Do I even need DAC (Xonar DX vs Entry Level DAC)

[Draghmar]

Yeah, so I need to ask this question to make sure I won't waste my money.
I'm in the middle of deciding on the gear I want to buy. I'm leaning towards combo of Schiit Modi 3+ and Magni Heresy to drive Dekoni Blue by Fosex. But just before going with the order I started to thinking (and reading) about DACs. Currently I have Asus Xonar DX and I wonder: Will Schiit Modi 3+ make anything better for the sound? Or if that money could be used to get better amp (Schiit's Asgard 3 or Magnius or something from this price range)?
There's a one unusual benefit for replacing Xonar though - it sits in PCIe slot that could be freed up. It's not a huge thing but still it is to some degree.

 

[JJB70]

In terms of audible performance, probably not.

 

[ziddy76]

Yeah, so I need to ask this question to make sure I won't waste my money.
I'm in the middle of deciding on the gear I want to buy. I'm leaning towards combo of Schiit Modi 3+ and Magni Heresy to drive Dekoni Blue by Fosex. But just before going with the order I started to thinking (and reading) about DACs. Currently I have Asus Xonar DX and I wonder: Will Schiit Modi 3+ make anything better for the sound? Or if that money could be used to get better amp (Schiit's Asgard 3 or Magnius or something from this price range)?
There's a one unusual benefit for replacing Xonar though - it sits in PCIe slot that could be freed up. It's not a huge thing but still it is to some degree.

Nope you don't need a DAC. This isn't 1995 any more. Built DAC and headphone amp from any new phone, laptop or desktop motherboard are good. The need for DAC and AMP is ridiculously exaggerated nowadays.

The measurements you see often are often things only machines can well measure, not human ears.

Whatever you read for the most part are purely subjective opinions and influenced by what they have been told by others or read on forums.

Audio salesmen have known for a century you can literally tell someone they can hear certain improvements from different gear and they will hear that difference.

My suggestion for buying is determine your needs, what features you need. Figure out your budget. And undetstand how much power your headphones needs. I can listen to for example the Dan Clark X Closed with my OnePlus 9 phone with more than sufficient volume.

That said I won't deny the pleasure from using an external amp/DAC. It is fun. But my current setup is based on budget and features I needed. You go down the other road, it is a rabbit hole that really leads to nowhere but empty wallet or angry wife/husband.

Use this forum to see what hardware do what they say they do and are not a waste of your money. NFB11 probably not great value but that was before there was this mountain of excellent budget gear that is on the market now.

 

[Draghmar]

In terms of audible performance, probably not.

Thanks, I was "afraid" that would be the case.

Nope you don't need a DAC. This isn't 1995 any more. Built DAC and headphone amp from any new phone, laptop or desktop motherboard are good. The need for DAC and AMP is ridiculously exaggerated nowadays.

The measurements you see often are often things only machines can well measure, not human ears.

Whatever you read for the most part are purely subjective opinions and influenced by what they have been told by others or read on forums.

Audio salesmen have known for a century you can literally tell someone they can hear certain improvements from different gear and they will hear that difference.

My suggestion for buying is determine your needs, what features you need. Figure out your budget. And undetstand how much power your headphones needs. I can listen to for example the Dan Clark X Closed with my OnePlus 9 phone with more than sufficient volume.

That said I won't deny the pleasure from using an external amp/DAC. It is fun. But my current setup is based on budget and features I needed. You go down the other road, it is a rabbit hole that really leads to nowhere but empty wallet or angry wife/husband.

Use this forum to see what hardware do what they say they do and are not a waste of your money. NFB11 probably not great value but that was before there was this mountain of excellent budget gear that is on the market now.

Xonar DX doesn't have headphone amp so this one is needed. Especially for Dekoni Blue. As for DAC I didn't think I'd get too much from the "upgrade" like that. For me it was mostly getting back PCIe and having toys on the desk (that's why originally I was thinking about more PC related external sound card....but then I start to read stuff ). But I though I'd get some benefit, especially with the stack. And after reading quite a lot I've noticed that for noobs like me there probably won't be any difference, which triggered my inner miser to scream as a result.
Anyway, thanks for sharing your thoughts on the subject.

