Can a DAC improve soundstage, depth, separation?

[Graham849]

I have a fosi q4 which sounds great for material that is not wide in digital signature(I think thats the lingo) but output clicked if stressed.

So I got a AO100 amp/DAC which fixed that problem. Reviews of the DO100 convinced me to buy it which gives me better Bluetooth and balanced connections.

Cheap equipment but for my 62yo ears more than adequate.

Another way of explaining : the circuitry in the fosi q4 is probably adequate if I only listened to YouTube, but I have some flac recordings which show its limitations. Modern circuit design has trickled down to cheap assembly. Good sound for peanuts.

 

[LSB]

So my question: is it possible for a DAC upgrade (from the internal DAC in my Hegel h390 to, say, a Topping d90se) to improve the DEPTH and WIDTH of my soundstage and the SEPARATION of instruments in three-dimensional sound space?

Yes this is possible but unlikely if your comparator DAC is similar. Anecdotal reports indicate DACs that do better imaging only work when the room/speakers/set up/amp etc etc are all sorted. The DACs that pull off 3D representations tend to be R2R topology with NOS or superior filters and are usually not so affordable. This all implies phase/timing is implicated.

The problem finding out is measurements wont tell you which DAC to try. There is no measure for 3D audio imaging. That means there is no data. Lots of people confuse no data for no effect. Amusingly they often do it with supreme confidence.

To find out what your Hegel does, make a pilgrimage to someone with a great system that has nailed the 3D imaging trick. This is very rare by the way. Take your DAC and AB their source vs your DAC.

That will hopefully tell you your DAC is just fine and you can relax and save your money.

The best 3D imaging I heard used the top of the line MSB R2R DAC in a great system. Changing to an affordable S-D DAC was crushing. Then again it wasnt a blinded trial but the effect wasnt subtle. Id say any music lover with two average ears would have picked it blinded at p<0.05.

Which town are you in NZ?

 

[DonR]

Yes this is possible but unlikely if your comparator DAC is similar. Anecdotal reports indicate DACs that do better imaging only work when the room/speakers/set up/amp etc etc are all sorted. The DACs that pull off 3D representations tend to be R2R topology with NOS or superior filters and are usually not so affordable. This all implies phase/timing is implicated.

The problem finding out is measurements wont tell you which DAC to try. There is no measure for 3D audio imaging. That means there is no data. Lots of people confuse no data for no effect. Amusingly they often do it with supreme confidence.

That is very interesting. Do you have any papers or published articles that explain the science behind this effect? I would like to know more.

 

[tiramisu]

nope

 

[digitalfrost]

Having said that, I am a constant tinkerer and find myself wondering just HOW can I improve the 3-dimensionality of my soundstage in my listening room.

You should try Ambiophonics https://www.ambiophonics.org/

 

[Mnyb]

Just NO to influence depth and width you need to influence fr response and phase relationship with specific sounds in the mix not a property a DAC can have it’s not an DSP engine.

I just decodes 2 channels of audio . It’s the usual electrical waveform with amplitude on one axis and time on the other as your accustomed to with your physic teaching, it does not have more properties.

They are boringly similar when they work properly.

So to counter that audiophile community has given you stuff like.

A renaissance for R2R DAC ( the original way of building DAC’s) , this tech can work if done properly then its gets expensive, typical delta sigma based chips DAC’s betters even the best ones for a fraction of the price .
The bad ones are not very good at all.

NOS DAC non oversampling DAC’s. A weird idea that the oversampling in DAC chips are bad ?

Filter less DAC’s the idea that digital filters are bad these does not work properly at all in reconstructing the original wave form.

These usually combines to the final horror R2R DAC with no filter run .

If it where anything to this nonsense it would show up in the measurement of THD and noise .

Have you seen this btw.

 

[Beave]

Yes this is possible but unlikely if your comparator DAC is similar. Anecdotal reports indicate DACs that do better imaging only work when the room/speakers/set up/amp etc etc are all sorted. The DACs that pull off 3D representations tend to be R2R topology with NOS or superior filters and are usually not so affordable. This all implies phase/timing is implicated.

The problem finding out is measurements wont tell you which DAC to try. There is no measure for 3D audio imaging. That means there is no data. Lots of people confuse no data for no effect. Amusingly they often do it with supreme confidence.

No so, my friend. Apparently you have never been introduced to the Lirpa Labs Analyzer of SoundStages (A.S.S.). It's a remarkably advanced piece of test gear that can quantify both soundstage depth and soundstage width for any DAC under evaluation. I used one for years when I worked on DAC design and development.

 

[MAB]

I read all these subjective reviews (Goldensound and New Record Day's review of the Holo Audio May R2R DAC have nearly taken my money a hundred times) and they make me feel like I'm missing something if I don't upgrade my DAC. Is it all subjective crap?

I’m a physicist too; and I worked in audio shops when I was young. Believe me, the gravitational pull on your wallet and emotions by some of the sales pitches is difficult to resist. ASR can be a great place to center yourself on what is really important.

