When Will the DAC Singularity Be Reached?
A humorous title, but wondering if those more in the know have an opinion on either: i) examples today where inexpensive DACs (say under $2500) are comparable or superior to expensive (say over $10K) DACs or ii) can we anticipate that within a relatively few number of years that inexpensive DACs will basically achieve the sound quality of today's expensive DACs? Thanks.
If you can’t measure it it doesn’t exist according to the ASR crew. I asked a question there once and was surprised by the quick attack to legitimate questions. I was new and apparently asked a question regarding measurements and how we hear things differently. I got the measurement comment above. So I guess none of them there believe in a god! Anyway, I’m 3 dacs in and all 3 sounded noticeably different. I’m not sure what the controversy could possibly be. | ||
I kind of view sound “differences” in dacs like flavors in foods. Ingredients can be the same but can taste differently based on how they are prepared. Also, everyone tastes that same food differently. Hearing is the same way. Science does not have a full understanding of why one sound is pleasurable to one person but unbearable to another. Find the dac that suites your ear. Hopefully it will be a cheaper on. Probably not though. | ||
If everyone actually enjoys music (which I truly hope), isn't that all that matters? I love LIVE music, Spotify through my Blowz NC headphones on the plane, Spotify @ work on my crappy laptop and Qobuz on my budget (to most) systems at home. It has always been an important part of my life and many memories are marked with music...or vice-versa. The music is the point - not trying to figure out if that $10K DAC is 4 times better than a $2.5K DAC. :-) | ||
DACs are dead.. long live digital http://tweakaudio.com/EVS-2/The_Audio_Revolution_has_begun.html | ||
We can have different specific sound "colors" related to any components.. Dac-amplifiers-speakers-headphone... We can achieve a good system without basic neutrality... By synergetical matching... I did it with my last systems /room ... Which system was not "neutral" more on the "warm" side... French Nos dac TDA 1543 +Sansui AU 7700=Mission Cyrus speakers 781
Now i turned by fateful event to headphone... The AKG K340 modified is very neutral and able to reach deep bass and refined high frequencies being an hybrid.. My Sansui AU alpha 607i do not sound as a tube amplifier like My Sansui AU 7700 but more as a refined S.S. amplifier , lower noise floor very , very clean... Then i changed my dac french NOS tda1543, a very organic sound for a Hidizs dac , a more clean and less noisy and more refined sound in the "colder" side but not digital at all... Results are astonishing... You cannot replace the speakers qualities or the headphone qualities by upgrading the source dac... You must in the opposite match the source choice with the speakers or headphone... This is why for me the speakers and headphones are the most important component ( i dont count the acoustic room here) Then at the end i think that dac technology is mature... Because i cannot fault the basic chinese dac i own now with my very sensitive AKG k340 ... There is better dac for sure... But better here is not better in the absolute sense of the word , it is better for some synergetical matching not for some others... Dont buy costly dac, buy first better speakers, buy a better room , buy better headphone ... Or at least buy better amplifier... It is my advice... I can be wrong... Others had more experience than me with dac... But i am pretty sure to be right... If not why in the world my actual system could be so great that upgrading seems preposterous to me ? I am not deaf by the way, nobody half deaf can do that, I tuned my room by ears myself...😊 If i am not deaf , if i am so pleased with my dac which is basic , that means that amplifier and headphone and speakers upgrade and synergy matter more than dac upgrade... my post is there not to negate difference in dac sound qualities, but to claim that it matter way more to create synergy between components... A dac dont sound the same in different system... And the best dac in the world will not be so great with bad headphone or bad speakers or not so good amplification or simply in a not so good synergetical match for it ... At the end, no component had a sound of their own; they sound as good the worst part of the system ...
