How far has DAC technology advanced?

TeddyNUC runs 19V, up to 3.5A. It’s not the highest end PS but IMO is a great value in priceerformance.

 

I understand your suspicions. After all there is no white paper or alike and no major reviews (yet). So, I was also suspicious, it’s only when I read about this in German audio mag and I got enthusiastic feedback from a first user here, it was that I took the gamble to test it. And the gamble paid off (for once)! Fascinating CD sound in the league of much more costly DAC’s.

 

What jitter seems like in nervous audiophile discourse:



What jitter actually sounds like:

{silence}

 

Zackely.

 

Wow! That’s the way I make milkshakes.

 

I am primarily a analog guy (my system is posted here and I have a fair bit invested in my table/arm/cartridge and phono pre) but I have to admit to being fairly impressed with how far cheap digital has come based on recent experience.

I bought a Topping E30, primarily for streaming Amazon HD, but I also use it for Netflix almost every day and occasionally to play a CD using a Blu Ray player as a transport, last November and since then have been on a bit of a tweak fest journey to see how much I could elevate its performance, which was really not bad from the get go.

What I've discovered is that digital is almost as tweaky as analog in terms of set up and maximizing audio performance; it is really not what I expected at all.

In terms of low cost to no cost options, a couple of no brainers are:

1) setting up an isolated, dedicated network for streaming. In my case I have a separated a 2.4 ghz network dedicated to streaming Amazon HD, all other devices run off the 5 Ghz network. Cost: $0

2) with a 5V DC dac like the E30, I am convinced that, unless you are spending $200-$400 plus for a linear power supply that battery power is the way to go. I actually ran the E30 off a sub $100 Chinese LPS I purchased off Ebay with a very good DIY power cord and a $20 power bank from Costco significantly bettered the performance of the Topping combined with the LPS. Cost: $20

Still low cost but not break the bank improvements:

1) Holo Audio Titanis USB processor. Regenerates both power and data, although I don't technically need power generation by using the battery. Reclocks data to supposedly eliminate or reduce jitter. I found this to make a fairly significant difference in sound quality. Cost: $65

2) Ifi Silencer + Bought this just before buying the Titanis and might not have if I had known about the Titanis before. Essentially lowers noise (which can be an issue with USB). I ended up daisy chaining it after the Titanis (see photo below) and it did improve things further in this configuration but not to the extent that the Titanis did on its own. If I had to choose one or the other and not both, I'd recommend the Titanis. I thought the Silencer + might be a throwaway when I got it but it is not. Cost for the Silencer +: $50

The Titanis/Silencer combo at $115 is very high value as far as I'm concerned and if I'd paid $500 more for a better DAC to equal the performance upgrade I would not have felt cheated. But YMMV, not sure how it will work with more expensive DAC's or in other setups. Just putting the info out there.

3) Decent USB cable. Can't understand the controversy over this one. Well I guess I can if we're talking about $1000 for a USB cable lol! Bought a decent (15 foot as I need the length) USB cable from China off Ebay. It very strongly resembles the basic Furutech USB cable sold at significantly higher prices and for about $55 was a no brainer and I was very happy with how it sounded vs. a $10 printer cable.

Even though I have what I consider to me a pretty good analog set up, I find this very inexpensive digital setup to be quite enjoyable for the most part, especially with decent modern digital recordings or well mastered older analog stuff streamed. There are still some recordings which exhibit a bit of digital edge or glare, but Filter 5 on the Topping will minimize that to some degree at the push of a button, which is quite convenient.

I have some friends with significant $$$ in the DAC/digital department and really don't feel I'm missing out much with the above (and below ) setup.

I'm pretty well set for a while the way I figure it.

 

Well in that sense, I would agree.

I find that some of the recent designs (class D, G, etc) are pretty capable. But it's interesting how many who've grown up with amplifier designs from the 70s, 80s and 90s struggle to 'accept' the sound produced by newer technologies - often described as boring or lacking character.

