• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Benefits of using expensive DACs

ciccio1378

Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2022
Messages
17
Likes
33
Vorrei segnalare il seguente articolo:
Invito i nostri amici del blog a leggere e valutare attentamente quanto scritto. Sono totalmente d'accordo con l'autore.

Translated by moderator. Please post in English going forward.

I would like to point out the following article:


I invite our blog friends to read and carefully evaluate what is written. I totally agree with the author.
 
Nothing to disagree with in there! All good advice. Getting great sound from both my Schiit and JDS DACs, no plans to upgrade.
 
There is a clear benefit to the dealer if you buy an expensive dac.
Keith
 
Nothing to disagree with in there! All good advice.
Well, except for that very last part:
Lastly, your music source also matters A LOT.


High-quality audio files, like lossless formats or well-mastered recordings, will offer a much more significant improvement over compressed MP3s.
If you have normal, generally healthy hearing, chances are you'll have one hell of a time discerning lossy audio of a half-decent bitrate and the uncompressed originals. (There are people with specific forms of hearing loss who can basically always tell the difference because their hearing's frequency response is way off from the psymodels employed by lossy codecs and masking doesn't work as expected. The same can also happen when transducers have a super wonky frequency response.)

But recordings and mastering, boy do those ever matter.
 
The only conceivable benefit of an expensive DAC, AFIAC, is to use it as a piece of sculpture like, for example, this:

1729317832635.png



If you want something like this, and are willing to pay $50,000 USD to look at it every time you play a Celine Dion record, then go make yourself happy. We won't judge. Of course it won't sound any better than a $40 DAC, but you should already know that, so do what thou wilt.
 
define 'expensive'

i have no issues with an RME ADI2 given it does a lot for your money... and it does some uniquely decent things

i think that is separate to 'boutique' dacs from dCS or whatever

i would even say the top end DACs from SMSL Topping etc are kind of waste of money.. like what does a $1k topping dac do over a $500 smsl midrange?

truthfully the chinese have done a number on the industry given what you can do for under $300

and given dacs are so simple one might ask why the non Chinese companies havent developed stuff in this price range too

but yeah... the SU-1 has shown that a $69 unit can do it as far as line performance
 
I usually do not write this, because people that spend a lot of money on such gear may feel insulted.
I'm quite sure there are quite coarse working, cheap DAC chips, without daubt. If we keep these uncapable models out of the comparison, we will have a lot of perfectly fine basic chips, which are the core of any DAC, may it be inside a CD player, DVD, streamer or a separate unit.

Where the "sound", if you can find a specific one, comes from and where the designer can tune it a little, is the output stage.
Cheap CD player with audible worse sound, in most cases have very simple power supply's. If you don't drive an output stage with a clean power, it will have a much harder time delivering a clean output. From my experience, this is a fact.
An external DAC has the advantage of not needing to drive power consuming electric devices, like a motor, laser etc. This puts a much lower load on its supply voltages. I have some CD player that clearly profit from an external DAC, even as the DAC chip inside the drive is of theoretically "better" quality, more expensive or from a much more prestigious manufacturer than the one in the external one.

There are lists with the DAC chips build into any CD player or other D/A converting piece of gear. If you find a separate and integrated unit with identical DAC chips, you can check this out on your own. If it was the DAC model dictating sound quality, both should sound identical. IMO even if the analog output stage is using the same IC, like a NE5532 which is quite good, in most cases you will hear differences.

If you are objective and match levels, your findings may not be what you expect or want to hear. There are very cheap DAC's in the 30$ range that match or even sound better than quite expensive CD drives. Maybe high integration is better than old school, large PCB areas with many parts. Just an idea.

Because of the various components that are needed to build a working DAC, from it's input to it's output, I don't think there will be a final answer to the thread's question. You can only answer it for your self. By the way, a 12$ multimeter in the AC range and a 400Hz or the like test CD, burned from some
free file, is the base you need for a serious home test. Without matched levels you will fool yourself.
In all honesty, I don't expect any new DAC, as expensive as it may be, to sound better than the existing, good ones. The differences are just not there. I fear there is just as much honesty when improvements are presented, as there are with cables. You simply can not get better than 100% perfect, even as most of the audio industry is living on this well-fed illusion. If you want to really improve your audio chain, today 99.99% are in the speakers.
And don't use compressed audio that is not loss less, whatever someone tells you. Missing data are missing.


