• 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

plikestechno said:
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.
Click to expand...
Why would it, though? Think about that. Unless you've done a double blind comparison you are open to psychological effects. Do not underestimate psychological effects.
 
plikestechno said:
It's hard to quantify but I know my Denafrips Pontus Ii sounds better than my Topping D90.
Click to expand...
And of course, all those insights are based on well-controlled, level-matched blind tests in order not to give even the slightest chance to any expectation bias. ;)

However, without any irony - if having spent more money on it or having better haptics, making it subjectively sound better, then it already had its value. No one is entirely immune against that I guess, although it is irrational.
 
I think for me, part of it, is that the Denafrips is a truly balanced, differential DAC with separate channels and I run a fully balanced system. The original Topping D90 was the only non-true balanced piece in my system. The Topping had a single DAC chip broken out to two channels and I think there was always some weird phasiness going on, especially with the vocal centre and cymbals. Too much crosstalk for me. Or phase issues. I noticed it especially in headphone setup. Everything also is less up in your face and larger.
 
plikestechno said:
I think for me, part of it, is that the Denafrips is a truly balanced, differential DAC with separate channels and I run a fully balanced system. The original Topping D90 was the only non-true balanced piece in my system. The Topping had a single DAC chip broken out to two channels and I think there was always some weird phasiness going on, especially with the vocal centre and cymbals. Too much crosstalk for me. Or phase issues. I noticed it especially iny headphone setup. Everything also is less up in your face and larger.
Click to expand...
That would be measureable.
 
little-endian said:
And of course, all those insights are based on well-controlled, level-matched blind tests in order not to give even the slightest chance to any expectation bias. ;)

However, without any irony - if having spent more money on it or having better haptics, making it subjectively sound better, then it already had its value. No one is entirely immune against that I guess, although it is irrational.
Click to expand...

I can only reply on my experience, it would be too bothersome to match everything perfectly between two different DACs from two different manufacturers.

At the same volume level on my preamp, the Denafrips is much better, truer and took away the phasiness and brittleness I always noticed with the Topping.
 
Buying really expensive DACs offer the great advantage of taking off the financial burden from your shoulders. No more worries about inflation, stocks, investment... just feeling liberated to concentrate on the music.
 
JustJones said:
Anyone who's interested in discovering the benefits there is a lot of used expensive DAC'S at the music room, especially Denafrips and dCS.
Click to expand...
As those used items are probably much less expensive I do not see how one could experience the benefits any more. My guess is that the benefits will mostly wear off with the price. This is certainly true for all those advantages @Overseas mentions.
 
Overseas said:
Buying really expensive DACs offer the great advantage of taking off the financial burden from your shoulders. No more worries about inflation, stocks, investment... just feeling liberated to concentrate on the music.
Click to expand...
Well that depends on whether the DAC holds it's value or not. And whether you need that money for food or to fix your leaking roof.
 
... and how did you decide it is 'phasiness'!? I mean, where did you hear the ORIGINAL sound in its purity an completeness to make the difference?
 
voodooless said:
Made up nonsense!
Click to expand...

No. You hear it. Maybe im using the wrong term but the center was never the clear, resolved center with the topping but with the denafrips the center of the image is solid. You hear the sound clearly right in the center.

And it wasnt a matter of immediate comparison for this problem. It was always there and bugged me with the topping no matter what i did with my speakers. Bought the denafrips for a good price locally and the problem was gone.
 
Overseas said:
... and how did you decide it is 'phasiness'!? I mean, where did you hear the ORIGINAL sound in its purity an completeness to make the difference?
Click to expand...
The center was never strong and clear with the topping. If you dont think different equipment sounds different i cant help you.
 
plikestechno said:
No. You hear it.
Click to expand...
Whatever you heared, your explanations are nonsense. The D90 is objectively clearly the superior DAC. How much that matters is questionable. Surely in NOS mode differences are probably audible. Probably not in OS mode, unless the intersample over handling is really as poor as the measurements show.

And as others have pointed out: if you didn’t do any controlled comparison, your (and any humans) observations are very unreliable.
 
plikestechno said:
No. You hear it. Maybe im using the wrong term but the center was never the clear, resolved center with the topping but with the denafrips the center of the image is solid. You hear the sound clearly right in the center.

And it wasnt a matter of immediate comparison for this problem. It was always there and bugged me with the topping no matter what i did with my speakers. Bought the denafrips for a good price locally and the problem was gone.
Click to expand...
Are you aware channel separation of 25 db is plenty for a clear center? Are you claiming the Topping couldn't manage this? Are you aware the influence of knowing your DAC is fully balanced has on your perceptions or the idea one DAC uses a single chip for both channels has on your perceptions and how those perceptions will not match the signal leaving the electronic boxes that house the DACs?
 
plikestechno said:
The center was never strong and clear with the topping. If you dont think different equipment sounds different i cant help you.
Click to expand...
I can understand when something is not clear.
But there is no different equipment, these are DACs.
 
VientoB said:
Well that depends on whether the DAC holds it's value or not. And whether you need that money for food or to fix your leaking roof.
Click to expand...
Every other intersection around where I am visiting at the moment has people panhandling with signs saying, “Veteran, Homeless, God Bless.”
Are you suggesting I get rid of the RME and Gove them the money for beers or something?
(They don’t need it for a roof.)

Overseas said:
... and how did you decide it is 'phasiness'!? I mean, where did you hear the ORIGINAL sound in its purity a completeness to make the difference?
Click to expand...
Well it is hard to say, as few of the measurements show phase.
Maybe some amps have impedance and phase shown… but all the FFTs generally show only the amplitude.
(But it does seems like it should be difficult to decode the digital and somehow jack up the phase.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Z
Problem
Replies
2
Views
330
zag55
Z
Back
Top Bottom