Serious Question: How can DAC's have a SOUND SIGNATURE if they measure as transparent? Are that many confused?

[SIY]

Hi,

Is it stupid from me to assume that, once that conversion is performed, it is not passed directly to the output connectors ?
That there is some "tweaking" on the analog part of the output (so the part that comes AFTER the DAC) ?

And that the difference that people are hearing is caused by that anaolog output staging and not the DAC itself ?

You go wrong in the last sentence. A more accurate version would be "And that the difference that people claim they are hearing is caused by that analog output staging and not the DAC itself ?" And therein lies the problem- there's a large gap between claiming to hear a difference and demonstrating that one hears a difference. If you're unwilling to do the latter, the former is absolutely worthless.

 

[BDWoody]

Is it stupid from me to assume that, once that conversion is performed, it is not passed directly to the output connectors ?
That there is some "tweaking" on the analog part of the output (so the part that comes AFTER the DAC) ?

That final output is what gets measured...after whatever analog output stage exists. These aren't measurements of just the chip, they are measurements of everything that comes before the cable connectors, so there isn't anything hiding in there waiting to be explained...

 

[solderdude]

Can it be assumed that a DAC is a "digital-to-analog" converter ?

yes.

Therefore, the sound is converted form "0-1" binary sequence to an electrical signal...

In basic principle yes, however, it as far from as simple as you think it might be.

Is it stupid from me to assume that, once that conversion is performed, it is not passed directly to the output connectors ?

No, only very few, usually cheaper, DAC chips output directly to output connectors, the vast majority does not.

That there is some "tweaking" on the analog part of the output (so the part that comes AFTER the DAC) ?

No 'tweaking' but usually essential components to create a certain output level, conditions, buffering or additional low pass filtering above 50kHz or so.

And that the difference that people are hearing is caused by that anaolog output staging and not the DAC itself ?

No, but can understand people think it does. (see @SIY post above)

I am totally ignorant, but would like to understand...

That's the beauty of internet, you can eduacate yourself. The biggest issue here is to weed the nonsense from real info. And so you know there is much much much more nonsense found on the web than real info. You need to know where to look.

I would also like to point out that since Amirm started to measure speakers, on not so rare occasions, his conclusion is :
"Despite the rather good measurements, I did not like the sound I subjectively heard".
Or the other way round : "Given the pretty bad measurements, I expected catastrophical subjective listening test. But the thing sounded pretty good".

As I mentioned before... speakers aren't electronics. Measuring and interpreting acoustical and electrical measurements is a totally different ballgame and includes a big unknown... the room and positioning of speakers.

 

[VintageFlanker]

Can it be assumed that a DAC is a "digital-to-analog" converter ?
Therefore, the sound is converted form "0-1" binary sequence to an electrical signal...

Is it stupid from me to assume that, once that conversion is performed, it is not passed directly to the output connectors ?
That there is some "tweaking" on the analog part of the output (so the part that comes AFTER the DAC) ?

And that the difference that people are hearing is caused by that anaolog output staging and not the DAC itself ?

No. In the common language, we use the word "DAC" for the entire unit (not only the chip), including of course, its output stage. Needless to say, what @amirm is measuring is already everything coming from the "output connectors"...

 

[Jimbob54]

DAC performance depends on temperature. Some of them readily gain a few dB of SINAD if cooled to -30 °C or so.

Sadly, walk in freezers do not make for a comfortable listening environment and all the frozen carcasses play havoc with the in room response of my speakers.

 

[PenguinMusic]

You go wrong in the last sentence. A more accurate version would be "And that the difference that people claim they are hearing is caused by that analog output staging and not the DAC itself ?" And therein lies the problem- there's a large gap between claiming to hear a difference and demonstrating that one hears a difference. If you're unwilling to do the latter, the former is absolutely worthless.

