DAC types and their sonic signature

[patient_ot]

It's one thing to make such a claim. It's another thing to substantiate that claim in a properly controled blind test.
It is VERY easy to hear differences when one knows which DAC is playing.

Agreed.

 

[patient_ot]

I am trying to make sense of it all. I don't get it. I certainly don't want to start a rivalry or something. But sometimes I look at Super best audio friends and they also do measurements and such. And to my surprise, they also do blind tests. And they say it is pretty easy to hear the differences in dacs.
I am in a position where I want to choose a Dac/preamp maybe streamer. Now the RME Dac makes sense but it isn't the best in measurements. I keep reading that it misses depth. But I am in no position to blind test. Now I really don't know why these people would lie. Many speak lyrically about schiit there and here they are destroyed. It all is so confusing to me.

You could blind test with another person helping you. You would need to purchase two DACs with generous return policies. I tend not to put a lot of stock in subjectivist reviewers like those found on sites like SBAF. One of the members there loved the Massdrop Airist DAC, yet we can see from measurements here that it performs very poorly by any objective measure. If someone claims they prefer that thing over a decent performing D-S DAC they either prefer high levels of distortion and have been brainwashed by audiophool/subjectivist nonsense.

 

[solderdude]

Now I really don't know why these people would lie. Many speak lyrically about schiit there and here they are destroyed. It all is so confusing to me.

Indeed it is confusing. I am convinced they are not lying. This would imply they misinform on purpose. They don't. They are convinced they hear it.

Now the RME Dac makes sense but it isn't the best in measurements. I keep reading that it misses depth.

It would be great if someone would find the parameters that defines 'depth' and what one can do to minimize or maximise it.
I think it is very safe to say the perception of depth has more to do with mindset than of electronic origin.
I also have never found concensus about how one determines/measures depth and why it is not described in meters/feet and quantified.

The problem with reading SBAF and ASR as well as other sites is that everyone just posts their opinions.
And opinions are just that.... everyone has one.

When you like Schiit, just buy it, when your eye is on the RME you won't have a bad purchase.
Buy both... do some tests in your chain and return the one you have no need for and see the return costs as tuition.
Then you'll know. (The RME has options that are not offered by any Schiit DAC)

 

[Bliman]

Indeed it is confusing. I am convinced they are not lying. This would imply they misinform on purpose. They don't. They are convinced they hear it.



It would be great if someone would find the parameters that defines 'depth' and what one can do to minimize or maximise it.
I think it is very safe to say the perception of depth has more to do with mindset than of electronic origin.
I also have never found concensus about how one determines/measures depth and why it is not described in meters/feet and quantified.

The problem with reading SBAF and ASR as well as other sites is that everyone just posts their opinions.
And opinions are just that.... everyone has one.

When you like Schiit, just buy it, when your eye is on the RME you won't have a bad purchase.
Buy both... do some tests in your chain and return the one you have no need for and see the return costs as tuition.
Then you'll know. (The RME has options that are not offered by any Schiit DAC)

First thanks for the answer. To me you are one who has much much knowledge. And you have given me great advice on headphones on your site by email. I bought the Beyerdynamic DT 250 from your review on the site.
Now can you say to me that you never heard differences between dacs of good quality?
I have often asked myself how they could hear difference of depth and how you could read that in measurements.
I know that I can hear a difference in depth when playing music through my stereo by how I angle my speakers. I hear the most depth when I angle my speakers slightly outwards.
It is also just peace of mind. I don't want to think that I am missing out when choosing a dac.
I know it is something that you have to do yourself, the blind test I mean. For me it is pretty easy to hear the difference between my computer dac/preamp and my Grace design m902 headphone amp/dac. But I don't know how much quality difference there is between the two. The Grace is good but I don't know for the computer. But I don't know how a Grace Design m902 would fare against the RME.
I also don't have the equipment to switch fast between the two and then I have to order the RME first.

 

[solderdude]

Now can you say to me that you never heard differences between dacs of good quality?

Once I recorded 4 DACs I had at my disposal.. FiiO X3 (with EQ enabled but flat because it has a nasty clip at 0dBFS), A Mojo, the UMC204 and an EMU0204. I ensured the recording levels were below -3dB and used the same piece of music (FLAC 44/16) and recorded it at 192/24.
Then I normalized each recording (to -3dB FS) and named them.

I played each one in random order using a player and tried to hear differences.
Listened (eyes closed) and used a keyboard button for 'next song' so did not know which DAC was playing.
I tried and tried but could not hear a difference.
Did the recording of the UMC204HD make them all sound the same ?
Can the 192/24 recording/playback of the UMC204HD not resolve the differences ?
Are my listening skills not good enough ?
Am I too old by now ?