| ||
dhdprentice, I haven't even updated my components in some time, but I'll do that maybe tonight or tomorrow. I had pictures of my system up for a couple of months, but I started getting BS posts about room treatment (yeah I know), the type of cabinet my components are in, not optimal placement.....all of which I am aware of. Maybe I'll take the time to clean things up and take a couple of pics. Thank you for the note | ||
Yep. Same. Received my new custom order BorderPatrol SE-I DAC this week. Has the Beez Wax caps and new Choke design. Tube not in signal path, part of Power Supply regulation only. It’s a different presentation and type of sound compared to all of my former R2R chip tube and non-tube dacs. It's been fun to rediscover music again, thanks to this dac. Easy listening. 👍
| ||
Whether to upgrade a DAC obviously comes down to personal choice in sound signature, finances, etc. However for me it is also a factor of my current system performance. I have a roughly $15K system that is filled with “bang for the buck” components that mostly punch above their cost…..but I know I’ll need to replace as funds permit. Right now, none of my components is a major limiting factor in the overall SQ. As I upgrade components (streamer first, power cables, and room correction). It will reveal weaknesses in other components. Necessitating replacing other components to reach the next “mid fi” level. And yes, I know room correction should be next, but I’m building a “from scratch” audio room in my basement that won’t be finished for quite a few months. | ||
A DAC by nature needs to fill in (guess) the gaps between the digital sampling rates, so a higher rate per second (aka Hz) will produce a more accurate output. That's why, when available, I prefer my source to have a 192k sample rate. | ||
I'm not in 'The List'. so I'm pissed. As a 'resident loon' with no dog in the show, DACs' v. ducks, I'd rather the latter for dinner....;) As for the former(s)....those with 'dog whistle' ears can spend to their hearts', ears', and minds' content and contentions... Meanwhile....*munch*....popcorn 'n beer, cheers 'n jeers.... *L* Do carry on.....😏 ...'cus I know y'all will.... Have a good week, J | ||
bingo -- pathetic loser defined | ||
I can confirm that DACS can sound different. The one in my Onkyo 7030 is warm and somewhat polite, If I go coax into my high end - ahem - Fosi Audio DAC 05 the sound becomes more clear with better highs. I also just had a SMSR and Topping DAC in the five hundred buck range, and returned them both. No better than the Fosi 05. Personally I would rather spend the money on records. They sound better and are just more fun for me. | ||
THIS: I used to be on the equipment ferris wheel, going around and around and around. Maybe equipment roulette is more fitting? This DAC, that DAC, this cartridge, that cartridge, amps, etc. Never quite happy. Once I learned all the nuances of speakers in a room, got appropriate speakers, subs, and fixed my room, then I finally got off the equipment merry go round. All those changes I thought I was making, that never seemed to quite do it, were not doing anything. I have easily spend over $20K on DACs over the last decade. Now every DAC in my main system sounds good. Maybe I am the man out in this discussion, but I would rather be happy and confident in my system than yearn for yet another lateral change. Because of my journey, like the op, I question the value of expensive DACs. They may be different but different is not better, it is different. Maybe that works for you, maybe it does not. It is working for some people here, but I wonder what are they putting a bandaid over.
(and definitely not this, which has never been glibly true, and could be argued is actually the opposite of true when it comes to 'the nature of advancement'): "Low cost DACs will sound like low end DACs and high end DACs will continue to sound way better. It is the nature of advancement." | ||
Sorry for the threadjack but.... | ||
Exactly right ...Thanks to say it clearly..
| ||
I lived through the same experience and reach the same conclusion...
