Question about choosing DAC and so on

[SweetStone]

Hello Guys!

I want to have a new DAC for my head-fi system, and I'm thinking hard about what to buy.

Now I'm using DX3 Pro(Not LDAC ver) as Pure DAC, THX AAA789 amplifier and Edition XX headphone with XLR Balanced Cable.

Although I'm happy with this, want to upgrade DAC for better sound.

So I think several DACs, ex) Matrix X-Sabre Pro, Topping D90, Chord Qutest

If you do not mind, can you recommand the best price performance DAC for me? I will be happy to answer

+Add to, Even Audio Power Conditioner/ Battery are effective for sound quality? I wonder if this really works

 

[flipflop]

Although I'm happy with this, want to upgrade DAC for better sound.

Bad idea. Equalize your headphones instead:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/equalizerapo
https://sourceforge.net/projects/peace-equalizer-apo-extension
https://www.dropbox.com/s/4dx0rxb6kszldg9/Hifiman Edition XX.pdf?dl=0

 

[SweetStone]

Bad idea. Equalize your headphones instead:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/equalizerapo
https://sourceforge.net/projects/peace-equalizer-apo-extension
https://www.dropbox.com/s/4dx0rxb6kszldg9/Hifiman Edition XX.pdf?dl=0

Does your reply mean even upgrade DAC I can't feel sound better? I'm satisfied with tonal balance of Edition XX. Now I want enhanced detail

 

[Fluffy]

DACs don't make sound. They make electronic signals. Once you've gone past a certain distortion and noise threshold (where it is exactly is debatable, but the DX3 Pro is certainly past it), there are no audible gains to be made by upgrading to a better performing DAC. If the tonal balance of your headphones is right for you and the music you are playing is good quality and lossless, there is not much "detail" to be enhanced, except for upgrading to more accurate headphones.

I do doubt that you are actually satisfied with the tonal balance of the headphones. If you feel the sound lacking, that might be because of their frequency response. you should first try equalizing them, as suggested above.

 

[SweetStone]

DACs don't make sound. They make electronic signals. Once you've gone past a certain distortion and noise threshold (where it is exactly is debatable, but the DX3 Pro is certainly past it), there are no audible gains to be made by upgrading to a better performing DAC. If the tonal balance of your headphones is right for you and the music you are playing is good quality and lossless, there is not much "detail" to be enhanced, except for upgrading to more accurate headphones.

I do doubt that you are actually satisfied with the tonal balance of the headphones. If you feel the sound lacking, that might be because of their frequency response. you should first try equalizing them, as suggested above.

Thanks to your sincere reply! Listen to you, Exactly I have to buy another more accurate headphone if I want to listen more detailed sound
If you don't excuse me, Can I recommand the best detailed headphone?

 

[Fluffy]

Thanks to your sincere reply! Listen to you, Exactly I have to buy another more accurate headphone if I want to listen more detailed sound
If you don't excuse me, Can I recommand the best detailed headphone?

That's not exactly what I said. Before you go running and making purchases, you should figure out exactly what it is you are missing with your current setup. Your DAC and amp are top notch, so the problem is most definitely not there. That leaves either the source or the headphones.

So first, you need to make sure that your source (files, streaming, CD, whatever) is at the best quality you can have – that means first of all lossless codecs, and second is the actual quality of the recording. For example, listening to some mono vinyl rip of a 40's single mic recording of a live jazz gig would most definitely not sound detailed, doesn't matter what gear you have. and on the other hand, listening to a well mastered album ripped to 128 kbps mp3 from YouTube would also be inherently limited in detail.

So after this is sorted and you still feel you lack detail, you should experiment with what your headphones can do. The best way to do that is with EQ, because it lets you change the sound of your headphones (with certain limitations) without changing headphones. With whatever EQ app you choose to use, boost and cut frequencies from the entire range, and see what it does to the sound. you may find that cutting some frequencies "clears up" congestion and let you hear things better. Or boosting frequencies "bring forward" some elements that were missing.

Specifically, detailed sound is connected psychologically to high frequencies. Try to boost frequencies between 3khz and 20khz (wide bandwidth at first, and narrow it down if necessary) , and see what it does for you.

 

[SweetStone]

That's not exactly what I said. Before you go running and making purchases, you should figure out exactly what it is you are missing with your current setup. Your DAC and amp are top notch, so the problem is most definitely not there. That leaves either the source or the headphones.

