Benefits of using expensive DACs

[Holmz]

I guess I should have added a smiley at the end of the sentence. It was just meant to be a light-hearted comment on generally unwise, or even unhealthy, spending habits of many young (and some not so young) males. Drugs are an extreme example.

Ok ^that^ is clearer.

^and it^ is a lot of people, and not exclusively happening in just the males of the species.

 

[BDWoody]

Some DACs are more expensive than others. Some DACs sound better than others. Some DACs are more expensive than others and sound better than others. So it would be possible that a more expensive DACs could bring better sound quality than a less expensive one.

You could make the same 'argument' by saying it's possible some less expensive DACs sound better than some more expensive DACs, so it's also possible a less expensive DAC brings better sound quality than a more expensive one.

That is of course true, but pretty much meaningless I'm thinking.

 

[akamatsu]

You could make the same 'argument' by saying it's possible some less expensive DACs sound better than some more expensive DACs, so it's also possible a less expensive DAC brings better sound quality than a more expensive one.

That is of course true, but pretty much meaningless I'm thinking.

Yes. That is also possible. There is a lot of overpriced junk out there. But there's also some legitimately good kit out there as well. Some of it is better than less expensive offerings, and could therefore be worth the extra expense.

 

[Doodski]

Yes. That is also possible. There is a lot of overpriced junk out there. But there's also some legitimately good kit out there as well. Some of it is better than less expensive offerings, and could therefore be worth the extra expense.

DACs have been a solved problem for some time. $100 gets a decent DAC these days.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

You could make the same 'argument' by saying it's possible some less expensive DACs sound better than some more expensive DACs, so it's also possible a less expensive DAC brings better sound quality than a more expensive one.

That is of course true, but pretty much meaningless I'm thinking.

Same is true for a lot of products including amplifiers and DACS. I remember a few years back Hafler had a flagship amplifier which deliberately had something called a "Gundee Dip" which was an engineered filter designed to attenuate frequencies in the 3-6 khz region by 2-3 db. Likewise Transparent and MIT employ those termination boxes at the end of their cables which attenuate bass response. In both instances what we're seeing is an attempt by manufacturers to voice their product, to make it sound different, from most of the other offerings on the market. It's almost always disorienting because the normal expectation for well designed cables and amplifiers is that they will render the entire frequency band in with zero peaks or dips form 20-20khz.

That's something we expect in every well designed component, including especially Dacs. Perhaps this is a case where Denafrips is doing much the same thing as, say, Carver, and has engineered some frequency response anomaly and that's what plikestechno is hearing? It wouldn't be the first time someone has heard a component that has a different sound (even though it's a coloration) and leaped to the conclusion that said sound was "better." Happens in every "bricks and mortar" audio shop all the time. It's an audio salesperson's bread and butter.

 

[akamatsu]

DACs have been a solved problem for some time. $100 gets a decent DAC these days.

Lucky you. Unfortunately I have to spend much more than that to be satisfied. Been doing hifi for a long time and my system has become better and better over the decades. It's also become more and more expensive. I recall in my younger, poorer days being perfectly happy with a much more modest system.

I think the OP asks about spending more and getting a better DAC. Yes, one could do this, but more expensive doesn't necessarily translate to better sounding. Some kit is worth the additional cost, but a lot of it isn't. In some cases, it could be worse.

 

[VientoB]

Same is true for a lot of products including amplifiers and DACS. I remember a few years back Hafler had a flagship amplifier which deliberately had something called a "Gundee Dip" which was an engineered filter designed to attenuate frequencies in the 3-6 khz region by 2-3 db. Likewise Transparent and MIT employ those termination boxes at the end of their cables which attenuate bass response. In both instances what we're seeing is an attempt by manufacturers to voice their product, to make it sound different, from most of the other offerings on the market. It's almost always disorienting because the normal expectation for well designed cables and amplifiers is that they will render the entire frequency band in with zero peaks or dips form 20-20khz.

That's something we expect in every well designed component, including especially Dacs. Perhaps this is a case where Denafrips is doing much the same thing as, say, Carver, and has engineered some frequency response anomaly and that's what peaceonearth is hearing? It wouldn't be the first time someone has heard a component that has a different sound (even though it's a coloration) and leaped to the conclusion that said sound was "better." Happens in every "bricks and mortar" audio shop all the time. It's an audio salesperson's bread and butter.

Has anyone measured the frequency response of the Denafrips? I suspect GoldenSound has.

 

[SIY]

DACs have been a solved problem for some time. $100 gets a decent DAC these days.

$10 does if you can deal with 1V out.

 

[nemanja_t]

Any DAC is expensive, when you buy good integrated amp you get at least good enough or good absolutely DAC, for free. Same as with Ferrari, as Enzo had saying, “You are paying for engine, rest of the car you get for free”

 

[phoenixdogfan]

Lucky you. Unfortunately I have to spend much more than that to be satisfied. Been doing hifi for a long time and my system has become better and better over the decades. It's also become more and more expensive. I recall in my younger, poorer days being perfectly happy with a much more modest system.