| ||
One other word about improving DAC performance. It was recommened by Alvin Chee (owner of Denafrips distributor Vinshine Audio), that adding a Denafrips Iris between my Bluesound Node 130 and my Denafrips Pontus II DAC might improve overall performance. If it didn't work, I could sell it for not much less than the purchase price. Alvin has never steered me wrong, so I bought one. What does it do? The Iris DDC (and I assume most DDCs), takes an input signal and filters it galvanically and optically to reduce jitter and noise. The Iris then re-clocks the signal prior to outputting (via I2S HDMI in my case) using a TCXO which is superior to the one in the Pontus II. Does it work? Absolutely it does in my configuration. The SQ improvements were immediate and not subtle. Soundstage width and height were improved (but not depth), the noise floor was lowered and I could more easily separate instruments and hear detail that was not as obvious without it, it took away some of the sharp edges while at the same time allowing more detail in higher frequencies, and improved vocals beyond what I thought were already great qualities in the Pontus II through my Buchardt Audio S400 MKII speakers. Others have shared with me that the improvement will be less noticeable when I migrate to a better streamer (Innuous, Aurender, Lumin, or the like) as they have a far superior treatment of the signal path.....less noise, less jitter, more stable clock, etc.....and I may find the Iris redundant in this scenario. We'll see when I get there | ||
No. There are DAC sonic advances at all price points, no evidence that cheaper can catch up with the more expensive offerings. Higher quality parts within expensive components usually costs significantly more and is reflected in higher prices. Also, cutting edge designs have significant R&D costs that have to be passed on to the customers. | ||
Cin? @othercrazycanuck ? Come on man… Did your Google Machine break down? | ||
Cin Dyment @othercrazycanuck : anything you have to say? Can you answer my question on the PS Audio?
| ||
My Emotiva DAC for $300 in 2011 was modified with 5 $47 Sparkos regulators, high quality Panasonic power caps, film caps, etc. and a Synergistic Research purple fuse. The unit comes with a fully discrete audio board without Op-Amps. The result is $20K sounding DAC on the cheap. It also operates flawlessly, stand-by mode, digital close matched attenuation, nice heavy/quality remote (why is it that so much higher end gear have junky feeling plastic remotes) and light dimming display. Nothing missing in operation and sonically a window to the digital master whatever the engineer did. It is an equivalent but different sound than my analog set up. I’ve heard many under $20K DACs and very few expensive ($5K+) CD players. I don’t know if a CD player for less is as good as separates can be. I'm sure that better DACs exist with more modern chips, clocks, etc. but basically, they need to sound musically involving and have great resolution, not leaving anything musically important out. I've achieved that on the cheap and I tried $9K DACs also superbly constructed/art works but lacking in musicality (electronics design failed due to a noise laden conversion algorithm). | ||
Actually, that $700 outlay for a decent stereo would be much more today.
All said, that amount would get you a mighty fine system today. All the best, | ||
I know that my comment will fall on tone deaf ears but I find all of these arguments self serving and gibberish. I became an “audiophile” in 1966 when in Vietnam and bought Sony reel to reel with both detachable lid and sidemounted speakers. Wow. It beat the hell out my portable radio. Peter, Paul and Mary were awesome and Uncle Bob couldn’t sing a lick but wrote great stuff, somebody in our basecamp had a similar tape recorder but added some Pioneer full range speakers. Off to the PX and massive improvement till someone added receiver for more power. Holy Mackerel. I had to get me one of those. So I did. I rotated back to the states before getting a turntable but the scarcity of prerecorded tapes made a Gerrard necessary.I upgraded for more power, auto reverse and turntable vs changers, but the constant was ANALOG. I hated clicks and pops and tape hiss but the music was not an issue. It was great. Now I have pay thousands of dollars to try to recapture the analog era that we lost to bandwidth. Tape deck $200. Pioneer speakers $115 each. Sansui receiver $125. Gerrard changer $119. Less than $700 for a mid quality analog system that my fellow soldiers coveted. How much is a good DAC? No wonder 50 year old stuff is so popular! | ||
| Post removed | ||
