• 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

AllenW

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
70
Likes
36
FWIW...........

I had the Denafrips ARES II in my system/room and found it a little dull/muddy regardless of settings.
I had the Topping D90MQA in my system/room and found it very detailed and ultra quiet but a little thin and flat.

I have since moved on to a Gustard X26Pro and am now very happy.

I believe it's just a case of finding the best DAC you can afford which suits your system/room regardless of how it measures.
For example............in a bright, harder sounding system the ARES II would probably be a godsend.
you have to pair the denafrips with the right preamp to make it sound right. It has high output impedance. If not matched well it will roll off the highs. It sounds very good with the Gustard P26.
 
Last edited:

gvl

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 16, 2018
Messages
3,427
Likes
3,981
Location
SoCal
Genuine question. What properties of a dac might lead to that?

I don’t know. I had an earlier question out to @amirm about the frequency response test. It measures a voltage value per frequency point. If it simply calculates the RMS value as 0.7071xVpeak, this formula is only valid for a true sine wave. If THD rises with frequency then given the harmonic content the RMS of the fundamental is likely going to be lower, so there might be a slight roll off in the audible HF despite the measured FR response being flat. Just a thought, and given the Ares’s THD(F) is mostly flat it wouldn’t explain it anyway. So, like I said, I don’t know.
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,066
Likes
14,697
I don’t know. I had an earlier question out to @amirm about the frequency response test. It measures a voltage value per frequency point. If it simply calculates the RMS value as 0.7071xVpeak, this formula is only valid for a true sine wave. If THD rises with frequency then given the harmonic content the RMS of the fundamental is likely going to be lower, so there might be a slight roll off in the audible HF despite the measured FR response being flat. Just a thought, and given the Ares’s THD(F) is mostly flat it wouldn’t explain it anyway. So, like I said, I don’t know.
Although see post above yours. This is what frustrates me about having zero technical understanding. I feel like a dunce :/
 

zepplock

Active Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2019
Messages
230
Likes
259
Location
San Jose, CA
you have to pair the denafrips with the right preamp to make it sound right. It has high output impedance. If not matched well it will roll off the highs. It sounds very good with the Gustard P26.

That exactly proves my point, denafrips is a worse device than say topping e30 from engineering perspective. It alters sound and in order to sound good, you need to pair it with another device that alters sound in the opposite direction to fix it.

I was in that situation like that, here's an example: I used to have DarkVoice OTL tube amp. Sounded like shit, no highs, distorted, etc with pretty much any headphones. Until I used Beyer DT990 600ohm with it = pure magic. Those cans have totally screwed up high freqs, and 600ohms were high enough not to interfere with high output impedance of darkvoice. Add high harmonic distortion from tubes and you get a very pleasant sound.

Does that make DarkVoice a better amp than absolutely flat Massdrop THX789? No!
Does that make DT 990 better than AKG 371 cans? No!
Can you enjoy sound when matched? Of course, it sounds good, it's your hobby/money, be my guest.

What I argue against here is your attitude where you try to defend a DAC which both from money and performance perspective is worse than competition. Why is it that hard for you to understand?
 

Zensō

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Messages
2,740
Likes
6,740
Location
California
That exactly proves my point, denafrips is a worse device than say topping e30 from engineering perspective. It alters sound and in order to sound good, you need to pair it with another device that alters sound in the opposite direction to fix it.

I was in that situation like that, here's an example: I used to have DarkVoice OTL tube amp. Sounded like shit, no highs, distorted, etc with pretty much any headphones. Until I used Beyer DT990 600ohm with it = pure magic. Those cans have totally screwed up high freqs, and 600ohms were high enough not to interfere with high output impedance of darkvoice. Add high harmonic distortion from tubes and you get a very pleasant sound.

Does that make DarkVoice a better amp than absolutely flat Massdrop THX789? No!
Does that make DT 990 better than AKG 371 cans? No!
Can you enjoy sound when matched? Of course, it sounds good, it's your hobby/money, be my guest.

What I argue against here is your attitude where you try to defend a DAC which both from money and performance perspective is worse than competition. Why is it that hard for you to understand?
Agreed. Once you start talking about “synergy” of electronic devices, you’re off the deep end into subjectivist lala land. It’s much simpler and more sensible to buy high performance gear and, if you must, add color to taste using DSP.
 

