Can you guys really hear huge differences In DACs?

I have an older, top of the line Saber DAC in my older Peachtree iNova. I think a lot of how a DAC sounds has less to do with the chip and more to how it is implemented.

As to SQ.

Something that sounds bad, will measure bad. I'm in agreement with that.

However measurement on a machine has nothing to do with how a piece of equipment is going to sound, in the real world.

Never has been.

Two hundred dollar AV receiver's can measure well, but sound like garbage, as compared to better quality amplifier's.

There has been audio gear out there for a half of a century that measures low in both harmonic and intermodulation distortion and still does not sound as good as a quality amp will sound.

From your source to your speakers, every piece of gear is different. There is no "correct" piece of gear.

Less important than how a piece of gear measures, is how that piece of gear integrates into the system and how that system as a whole sounds.

Today, a half century later from my previous example, is there truly any piece of gear that can not be built to "measure" well? If, that is the goal.

 

IMO the idea that certain DACs are more pleasing becuse they add more distortion is wrong (except, perhaps, for NOS DACs). That’s not what makes most DACs sound different. There are differences in DACs that just don’t get captured by common measurements.

The ASR crowd gets worked up about differences in measurement (assuming they’re even done correctly, which in the case of many Schiit DACs seems not to be the case!) that are completely inaudible. The pattern you see there, though, is that super-cheap Sabre-based DACs measure “perfect,” according to the same limited set of measurements, over and over again. But if Schiit or Chord to whoever wanted to, they could easily pull a Sabre chip off the shelf, slap it into their nicer cases, and make a bundle. Yet Mike Moffat from Schiit has explained at length why he chose a chip used in medical and military applications instead, mainly due to how it measures on parameters not usually reported at places like ASR. Likewise, Rob Watts from Chord has explained at length why he went with an FPGA. There’s no way to explain things like that unless you think A) randos on the internet are smarter than Moffat or Watt and/or B) they’re purposely trying to make less profit by investing tons of money in expensive custom designs, when they know perfectly well a cheap Sabre chip is superior.

The reality is they even many “perfect measuring” DACs sound different. But for people who think all properly measuring DACs (or amps!) sound the same, there’s no way to convince them of this. By all means, you should level-match your DACs, and you shouldn’t let emotion get in the way of evaluation (be willing to return or flip your new DACs if you don’t like it!). But you really need to carefully and critically evaluate DACs head-to-head in your own system on an album/mastering you know well to hear the differences. In my experience, there are even notable differences even among DACs with the same chips.

 

Undoubtedly, there is difference in DACs, at any level. Compared to other Hi-Fi components, swapping DACs I think brings about nuance variations similar to swapping power amplifiers, WHEN the loudspeakers are an easy load.

Technically speaking, this comparison does't make much sense. Anyway my impression is that the analog output section of any DAC is more likely to play a bigger part than its digital reconstruction algorithms in the resulting acoustic pleasure.

 

Guys

Very helpful discussion. Just finished ordering my Border Patrol Brooklyn Qutest Dac3.

 

I'm building an ANK DAC 5.1 at the moment. Should be finished in about a week or so.

 

In one sense DACs all sound the same: frequency curves...
Because digital is simple math once the proper flat response is applied during design it stays put and will be "flat" upon playback.
Not so in vinyl.
In analog vinyl you have at least THREE ways for the curve to get out of whack and sound totally different one vinyl rig to another:
1) Your cartridge may have a totally different curve.
Yes cartridges TRY to be "flat" but in practical reality they many times have distinct curves---"zingy" "hefty" "chesty" "bassy""great on vocals" "delicate".
You know the drill.
2) Your phono preamp can have a sonic curve that is a "signature."
Even following the RIAA curve.
And some records also require different curves just to playback the recording!
3) Your transformers, your cable capacitance, your impedance, your cables, the capacitance of your phono pre---ALL these can RADICALLY shift the curve one way or another.
Now take a look at digital---as in DACS and built in DACs in a CD player too.
THEY ALL SOUND THE SAME.
They all have the identical curve.
The big difference with a DAC is in HOW the digital is implemented.
How solid is the technology that renders ones and zeroes back into an analog signal?
Is it loaded with jitter?
How great is the line level circuitry that amplifies the analog up to line level?
No it is not as wacky in difference one DAC to another.
But the QUALITY of the circuit design matters big time.
Some DACs just sing.
Others sound dead.
But they all have good frequency response as that comes along with rendering from digital as a source.
As a matter of fact since digital is so flat I use my CD frequency curve to inform me whether or not my analog vinyl curve is on the money or out in left field.
Here's what I mean.
I have both the CD AND the vinyl of "Yellow Submarine---the soundtrack"
Both were made during the same production and care was taken for them both to be remastered with similar results sound wise in order to have a chosen "sound."
So.
If they are both pretty close in frequency curve I can thus play them side by side and see if my vinyl if off.
If so I can change some of the variable parameters in my vinyl rig to get it to closely match what the CD sounds like.
By changing cables,
Shifting impedance.
Changing trannies.
Playing around with azimuth.
Altering stylus rake.
Anybody else do that?
Anyway that is my take on the subject of DAC curves...
My goal is to have playback that tells me what was done during the recording.
And that sounds beautiful because instruments sound beautiful if you don't screw up the recording.
I try real hard not to screw up.
Nothing beats KNOWING your rig is telling you truth.
Its's also fun KNOWING the beauty you are hearing was intended to be there by whomever made the product.
I figure I was blessed to have at my disposal about a hundred years of hard work done by engineers. artists and producers that were trying to entertain me.
I owe them a decent hearing to judge their talents.
My two cents.