As a basis for good digital (or analogue) reproduction though, these newer designs are pretty interesting and - for me - may be quietly (pardon the pun) ushering a new ways of listening at home. Not to everyone's taste/expectation though.

 

It's not a question of being "suspicious", they are lying to you about 16/44.

So-called "high resolution" audio (for listening purposes) is a huge con.

 

I don't know the dacmagic, but had an Arcam rdac with seperate psu until recently which served well for 10 years. 6 months ago it got swapped out for an Exogal Comet and the jump in SQ was large - especially soundstage holographics and HFs.

 

Have you tried listening to high resolution audio on digispeakers?

 

I'm fascinated by this thread, since it appears impressions of DAC qualities are based on combinations of all sorts of experiences and formed beliefs from 1. manufacturer's propaganda, 2. comparison and contrast, or 3. review; so, it's no wonder the concept of best is as elusive as it is debatable.

I have 6 devices which have a DAC function and two of those have an ADC function. None of these components was purchased for the DAC function; yet, comparison and contract of these DACs has produced a preference to process digital streams via my 2.1 Parasound P6 Preamplifier & DAC and since it's the newest of my means to digital music pleasure, perhaps, it indicates there have been advancements in DACs from the time my Sony PCM-7010F Digital Audio Recorders were manufactured, or it may indicate other things.

What I know for sure is my preamp presents tone from digital material at most any bit and bite rate which is for the most part indistinguishable from LP tone via a Technics SL-1210GR/A-T VM540ML powered by my preamp's phono stage; and, this quality experience precludes me from entertaining the purchase of a DAC component until I upgrade in the speaker arena.

 

I’ve owned outboard DAC’s since 1990 starting with Theta progressing thru numerous models then to MSB, Benchmark’s, Wadia’s and several Esoteric’s. Although the rate of improvement’s of newer generations is slowing over the last 15 years, the best brings digital within a hairs breath of the equivalent of analog in the same price range, using high quality source material.
Today you can get sound superior at a small faction of the price that would have cost you thousands 20 years ago.

 

Fully agree with you. There are various serious companies that pushed DAC performance (of 44.1/16) to new musical heights through digital processing and new algorithms.
But this also comes at a relatively high cost and since there are more ways to skin a cat, I (and others) are impressed with the relatively low cost approach of using a NOS DAC in combination with an analog based post processor by Sparkler.

Below a review, and here a quote from the review:
“Another unexpected consequence of this review has been my re-discovery of the sonic virtues of the “lowly” compact disc. It was easy to forget about hi-resolution streaming files when I listened to my music through the Sparkler Spiral player. The timing, texture, and detail offered by this unit using the old Phillips TDA 1543 converter chip are mind-blowing.

Given the performance and the price of these special products, we’re nominating them both for our coveted Julia Award, the exclusive value-oriented category of our Editors’ Choice Awards.”
Review: Sparkler Audio Spiral, Ether | Review | Part-Time Audiophile

Here a 1996 paper on the advantages of a NOS DAC and why the oversampling hipe was the wrong way to go. Also interesting his notes that measurements do not always agree with human hearing.
NOS DAC

I would agree that DAC performance has been pushed close to the limit indeed, but the challenge now is to get cost down.

 

No, but it will sound the same as 16/44, unless it's remastered.

 

What about new music? New music is not getting remastered, it is getting mastered in high resolution to begin with.

 

Good question.

 

I dont stream and am NOT in the know in this regard, just using common sense. I would think most new music being produced these days is being mastered in high resolution formats.

 

I read only 20% of studios have gone to hi res, the rest 16/48.
It was in AES or recording engineers society paper.
They were advocating for higher though.

 

Thete was a progress:

1.Jitter is no longer an issue.
2. Effective resolution went from 19 to 21 bits.
3. DACs can natively decode DSD1024
4. End user can select reconstruction filters best suited for music he plays and switch them on the fly.

Isn't that enough?