 

[AnalogSteph]

Sound quality is literally the last reason to replace a Xonar DX for. That's the one thing it does really well for what it is. The drivers can be a buggy frustrating mess (should be better than D1/D2 though), and it does obviously take up a PCIe slot and increase power consumption by a few watts, aside from being stuck inside an IEC Class I device. Oh, and they seem to have a bit of tendency for going belly up for some reason.

In this situation I would recommend neither the Asgard 3 (would get you ground loop problems) nor the Magnius (performance in single-ended mode isn't that outstanding). The IEMagni or Magni Heresy is just fine. A Topping L50 also is a great amp but does not have quite enough gain to reach full output power with a 2 Vrms source, though the 9 Vrms it does reach then should still be plenty for the Dekoni Blue (99.7 dB at 1 Vrms 1 kHz, so that's ~119 dB SPL max) and obviously ultra clean. The Magnis are still doing plenty well enough at 50 ohms, just not as measurably perfect. In practice, having 2 dB more gain may very well be the more relevant factor.

You might want to wait for how the new Topping DX3 Pro+ turns out in the headphone amp department. Or maybe you'll catch the XLR microphone bug and start looking at audio interfaces as a source instead (many of which will appreciate an "afterburner" headphone amp to beef up their modest built-in stages).

 

[julian_hughes]

There are some advantages to using a USB DAC instead of the Xonar DX (I also have a DX). The DX supports 44.1/48/96/192kHz sample rates but not 88.2kHz (not so unusual with hi res streaming or downloads) or 176.4kHz (uncommon) or DSD. However if you use the optical output it will pass 88.2 and 176.4 unmodified to an external DAC. It can't handle DSD at all. If you use sensitive headphones you can notice some background noise with the Xonar DX and D1 (D1 is the older version, PCI not PCI-E) and you can also find that the headphone output has high impedance and is quite unsuitable for IEMs or even some headphones which don't have flat impedance curves. I have the DX installed in an old gaming PC but use the optical output to pass audio to an external DAC (whose USB input is required by another device). If the old motherboard had its own SPDIF I would use that instead. Also Asus's very impressive performance stats never seem to be equalled in real life by real reviewers. I think you might even find a USB DAC sounds better even when not using sensitive IEMs or headphones.

 

[MRC01]

There are some advantages to using a USB DAC instead of the Xonar DX (I also have a DX). The DX supports 44.1/48/96/192kHz sample rates but not 88.2kHz (not so unusual with hi res streaming or downloads) or 176.4kHz (uncommon) or DSD. ...

The Xonar DX card that I've been using for the past several years in one of my desktop PCs supports 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176.4 and 192.
But this is on Linux, so perhaps the limitation of not supporting 88.2 and 176.4 is in Windows drivers?

BTW, I'm quite happy with the sound quality from this card. I run its analog output to my headphone amp (JDS Atom). And it's been reliable, used it in 3 different machines over the years, daily. The Xonar DX A/D converters sound clean too, I use them daily with my studio mics, a pair of Rode NT1As driven by a Tascam mic preamp, its analog line level output goes to the Xonar DX analog input.

 

[julian_hughes]

I'm using a Xonar DX on Windows and a Xonar D1 on Debian (essentially identical cards except for PCI-e/PCI interface). Coincidentally I also have a JDS Labs Atom sitting on my desk! Yes, you can play back 88.2 and 176.4, apparently natively, via the alsa driver. However the CMEDIA audio processor of the Xonar cards only has one oscillator, which is configured for sample rates which are multiples of 48kHz, and all the rates not multiples of 48k are actually reclocked, including 44.1kHz, which causes an increase in noise/reduced SNR. I'm sure this is why the Windows driver doesn't allow 88.2 and 176.4 rates. 44.1 is too ubiquitous to disallow or ignore! Whether you can notice the increased noise is debatable, especially if the output is to an amp, but it is measurable. And if using sensitive IEMs with the headphone port you can "enjoy" this drawback combined with the very high output impedance and slight susceptibility to noise from the motherboard for a very different experience. Of course motherboard/component noise can vary a lot with different hardware.