Hi,

So, if I read your post correctly, there can be no audible difference between a DAC dongle and a stand-alone DAC ? <

If that is so, I was hesitating between the Fiio BTR1k (55€ here) and the BTR5 from same maker (120€ here).
But if their output is the same, I'll go for the cheaper one...
Or will integrate that the price bump is not to get better sound but to get a longer lasting battery

 

[Jimbob54]

Hi,

So, if I read your post correctly, there can be no audible difference between a DAC dongle and a stand-alone DAC ? <

If that is so, I was hesitating between the Fiio BTR1k (55€ here) and the BTR5 from same maker (120€ here).
But if their output is the same, I'll go for the cheaper one...
Or will integrate that the price bump is not to get better sound but to get a longer lasting battery

They are DAC/amps are they not. I suspect the bulk of this thread is referring to the devices we call "DACs" which would output (lets say) 2v intended to go to an amp of some sort. Dont assume combined DAC/amps follow the same rules.

Also, arent they Bluetooth devices? Again, not necessarily what is being discussed here.

 

[PenguinMusic]

yes.

In basic principle yes, however, it as far from as simple as you think it might be.

I imagine it is indeed a much more complex process...


No, only very few, usually cheaper, DAC chips output directly to output connectors, the vast majority does not.
So that would be a relevant comparison. Taking 2 of those and measure those.
If they output a difference, there can dbe an audible difference between them.
If not... Well there can't be Am I wrong assuming there will probably be no difference at all ?


No 'tweaking' but usually essential components to create a certain output level, conditions, buffering or additional low pass filtering above 50kHz or so.
Ok, "tweaking" is probably improperly used, byt that is what I meant


No, but can understand people think it does. (see @SIY post above)
So, even after the "analogue" processing, no audible sound difference to expect ?
If so, thanks a lot... You just saved me 50 dollars See my other post...


That's the beauty of internet, you can eduacate yourself. The biggest issue here is to weed the nonsense from real info. And so you know there is much much much more nonsense found on the web than real info. You need to know where to look.
Yeah... That is the problem. I rely on the claims of some people And I must say that you are part of those I listen to and take their words for granted


As I mentioned before... speakers aren't electronics. Measuring and interpreting acoustical and electrical measurements is a totally different ballgame and includes a big unknown... the room and positioning of speakers.
Sadly, I modded my post :-(
In the first version, I got to the conclusion "So, for analogue devices, do measurements still tell the whole story ?"

Thanks a lot for your answers...

Still get a couple of questions, but I will ask later and wait before I spill some new oil on a flaming debate

 

[PenguinMusic]

They are DAC/amps are they not. I suspect the bulk of this thread is referring to the devices we call "DACs" which would output (lets say) 2v intended to go to an amp of some sort. Dont assume combined DAC/amps follow the same rules.

Also, arent they Bluetooth devices? Again, not necessarily what is being discussed here.

Thanks a lot for your answer.

As I said, I don't really understand of hwo it all works, but I (naively ?) assumed that if the device gets a BT signal, that signal will be "digital" and thus, said device will necessarily have to include a DAC.

But I assume that yes, they also have to include an AMP.
So the sound difference can be from the amp ?

Guess I'll open a new thread to educate myself on these points before buying one of those devices...

 

[Jimbob54]

Thanks a lot for your answer.

As I said, I don't really understand of hwo it all works, but I (naively ?) assumed that if the device gets a BT signal, that signal will be "digital" and thus, said device will necessarily have to include a DAC.

But I assume that yes, they also have to include an AMP.
So the sound difference can be from the amp ?

Guess I'll open a new thread to educate myself on these points before buying one of those devices...

1. There will have to be a DAC chip in their somewhere, likely on the same chip as the bluetooth receiver. (As pointed out by a few , this thread is about the devices we refer to as (desktop) DACs BUT
2. Even if the 2 devices you mention have the same BT receiver and DAC inside, they will most certainly have different amplifier components / power capability etc. Given the price difference I would like to think so. This makes them apples and pears.

There are combined desktop devices that have both a DAC portion and a (headphone) amp portion- take a look at the Topping DX3 /DX3 pro as an example. These tend to also have RCA outputs to connect to a separate (probably speaker) amp too. You can measure the latter as any other desktop DAC at the RCA outputs. But if you are measuring the output from the headamp socket, the HP amp is probably the least well measuring portion of the device - the bottleneck if you like. The DX3 is a damn good headamp too. But the amp circuits in some of the portable BT all in one devices, maybe not so much. Mostly depends what headphones you intend to use. The higher the power requirement of the HP, the less likely the portables are to be adequate.

 

[SIY]

Hi,

So, if I read your post correctly, there can be no audible difference between a DAC dongle and a stand-alone DAC ?