PS I may add one observation. Valve output stages, may they be inside a CD player or DAC, can seriously change the sound. Sometimes very nice I must admit. If you like it or not, is your personal decission. This is not a sign of the valve concept's superiority, but just a side effect of an outdated electronic part, changing the original signal. I know, there are many fanatics working in this area, but simply because you need more, heavier and more complicated, expensive parts, something must not be automatically better than a state of the art, 5 Volt driven, integrated 40 Gram solution.
 
Last edited:
An external DAC has the advantage of not needing to drive power consuming electric devices, like a motor, laser etc. This puts a much lower load on its supply voltages.
CD/disc players have several+ power supplies within for the motors, display, laser p/u and separate power supplies for the digital IC stage(s). They do not suffer from anything in this regard.
 
If you are sure, fine for you.
I'm very certain. I have seen thousands of CD players cross my workbench and they all had good power supplies and some even had dedicated power supply transformer(s) for the digital circuitry. Your concern is not founded on reality.
 
Last edited:
Well, except for that very last part:

If you have normal, generally healthy hearing, chances are you'll have one hell of a time discerning lossy audio of a half-decent bitrate and the uncompressed originals. (There are people with specific forms of hearing loss who can basically always tell the difference because their hearing's frequency response is way off from the psymodels employed by lossy codecs and masking doesn't work as expected. The same can also happen when transducers have a super wonky frequency response.)

But recordings and mastering, boy do those ever matter.

I have relatively crappy old man hearing and I can hear the difference between 320 and lower files versus lossless files in multiple blind tests but you are correct that the mastering matters a lot especially when comparing versions from loudness wars years to ones with higher dynamic range.
 
I always wanted a Holo May because of its looks. But I wouldnt pay that price unless I was worth millions.
The one other benefit of very pricey audio gear is the looks, and maybe the deluxe 'feel' of the controls. These days (speakers aside), that's it, really :D

It's all 'eye-fi' to so many audiophiles...
 
Well, except for that very last part[...]
Just wanted to write that until I saw your post.

Exactly! As relatively decent that article is, ironically, at the end it also falls into the usual "lossy can hardly be good" trap, including using the rather confusing term "compression" (nowadays' decease of ruining dynamic ranges or rather "crest factors") instead of "data reduction".

But recordings and mastering, boy do those ever matter.
And boy did those used to be great already more than 40 years ago and do they ironically often suck today.


i have no issues with an RME ADI2 given it does a lot for your money... and it does some uniquely decent things
RME certainly stands out when it comes to the product features, support and especially the great documentation. Somehow the stereotypical German, decent, puristic and also not-too-flashy approach.

However, given that RME isn't the typical voodoo manufacturer (similar to Benchmark), that Fempto-Clock jitter-reducion thing and their support of actually entirely insane* sample rates up to 768 kHz, for me already has that slight voodoo/highend aftertaste and maybe I would appreciate both manufacturers even more if they would say "no, we don't support more than 44.1 kHz / 16 Bit" (or maybe 20 bit to even cover less likely scenarios where one would ever need that), even if we could as it is simply good enough for your ears!" and save further costs.

* unless you want to use their devices for measurement purposes or at some point even start to record video signals. ;)

On the other hand, I assume that nowadays, if you don't design your own ADC/DAC chip, even the cheapest ones simply already come with support of such sample rates and bit depths "because they can" and the market demands it. At the end, it might not be much cheaper after all to only concentrate on the useful ones. I don't know, but when I read that RME's equalizer is somewhat limited in terms of bands and in general depending on the sample rate due to limited processing power, I wonder if it wouldn't be better to just support something like 48/16, optimize on that and call it a day.
 
It's hard to quantify but I know my Denafrips Pontus Ii sounds better than my Topping D90.

It has less high end brittleness and bite but has much better instrument separation, soundstage and vocal resolution. So is the more expensive Pontus better or nicer? So maybe those qualities are what a more expensive DAC starts to get you. I've had it about six months now and the Pontus Ii with FPGA upgrade is probably my endgame DAC. Certainly financially LoL. Im not spending Terminator money.

The step up from the Topping sounded much nicer both through my two channel system and headphone system.
 
Back
Top Bottom