Is the Performance of a DAC Linked toCost?

[Mnyb]

They can also add expensive IV conversion and discrete output stages to their products ? They are some that shuns OP-amps and thinks discrete solution are better.

 

[JktHifi]

It might be related to Reliability Issues. I don’t know whether my SMSL PO100 AK will die next month. But my Onkyo amp already satisfying me for decade.

 

[Mitch]

2 possibilities.

1 (Least likely) their design skills for the analogue design are insufficient to filter out any noise coming from the PSU so they build a very low noise PSU to enable them to achieve the same results as another manufacturer who have the skills not to need it.

2 (Most likely) it enables them to tell a marketing story about how their "advanced" power supply will lift veils - regardless of reality.

Thanks, see my reply to fpitas above, which more or less echoes your view. I have learned a great deal from the exchange of views on this thread, and really enjoyed being part of this forum. I look forward to more of the same. Oh, and incidentally I have solved my dac purchase dilemma - RME Pro.
Mitch

 

[Mitch]

The answer to the question varies depending on price range. Getting to the top of our SINAD chart costs money. You have to use the best DAC chip and combine multiple channels. And spend good money on regulators, etc. I don't see a DAC that costs $700 in that ranking be doable for $70.

Above $1000, the cost is not justified by electronics cost. You have to then include the cost of fancy enclosure, dealer channel, cost of marketing, support, etc.

All of this is about measured performance. Subjective performance is harder to quantify but clear you don't need to go above a few hundred dollars to get assured transparency.

Thank you for adding this. I apologise for misspelling your name in my original post. This forum and your great reviews have been a ‘game changer’ for me’. I feel I am now much better informed when it comes to the inevitable upgrades. I cannot imagine buying another hi fi product that is not on your reviews list; nor can I imagine ever again taking a purely subjective review of a product at face value. It is not just the reviews though; I have been fascinated by your educational videos, which have rekindled my long interest in electronics (very amateur ). Please continue to delight us.
Mitch

 

[Mitch]

Back to your OP, here are my views relating to PS stage.

What's the objective/role of the PS stage? To provide a very stable DC voltage at whatever demanded current, with minimum noise.
(DAC's demanded current is quite low, unlikely to heavily stress the PS of today).

How is this objective achieved? One can use the traditional stepdown transformer + filtering circuit; or newer switching method; or some other exotic method (battery, solar).

What are the Cons of mainstream methods?

• Stepdown transformer+filter = LF noise (hum)
• Switching PS = HF noise (switching noise)

Based on today's engineering capability, both cons have been eliminated. Therefore, a DAC using either method, provided it's well engineered, should be fine.

My current R2R DAC uses 3 miniature switching power supply. Some may consider this cheap or simple engineering. To my ears, the R2R DAC sounds very very good even with such PS in them.

In my opinion, for a DAC, the analog stage engineering plays a far bigger role in achieving great sound quality.

Thank you for this objective reply - very helpful. My current dac is a fairly expensive and capable ESS based unit with a valve output stage. Because of my long experience of vinyl, I had convinced myself that I liked the valve sound which the Unison Research dac produced. It may be the valves introduce distortion, but it is nice distortion! Now I better understand the issues, I am keen to hear my system with a state of the art dac and I have decided on the RME, but I will not sell my valves, just I case!

 

[Bach]

Part of the first post:

"An obvious example of what I mean would be to compare the 2 DACs at the very top of the league table: the Mola Mola and the Topping. They have near identical performance, yet vastly different prices."

Well the cost of Mola Mola is obvious not to their investment and use of advanced communication gear. But maybe it sounds more analog!

 

[Els]

I have been seeking advice from the experts on the RME Forum about power supplies for the RME Pro which has been most interesting.

