• 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!

Denafrips ARES II USB R2R DAC Review

decoRyder

Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2019
Messages
99
Likes
161
Thanks the answer. The SMSL M400 has been my favorite for a while, probably sound of M400 is fits my system best. The D90 was the first for a long time but the most testers said bigger soundstage and softer high-pitched voice compared to the D90.

IMO opinion the M400 is a 'flawless' DAC, you simply can not go wrong:) Yes, I had the D90, and using SE outputs the M400 sounded more rolled off, which I really like. I use the 'short rolloff' filter on the M400, which to my ears sounds best - and yes, the filters do sound different:)
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,554
Likes
1,701
Location
California
This is typical audiophile nonsense. Think about it, do those electrons know the difference?! And then there's the fact the PCB mounted "low end" jacks have a much shorter signal path, so one could argue they're actually better. Those "high end" jacks might look nice (to some who look at such things) but there's actually more in the way of the signal, again if you're buying into the audiophile mindset/paranoia.
In short, there's NOTHING wring with those PCB mounted RCA sockets at all.

You apparently missed my point. These 3 DACs are going to sound essentially the same as a $100 DAC based on their measurements. So why should I pay $500+ for a D90/x16/denafrips if I’m not getting nice looking durable parts like panel mount jacks and thick aluminum chassis components? What pray tell am I paying for then?
 

KTN46

Active Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2020
Messages
104
Likes
191
You apparently missed my point. These 3 DACs are going to sound essentially the same as a $100 DAC based on their measurements. So why should I pay $500+ for a D90/x16/denafrips if I’m not getting nice looking durable parts like panel mount jacks and thick aluminum chassis components? What pray tell am I paying for then?

Placebo. You're paying for placebo.
 

mocenigo

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 8, 2018
Messages
1,274
Likes
1,034
This is typical audiophile nonsense. Think about it, do those electrons know the difference?! And then there's the fact the PCB mounted "low end" jacks have a much shorter signal path, so one could argue they're actually better. Those "high end" jacks might look nice (to some who look at such things) but there's actually more in the way of the signal, again if you're buying into the audiophile mindset/paranoia.
In short, there's NOTHING wring with those PCB mounted RCA sockets at all.

PCB mounted RCAs are less expensive, and inserting/disconnecting them exerts some force on the soldering of the contacts of the sockets on the PCB. It may fracture or break. Case mounted RCAs do not suffer from this problem, esp. if the connectors are then wired to the board. But that costs more. So, yes, case mounted connectors are better. Not for the sound though.
 

mansr

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
4,685
Likes
10,700
Location
Hampshire
PCB mounted RCAs are less expensive, and inserting/disconnecting them exerts some force on the soldering of the contacts of the sockets on the PCB. It may fracture or break. Case mounted RCAs do not suffer from this problem, esp. if the connectors are then wired to the board. But that costs more. So, yes, case mounted connectors are better. Not for the sound though.
Many PCB mounted jacks can be bolted to the case for mechanical stability.
 

JohnM-73

Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
51
Likes
57
Location
Hampshire, UK
PCB mounted RCAs are less expensive, and inserting/disconnecting them exerts some force on the soldering of the contacts of the sockets on the PCB. It may fracture or break. Case mounted RCAs do not suffer from this problem, esp. if the connectors are then wired to the board. But that costs more. So, yes, case mounted connectors are better. Not for the sound though.

All I care to add to this is that in over 40 years I've used gear that has standard PCB mounted phono sockets, not once has your assertion ever happened :)
 

preload

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 19, 2020
Messages
1,554
Likes
1,701
Location
California
Of course, but in many cases the PCB mounted jacks are not bolted to the case.

Exactly. And in the products I referred to, it did not appear that the PCB mounted rca jacks were secured to the chassis.

And quality rca jacks are more of an issue when using higher quality rca plugs that are tighter and have greater insertion/extraction force. That's when solder can crack. I've had it happen to a car audio amp once.
 

KillerQ

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2021
Messages
33
Likes
25
I want a Denafrips Ares II sooo bad. I’m actually looking to trade my RME ADI-2 DAC fs (the newest release with updated chipset) for one of them. If anyone is interested, please let me know! I have an itch to scratch with R2R.

I love planar magnetic headphones and I love tube amps, so I’m feeling this would be the right kind of

I’d even do the trade for a month or so if you didn’t want permanent. Thanks!





A5474E6D-5767-4A6B-B82A-29CFEE7CEF9C.jpeg
 

decoRyder

Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2019
Messages
99
Likes
161
I want a Denafrips Ares II sooo bad. I’m actually looking to trade my RME ADI-2 DAC fs (the newest release with updated chipset) for one of them. If anyone is interested, please let me know! I have an itch to scratch with R2R.

