• Welcome to ASR. 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!

DAC NOS vs DELTA SIGMA, Who is the real winner...

It is just sighted preference.
Merely an opinion and everyone is free to have those and spend their money the way they see fit.
Nothing to see here :D
 
Looks usable when doing all upsampling to at least 192kHz and proper reconstruction filtering in the RPi.

Would not recommend to use it below 88.2kHz sample rates (be it native or upsampled).

Of course, people that prefer the added distortion of tubes or certain amp designs I can see the 'natural roll-off' of NOS 44.1 and 48kHz to be compelling reasons to use it that way.
The relatively high distortion of the DAC is not a problem... the generated RF might.
 
From Chatgpt, to the question : what are the benefits of NOS DAC

NOS DAC stands for Non-OverSampling DAC. Unlike traditional DACs (Digital-to-Analog Converters) that perform oversampling to improve resolution and reduce noise, NOS DACs process the digital signal at its native sampling rate without any interpolation or oversampling. This design philosophy can offer some unique benefits and a distinct sound profile, particularly appreciated by audiophiles. Let's dive into the benefits of a NOS DAC:



1. More "Analog-Like" Sound​


  • NOS DACs are often favored for their ability to maintain a more natural, organic sound that some listeners find more "musical" compared to oversampling DACs.
  • By skipping the oversampling and interpolation processes, the signal retains its original timing and waveform, which can result in a sound that feels more immediate and authentic, closer to the source material.

2. Simplicity and Purity​


  • The design of a NOS DAC is often simpler because it doesn’t require the additional circuitry needed for oversampling or digital filters.
  • Less processing can mean less potential for digital artifacts or coloration, and a cleaner, more direct conversion from digital to analog. This purity can be appealing to those who prefer the minimalist approach.

3. Lower Distortion​


  • Because NOS DACs don’t use oversampling, there’s less risk of distortion introduced by filtering at high frequencies. Oversampling DACs often use steep digital filters to shape the output, which can introduce artifacts like ringing or phase distortion.
  • In a NOS DAC, the signal is passed through more directly, with fewer stages of digital processing, which some listeners feel results in less artificial distortion.

4. Retains the “Original” Digital Signal​


  • NOS DACs can offer a more accurate representation of the original recording’s signal because they don’t interpolate between the digital samples. This means there’s no attempt to artificially increase the sampling rate or fill in the gaps between samples, which some believe can alter the sound.
  • Some audiophiles find that the natural timing and rhythm of music is better preserved in a NOS DAC, as it doesn’t overcompensate for digital data gaps, as oversampling DACs might.

5. No High-Frequency Filtering​


  • Oversampling DACs typically introduce high-frequency digital filters to eliminate high-frequency noise. These filters can sometimes cause unwanted artifacts (like "pre-ringing" or "post-ringing" effects), which can color the sound.
  • NOS DACs, by contrast, bypass these high-frequency filters, often resulting in a more "natural" and less “processed” sound.

6. Warmth and Musicality​


  • NOS DACs are often described as having a warmer, smoother sound compared to oversampling DACs. Without the processing of high-frequency signals, some listeners find that the result is more pleasing, especially with older, highly compressed, or less-than-ideal digital recordings.
  • Some people prefer this type of sound because it softens digital harshness, making the music feel more natural or analog-like.

7. Potential for Fewer Digital Artifacts​


  • Oversampling DACs introduce multiple stages of digital processing that can sometimes create digital artifacts, like "glare" or a cold, clinical sound. The simplicity of a NOS DAC can lead to fewer of these issues, which some listeners appreciate for long listening sessions.

8. Compatibility with Older Recordings​


  • NOS DACs are often more forgiving when playing older, lower-quality digital recordings or lower bitrates. The simplicity of not upscaling the signal means that the DAC’s sound remains closer to the original recording, which can be beneficial for those listening to older, less-than-perfect recordings that don’t benefit from the oversampling process.


Trade-offs to Consider:​


While NOS DACs offer these potential benefits, there are also some trade-offs to keep in mind:


  1. Higher Nyquist Noise: Since the DAC doesn’t oversample, higher frequency noise from the digital signal may be more audible, particularly with lower-quality sources.
  2. Potential for Aliasing: Without the oversampling process to "smooth" the signal, aliasing (unwanted artifacts at lower frequencies) can occur if the DAC isn’t carefully designed.
  3. Less Precision: Some listeners may find that NOS DACs offer less "precision" or "detail" in the sound compared to oversampling DACs, especially in more complex musical passages.
  4. Higher Frequency Roll-off: NOS DACs can exhibit a roll-off at higher frequencies due to the lack of oversampling, which some listeners might interpret as a loss of detail in treble frequencies.
  5. Limited Support for High-Res Audio: Since NOS DACs don’t oversample, they’re typically more suited for CD-quality (44.1kHz) audio rather than high-resolution files (96kHz or 192kHz), though some higher-end NOS DACs attempt to handle these files with care.


Conclusion: Why Choose a NOS DAC?​


In essence, NOS DACs appeal to listeners who prefer:


  • A more natural, musical, or "analog-like" sound.
  • Simplicity in design, leading to a potentially purer, less processed signal.
  • A warm, smooth tonality with reduced harshness or digital glare.
  • Old-school audiophile sensibilities, where the focus is on maintaining the integrity of the original recording without adding too much digital enhancement.

If you prioritize musicality, warmth, and a more vintage or natural sound, a NOS DAC might be a great choice. However, if you prefer detail, precision, and extended high frequencies, you may lean toward an oversampling DAC or a delta-sigma DAC.