Now I have a more general question about powering dacs and the cost/benefit equation of elaborate internal power stages which is probably more appropriate for this forum. The measurements have proven that DACs such as the RME, and others at the top end of the league table are able to accurately reproduce the digital input in analog form. Some makes have sophisticated, and expensive, internal power sections with huge and heavy components, and others do not, yet output measurements are near identical. How is this possible? A layman, such as me, might conclude that those big, shielded power stages are not required. In other words, if 2 DACs have similar DSP producing similar measurements with noise and jitter etc well below audible threshold, yet one has a power stage that doubles the cost of the unit, should we not always opt for the cheaper model, functionally and ascetics apart. OR, is there another factor, other than the measurements that might make the more expensive dac sound better, excluding any downstream equipment? I am just interested in what the dac produces, as Armin says, what the designer does inside the box should not concern us, it is only the end result in which we are interested? I quote a popular reviewer on Utube: ‘ the RME is a great sounding dac, but not as good of course than dac …. at twice the price, as you would expect’. Well is that what we should expect? What I have learned from this excellent site is that maybe we should not. But am I correct?

Ultimately this decision affects buying choices. I want a new dac, and I am prepared to spend to get a high performance one, but on the other hand, I do not want to spend on what is not necessary! I am very attracted by the RME Pro, and it is at least half the price of my other contenders, some of which have slightly worse measurements. But am I missing something? Is the old adage of ‘you need to double the price you pay for a component to get noticeably better performance’ correct - it is a revalation to me, after 50 years or buying hi fi, that it might not be. I have found through my own blind testing that I cannot tell the difference between good quality professional interconnects and high end audiophile cables - hence I use the far cheaper professional products. From what I have learned so far, the same may well apply to DACs such as the RME as well??

An obvious example of what I mean would be to compare the 2 DACs at the very top of the league table: the Mola Mola and the Topping. They have near identical performance, yet vastly different prices. If any one was in the fortunate position to have access to both, and could carry out a proper blind test that was repeatable, what would be the result in terms of sound quality (ignoring things like ascetics and functionality). For instance if one was found to be better than the other, surely we must ask why, when they have the same measured performance. If, on the other hand, they were the same, what about all the pundits who go on endlessly about sound stage depth etc, etc? Would they then be out of business?

Sorry for this rambling post, but after a long time in this hobby I may be at a crossroads, mainly because of the compelling arguments of Armin. I just hope I have interpreted those arguments correctly.
Thanks, Mitch

Price is not the issue here. I have a dozen or so Dacs and I believe fpga Dacs like the Chord sound very different to delta sigma Dacs based on long term comparisons; would I be able to tell them apart on a blind test? Maybe not. The hardcore objectivists on this site will tell you that there is no difference between a good 200 dollar Topping Dac and 3000 Dollar whatever well reviewed and well measuring Dac. This is also hard to believe. Hard cored objectivists look at the measurements and make a decision and that is it. Gullable audiophiles like I, buy lots of equipment and mix and match, long term. Objectivists find no value in that. Back to Dacs, my conclusion is : In my system it does not really matter whether I use the 200 Dollar topping or the 3000 Dollar Chord, because there is so much equipment that follows after the Dac that is going to define the sound in a much bigger way. So perhaps, from this perspective objectivists make a good point.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

No

 

[Mitch]

Price is not the issue here. I have a dozen or so Dacs and I believe fpga Dacs like the Chord sound very different to delta sigma Dacs based on long term comparisons; would I be able to tell them apart on a blind test? Maybe not. The hardcore objectivists on this site will tell you that there is no difference between a good 200 dollar Topping Dac and 3000 Dollar whatever well reviewed and well measuring Dac. This is also hard to believe. Hard cored objectivists look at the measurements and make a decision and that is it. Gullable audiophiles like I, buy lots of equipment and mix and match, long term. Objectivists find no value in that. Back to Dacs, my conclusion is : In my system it does not really matter whether I use the 200 Dollar topping or the 3000 Dollar Chord, because there is so much equipment that follows after the Dac that is going to define the sound in a much bigger way. So perhaps, from this perspective objectivists make a good point.

Thank you for this helpful reply. After 50 years of being a gullible audiophile, I am now moving into the objectivist camp!
Mitch

 

[Mitch]

No

When you say no, do you mean that you think that if 2 DACs both have sub hearing threshold SINAD, one can still sound better than the other? And would it be the more expensive one that sounded better? You are talking to someone who really wants to believe his $4000 dac sounds better than a $200 one, but who is becoming increasingly unsure about it!

 

[antcollinet]

When you say no, do you mean that you think that if 2 DACs both have sub hearing threshold SINAD, one can still sound better than the other? And would it be the more expensive one that sounded better? You are talking to someone who really wants to believe his $4000 dac sounds better than a $200 one, but who is becoming increasingly unsure about it!