The Ares II is much harder to match in terms of equipment, it's much more sibilant compared to say my SMSL M400 - you might not like the result.
 

KillerQ

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2021
Messages
33
Likes
25
The Ares II is much harder to match in terms of equipment, it's much more sibilant compared to say my SMSL M400 - you might not like the result.

really? I never would have guessed that in a million years.
 

KTN46

Active Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2020
Messages
104
Likes
191
The Ares II is much harder to match in terms of equipment, it's much more sibilant compared to say my SMSL M400 - you might not like the result.

Looking at the measurements, the distortion products should be borderline inaudible. Did you blind test/account for expectation bias in your comparison? You're saying this as if it's objective reality. On ASR.
 

decoRyder

Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2019
Messages
99
Likes
161
Looking at the measurements, the distortion products should be borderline inaudible. Did you blind test/account for expectation bias in your comparison? You're saying this as if it's objective reality. On ASR.

sigh... with the Ares II in the chain, I can hear prominent 'sss' sounds during dialog, really annoying btw. With the SMSL it's there, but not prominent, and not unpleasant, simple as that. I don't see how the analog output stage of different DACs is expected to sound the same, or somehow challenge the notion of 'objective reality' - of course they will sound different.
 

BDWoody

Chief Cat Herder
Moderator
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Messages
6,948
Likes
22,625
Location
Mid-Atlantic, USA. (Maryland)
I don't see how the analog output stage of different DACs is expected to sound the same, or somehow challenge the notion of 'objective reality' - of course they will sound different.

Should be easy to prove... Except nobody has.

What do you mean by analog output stage? The Analyzer is connected to whatever the analog output stage is. There isn't something missing you can point to.
 

decoRyder

Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2019
Messages
99
Likes
161
Should be easy to prove... Except nobody has.

What do you mean by analog output stage? The Analyzer is connected to whatever the analog output stage is. There isn't something missing you can point to.

Yes I understand that, but the analyzer will measure performance using synthetic test tones, not complex waveforms . And while that is certainly useful, it still does nothing to prove or disprove how a particular DAC will perform or sound during regular use that's not restricted to synthetic tests.
 

KTN46

Active Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2020
Messages
104
Likes
191
Yes I understand that, but the analyzer will measure performance using synthetic test tones, not complex waveforms . And while that is certainly useful, it still does nothing to prove or disprove how a particular DAC will perform or sound during regular use that's not restricted to synthetic tests.

I've heard this argument time and time again, but does he not use a multitone test? Is all sound not just sine waves? Even the most complex ones are just sine waves that you can do some math to to get the original tones.

Do you have any blind testing evidence that can account for your observer bias? You're saying that there is something missing in these measurements, and that's due to the fact that the waveforms aren't complex enough. Do you have any evidence that can back this up?
 

BDWoody

Chief Cat Herder
Moderator
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Messages
6,948
Likes
22,625
Location
Mid-Atlantic, USA. (Maryland)
Yes I understand that, but the analyzer will measure performance using synthetic test tones, not complex waveforms . And while that is certainly useful, it still does nothing to prove or disprove how a particular DAC will perform or sound during regular use that's not restricted to synthetic tests.

So back to the should be easy to prove thing.

Lots of claims... No controls... No evidence... Same old thing.
 

decoRyder

Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2019
Messages
99
Likes
161
I've heard this argument time and time again, but does he not use a multitone test? Is all sound not just sine waves? Even the most complex ones are just sine waves that you can do some math to to get the original tones.

Do you have any blind testing evidence that can account for your observer bias? You're saying that there is something missing in these measurements, and that's due to the fact that the waveforms aren't complex enough. Do you have any evidence that can back this up?

Specifically, what I'm claiming is that:
Dacs that measure similarly using synthetic simple waveforms will actually measure and perform differently when compared using complex waveforms that vary in complexity, frequency and amplitude.

No, the multitone test is not sufficient. I don't have the means to do this but what I'd like to see is two DACs tested with say an actual audio recording, and then measuring the output/response and comparing them to each other. To my knowledge this has not been done on ASR.
 
Last edited:

KillerQ

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2021
Messages
33
Likes
25
In the end, this should be the only test that matters :)
Specifically, what I'm claiming is that:
Dacs that measure similarly using synthetic simple waveforms will actually measure and perform differently when compared using complex waveforms that vary in complexity, frequency and amplitude.

No, the multitone test is not sufficient. I don't have the means to do this but what I'd like to see is two DACs tested with say an actual audio recording, and then measuring the output/response and comparing them to each other. To my knowledge this has not been done on ASR.
 
Top Bottom