2. digital
  3. 188489-2439

One DAC to Rule it All

Sorry for the "click-bait" headline. The digital side of my system is an Auralic G1 sending to an OKTO DAC8 Stereo. I like the sound a lot, but I also use a DBX Venu360 digital crossover system to split the signal to my mains and subs. The DBX gets an analog signal from my preamp (Benchmark HP4), but to do its function the DBX unit converts to digital, then back to analog at 96Khz. My question is, since the DBX unit has the capability to receive a digital signal (AES/EBU), would it be better to use just one DAC (DBX) to do it all, or stick with the double converting and keep the OKTO in the system?

koestner
fuzztone's avatar
fuzztone
5,510 posts
 

No. Any proof for you is in the listening.

koestner OP
628 posts
 

This isn't a simple cable swap. It would mean a lot of rewiring to go back and fourth. I was hoping there would be a consensus as to which way would be better.

soix
8,881 posts
 

The double digital conversion would bug the crap outta me.  How are the reviews of using the DBX as a DAC?  I’d think the OKTO would be the better of the two, but that’s just an uninformed guess.  One thing I’d do is take the DBX out of the system and integrate the subs the old fashioned way and see what you get.  This would take some work obviously, but the prospect of getting a digital crossover out of the signal chain would be well worth it IMHO.  FWIW.

koestner OP
628 posts
 

I had been doing it the "old fashioned" way until I got the DBX. I found a great improvement upon sending only 100 Hz and up (48db/oct.) to my main speakers (Reference 3A NEFES II), and just below 100 Hz to the subs (same slope). I wasn't expecting such an improvement in detail, but I must confess it was there. I'm just wondering about the double digital conversion. I truly believe the OKTO to be the better DAC, but it won't do the crossover and other things like parametric EQ. So, it's either both, or just the DBX doing it all.

More to discover