Would you like recommendations for specific NOS DACs, or examples of models that have been particularly praised for their sound quality?
 
The above quoted answer to the question from a robot reminds me so many Wikipedia articles that mimic encyclopedic articles, whereas they are full of misinformation and unsubstantiated claims because they are written by anonymous authors without any credentials who rely on doubtful sources they are incapable to understand.

A shipwreck of thought and critical thinking.
 
It is technically possible to make a NOS Delta sigma DAC, now watch those tiny heads explode.

Actually come to think of it, don't the newer sabre and CS or something DACs already have the option to leave the staircase in
 
raif71 said:
By skipping the oversampling and interpolation processes, the signal retains its original timing and waveform,
Click to expand...
This is factually incorrect. Timing and waveform are severely distorted with NOS DACs
raif71 said:
The design of a NOS DAC is often simpler because it doesn’t require the additional circuitry needed for oversampling or digital filters.
Click to expand...
Also not true. You'll need a way more complex analog filter
raif71 said:
Less processing can mean less potential for digital artifacts or coloration, and a cleaner, more direct conversion from digital to analog. This purity can be appealing to those who prefer the minimalist approach.
Click to expand...
Why cares about potentials.. We're talking about real products here.

raif71 said:
Because NOS DACs don’t use oversampling, there’s less risk of distortion introduced by filtering at high frequencies. Oversampling DACs often use steep digital filters to shape the output, which can introduce artifacts like ringing or phase distortion.
Click to expand...
Yeah, NOS DACs totally have low distortion at high frequencies :facepalm: WTF!
raif71 said:
In a NOS DAC, the signal is passed through more directly, with fewer stages of digital processing, which some listeners feel results in less artificial distortion.
Click to expand...
:facepalm:
raif71 said:
NOS DACs can offer a more accurate representation of the original recording’s signal because they don’t interpolate between the digital samples. This means there’s no attempt to artificially increase the sampling rate or fill in the gaps between samples, which some believe can alter the sound.
Click to expand...
Surely ChatGPT failed Sampling Theorem 101...
raif71 said:
Some audiophiles find that the natural timing and rhythm of music is better preserved in a NOS DAC, as it doesn’t overcompensate for digital data gaps, as oversampling DACs might.
Click to expand...
Digital data gaps???

raif71 said:
Some people prefer this type of sound because it softens digital harshness, making the music feel more natural or analog-like.
Click to expand...
I always find ik hilarious that stairsteps are described as more analog :facepalm:

raif71 said:
Oversampling DACs introduce multiple stages of digital processing that can sometimes create digital artifacts, like "glare"
Click to expand...
What is glare? I've never seen an objective description of this

raif71 said:
NOS DACs are often more forgiving when playing older, lower-quality digital recordings or lower bitrates. The simplicity of not upscaling the signal means that the DAC’s sound remains closer to the original recording, which can be beneficial for those listening to older, less-than-perfect recordings that don’t benefit from the oversampling process.
Click to expand...
Again, failed Sampling Theorem 101...
 
Please no more,’I asked chatgpt’.
Keith
 
Scytales said:
A shipwreck of thought and critical thinking.
Click to expand...
Purité Audio said:
Please no more,’I asked chatgpt’.
Keith
Click to expand...
Well, the issue is that they didn't ask it to use critical thinking and objective data... If you do, it will come up with a better response. I've tried with "Deep Research" enabled. But then still, it forms conclusions that are incorrect or still contain misinformation, but at least it's a lot closer to the truth. It just shows how well the industry has brainwashed its customers over the many decades.
 
To check, I asked it the same thing and got a similar response to @raif71... but then I said "sorry, that's all complete audiophool rubbish... science please" and got a much better response. It just needs to be pushed sometimes... but if one doesn't know the facts, many would take that first response as true. This is why such "AI" chat and response bots are useless for valid audio related info, due to all the crap that exists out there, it can't discern easily. Ask it physics questions and in many cases it is factual... as there aren't as many deluded people in physics posting rubbish all over forums.


JSmith
 
It seems to me that ChatGPT and its ilk fulfil the old adage of Vox Populi, Vox Dei. i.e. the masses are always right.

Consequently, my first reaction to anything that's produced by these AIs is disbelief, they are most likely wrong.
Consequently, their use here on a science-based forum should be avoided, in the same way that uncorroborated opinions are questioned.

S.
 
voodooless said:
This is factually incorrect. Timing and waveform are severely distorted with NOS DACs

Also not true. You'll need a way more complex analog filter

Why cares about potentials.. We're talking about real products here.


Yeah, NOS DACs totally have low distortion at high frequencies :facepalm: WTF!

:facepalm:

Surely ChatGPT failed Sampling Theorem 101...

Digital data gaps???


I always find ik hilarious that stairsteps are described as more analog :facepalm:


What is glare? I've never seen an objective description of this


Again, failed Sampling Theorem 101...
Click to expand...

LLMs are just like a 3 year-old regurgitating and reinterpreting what they'd heard adults say, with no understanding of the concepts or any ability to judge the validity of anything they repeat. LLMs are much better in forming the correct sentence structure and in using longer words, though :)
 
Particularly here of all places where there is a wealth of real knowledge.
Keith
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Preamplifiers, gain and volume control - is the usual architecture really clever?
Replies
13
Views
1K
dualazmak
dualazmak
NTTY
Sony CDP-X333ES Review (CD Player)
Replies
15
Views
2K
SigmaR1
S
Back
Top Bottom