Yet, when I listen to them 'normally' I always think I can hear differences.
Now I know it is in my head.


Would I buy the RME DAC2 ?
I haven't because of the price point. For a second hand version I have to fork out E 600.- and I don't think it audibly superior to what I have.
I might one day buy the ADC/DAC version though... for measurements.
Would I need the connectivity or plethora of filter options and DSP then I would have.
Now I rather buy another headphone in the same price class.
This gives much more of a sonic difference.

Of course the DAC2 measures much better than what I have but it is all far below the audible thresholds I determined for myself.

 

[Bliman]

Once I recorded 4 DACs I had at my disposal.. FiiO X3 (with EQ enabled but flat because it has a nasty clip at 0dBFS), A Mojo, the UMC204 and an EMU0204. I ensured the recording levels were below -3dB and used the same piece of music (FLAC 44/16) and recorded it at 192/24.
Then I normalized each recording (to -3dB FS) and named them.

I played each one in random order using a player and tried to hear differences.
Listened (eyes closed) and used a keyboard button for 'next song' so did not know which DAC was playing.
I tried and tried but could not hear a difference.
Did the recording of the UMC204HD make them all sound the same ?
Can the 192/24 recording/playback of the UMC204HD not resolve the differences ?
Are my listening skills not good enough ?
Am I too old by now ?

Yet, when I listen to them 'normally' I always think I can hear differences.
Now I know it is in my head.


Would I buy the RME DAC2 ?
I haven't because of the price point. For a second hand version I have to fork out E 600.- and I don't think it audibly superior to what I have.
I might one day buy the ADC/DAC version though... for measurements.
Would I need the connectivity or plethora of filter options and DSP then I would have.
Now I rather buy another headphone in the same price class.
This gives much more of a sonic difference.

Of course the DAC2 measures much better than what I have but it is all far below the audible thresholds I determined for myself.

First thank you very much for answering. Those are pretty cheap dacs, no? I even thought that the Fiio is a music player.
Why didn't you switch between the dacs? It seems to me (as not knowledgable) that you first recorded music from a dac and did stuff to it and then you played each through the same player. That to me looks like many steps where the difference can get lost.

 

[majingotan]

You could blind test with another person helping you. You would need to purchase two DACs with generous return policies. I tend not to put a lot of stock in subjectivist reviewers like those found on sites like SBAF. One of the members there loved the Massdrop Airist DAC, yet we can see from measurements here that it performs very poorly by any objective measure. If someone claims they prefer that thing over a decent performing D-S DAC they either prefer high levels of distortion and have been brainwashed by audiophool/subjectivist nonsense.

It's really easy to be brainwashed because we tend to have selective perceptions by reading a bunch of subjective or even false objective views regarding R2R vs D-S DACs. Audio business takes advantage of this of course when reality those R2R DACs measure poorly. Selective perception also goes to objective extremity where one will never recommend a competently engineered DAC with > 110 dB SINAD because it did not resolve at least 20 bits SINAD and simply ignore the fact that speakers or headphones themselves have THD values of > 0.01% (gets worse at low frequencies) which blurs the difference between well engineered DS DACs and poorly measured R2R DACs unless those R2R DACs have a tube stage couple with weird impedance curve that might make a difference in sound. I use Schiit Bifrost 2 as my main DAC but I bought it not because it sounds superior to DACs many times less than its price but because it's a status symbol to own one in my country and to have a non-audio spec DAC as my DAC lol. I cannot distinguish the difference between Bifrost 2 and the Chord Mojo DAC on a sighted ~1 dB volume matched A/B as well.

Bottomline IMO and many have said this already that competently designed DACs converge to that true source file's sound. I'd probably believe in one's claim about a DAC sound signature if that DAC has some fancy tube stage for amplification or that its THD levels are 0.05% or higher

 

[solderdude]

First thank you very much for answering. Those are pretty cheap dacs, no? I even thought that the Fiio is a music player.
Why didn't you switch between the dacs? It seems to me (as not knowledgable) that you first recorded music from a dac and did stuff to it and then you played each through the same player. That to me looks like many steps where the difference can get lost.

Firstly because they cannot play at the same time and secondly they cannot be level matched.

I am quite sure the recording device would impart its own sound over the signature of the other DACs.

 

[Bliman]

Firstly because they cannot play at the same time and secondly they cannot be level matched.