Anyway if you look to get a USB DAC I can happily recommend the Topping D10 in combination with the JDS Atom. That's been my headphone playback system for music for about 18 months and I like it very much and prefer it to any integrated PC DAC/amp set up I've ever used.

 

[MRC01]

... Yes, you can play back 88.2 and 176.4, apparently natively, via the alsa driver. However the CMEDIA audio processor of the Xonar cards only has one oscillator, which is configured for sample rates which are multiples of 48kHz, and all the rates not multiples of 48k are actually reclocked, including 44.1kHz, which causes an increase in noise/reduced SNR. ...

Interesting. I wonder why they don't use a 7.056 MHz master clock. This being the least common multiple of 44100 and 48000, all sampling rates are integer factors.
Correction: 28.224 MHz is the least common multiple of all common sampling rates. 7.056 MHz would be good for 44.1, 48, 88.2, 176.4 but not for 96 and 192.
Either way, 28.224 MHz doesn't seem that fast in computers having gHz clock speeds (PS I realize the sound card has its own processor and clock, different from the system CPU).

 

[julian_hughes]

Interesting. I wonder why they don't use a 7.056 MHz master clock. This being the least common multiple of 44100 and 48000, all sampling rates are integer factors.
Correction: 28.224 MHz is the least common multiple of all common sampling rates. 7.056 MHz would be good for 44.1, 48, 88.2, 176.4 but not for 96 and 192.
Either way, 28.224 MHz doesn't seem that fast in computers having gHz clock speeds (PS I realize the sound card has its own processor and clock, different from the system CPU).

I have no idea which master clock rates are possible or how the designers or engineers make their choice, but if you Google xonar clock replacement you'll find lots of mostly old stuff by people who go to extreme lengths to attack this problem. It seems overkill but then this same issue is found in extremely expensive ST & STX cards too. I think it's only with fairly recent cards like the Xonar AE that Asus finally do it properly.

edit: so far as I can tell most of the mods people do to the Asus Xonar & Essence cards are a complete waste of time! Real crackpot stuff. But 10 years ago a standalone DAC which could do high sample rates cost a small fortune so I can see why people got into investigating and modding PC sound cards.

 

[MRC01]

The ESI Juli@ was another great sound card for its time, high quality, flexible, and unique design with a flippable daughter board for SE or Balanced operation. I've had one in one of my desktop PCs for the past 15 years or so.

 

[julian_hughes]

Looks really great. I can imagine it must have cost plenty!

 

[AnalogSteph]

Looks really great. I can imagine it must have cost plenty!

Around 140€ or something if memory serves, and by the late 2000s lowest price had dropped below 120€. Keep in mind that less than 200 would get you an EMU 1212M! A Xonar D1 would run you 55ish, a D2 roughly twice that.

ESI Juli@ Windows drivers always had very poor (read: no) power save mode support, really annoying. Their driver development was pretty much a one-man operation AFAICT.

 

[MRC01]

Yeah that's about what I paid for it all those years ago. Both cards (ESI Juli@ and Xonar DX) run flawlessly under Linux, no drivers needed. Just plug it in and it works, simple.

 

[Draghmar]

Thanks all for your input. It's really great lecture to read!
For the moment I think I'll stay with my Xonar even though I'd really like to get my PCIe back. But getting Amp like Schiit Heresy will give me open door for upgrade later on.
I checked that Topping DX3 Pro+ and it looks interesting but I think I'd have to overpay for wireless stuff that I don't need.
I'll to check Topping L50 and confront with both Heresy and my non-audiophile background.