 

Limited experience and no standalone DAC, but I recently bought a Cambridge CXA60 Int Amp that has an internal Wolfson DAC (WM8740) partly because I wanted to have the flexibility to use different connections with my Marantz CD6006, which has an internal Cirrus Logic DAC (CS4398). I have the RCA cables connected to the analog output of the CD player and a Coaxial cable to the digital and then on the CXA60 can flip back and forth with the press of a button, the song hardly skips a beat. I'll be honest I hear little difference but that may be because they are in a similar mid-fi price range. A friend said he slightly liked the Marantz DAC better on some jazz recordings but it definitely wasn't significant.

 

My Chromecast Audio sounds excellent and apparently measures fairly well too. To be honest I've been pretty skeptical of the DAC concept. The Wyred 4 Sound room at Axpona has kept my mind open however. Two years running they have had the best sounding room of the show, but these rooms had some impressive loudspeakers, first from Acoustic Zen and later by Fritz. I just can't bring myself to spend big on a leap of faith, especially when the humble Chromecast sounds great. I've considered dipping my toes in with a Modi Multibit which, being an R2R, should at least sound different. I level matched and tested the Chromecast against an Audioengine D1 and they sounded identical. Not science, but keeps me too skeptical to fork over the $. First time poster .

 

I agree regarding tube amps, though it doesn't mean they produce linear measurements, they very rarely do. Typically they have audible-bandwidth plot swings of 1db or more. I actually suspect some of their perceived edge in resolution might be attributed to that behavior. As I stated before, I wasn't bashing on NOS DACs. I was only surmising that the significant difference in sound, compared to upsampling DACS, can likely be measured in some respsect. What that metric would be - distortion, something else - I can't say. I don't think anyone can. It's all speculation. I was thinking most of the Border Patrol DAC that gets such rave reviews, yet produces terrible measurements.

 

We are going off topic but I think the previous post needs addressing. While tube amps can be nonlinear due to impedance swings, mine is, I don't attribute that to the tube sound. I attribute the non-linearlity as a fault in tube amps, including mine.

IMO, speaking in generalizations, the differences are in the distortion plots and the type of distortions. The distortion plot of SS amps is usually downward sloping between the noise floor and the rated output. The distortion plot of a tube amp is usually upward sloping to the rated power, meaning a 100 watt SS amp usually has less distortion at 80 watts than it has at 1 watt. The significance of this distinction is that tube amps have their cleanest sound generally between the noise floor and the first couple of watts, where SS amps have their cleanest sound when run at nearly full power. Most of our listening falls in the first couple watts.

Secondly, tube amps have mostly even order distortions. SS amps, while having lower distortion, have more odd order distortions in that smaller number. Our ears don't mind even order distortions however odd order distortions can become cringe worthy very quickly. If our ears are 10 times more sensitive to odd order harmonics that could translate as a tube amp could possibly have 5 times more distortion as long as it is even order and still sound cleaner. Compounded that the cleanest part is also in the most important first couple of watts.

Does that always hold true? No. I've heard bad sounding tube amps too. On a case by case basis nothing holds true. On a scale of generalities I think it holds up as a contributing factor to the "tube sound" vs "SS sound" and serves as a reason that buying objectively based on charts and graphs doesn't tell the whole story. You have to hear it first.

 

So basically I have to go try as many as I can.

Ugh.
Same as anything.
Now I’m looking at the Marantz DAC1 and the Marantz NA6006. Wtf?
Lol
Hate this **** sometimes.

Both have different chips. One is much newer. Is the DAC on the NA6006 as good as the DAC1? Or better?
I know one is a network player.
I could care less if one is a network player and one has a dedicated headphone amp.

I want to know which has the better DAC.
Lol
Sucks.

 

.

1) Hobbies are supposed to be fun

2) I have a feeling that while the DAC1 might sound a tad better the differences are mostly cosmetic/feature set vs. sound.

 

Yeah right?

I know man. Why I’m laughing at myself. I actually like just listening to the music.
Just like with guitar. I dug the gear but I am the type that much prefers playing.