AllenW

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
70
Likes
36
That exactly proves my point, denafrips is a worse device than say topping e30 from engineering perspective. It alters sound and in order to sound good, you need to pair it with another device that alters sound in the opposite direction to fix it.

I was in that situation like that, here's an example: I used to have DarkVoice OTL tube amp. Sounded like shit, no highs, distorted, etc with pretty much any headphones. Until I used Beyer DT990 600ohm with it = pure magic. Those cans have totally screwed up high freqs, and 600ohms were high enough not to interfere with high output impedance of darkvoice. Add high harmonic distortion from tubes and you get a very pleasant sound.

Does that make DarkVoice a better amp than absolutely flat Massdrop THX789? No!
Does that make DT 990 better than AKG 371 cans? No!
Can you enjoy sound when matched? Of course, it sounds good, it's your hobby/money, be my guest.

What I argue against here is your attitude where you try to defend a DAC which both from money and performance perspective is worse than competition. Why is it that hard for you to understand?
I see your point. The ares has no output stage, it comes straight off the resistor network to the outputs. I'm basically having to add my own by going into a pre but I am adding a much better one than would be included in any DAC at this price point. The Gustard was about about the same price as the DAC. That could be the reason it sounds better to me.
 

HiFidFan

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 22, 2021
Messages
723
Likes
906
Location
U.S.A
I see your point. The ares has no output stage, it comes straight off the resistor network to the outputs. I'm basically having to add my own by going into a pre but I am adding a much better one than would be included in any DAC at this price point. The Gustard was about about the same price as the DAC. That could be the reason it sounds better to me.

Wait. . . What? It sounds better to you because of the price?
 

zepplock

Active Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2019
Messages
230
Likes
259
Location
San Jose, CA
No, because of the preamp being better than what comes included in budget dacs.

Again, you think it's better, or you are guessing. When Amir is testing dacs, he's testing output of the RCA jack. It does include everything. In fact, may dacs function as pure DAC (fixed output) or a preamp (change volume or gain or both). So far denafrips tested not worse except higher harmonic distortion, which you can hear and like, which is great! But don't mark it as a better dac because it is not, neither by performance (see distortion) not by value (see topping E30)
 

raif71

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 7, 2019
Messages
2,333
Likes
2,535
I see your point. The ares has no output stage, it comes straight off the resistor network to the outputs. I'm basically having to add my own by going into a pre but I am adding a much better one than would be included in any DAC at this price point. The Gustard was about about the same price as the DAC. That could be the reason it sounds better to me.
Interesting buy the Gustard P26. I wonder if you've heard about the Topping Pre90 and if so, why you chose the P26? Thanks
 

AllenW

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
70
Likes
36
Interesting buy the Gustard P26. I wonder if you've heard about the Topping Pre90 and if so, why you chose the P26? Thanks
I have the Pre90 as well. I can't really hear any difference between them.
 

AllenW

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
70
Likes
36
Again, you think it's better, or you are guessing. When Amir is testing dacs, he's testing output of the RCA jack. It does include everything. In fact, may dacs function as pure DAC (fixed output) or a preamp (change volume or gain or both). So far denafrips tested not worse except higher harmonic distortion, which you can hear and like, which is great! But don't mark it as a better dac because it is not, neither by performance (see distortion) not by value (see topping E30)
True but even when used in pure Dac mode most still go through an output stage. There is a review of the P26 on here and it measured very good. At least on the XLR outputs. I actually am running the Topping D70 in DAC mode through the Pre90 and it does sound better than the internal pre in the DAC.
 

raif71

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 7, 2019
Messages
2,333
Likes
2,535
I have the Pre90 as well. I can't really hear any difference between them.
In terms of dimension size of stacking up the denafrips, gustard and amp I suppose the gustard is better as I notice its front to back length is better suited for the denafrips. The pre90 is kind of shorter.
 