I think the OP asks about spending more and getting a better DAC. Yes, one could do this, but more expensive doesn't necessarily translate to better sounding. Some kit is worth the additional cost, but a lot of it isn't. In some cases, it could be worse.

Sorry but we are at the point with DACs as where timekeeping craft is with wristwatches. I can go on Amazon and buy a $30 Casio wristwatch which will keep time every bit as well as any watch in the world. Or I could even go to a kiosk in a mall (they still do exist) and buy something that checks in an atomic clock kept by the US Naval Observatory, and that watch will be even better and won't cost more than $50.

Same deal with DACS. Amir has literally measured over a hundred of them, many costing under $100, some even costing less than $10, and they are all absolutely good enough to be the source for the finest of audio systems. That's why people say it's a solved problem.

You can, of course buy something that looks different or imparts some coloration, if that makes you happy. There are companies who make DACS with tube output stages, and employ other gimmicks to make them into tone control. If that's someone's idea of better, then great. But if all someone wants is something true to the source, something like a $120 Topping D10, to pick but one example, will admirably fill the bill.

Obviously, you can pay more for more features, or more channels. My only system Dac is the Octo Research DAC 8 Pro. It cost $1400, but it has 8 channels and I use the USB feed from it to drive a 5.1 home theater setup, while the remaining two channel are employed as a DAC for my Smyth Research Realiser. So for me the extra cost brings extra functionality.

 

[akamatsu]

Sorry but we are at the point with DACs as where timekeeping craft is with wristwatches. I can go on Amazon and buy a $30 Casio wristwatch which will keep time every bit as well as any watch in the world. Or I could even go to a kiosk in a mall (they still do exist) and buy something that checks in an atomic clock kept by the US Naval Observatory, and that watch will be even better and won't cost more than $50.

Same deal with DACS. Amir has literally measured over a hundred of them, many costing under $100, some even costing less than $10, and they are all absolutely good enough to be the source for the finest of audio systems. That's why people say it's a solved problem.

You can, of course buy something that looks different or imparts some coloration, if that makes you happy. There are companies who make DACS with tube output stages, and employ other gimmicks to make them into tone control. If that's someone's idea of better, then great. But if all someone wants is something true to the source, something like a $120 Topping D10, to pick but one example, will admirably fill the bill.

Obviously, you can pay more for more features, or more channels. My only system Dac is the Octo Research DAC 8 Pro. It cost $1400, but it has 8 channels and I use the USB feed from it to drive a 5.1 home theater setup, while the remaining two channel are employed as a DAC for my Smyth Research Realiser. So for me the extra cost brings extra functionality.

Yes. There's good enough, and there's better than good enough. Some DACs soiund bettter than others. Usually to make an audio component (DAC) that sounds better takes engineering, and this costs money.

 

[Purité Audio]

Yes, no not really, the properly engineered ones sound the same* only the really poorly designed ones sound different and definitely not better.
Keith
*reconstruction filters may vary.

 

[voodooless]

an audio component (DAC) that sounds better takes engineering

What engineering makes it sound better?

 

[VientoB]

What engineering makes it sound better?

2 billion taps

 

[akamatsu]

What engineering makes it sound better?

Find a superior DAC and talk to the engineers who designed it. They would be able to tell you what engineering was performed to make it sound better.

 

[voodooless]

Find a superior DAC and talk to the engineers who designed it.

So you don’t know then? The problem is, if you add proper controls, DACs tend to be indistinguishable from each other.

We can measure the things, and we know the physical limits of what our ears can perceive. DACs tend to perform orders of magnitude better than those limits, regardless of price.

 

[solderdude]

The designers that make expensive (read superior and thus better sounding) DACs have to sign a non-disclosure agreement so the designers that make the superior DACs can't and won't disclose what is needed to do so.
We asked several designers and they all say they do it differently and their way is best and sometimes give hints in their advertising materials.
It seems there are many ways to make better sounding DACs.

The Topping engineers are not part of this elitist group of designers so have no knowledge about this but do state a lot of things in their advertisements but are faking it.
Instead they just design for optimal signal fidelity which, obviously, is the wrong method and sterilizes the sound. It is neutered as it were.
If only they learned how to use the right components then their DACs would measure and sound great. Even their new 1 bit discrete DAC struggles with superiority in sound.
Now Topping stuff only measure great... but sounds poor ... bummer.

 

[akamatsu]

So you don’t know then? The problem is, if you add proper controls, DACs tend to be indistinguishable from each other.

We can measure the things, and we know the physical limits of what our ears can perceive. DACs tend to perform orders of magnitude better than those limits, regardless of price.

I do know of at least one example. But you would have to listen to the kit to hear the difference. I don't think you are going to do that, so the discussion becomes rather moot. I could say that DAC A sounds better than DAC B. Would you be willing to except that assertion for the sake of furthering the discussion?

 

[JustJones]

DAC B sounds better than DAC A.

 

[solderdude]

Weird.... DAC A sounds better to me than DAC B... but not as good as DAC C