Cin Dyment: we both know very well you never owned such DACs. You don’t own any audio system. Maybe in your rhetoric trolling the audiophiles you hate so much, lies. By the way, which PS Audio DAC had filters you could change by getting up and pressing buttons on it? Enlighten me. You clearly never owned any PS Audio DAC. Or Tambaqui Mola-Mola. Or Lampi. It’s all made up stuff, usual from you. For others here who read this, I am posting a list of your previous Audiogon usernames, all banned. By no means not all inclusive, as I may have missed some. This time around I spotted you in the 6th post and same day you “joined” 😂. I am sure you so my post calling you out the other day in the big Amir’s propaganda thread ———- othercrazycanuck
thespeakerdude
cindyment2
oddioboy
crymeanaudioriver
theaudiomaniac
theaudioamp
deludedaudiophile
thynamesinnervoice
cindyment
snratio
yesiamjohn
sugabooger
dletch2
audio2design
dannad
roberttdid
roberttcan
heaudio123
audiozenology
atdavid
| ||
IME in the world of DAC’s…I’m with @othercrazycanuck | ||
You are reading into what I wrote what you want to think, not what I said. Imagine being in a room, the left wall is one shade of blue. The right wall is a different shade of blue. You can see the shades and clearly identify them as different. I now lower the lights. It will get harder and harder for you to tell the two walls are different until at some point you cannot tell that the walls are two different shades. If I keep lowering the light, at some point you will not even be able to clearly identify walls. I could have started with red and green walls and at some point you will not be able to tell they are different colours. Why do you readily accept a very finite and limiting range for your sight, but insist on an infinite range for your hearing? I acknowledge DACs can sound different and I even discussed preference in filters. How can you interpret that as black and white and not seeing greys? I accept, as it is reasonable, that just like there is finite range for our sight, there is finite range for our hearing. For that reasonable reason, I am skeptical that it takes a large sum of money, to make a DAC that exceeds the range of our hearing. If it does, DAC vendors are doing a poor job of proving their case. What I don't understand is why some are so attached to this idea that to get the basic function right, it must take a lot of money? Filters, tube output stages, and I am sure many more ways exist to create a differentiated sound. Attractive cases, nice displays, added functionality. So many ways to differentiate your product. Why the need to insist getting the basics right is expensive? | ||
Objectivists always see the world in black and white terms. There are no grays, no preferences and no hierarchy of qualities. It tests good - on the tests we apply to the item - so it must be good. If this thinking was verifiably true everything would be reduced to a single set of measurements and a requirement that everyone agree to this unnatural logic. | ||
Better DAC topology, better power supplies, better clocks, better components, better pre and post analog stages and better input types all have a huge impact on what we universally call a DAC. It could be true that all digital to analog converters sound similar (not the same) but that all the other factors mentioned above make up the huge differences in DACs
I am not directing this specifically at you @creativepart as several other people have written this and I frequently see this written. However, the skeptic in me says if all these things are true, then the results should be easy to demonstrate. Take clocks and jitter. Apparently engineers have quite a handle on how to measure jitter even at the analog output of a DAC. DACs << $1,000, even in our near worthless Canadian dollar have so little jitter we could never hear it. If power supplies are an issue with $1-2,000 DACs, why is there no 60Hz and harmonics in the outputs (or a very very small amount). If the analog stages are no good, why is there no distortion? I used to accept these things as of course it is better, but the more I learn, the more skeptical I am. Don't get me wrong, I don't have cheap DACs, but I was prepared to buy what most would consider expensive, tried, listened, and I could not see any value. | ||
Actually one could as those units are highly praised by vinyl enthusiasts and reviewers for how beautiful it sounds when playing records back through them. With the SU-R1000, you can pick from a variety of vinyl settings as well as match your favorite 3 cartridges using the "record" provided to level match it to the integrated. All the best,
| ||
Better DAC topology, better power supplies, better clocks, better components, better pre and post analog stages and better input types all have a huge impact on what we universally call a DAC. It could be true that all digital to analog converters sound similar (not the same) but that all the other factors mentioned above make up the huge differences in DACs A digital to audio converter can be a tiny single chip but a DAC is a combination of far too many ancillary variables to be generalized. And, yes, the price of the DAC - not so much the "converter" makes for better sub-sytems and better sound. | ||