He is answering the title of your topic - no it is not linked to cost.

Put simply - all Dacs which measure with inaudible noise and distortion don't have a sound. They will be indistinguishable from each other.

And this is the vast majority of Dacs made today. Some which do have audible noise and distortion (and this includes some very expensive models) can sound different - but if they do, you are hearing reduced fidelity - not improved.

 

[Mitch]

He is answering the title of your topic - no it is not linked to cost.

Put simply - all Dacs which measure with inaudible noise and distortion don't have a sound. They will be indistinguishable from each other.

And this is the vast majority of Dacs made today. Some which do have audible noise and distortion (and this includes some very expensive models) can sound different - but if they do, you are hearing reduced fidelity - not improved.

Thanks. Thought that might be the answer. Don’t want to buy a $4000 Dac do you?
Mitch

 

[antcollinet]

Thanks. Thought that might be the answer. Don’t want to buy a $4000 Dac do you?
Mitch

No, thanks

 

[notsodeadlizard]

It's hard to say what kind of world you live in, because in the ordinary world nothing good is ever cheap, and never has been.
But banalities are difficult, that's a fact.

 

[antcollinet]

It's hard to say what kind of world you live in, because in the ordinary world nothing good is ever cheap, and never has been.
But banalities are difficult, that's a fact.

In the ordinary wold many good things are cheap - take water, or an egg, as examples. Products that have become commoditised are incredibly cheap for the SOTA performance you get. And many things that are expensive are not good.

It is really hard to say what kind of world you live in.

 

[voodooless]

It's hard to say what kind of world you live in, because in the ordinary world nothing good is ever cheap, and never has been.

Your a Linux user

 

[TonyJZX]

why dont you keep your discussions to DACs?

i think there's a point we are at where you can conceivably assemble an entire chain... ie. int. amp + dac + speakers for really not a lot of money

this is a common theme or meme of the YT set... you know... $350 amp dac + speaker setup

i do get the derision but i also think its not untrue?

i had a lot of fun with a 'cheap' setup on my end... basically a $200 amp, a $200 set of german speakers and a $50 dac.... and its close enough that i can enjoy it

 

[notsodeadlizard]

In the ordinary wold many good things are cheap - take water, or an egg, as examples. Products that have become commoditised are incredibly cheap for the SOTA performance you get. And many things that are expensive are not good.

It is really hard to say what kind of world you live in.

You yourself perfectly understand the inconsistency of this comparison.

Another thing is that "high price" does not always mean "adequate formal parameters for this price."
This is also a banality.
But in the case of consumer audio equipment, even justifications for this banality are not required.
Because consumer audio equipment is designed solely for enjoyment.
Therefore, everything is possible.
If someone is pleased with the very fact of owning an audio system for several millions, no one can and should not do anything with this, despite the formal parameters of this audio system.
The owner likes to own it.
It is not a fact that the owner even seriously listens to music.
It's all just for fun.
I know many people who keep beautiful reel-to-reel recorders in their equipment collection solely because a beautiful reel-to-reel recorder is nice to look at.
People enjoy surprisingly different things. Audio is one of the most harmless things like that

 

[Ra1zel]

People love to steer others here to the least expensive good measuring unit, which usually ends in some combination of those:

- realizing that you could have gone for more extensive I/O
- being tired by unfriendly design like weird touchscreens that work half the time or pilots that have to be aimed with marksman precision
- trying to communicate with chinese speaking only customer support to somehow use your warranty after the device fried itself 6 months later
- going insane from dropouts when using optical

 

[antcollinet]

People love to steer others here to the least expensive good measuring unit, which usually ends in some combination of those:

- realizing that you could have gone for more extensive I/O
- being tired by unfriendly design like weird touchscreens that work half the time or pilots that have to be aimed with marksman precision
- trying to communicate with chinese speaking only customer support to somehow use your warranty after the device fried itself 6 months later
- going insane from dropouts when using optical

Not sure what people you are referring to here.

Personally I steer people to stop looking at audio quality as a discriminating factor, and look instead to features, build quality, reliability and after sales support - as well as price - for the selection criteria.

The only advice I've seen knowledgable people here give is similar.