I am quite sure the recording device would impart its own sound over the signature of the other DACs.

I really trust you to know what you are doing. And that you are right.
If you say that the recording device would impart its own sound over the signature of the other Dacs. Isn't that the same, and I hope you don't take this the wrong way because I don't want to insult you. Let's say that in this clip

the levels were matched and I listen to it. Isn't that then the same thing as your test?
Maybe it is something where I have to need to take the red pill myself and try to do some test to the best of my abilities.

 

[BDWoody]

Maybe it is something where I have to need to take the red pill myself and try to do some test to the best of my abilities.

I would strongly encourage you to do this...
No need to trust anyone else's ears any longer...

I trust @solderdude as well, but if he didn't implement controls in a subjective comparison, I wouldn't believe his impressions any more than anyone else's. I guarantee you he wouldn't be offended by that.

Do yourself the service of going through this exercise as well as you can at least once. You may find yourself with a lot less stress about all of this.

The most useful thing I've ever done for myself to increase my enjoyment of this hobby was to do a few blind tests.

 

[Bliman]

I would strongly encourage you to do this...
No need to trust anyone else's ears any longer...

I trust @solderdude as well, but if he didn't implement controls in a subjective comparison, I wouldn't believe his impressions any more than anyone else's. I guarantee you he wouldn't be offended by that.

Do yourself the service of going through this exercise as well as you can at least once. You may find yourself with a lot less stress about all of this.

The most useful thing I've ever done for myself to increase my enjoyment of this hobby was to do a few blind tests.

Yeah I know. It was a pretty unscience thing to say to just trust somebody.
But I am afraid that if I buy the RME DAC that I would not do the blind test in a good way. I don't have something where I can switch quickly between the dacs and I don't have someone that is pretty technical to help me to change things behind the curtain (so to speak) to switch the connection relatively quickly. And with that, you are rapidly going to go in a biased way when you know things.

 

[raif71]

These kind of threads are just music to my ears....the subject just adds a certain flavor to it, so refreshing

 

[BDWoody]

These kind of threads are just music to my ears....the subject just adds a certain flavor to it, so refreshing

Just encouraging less music to my eyes...!

 

[raif71]

D-A-C more than meets the measurement... (sing to the tune of the transformers cartoon)

 

[solderdude]

Yeah I know. It was a pretty unscience thing to say to just trust somebody.
But I am afraid that if I buy the RME DAC that I would not do the blind test in a good way. I don't have something where I can switch quickly between the dacs and I don't have someone that is pretty technical to help me to change things behind the curtain (so to speak) to switch the connection relatively quickly. And with that, you are rapidly going to go in a biased way when you know things.

The controls were to ensure the whole song was recorded and started at the exact same point (trimmed at the beginning).
The subjective control was to not look at the screen and having the player on 'random' (as far as it is random) and check to see if all files were used when skipping.
Only one very high quality and to me familiar song was used so rather limited test.

Then listening without looking and trying to find differences.
I could not say which one was which.
The Mojo measures pretty well and also the other DACs are no slouches.
If there are sonic differences they are inaudible to me.

I can't hear the differences subjective reviewers claim there are anyway so either my brain can't create it and theirs can or am not trained enough or the differences are too small.

I did pass the 'golden ears test' and have some experience with sound reinforcement, studio recordings, knowing how instruments sound IRL, electronics, and evaluating sound.

The reason I don't believe my ADC changes the sound in an audible (but certainly measurable) way is that it was used at 192/24 while the playback was at 44.1/16 (where audible differences would be most obvious) so the ADC would have no trouble recording everything at the analog outputs.

Indeed, that's why I keep repeating it, one should seek out their OWN hearing thresholds. This isn't done overnight. I have over 30 years of 'experience' and testing every now and then so I know what I can here and having tested some other individuals have confirmed other people were not different than my experiences.

Do NOT trust my findings... the controls are good enough for me. Not DBT, not scientifically lab conditioned. An amateur playing around with what he likes.

When you were to end up with the DAC2 you really don't need to test or compare it. Measurements tell me it is far beyond transparent. Overkill for me so won't buy one myself but strongly recommend one (based on measurements)
When you can enjoy music with the stuff you have there is no need to upgrade unless you need the functionality it provides or 'want to be sure'.
Yes, some other DACs may surpass it on the Amir scale (SINAD) but do not have the options the DAC2 provides.

 

[Bliman]

The controls were to ensure the whole song was recorded and started at the exact same point (trimmed at the beginning).
The subjective control was to not look at the screen and having the player on 'random' (as far as it is random) and check to see if all files were used when skipping.
Only one very high quality and to me familiar song was used so rather limited test.

