Recommend me a DAC + headphone combo device to use with my PC

[mike7877]

tl;dr under the "-----"

Since late spring/early summer, I've been using and loving my Topping G5 as my main DAC.

I love it so much that I use it for everything! What's "everything"?

- biking
- walking
- PC sound (including podcasts)

and even
- the DAC for my hi-fi!

The G5 sounds just as good through its headphone amp'd output, whether it's in high gain with the volume down, or low with the volume up, it always sounds the same.
Which is great for a DAC. Consistency like that, I appreciate.

I have a bit of a problem with the G5, though. Not anything to do with its performance, but the fact that it's a battery powered device.

It lasts about 12 hours on a full charge, and if you keep a lithium ion battery charged between 5 and 65%, you can essentially get 9x the total watt-hours into and out of the battery (yes, NINE times). Taking this into account, the battery will last 6 years (running 24/7 with 500 cycle battery)

But..........

There is no percentage indicator on the G5! And percentage isn't communicated over Bluetooth, either. Obviously I've monitored how long it takes to charge the device and estimated the length of time it takes to get to 65% from when the low battery indicator light comes on [at 5%], but I make mistakes sometimes. I also fall asleep (I guess that could be considered a mistake). Anyway, since each screw-up deducts 9 {NINE} cycles, you can see that it doesn't take many of them to severely affect my G5's lifespan. With my rate of mistakes, it'll probably need a new battery in less than 3 years.
And all the work and constant attention! After these few months, it's starting to get to me... I do this with my phone and I don't mind, and I thought I wouldn't mind the G5, but when I bought the G5, I assumed there would be a way to determine the battery's state of charge... There's not! Ha-ha!

"-----"

I'm looking for something that performs as well, or nearly as well as my G5 that I can use with only my PC. I chose PC because I spend more time on it than walking/biking/hi-fi. Even combined, I spend more time on the PC than the other 3 lol (it'd be weird if I didn't, right?!)

My budget is 175USD/225CAD. I can go over by a bit, but that's the target.
My lowest impedance headphones are 40 ohms, my usual are (I believe) in the low 50s.
I'd like it to be able to do DSD and MQA, but it's not a deal breaker if it can't.
I kind of want to stir things up a bit and go with an AKM DAC instead of ESS. Don't ask why, I know the chip is less important than its implementation. I just want it implemented well like the ES9068AS is in the G5.

I'm really enjoying the fact that a couple manufacturers finally decided to put out DACs that aren't fundamentally flawed in the obvious ways that most older DACs are now known to be...
I'd like to see them do their best with some lower-tier chips in the $50 price category. That'd make things interesting!

 

[mike7877]

How are the E30 II and DX1?

I like the E30 II for its display (sometimes I want to know the bitrate of stuff), but it's not the end of the world if I end up with something that doesn't tell me. Since this is for PC, I'm sure there's a way to have some application tell me.

Other than the ~3dB difference in THD+n, is there any worthwhile difference between the two?

How do they compare to other stuff out there for similar prices?

 

[staticV3]

The DX1 is a DAC+Amp whereas the E30 II is just a DAC. You'd have to buy a separate headphone Amp to be able to use the E30 II with headphones.

 

[DVDdoug]

Is there something wrong with the soundcard/soundchip built into your PC?

If you're not getting background noise and it goes loud-enough, you're not going to get any improvement with an external DAC/headphone amp. Distortion and frequency response are almost always better than human hearing.

I'd like it to be able to do DSD and MQA, but it's not a deal breaker if it can't.

MQA is pretty-much dead.

 

[mike7877]

Is there something wrong with the soundcard/soundchip built into your PC?

If you're not getting background noise and it goes loud-enough, you're not going to get any improvement with an external DAC/headphone amp. Distortion and frequency response are almost always better than human hearing.


MQA is pretty-much dead.

I have multiple PCs. Well, 3. One has crap sound, one has OK sound, one has better OK sound. I am driving $4-600 headphones, and my Shure SRH-1440s are pretty bright and not too forgiving.
I forgot, my laptop, it's a surface laptop 2, with worse OK sound.