So first, you need to make sure that your source (files, streaming, CD, whatever) is at the best quality you can have – that means first of all lossless codecs, and second is the actual quality of the recording. For example, listening to some mono vinyl rip of a 40's single mic recording of a live jazz gig would most definitely not sound detailed, doesn't matter what gear you have. and on the other hand, listening to a well mastered album ripped to 128 kbps mp3 from YouTube would also be inherently limited in detail.

So after this is sorted and you still feel you lack detail, you should experiment with what your headphones can do. The best way to do that is with EQ, because it lets you change the sound of your headphones (with certain limitations) without changing headphones. With whatever EQ app you choose to use, boost and cut frequencies from the entire range, and see what it does to the sound. you may find that cutting some frequencies "clears up" congestion and let you hear things better. Or boosting frequencies "bring forward" some elements that were missing.

Specifically, detailed sound is connected psychologically to high frequencies. Try to boost frequencies between 3khz and 20khz (wide bandwidth at first, and narrow it down if necessary) , and see what it does for you.

Thank you for your kind reply again. I use Tidal Master by laptop, mostly listen 70's~90's music like Pink Floyd, Oasis, Bon Jovi etc.(of course including remastered tracks)

Then I have to use EQ app steadily when I listen to. But if my greed is bigger, I might purchase another headphone

I received a lot of help. Good Night, Gentleman!

 

[Fluffy]

Thank you for your kind reply again. I use Tidal Master by laptop, mostly listen 70's~90's music like Pink Floyd, Oasis, Bon Jovi etc.(of course including remastered tracks)

Then it sounds like your source is great.

 

[SweetStone]

Then it sounds like your source is great.

Thanks for reply I can relax about my source

 

[sejarzo]

Specifically, detailed sound is connected psychologically to high frequencies. Try to boost frequencies between 3khz and 20khz (wide bandwidth at first, and narrow it down if necessary) , and see what it does for you.

Agree 100%. My experience tells me it's often more a question of perception rather than inherent detail, either captured in the recording or as a capability of playback gear.

I thus tend to avoid using rock recordings to judge EQ/detail as they have been heavily processed with EQ already, in many cases to add "presence" or "air" to vocals.

When I listen to an orchestral/acoustic recording that seems to be otherwise well done, but in which the violins or other strings sound dull, and add 3 dB in the 6-9 kHz range, it usually sounds more realistic/detailed to me. Whether that's how those instruments sounded in that hall or studio that day...who knows?

 

[TomB19]

Perhaps I'm the only one who considers the 70s to 90s pop/rock to be a red flag.

I listen to a lot of this era and it is dominated with heartbreaking recordings of amazing material.

I suspect Mr. SweetStone is looking for detail that is simply not there.

He might be happier with a headphone that has less detail but is warm and smooth as butter, like something from AKG or Beyer.

Mr. SweetStone, I suggest you audition a good quality, contemporary, recording from artists like Tool, Beck, etc. It would be better if they were recorded on a high resolution format. I suspect you will discover that your headphones are amazing at resolving detail.

I'd hate to think someone with a pair of Sennheiser HD 6xx thinks they need to upgrade headphones to get more detail out of 80s music. The 6xx prove that most 80s recordings are crap.

 

[Fluffy]

What is it with people slandering other people's music choices? If the guy doesn't like orchestral music or Beck (he might, but for argument's sake), there is absolutely no point in suggesting he uses those things to check for detail on his gear. The best gear is always the one that makes the music you like sound great. Making music you don't like sound great is pointless.

 

[TomB19]

Now post for a slight topic change.

80s recordings were pretty much all digitized using the same adc part. It was early days and there wasn't a ton of silicon. I seem to recall it being a Sony part but don't hold me to that.

This part had some flaws that introduced distortion with a specific signature.

A few years ago, somebody analyzed the distortion and designed a corrective algorithm for music digitized with this early part.

Some remastered recordings have been fixed in this way. Unfortunately, many of them have also been compressed.

The point being, you may find some remastered and restored recordings from the period which provide the details you are looking for. Once you find this detail, it will be difficult to listen to anything lower in quality when focusing on the music.

 

[TomB19]

If the guy doesn't like orchestral music or Beck (he might, but for argument's sake), there is absolutely no point in suggesting he uses those things to check for detail on his gear.

That is utterly ridiculous.

I don't enjoy test sweeps but I use them to test my equipment.