For decent dongles (e.g., the $9 one from Apple), yes, they will sound identical to an engineered standalone DAC. No-one has demonstrated that they can hear the difference, assuming they are driving loads within their capabilities, of course.

 

[PenguinMusic]

For decent dongles (e.g., the $9 one from Apple), yes, they will sound identical to an engineered standalone DAC. No-one has demonstrated that they can hear the difference, assuming they are driving loads within their capabilities, of course.

Hum... Cool No spending money on a DAC. Unless it also features an AMP and then I have to carefull read about the amp, but I can leave the DAC alone.

 

[solderdude]

So, if I read your post correctly, there can be no audible difference between a DAC dongle and a stand-alone DAC ?

There can be audible differences between certain dongles and a certain stand-alone DACs depending on how they are made.
There can also be no discernable differences between certain dongles and certain stand-alone DACs depending on how they are made.
To find out is why they are measured. You can also try to find out by listening to them. Alas, to do the latter properly and get real results you need to know how and why.
In all cases they will measure differently, support different bit rates, bit depths ?, have different filters or functionality and or connectivity, they can have different output voltages and whatnot.

 

[PenguinMusic]

1. There will have to be a DAC chip in their somewhere, likely on the same chip as the bluetooth receiver. (As pointed out by a few , this thread is about the devices we refer to as (desktop) DACs BUT
2. Even if the 2 devices you mention have the same BT receiver and DAC inside, they will most certainly have different amplifier components / power capability etc. Given the price difference I would like to think so. This makes them apples and pears.

There are combined desktop devices that have both a DAC portion and a (headphone) amp portion- take a look at the Topping DX3 /DX3 pro as an example. These tend to also have RCA outputs to connect to a separate (probably speaker) amp too. You can measure the latter as any other desktop DAC at the RCA outputs. But if you are measuring the output from the headamp socket, the HP amp is probably the least well measuring portion of the device - the bottleneck if you like. The DX3 is a damn good headamp too. But the amp circuits in some of the portable BT all in one devices, maybe not so much. Mostly depends what headphones you intend to use. The higher the power requirement of the HP, the less likely the portables are to be adequate.

But a DAC on a BT chip does the same as a stand-alone DAC so there is no difference there either ? Or is there ? If there is, then I am puzzled :-(

 

[PenguinMusic]

There can be audible differences between certain dongles and a certain stand-alone DACs depending on how they are made.
There can also be no discernable differences between certain dongles and certain stand-alone DACs depending on how they are made.
In all cases they will measure differently, support different bit rates, bit depths ?, have different filters or functionality and or connectivity, they can have different output voltages and whatnot.

Hum... OK.
So we are talking about the DEVICE and not the CHIP.

I thought the whole debate was about the CHIP...

Thus me being puzzled by some answers...

Still, I would have a question.

Amirm has measured several DACs.
He noticed that there was a bump somewhere in about all ESS Sabre driven DAC (devices) he measured.
Can this bump be considered as the "ESS Sound signature" (the CHIP) ?

Just to clear it : just asking... Not debating.

 

[mansr]

One troll leaves, another shows up.

 

[solderdude]

lesson learned... differentiate in all replies between DAC chip and DAC device.

 

[BDWoody]

Amirm has measured several DACs.
He noticed that there was a bump somewhere in about all ESS Sabre driven DAC (devices) he measured.
Can this bump be considered as the "ESS Sound signature" (the CHIP) ?

Has he identified it as such? Has he ever pointed out audible differences from his listening tests?

 

[Jimbob54]

Hum... OK.
So we are talking about the DEVICE and not the CHIP.

I thought the whole debate was about the CHIP...

Thus me being puzzled by some answers...

Still, I would have a question.

Amirm has measured several DACs.
He noticed that there was a bump somewhere in about all ESS Sabre driven DAC (devices) he measured.
Can this bump be considered as the "ESS Sound signature" (the CHIP) ?

Just to clear it : just asking... Not debating.

Honestly, I wouldnt go there. Or if you have to , search for threads about the measurement of DACs / ESS hump etc using search on here.

 

[Jimbob54]

Has he identified it as such? Has he ever pointed out audible differences from his listening tests?

The glare, oh the glare!!!