I am a constant tinkerer and find myself wondering just HOW can I improve the 3-dimensionality of my soundstage in my listening room.

I would explore some of the forums here on Room Equalization Wizard (aka REW). With a microphone and REW you can learn about your room and speaker’s acoustic properties. From there you can devise room treatment and speaker placement to get better frequency response. REW + mic + Digital Signal Processing even more powerful (but will cost a bit). MiniDSP (for instance) offers kit that can turn your HiFi into an acoustic laboratory.

Search for REW
See Amir’s intro on REW

Welcome to ASR!

 

[LSB]

That is very interesting. Do you have any papers or published articles that explain the science behind this effect? I would like to know more.

Apologies for the off topic trip here:

The literature on how cognitive bias affects human judgment, even in professionals making life and death decisions, is wide and robust. It includes:

Pilots Walmsley & Gilbey, 2016 - the air industry has often been ahead of the game with detailed investigations of high impact accidents
Legal Englich et al., 2006 - interesting how even judges taking so much time to deliberate can still make such shockingly bad judgements and ruin innocent lives
Medical Drew et al., 2013 - RIP, so many lives lost.

Im sure using Pubmed you will find even more fascinating and current literature. Enjoy.

 

[bluefuzz]

HOW can I improve the 3-dimensionality of my soundstage in my listening room.

If you are not using room correction – either digital (Dirac, Accourate, Audessy etc) or physical room treatment and preferably both – then you should be. Room EQ will make a vastly bigger difference than the difference between any two competently built DACs. I would be surprised if anyone could hear the difference in a blind test between the very best measuring DAC that Amir has tested and the worst measuring one ...

Soundstage and imaging is all to do with your loudspeakers frequency response and directivity and how they interact with the room. I am constantly amazed how much Dirac can improve already good sounding speakers ...

 

[DonR]

Apologies for the off topic trip here:

The literature on how cognitive bias affects human judgment, even in professionals making life and death decisions, is wide and robust. It includes:

Pilots Walmsley & Gilbey, 2016 - the air industry has often been ahead of the game with detailed investigations of high impact accidents
Legal Englich et al., 2006 - interesting how even judges taking so much time to deliberate can still make such shockingly bad judgements and ruin innocent lives
Medical Drew et al., 2013 - RIP, so many lives lost.

Im sure using Pubmed you will find even more fascinating and current literature. Enjoy.

Fascinating but it doesn't cover the subject of interest which is how a DAC with a particular output filter can construct a 3D image due to timing/phasing.

 

[Cote Dazur]

Is it all subjective crap?

Yes, you already know that speaker placement is key, other key is where you seat in the room and what is behind you. Then it is up to how the music was recorded.
The DAC, if operating within its parameter, is for all matter and concerned, transparent.

 

[Jim Shaw]

To the question at hand:

Any change you make is likely to change what you imagine you hear. And imagination is front and center in evoking musical 'realism.' This is the stock-in-trade of the subjective pundits -- especially the ones who try to make a living off your mental wanderlust.

I am convinced that the biggest enemy of good musical evocation is annoyance. Most often, but not always, the root of disturbance is the loudspeaker. Objective testing shows the widest variety of performance is in those devices. Your ears are very sensitive to certain characteristics of speaker performance. These sensitivities are hard-wired into us by evolution and fine-tuned by experience. [What is that sound behind me? How close? Friend or foe? Should I flee?] Music is heard through those same ears and that same brain.

Subjectively, there is another big factor in this -- the prejudice toward hearing differences as "better". Most often, the difference is just that -- not better or worse, more or less 'real', just different. Audiophiles tend to obsess about this; eg: I bought big dollar cables and I'm sure they sound different.

So what? Do they sound closer to evoking reality, or what?

Since you say you notice changes in the tilt, position, and angle of your speakers, I would look here first. The evocation of music necessarily has much to do with speaker dispersion, and how they play in your room. First and second reflections. These issues can dominate your perceptions very grandly. Look there for a change, first.

"Before you jump onto the audiophile 'train,' be sure you know where you want to go, and when you should get off." That, or it's just an obsession with train rides.

 

[Trell]

When testing it’s always very helpful to look at the price tag before making any judgement.

 

[reydelanada]

I’ve done a few “DAC testing days” at home. Some times 50€ DACs against 8000€ DACs, some times more similar price DACs.

We always tried to adjust levels, and set up zones in roon to be able to change just pressing a button from the preamp remote. Nothing too serious, but not a disaster.

Sometimes I could clearly distinguish between DACs. Sometimes I could hear differences but Probably never succeed a blind test, and sometimes it was inposible to hear any difference.

But never, never, could hear any change regarding soundstage. Even with a 50€ DAC soundstage was almost the same as with the most expensive ones.

Difference between DACs when present, were so little.

Just to mention, same testing with phono preamps made much more differences.