Then listening without looking and trying to find differences.
I could not say which one was which.
The Mojo measures pretty well and also the other DACs are no slouches.
If there are sonic differences they are inaudible to me.

I can't hear the differences subjective reviewers claim there are anyway so either my brain can't create it and theirs can or am not trained enough or the differences are too small.

I did pass the 'golden ears test' and have some experience with sound reinforcement, studio recordings, knowing how instruments sound IRL, electronics, and evaluating sound.

The reason I don't believe my ADC changes the sound in an audible (but certainly measurable) way is that it was used at 192/24 while the playback was at 44.1/16 (where audible differences would be most obvious) so the ADC would have no trouble recording everything at the analog outputs.

Indeed, that's why I keep repeating it, one should seek out their OWN hearing thresholds. This isn't done overnight. I have over 30 years of 'experience' and testing every now and then so I know what I can here and having tested some other individuals have confirmed other people were not different than my experiences.

Do NOT trust my findings... the controls are good enough for me. Not DBT, not scientifically lab conditioned. An amateur playing around with what he likes.

When you were to end up with the DAC2 you really don't need to test or compare it. Measurements tell me it is far beyond transparent. Overkill for me so won't buy one myself but strongly recommend one (based on measurements)
When you can enjoy music with the stuff you have there is no need to upgrade unless you need the functionality it provides or 'want to be sure'.
Yes, some other DACs may surpass it on the Amir scale (SINAD) but do not have the options the DAC2 provides.

Thanks for the wonderful post.
Yeah I think I will go for the RME. Now I think that I will let someone blind test it, someone who I trust.
The reason is that I am more technical than that person. I will use my headphone and I will keep my grace design connected to the computer by an optical cable. I will then play a song and then switch the Dacs without the person knowing which is playing.
I will then ask if she hears differences and also if she can pick consistently correctly. I will also hear sightly and see if my opinion is the same as her. The problem is that I don't have a clue to have the same volume between the Grace Design and the RME.

 

[solderdude]

The biggest challenge will be to have both DACs match their output levels within 0.1dB.
This is paramount for this test.

 

[Bliman]

The biggest challenge will be to have both DACs match their output levels within 0.1dB.
This is paramount for this test.

Yeah, I have no clue how I will do this. I think it is not good enough by ear

 

[Herbert]

I have posted the following links in the Yamaha-A1 reviwew, as "Stereo Review" was brought up-
off-topic there, better fitting here.
Now, Stereo Review could not find any difference between the very first CD-Players available, please read from page 61:

https://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-HiFI-Stereo/80s/HiFi-Stereo-Review-1982-12.pdf

A little more than 3 years later they tested 6 players, whixch all had 1rst and second generation DAC´s, read from page 52:

https://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-HiFI-Stereo/80s/HiFi-Stereo-Review-1986-01.pdf

The Players were:
Sony CDP-101: Sony CX20017
Sony CDP-650: Sony CX20152
Technics SL-P3: Burr Brown PCM53
Emerson CD150: (I assume also a first gen Sony CX20017)
Meridian MCD-Pro: Philips TDA1540
Carver DTL-100: Burr Brown PCM53.

They were all 16 bit and R2R, no Sigma delta, no 1-bit, no 24bit or 32bit, no noise shaping, upsampling, whatever.
Only the CX20152 was capable of 2xoversampling, the TDA1540 4x oversampling but in 14 bit.
The PCM53 and CX20017 were NOS.
They could barely not hear any difference (besides the first gen. CX20017) and were not able to judge good or bad-
again, in 1986. So with all advances made in the last 33 years, I do not believe that a sonic signature ist there.
If there is one, it is simply bad implementation and audible errors...

 

[Pluto]

It would be great if someone would find the parameters that defines 'depth' and what one can do to minimize or maximise it.

Think back to the good old hazy days of analogue recording and ask yourself, “has the perception of stereo depth improved since then?” and I think most folks would say “no”. Of all the parameters that have since improved dramatically, the perception of depth isn't one of them.

This is because good perception of depth is largely a matter of the stability of the phase relationship between the two channels, and the accuracy with which that relationship is preserved across the recording and reproducing chains. If one DAC has an audibly worse presentation of the ‘illusion’ of depth than another, I'd suspect a significant mismatch between the channels.

If a ropey old analogue recorder with all that high frequency instability and scrape flutter could record and reproduce the illusion of depth, it's a doddle for digital technology!