Ultimately I would love it if I had ten DACs in my price rand and listen and choose.

But alas I don’t.

 

Yeah, wouldn't we all. But you can break it down to the broad audiophile categories of "musical" versus "analytical" as to where a DAC might be classified as. And you can try to seek it out and hear it. Or you pays yer money and you takes yer chances. If I can convince myself it sounds better, then I'm not worried about missing out on choosing another DAC that coulda-woulda-shoulda been bedda-more.

I have an old DAC - an Electrocompaniet which shoulda fallen into the musical camp. As in versus the analytical camp, such as the reputed sound of, say, the Benchmark DACS. This topic is interesting because I think enough time has gone by that a more modern DAC would be a nice upgrade. Which one? Probably anything from the musical camp of DACs. Will it be a "huge" upgrade? HaHa almost nuthin' is a hyyuuuge upgrade in audioland unless you're starting from a ditch.

 

I am seriously considering the Marantz DAC1. But I’m afraid that it will be replaced pretty quick. Since it’s from 2014.

 

Well you sort of have to find a way to try each change planned out. Why buy a 2k DAC if the room, speakers and the rest of the system can not resolve the change in sound, in a way you can hear. If the plan is to slowly upgrade the system then I would change out those things that would let me evaluate the changes to come. Then you have the possibility to make a choice based on what is best for you and the system.

 

I play CDs and Tidal.

I have no DAC so TIDAL sounds like ****e to me from my iPad or iPhone straight to my powered monitors.
My CDs sound good 10x better.

 

The plan is to buy a nice DAC now and very soon most likely a pair of a Proac DT8’s and a nice amp. ( around $2k )

 

I would honestly do things the other way around. Buy the speakers you like and want and make sure your preamp/amp (or integrated amp) is of similar quality, then audition DACs. Maybe try something decent for around a hundred bucks. It'll be better than your iPad and you can relegate it to your computer speakers or something when you upgrade for real. What is your current setup? Sorry if you've already mentioned it, but it's not in your profile.

 

If you don't need MQA I think the Marantz is a good choice... I wouldn't worry about obsolescence too much... I looked at the Marantz and ended up with the TEAC UD-501. I love it. You can still get new in the box UD-501's for a fraction of their original retail price... It has been superseded twice... first by the UD-503 and the 505 just came out earlier this year. Most of the comparison reviews I've read say the 503 sounds better... It's got a difference chipset and op-amps than do the 503 and 505 which share the same chips and op-amps. If you google the TEAC you'll see it's won all kinds of awards and is quite highly regarded. Hi-Fi World still has it listed every month in their "World Standards" and it's 5 years old at this point. From their text "Feature-packed DAC with benefit of DSD play- back. Superb sound means little to touch it at
the price." It's known to be "on the warm side" fwiw. I'm running mine through a tube pre and tube amp so I'm basing my experience on that. Might sound different running though ss gear.

Happy Hunting!

 

Right now I have a pair of nice Adam audio powered monitors. Amazingly they are Class AB. Thank god. I kinda hate Class D.

Anyway that and my blueray player.
Not much you can call a system I know. The speakers sound really good though.
Us musicians usually spend all the money on guitar amps and guitars.

But I want good ear candy now.

I really do enjoy my CDs through the blue ray and monitors. I know that sucks compared to what most have here. But I do like it.
Just when I plug my iPad into the speakers direct out it sucks balls.
No punch or clarity as much as the DAC in my blueray. It actually is that big of a difference. The iPhone iPad is lame. Good depth but no punch or life. Total blah.

That’s why I’m saying that for now I would like to get a nice DAC to listen to my TIDAL stuff. Then get the Proacs maybe a Rega Elicit or some other good amp.
I didn’t like the Simaudio moon 340i through those speakers as much. Too soft sounding.

Hope that helps

 

Yeah I’ve heard hires audio. It would be nice to have a DAC do that as well. TIDAL has quite a few titles on MQA.


Thanks dude !

 

MQA is FAKE high-res. Frankly, its not worth your time or money IMO.

And the choice of a Marantz DAC is a probably good one. I'd personally take the Marantz over the Teac UD501 recommended above. I've owned a UD501, and while it sounded pretty decent overall, I was disappointed with its narrow soundstage.

 

It’s just an old model. Know what I mean? From the end of 2014.
Anyway.
Yeah MQA is ok. Didn’t blow me away. Most sounded harsh actually to me.

 

Some old models sound great. And some new models don't. I would not assume that a 2014 DAC is going to sound bad just because it isn't the very latest thing. The actual implementation of the DAC usually makes a bigger difference than the chip which is chosen.

If you want (and can afford) a SOTA contender DAC then consider the PS Audio Direct Stream DACs. The direct stream is mind-blowingly good. You may never feel the need to upgrade (especially if Ted Smith keeps coming out with improved versions of the his firmware).