Borrowing a CD or two to test equipment is part of the hobby.

 

[TomB19]

I will go one step further.

Once you fall down the high detail headphone rabbit hole, your life will be partially consumed with finding recordings that allow your equipment to demonstrate it's ability.

 

[Fluffy]

I will go one step further.

Once you fall down the high detail headphone rabbit hole, your life will be partially consumed with finding recordings that allow your equipment to demonstrate it's ability.

This is the quintessential audiophile fallacy – you listen to gear with music. I think this is absurd, and a music lover is one who listens to music with gear. Music should always come first, and the gear is there to serve it, not the other way around.

 

[TomB19]

You seem a bit ruffled, Fluffy. Perhaps you could use more fabric softener.

I can objectively state that I have found more detail in recordings that feature more detail. Even a $1500 pair of planar headphones is not going to pull detail out of an 80s recording of a mid-level band that simply doesn't have that detail.

I've found that most headphones are tremendously resolving, compared to speakers. Headphones will rip apart nearly any music collection.

For those fortunate enough to have a nice pair of planar a, Tool's Fear Inoculum Is pretty much required listening. If you go to an audio show like canjam, you will probably hear that particular selection at every headphone station. The synthesizer at the start of the song might have been designed to demonstrate headphones.

 

[Fluffy]

You seem a bit ruffled, Fluffy. Perhaps you could use more fabric softene

Ha ha, very funny…

I can objectively state that I have found more detail in recordings that feature more detail. Even a $1500 pair of planar headphones is not going to pull detail out of an 80s recording of a mid-level band that simply doesn't have that detail.

With this I absolutely agree. I mean, apart from the fact that "detail" is a pretty vague term to begin with. But let's say that we are talking about the apparent feel of detail, not the absolute definition or what really causes this feeling. So yeah, older recording done on the cheap probably have less of this detail sensation.

But, that doesn't mean this makes them "unworthy" to listen to. Music is music, and it's the same notes/chords/lyrics/arrangements whether it's recorded poorly or excellently. Some artists intentionally record lo-fi, and some releases are only available in lo-fi for various reasons. Limiting your choices of music to only those who attain some high audiophile standard is to limit yourself spiritually and culturally.

What makes me most sad about this hobby (apart from the exuberant amounts of money spent on snake oil and scams), is that it makes people self-censor their music taste. I agree that it's absolutely great to discover wonderful music recorded wonderfully, but wonderful music can also be recorded poorly, and the habit of filtering those out will prevent you from discovering some real gems.

My approach is to accommodate my gear to my music choices. I buy gear that intentionally makes my preferred music sound good, regardless of how it would sound on "better" gear, or how "better" music would sound on it. For me, this approach brought peace of mind and spared me the aforementioned rabbit holes.

 

[Magnifico]

If you´d buy a Topping D90 to have more detailed music....try a
- Beyerdynamic DT1990 Pro
- Brainwavz Gaming Earpads (https://www.brainwavzaudio.com/collections/earpads-round-xl/products/gaming-earpads-xl)
- SolderDudes passive filters (https://diyaudioheaven.wordpress.com/headphones/passive-filters/)

The Dt1990 pro is very analytical with the passive filter you can get rid of the beyerdynamic hump and the brainwavz eapads make it lot more fun to listen to. If you want it even more clean....stick to the factory delivered pads.
That is as detailed and analytical as it gets my friend.

A different Dac might improve the sound too a bit, but surely not as much as different headphones.
The SMSL M300 seem like the sweetspot (price to sound) currently.
Once Ben gets his stuff sorted out his LA-QXD1 this thing is an alternative...
What more could you want...SMSL with AKM and Soncoz with ESS. Freedom of choice.
Other better DACs didn´t impress me from the measurement point of view.
At least not close to those two formerly mentioned Dacs

 

[sejarzo]

What is it with people slandering other people's music choices?

I wasn't making any comment about the artistic value of that music at all, merely the technical aspects because the OP rather clearly noted, "Now I want enhanced detail".

I'm 62, and like many of my contemporaries, consider the early 70s to be the best era in rock, even if there's tons of tape hiss, excessive overdubs, or other massive screwups in the recording chain on some of my favorites ("Katy Lied" for instance.)

However, just as you note that someone might not gain much from listening to classical music if they don't appreciate the art, I don't get why so many artists now like to use fake LP noise to "enhance" their music. I find it annoying.