I see MQA on Tidal, so I guess it's applicable to me but not a lot of others who don't use it


Edit: I know some people will say this is impossible, but I hear a noticeable difference on voices (even on youtube when hosts use good mics) comparing my G5 to my MSI x570s Ace Max with its Realtek ALC4082 codec + ESS Sabre9018Q2C DAC + headphone amp (the "better OK" sounding computer). Idk if it is was MSI's op amp choice, or the fact that it's all stuck to a motherboard, or that the dedicated area for 8.1 output has less than a dozen passive components on it...
Edit2: the 9018Q2C apparently is a SOC with op amp included... I guess using just a regular power supply while also being surrounded by REALLY noisy shite, really does a number on the thing, because it's rated -115dB THD+n at 49mW into 32 ohms (per ESS website...)

original Edit cont'd: My other two desktops are 9600k and 2500k - the 2500k has the worst onboard sound, and the 9600K is decent for most people who aren't as OCD as me. For PC enthusiasts, I have both the 9600K and 2500K at 1.41V, 9600K is 5.2GHz all core all-ways (lol) and the 2500K is still ticking at 4.8GHz 100% of the time
(2500K still feels snappier than all the notebooks in bestbuy for OS and web navigation. Having 2133 C10 RAM (a whopping 60% overclock...) probably helps a bit too! I use the old beast for web browsing)

I'm looking for something that's at least -106db THD+n into loads down to 40 ohms. Why -106? Because in a sense it will be worked somewhat as a preamp, and, in my experience, anything less than that (and whatever the correlated IMD numbers would be) is the minimum for my taste - meaning: as far from absolute transparency as I'd like to wander in this particular circumstance)

 

[mike7877]

The DX1 is a DAC+Amp whereas the E30 II is just a DAC. You'd have to buy a separate headphone Amp to be able to use the E30 II with headphones.

I TOTALLY missed that!

I guess I'm only asking about the DX1 then

 

[mike7877]

So I ordered the DX1 from Amazon because there were only two left and I don't know of any similarly performing DAC + Headphone amp combo for ~$100USD.

I have Prime so if there's something better I can send it back, I just kind of had to order the DX1 because with few left I didn't want to miss the boat

 

[mike7877]

Is there something wrong with the soundcard/soundchip built into your
If you're not getting background noise and it goes loud-enough, you're not going to get any improvement with an external DAC/headphone amp. Distortion and frequency response are almost always better than human hearing.

I already replied regarding my OP, but I'd like to address something you've said...

An analogy, if I may:

You are unfamiliar with violins: 99% of the violins you've ever heard were synthesized. There is a concert violinist in front of you who's got two violins of the same make and model with him - one 14 years newer than the other. He tells you to sit down and put a blindfold on. You do, and he begins to play. He switches between violins at random, and every time you think he's made a switch, you have to push a button.

Now.. you know you're not going to have a chance in hell of being right!

But if that same guy plays those two violins for a few hours, gets to know them, and is then, himself, blindfolded in the same room, and someone else who can play enters and begins the show for him- like he did for you-, there is a very good chance he will be mostly right in his estimations.


Why is that?
It's because he's a trained musician and knows what to listen for. He's spent thousands of hours manipulating his tone through the instrument for it to sound just right. And the violin doesn't sound the same to the player as it does to the audience in the room - it's much louder and panned hard to one side. From many years of active engagement with his instrument, he knows how the violin sounds to observers from listening to what he hears while playing. His brain translates it seamlessly and without effort -something that's occurred since he got good enough to say he's mastered his instrument.


How the analogy is related to audio:
Just like any technical field - especially if one wants to be analytical - knowledge and practical experience are essential. As far as I know, there is not a University degree for "trained ear for evaluating audio gear". Most people start out just listening to music, then they heard their friend's stereo and "that sounds sooo good, I want one!" so they got one, and it wasn't as good as their friend's, so they got some new speakers at the local hifi shop and started talking to the guys there. Then picked up a subscription to stereophile and started learning - got on his hifi journey. Over many years, maybe decades, after ownimg 3-5 amplifiers and 5-7 different pairs of speakers, CD players, DACs, and earlier media (if applicable) were used and carefully listened to. Over all this time and with differently abled gear and (obviously) repetition of good albums, every detail of every favourite album became experienced and integrated [known]. Once posessing a system, carefully curated and matched to work synergistically, maybe some experimentation with more than just basic room sound treatments is done.