The following are not a secret to work out a how a Product is costed. The Design for the Circuit and Topology, along with the Parts chosen are one factor used to create a end price for a mainstream audio device or a commission built design. Add to this the Aesthetic Design, where depending on the styling, the end design can add a substantial increase to the pricing of the audio device. How the product is packaged for shipping will also add to the costings. Using a Supply Chain or dealing Direct as a means to reach a Customer is will also have a cost implication to be calculated. What is not typically identified is the required Mark Up to cover the Companies Overhead, as a break even calculation. Some Companies have a Policy of Over/Overs, with the latter being a cost included as a Buffer to cover a period of Bad/Slow Business, unfortunately the Loyal Customer or New Customer will be subsidising the Over/Over. Then there is the Minimum Profit, There is for some Models a price tag is a close match to the above costing combined, and for other Models a Minimum Profit, that far surpasses the combined sum of all the above costings being created. With a producer who's Marketing Intention being one that is substantially uplifting a Models Value, and then the same Model being available via a Supplier, that is wed to substantially adding monies to generate their Mark Up. It is very easy to see a product quickly find itself as being in the price range of Tens of Thousands. I have experienced through one to one conversation the Types of Mark Up a intermediate Supplier/Sole Importer, who has a very small overhead, is very happy to add to a offered product. I have also had Bespoke Products built, even a DAC and once the Circuitry, Topology and Parts are identified, a Case can be selected. The budget for the Parts does seem to have a Cap, 'Pardon the Pun'. The Budget for the Case is without limitation, the end design can be substantial if the monies are wanted to be spent. Add the time to be charged by the EE-Designer/Builder, and again a reasonable accuracy to a figure can be produced. The Bespoke way certainly side steps ludicrous Mark Ups for a sale item. | ||
@8th-note , I participated in an informal -formal DAC blind test around 2000. Can't remember all the models, but we could tell differences. It was not easy, but they were there. I had a Lampizator through here for a while, model 7 if I remember, it had a noticeable sound to it. It was not my thing. I have had a Mola Mola Tambaqui in my system which some claim is one of the best DACs made, but both standalone and fed from the Lyngdorf digital output, could I honestly say it sounded better or even different compared to my other DACs? No, and I really wanted to 🤗. I liked the way it looked. Had a PS audio in system for a few weeks too. Was fun to play with the filters. They sounded different. But then it just felt like work so I left it on the basic one, which was the best anyway. I am now down to some pretty pedestrian DACs, and don't have any regrets. Did the merry-go-round, and found out the grass was not greener, and just varied with the angle of the sun. I think today you could set up a blind test and pick 10 DACs that all sound different, or 10 DACs that sound all the same. For me, there are enough variables without worrying if my DAC is adding something I don't want or not so I go for the latter, ones that all sound the same. Call me boring. I am inclined to explore these filters again. I hear you can accomplish the effect in Roon. Would save me getting up and hitting buttons. | ||
I have two CD players (both decode HDCD), one Krell CD250/2 from around 2000 and an Emotiva ERC-3 from around 2015. Also have one SACD player, a Marantz SA KI Ruby from around 2018. I have 3 DACs, a Resolution Audio Quantum from the late 90’s, a PSA PerfectWave Mk II from the mid 2010’s, and a Black Ice Glass FX tube DAC from around 2020. I also have 2 transports, a Jay’s Audio CDT3 Mk III and a PS Audio PW Transport (now retired). All of them are hooked up to my Krell KRC-2 preamp. I’m running a Krell KSA 300S with Thiel CS6 speakers. I can compare these DACs and players very easily. With my system and my ears all of these players and DACs sound remarkably similar. Sometimes I can hear subtle differences but nothing dramatic. In my experience good quality, well reviewed digital components have a narrow range of sound quality. In other words, they all sound good. I could live long term with any of these pieces but my audio nervosa keeps me buying new stuff. My next purchase is probably going to be an Audio Mirror Tubadour IV SE DAC to see what all the hoopla about NOS ladder DACS is all about. I’m really hoping that it sounds different. Does anyone on this thread have a link to a documented blind test that shows that listeners can tell DACs apart if they don’t know which one they are listening to? I have never seen such a test and I suspect that I know why. |