AllenW

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
70
Likes
36
In terms of dimension size of stacking up the denafrips, gustard and amp I suppose the gustard is better as I notice its front to back length is better suited for the denafrips. The pre90 is kind of shorter.
There's that and I Can change op amps in the gustard. I put burson v6 vivid in it and it appeared to widen the soundstage
Interesting buy the Gustard P26. I wonder if you've heard about the Topping Pre90 and if so, why you chose the P26? Thanks
I was actually surprised with the pre90. I got the P26 first and expected it to sound better considering how much better The X22 is compared to the d70. In fact the Pre90 sounds every bit as good as the P26. Somebody try to tell me that's conformation bias when I wanted the P26 to be better.
 

helom

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2019
Messages
64
Likes
45
It's not a flawed logic. DACs' only function is to convert digital signal back to analog as precise as possible. With many dacs, even $150 topping e30, it's entirely possible. Yet, you prefer a DAC that introduces high level of distortion, obviously detectable by your ears. I respect that you like it more. But why do you argue that it's a better piece of gear when it is obviously one that changes original sound intended by an artist. If artist wanted it to sound warmer with more distortion, he/she would just do it in the studio.
In most cases, we know zero to little of what gear was utilized in the studio and the linearity of said gear. We also can’t get into the artist’s head and share their ears. And often, the final product is not exactly what the artists fully had in mind, rather, it’s what the producer signed off on.

Abbey Road uses B&Ws for monitoring and those are far from linear, so yes, it is indeed a logical fallacy.

Furthermore, check out Stereophile’s measurements: https://www.stereophile.com/content/gramophone-dreams-40-denafrips-terminator-ares-ii-measurements

Near 22 bits resolution, smooth sine wave and very low noise and distortion. It is not a high distortion DAC by any practical measure.
 

helom

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2019
Messages
64
Likes
45
Given the large number of reports of the Ares II sounding less forward than some of the cleaner measuring DACs I tend to think there’s something to it. At the same time I don’t think it’s worth the expense as you can get much of the same effect and better results with mild EQ in front of say a Topping D10s at a fraction of the cost.

You really can’t though. I’ve tried such with the Topping D90 and Schiit Lokius. Doesn’t work that way. It’s not a less bright or less forward sound that separates the Ares from other DACs. You really have to live with one for a while to understand. A lot of conjecture on this thread and very little actual experience.
 

Purité Audio

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Barrowmaster
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
9,051
Likes
12,150
Location
London
But we do have the measurements that suggest inaudible levels of distortion, perhaps if you compared level matched and unsighted?
Keith
 

zepplock

Active Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2019
Messages
230
Likes
259
Location
San Jose, CA
In most cases, we know zero to little of what gear was utilized in the studio and the linearity of said gear. We also can’t get into the artist’s head and share their ears. And often, the final product is not exactly what the artists fully had in mind, rather, it’s what the producer signed off on.

Abbey Road uses B&Ws for monitoring and those are far from linear, so yes, it is indeed a logical fallacy.

Furthermore, check out Stereophile’s measurements: https://www.stereophile.com/content/gramophone-dreams-40-denafrips-terminator-ares-ii-measurements

Near 22 bits resolution, smooth sine wave and very low noise and distortion. It is not a high distortion DAC by any practical measure.
You are missing my point here. Irregardless of what was used in the studio, an artist/producer/engineer/whoever, have produced a digital file, flac/wav/etc - it does sound identical on dozens of topping/schiit/smsls/benchmark/etc dacs, same low noise, low distorsion/etc - except on denafrips where people claim it's different. Are you still claiming that this ONE model does it correctly while other 100 dacs are broken?
 

AllenW

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2021
Messages
70
Likes
36
You are missing my point here. Irregardless of what was used in the studio, an artist/producer/engineer/whoever, have produced a digital file, flac/wav/etc - it does sound identical on dozens of topping/schiit/smsls/benchmark/etc dacs, same low noise, low distorsion/etc - except on denafrips where people claim it's different. Are you still claiming that this ONE model does it correctly while other 100 dacs are broken?
The topping D70 and the Gustard X22 are very good measuring DAC's and by your logic should sound the same yet they sound obviously different. The Topping sounds boring in comparison. The Gustard sounds like it's in a much larger room than it is. It sounds like things are way behind the speakers and even beside me sometimes. the topping sounds like it's 2D in comparison.
 
Top Bottom