Like I said, there's no school for it, but there is the audio/ audiovideo industry where a trained ear, which can only be acquired this way, is a tremendous asset. Not everyone who works in it has it, which is why so much horribly produced stuff makes it through (movies too).
Occasionally the artist and producer and some other important decision makers involved all have this skill (or at least knowledge of and appreciation for (instead of denial of the existence of), and so, an epic album that's also awesome ends up excellently recorded and released.

Here's a practical skill from having a trained ear - using just one song, adjusting the equalizer to correct for non-linear driver response + room response in a venue.
Not just any song will do, though. It must have energy across the entire spectrum.
A LOT can be done in 3 minutes!




Here is a Soundblaster G3 which I bought a few years ago to do everything it's supposed to (console, PC, phone), and it does a decent job, but only decent.

I can tell the difference between it and my G5 in 5 seconds using an album I'm familiar with as the source. I wouldn't even have to A/B (and no, the Soundblaster's noise isn't apparent)


I posit this: if anyone thinks all 21st century DACs and amps sound about the same and they're all good enough (especially the "THD 0.08% or 0.1% is OK" people, but also including anyone who says any better than -80dB THD+n (and associated IMD etc.) is "transparent" - they are inexperienced with audio equipment, are lying to themselves about what constitutes experience with audio equipment, don't have persistence as a primary personality characteristic, have bad memory, have bad hearing, listen to garbage. There could be other reasons too, but those are the big 'uns.


I am someone who can very easily identify substandard equipment without doing an AB comparison and saying "I think that one's worse"
I can listen for 10 seconds to a familiar song, and I can give a judgement of "crap or not crap" and be right nearly every time (always -70dB, mostly -80. Of course these numbers aren't set in stone, it's +-, everyone's hearing ability changes day to day, it's also affected by things like sleep and stress)

It's a strange situation because people online debate "is it possible to hear?" "I don't think so" "I do think so" etc. etc., while there's me, being like "I know it is because I can hear the difference easily". My hearing is not exceptionally good or special - I'd say at least 25% of men under 35 have hearing as good as mine, and that 75% of them have hearing good enough to discern what I can with practice.

I think a training exercise should be a complicated fast metal song with .... ok, I know - Judas Priest - Painkiller! First you listen and enjoy the whole thing really loud in 16/44.1. Like 20 times in a month. Then encode it in 320kbps mp3, 256, 224, 192, 160, 128, 112, 96.
Listen to each one and observe (aurally) how MP3 compression removes sound information, or "resolution".
Painkiller doesn't compress well, it should be pretty easy to tell them all apart. If some are too similar, do every other one for a while 'til you're able, then do 'em all...

Why do this?

Bad gear also removes information. Not usually as much, and obviously not in the same way, but it's a stepping stone.
Also a tip: things to listen for - snare, hi-hat, and cymbals.

Snare. Especially if a snare is sharp, has a fast attack with some HF energy, too - that detail gets missed first, evident clearly at 320kbps once you've identified

Cymbals./ hi-hat. Generally they sound like they're underwater. Also, if they crash on top of a synth which also has some HF energy, generally the underwater garbling crash completely cuts it (the HF part, not usually stuff under 1kHz or so.

 

[Transmaniacon]

So I ordered the DX1 from Amazon because there were only two left and I don't know of any similarly performing DAC + Headphone amp combo for ~$100USD.

I have Prime so if there's something better I can send it back, I just kind of had to order the DX1 because with few left I didn't want to miss the boat

The DX1 is a solid choice, should work well for you.

 

[dr0ss]

If you decide you don't like the DX1 and want to give the Roland UA-1G a try, let me know; I have a few extras.