Listening to some youtubers reviews for DACs I only conclude they are just creating a fiction story. Poetry. Literature. Not Reality.

 

[tallbeardedone]

Just NO to influence depth and width you need to influence fr response and phase relationship with specific sounds in the mix not a property a DAC can have it’s not an DSP engine.

I just decodes 2 channels of audio . It’s the usual electrical waveform with amplitude on one axis and time on the other as your accustomed to with your physic teaching, it does not have more properties.

They are boringly similar when they work properly.

So to counter that audiophile community has given you stuff like.

A renaissance for R2R DAC ( the original way of building DAC’s) , this tech can work if done properly then its gets expensive, typical delta sigma based chips DAC’s betters even the best ones for a fraction of the price .
The bad ones are not very good at all.

NOS DAC non oversampling DAC’s. A weird idea that the oversampling in DAC chips are bad ?

Filter less DAC’s the idea that digital filters are bad these does not work properly at all in reconstructing the original wave form.

These usually combines to the final horror R2R DAC with no filter run .

If it where anything to this nonsense it would show up in the measurement of THD and noise .

Have you seen this btw.

Super helpful thanks very much.

 

[tallbeardedone]

I’m a physicist too; and I worked in audio shops when I was young. Believe me, the gravitational pull on your wallet and emotions by some of the sales pitches is difficult to resist. ASR can be a great place to center yourself on what is really important.


I would explore some of the forums here on Room Equalization Wizard (aka REW). With a microphone and REW you can learn about your room and speaker’s acoustic properties. From there you can devise room treatment and speaker placement to get better frequency response. REW + mic + Digital Signal Processing even more powerful (but will cost a bit). MiniDSP (for instance) offers kit that can turn your HiFi into an acoustic laboratory.

Search for REW
See Amir’s intro on REW

Welcome to ASR!

Super helpful. Thanks for the info. Diving into REW now

 

[tallbeardedone]

To the question at hand:

Any change you make is likely to change what you imagine you hear. And imagination is front and center in evoking musical 'realism.' This is the stock-in-trade of the subjective pundits -- especially the ones who try to make a living off your mental wanderlust.

I am convinced that the biggest enemy of good musical evocation is annoyance. Most often, but not always, the root of disturbance is the loudspeaker. Objective testing shows the widest variety of performance is in those devices. Your ears are very sensitive to certain characteristics of speaker performance. These sensitivities are hard-wired into us by evolution and fine-tuned by experience. [What is that sound behind me? How close? Friend or foe? Should I flee?] Music is heard through those same ears and that same brain.

Subjectively, there is another big factor in this -- the prejudice toward hearing differences as "better". Most often, the difference is just that -- not better or worse, more or less 'real', just different. Audiophiles tend to obsess about this; eg: I bought big dollar cables and I'm sure they sound different.

So what? Do they sound closer to evoking reality, or what?

Since you say you notice changes in the tilt, position, and angle of your speakers, I would look here first. The evocation of music necessarily has much to do with speaker dispersion, and how they play in your room. First and second reflections. These issues can dominate your perceptions very grandly. Look there for a change, first.

"Before you jump onto the audiophile 'train,' be sure you know where you want to go, and when you should get off." That, or it's just an obsession with train rides.

thanks for the insight. your quote helped me get off the train and enjoy the music.

 

[Steven Holt]

I'm going to answer your question with a question : Would you rather have a $1500 pair of speakers and a $200 DAC, or would you rather have a $200 pair of speakers and a $1500 DAC?

 

[617]

Let me preface by saying I'm a physics teacher and lifelong audiophile in my years of listening I have found speaker placement, toe-in, and rake are the single most important factors in nailing a 3-dimensional sound stage. When listening to a great recording I love the feeling of being INSIDE the room where it was recorded (or inside the headphones of the person who mixed it). Having said that, I am a constant tinkerer and find myself wondering just HOW can I improve the 3-dimensionality of my soundstage in my listening room.

So my question: is it possible for a DAC upgrade (from the internal DAC in my Hegel h390 to, say, a Topping d90se) to improve the DEPTH and WIDTH of my soundstage and the SEPARATION of instruments in three-dimensional sound space? I read all these subjective reviews (Goldensound and New Record Day's review of the Holo Audio May R2R DAC have nearly taken my money a hundred times) and they make me feel like I'm missing something if I don't upgrade my DAC. Is it all subjective crap? I can't get my hands on any DACs to do a blind test to I have to go with you guys here at Audio Science Review. HELP!

As a physics teacher you are numerate enough to understand how the decibel scale works.

An absolute trash, garbage teir DAC has distortion and noise components that are 70db quieter than the pure signal. An okay DAC is more like 90db, and a top tier DAC is close to 120db.

The thing is, -70db is incredibly quiet. Like, you will never hear it in a million years quiet. Add that to the fact that noise is generally not that obtrusive and distortion isnt even a factor in subjective audio quality....it's safe to say no DAC has ever made a difference as long as it's putting out enough juice to make your amplifier happy.