. I feel just fine what's your problem?

Transparency means that the distortion and noise that exits the analog outputs is so low it’s beyond audibly for humans. If you take a dozen DACs and they all measure below the threshold of hearing then how can one be more transparent than another? I will mention not all DAC manufacturers strive for transparency which is why some have a sound signature. IMO DACs should be transparent if you want to color your music do it with tubes or EQ or tone controls it's much cheaper.

Just get an RME ADI-2,  Topping D90,  Benchmark DAC3, and forget it. DACs are to the point of transparency, they can be made to have sound signatures using the nonsense mentioned above but in the real world a DAC converts digital to analog without adding or taking it should be neutral. If you wish to add distortion use tubes. A $99 Schiit Modius would be indistinguishable from a $60,000 MSB to pretty much anyone since amplifiers and speakers have more distortion and noise than even inexpensive well engineered DACs. 

If you’re using a Schiit multibit modi try the Modius you might notice a difference depending on your other components. 

I have no desire for a dCS stack as it wouldn't provide anything audible that I don't already have. 
Take a little Topping E30 DAC it has a SINAD of -113 and the THD +N is about .0024% which is about -95dB. 
The Linn Akurate DSM has a SINAD of -110 and a THD+N around .001% or about -100dB. 
Both of these DACs reconstruction filters roll off the high level frequency above 22Khz as required by digital audio theory. 
Perhaps some people could tell one from the other in a blind test I doubt I could.
One DAC is $139 the other $10,500 in a sighted test which one will win consistently?  
Power supply noise and OP amp compression isn't that important as long as the output measurements are extremely good as long as the DAC can cope, if it can't then you don't have a well engineered DAC. 
Which of the 2 aforementioned DACs have power supply issues and reconstruction filter problems?

If the DAC is reconstructing the waveform optimally and the measurements for distortion and noise shows they are not audible that’s correct it doesn’t have a sound signature, it’s a well engineered transparent DAC. I understand not all DACs are transparent.  

How does the issue of compression figure in? Wouldn't a compressed signal result in distortion?

If it results in distortion then it is measurable. If it is above a certain level it will be audible. If it is audible then it's a lousy DAC sell it to an audiophile and move on.  DACs that are well engineered DO NOT have sound signatures they are considered audibly transparent. 

Does this statistical test (below) reveal anything useful about the power supply, OP amps, or ANYTHING else?

I assume you looked at the measurements. Is there something you didn’t understand because they reveal everything useful. Basically all these tests are doing is showing does the power supply leak audible noise into the signal path. Does the reconstruction filters get rid of high frequency distortion? You take those top 20 DACs from the $199 Modius to the $ 11,000 Mola Mola and noone except perhaps a few young people with extraordinary hearing could tell one from the other. It’s only in audiophile forums and high fi sales floors anyone thinks DACs are a problem anymore if they are well engineered as these are. Engineers are just chasing specs and trying new things DACs are no longer a mystery they haven’t been for years.

Noone ever claimed any DAC was 100% transparent. I said audibly transparent. I never claimed transparent is what everyone wanted I was trying to answer specific questions about audible distortion and power supply noise.

I think you would get a better understanding of how DACs work by asking that question on ASR. My understanding is rudimentary. 

Don't really know anything about it. Looks like it could be handy for 1 input to multiple DACs. 

That's where REW comes in to help with the room.

Jitter isn't a problem for well designed DACs.  Take the little Schiit Modius at $199 on the USB input, even for all the talk about problems with USB, Jitter comes in at -150 dB much better than it's toslink and coax inputs  where it hovers around -120dB. Of course none of this is audible. It just shows how far engineers have come if a company can produce a DAC in the US for $199 with the measurements this little DAC has. 

Those discrete R2R DACs are expensive even back in the day when they ruled. Yes and there’s circuit board layout, earthing , filtering, output stages it all adds up. IMO though it’s not relevant to how it sounds unless it’s been purposely designed to not be accurate. The only connection DACs have with the "outside world" is the output terminal. If we measure the magnitude frequency and phase well beyond anything a human can hear does it really matter how it was achieved? DS, R2R , which brand of chip, exotic components? If the output is accurate what difference does it make ? I don’t even know what DAC I have, what chip it uses no idea. I know I have class D amps but no idea what brand. They’re inside my active speakers and all I know they are the most accurate most detailed, smoothest speakers I ever heard. That’s where the rubber hits the road , the speaker, it’s the least accurate component with the most distortion in the chain, along with the room.