• 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!

Review and Measurements of Digital Amp DAC DAC HS

sonci

Active Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2018
Messages
233
Likes
112
Why some dacs have the full set of measurements, while others only 2 or 3 test?
Is Amir biased somehow?:rolleyes:
 

jj_coffee

Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2018
Messages
10
Likes
12
[Full disclosure: I'll admit I'm a little biased as I provided the units for review; also, this is my first post so be nice ; ) ]

Another very informative review by Amir, and I think it highlights the value of the reviews he does. Some of my take-aways:
- The specs for this device promoted on the website, mainly the 124dB SNR and THD+N, seem corroborated in the measurements, which is always nice to see.
- I was really interested in seeing whether any power related spikes would show up, because the pics of the power supply I've seen did look really "light" (to use Amir's term). Good to see things are all clean, and I would give credit to proper design here (regulars on this forum know you can't always take this for granted).
- I dunno if some of the underwhelming results of Amir's testing is a fault with my particular item, oversights in design, or a mix of both, but I think it shows the importance of the extended testing that Amir performs. This will help keep manufacturers informed, honest and on their toes, and hopefully we ALL benefit from this.
- Regarding the criticism over the case: I certainly agree it's not anything fancy (to say it lightly, some simple labeling would have been nice...), and yes there are expectations for this price range, but I (emphasizing the "I") feel like some of the criticism is unfair. I do believe that the company has (for better or for worse) decided to go with this style of casing for many of their products and would think they put in some effort here to finding a casing style that's flexible enough for their various needs, etc. I think this is the case (pun introduced accidentally) with many of the manufactures out there, and I don't find the DAC DAC to be that different in this regard. So you can certainly criticize their aesthetics, as I suppose one could for many of the smallish companies out there, but I don't think it's fair to imply they've putting no effort into this. As for me, if they can save money/time in a utilitarian case and provide a better product, then I'm all for it (certainly more preferred than the other way around), and I'm OK with how the product looks.
 

graz_lag

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 13, 2018
Messages
1,296
Likes
1,583
Location
Le Mans, France
Why some dacs have the full set of measurements, while others only 2 or 3 test?
Is Amir biased somehow?:rolleyes:

Personally, I do not feel he's biased somehow, he's doing a great service to the audiophile's community.
But I feel he is also a very practical and efficient person : why investing time, resources (so money at the end of the day) piling up measurements on devices that show up poor designs or implementations - or offer an offensive value for money as in this particular case of this Cherry DAC, as soon as the preliminary tests advert him of what the trend of these might be ...
IMHO
 

jj_coffee

Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2018
Messages
10
Likes
12
Why some dacs have the full set of measurements, while others only 2 or 3 test?
Is Amir biased somehow?:rolleyes:

This is kind of interesting, because as a scientist/engineer, I feel like I understand Amir's approach. Of course it would be nice (I suppose) if all the devices were subjected to the all the same tests all the time (something like a Consumer Review type of approach?), but it's not always feasible, and it's definitely not fun. I feel like Amir takes the basic measurements, sees what he's got, and lets his heart/head lead him to what looks interesting and answer the questions that come up along the way, and that also shows in his writing for these reviews. So I personally respect his approach, and commend him for getting to the bottom of what was non-optimal about this DAC.
 

graz_lag

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 13, 2018
Messages
1,296
Likes
1,583
Location
Le Mans, France
[Full disclosure: I'll admit I'm a little biased as I provided the units for review; also, this is my first post so be nice ; ) ]

Another very informative review by Amir, and I think it highlights the value of the reviews he does. Some of my take-aways:
- The specs for this device promoted on the website, mainly the 124dB SNR and THD+N, seem corroborated in the measurements, which is always nice to see.
- I was really interested in seeing whether any power related spikes would show up, because the pics of the power supply I've seen did look really "light" (to use Amir's term). Good to see things are all clean, and I would give credit to proper design here (regulars on this forum know you can't always take this for granted).
- I dunno if some of the underwhelming results of Amir's testing is a fault with my particular item, oversights in design, or a mix of both, but I think it shows the importance of the extended testing that Amir performs. This will help keep manufacturers informed, honest and on their toes, and hopefully we ALL benefit from this.
- Regarding the criticism over the case: I certainly agree it's not anything fancy (to say it lightly, some simple labeling would have been nice...), and yes there are expectations for this price range, but I (emphasizing the "I") feel like some of the criticism is unfair. I do believe that the company has (for better or for worse) decided to go with this style of casing for many of their products and would think they put in some effort here to finding a casing style that's flexible enough for their various needs, etc. I think this is the case (pun introduced accidentally) with many of the manufactures out there, and I don't find the DAC DAC to be that different in this regard. So you can certainly criticize their aesthetics, as I suppose one could for many of the smallish companies out there, but I don't think it's fair to imply they've putting no effort into this. As for me, if they can save money/time in a utilitarian case and provide a better product, then I'm all for it (certainly more preferred than the other way around), and I'm OK with how the product looks.

Everything you wrote is very nice and understandable, the real problem that comes out here is that we just could not fathom the reason behind the fact that - for example : one buys three DAC7s from Topping with the same budget of - for example, this DAC DAC HS. :facepalm:
The measurement outcomes are not part of my point here, I am supposing both units bring full satisfaction to the end users.
Considering that the components - if and when standards, have the same $ costs across the world ...
Does the higher labor & logistic cost in North America justify the $ difference ? To me not ...
Does the spreading of the R&D cost onto the sales forecast (so the estimated number of units to be sold) justify the difference ? Yes, probably ...
And Yes, the R&D in China is much cheaper for reasons that are very well known.
 

AmpDesigner4444

Member
Audio Company
Joined
Jan 22, 2019
Messages
6
Likes
15
Regarding the DAC DAC enclosure: We aren't about bells and whistles or fancy cases. We focus on circuit design and sonic performance. The case is also designed to be stacked with our 60V 1kW amp power supplies, Cherry USB, as well as our Stereo Maraschino (STM) Amplifiers.
Regarding "the audio beatnik" review: Our DAC DAC 1 HS won "Digital Product of the Year 2017" (see attached graphic).
Regarding the DAC DAC design in general: The analog signal path is about one inch long. The outputs are double differential, requiring dual DAC chips. Internal power supply reconstruction allows >1Vpp noise without affecting the measurements, plus the external power supply is regulated as well. Sonic performance is outstanding, and testing of full scale square wave reproduction doesn't say anything about what you hear. I'm a huge fan of measurements as opposed to "subjective testing", but the DAC chip was selected among several current market contenders, and some things don't show up in the measurements as far as perceived performance. 124dB+ and 0.0004% THD+N isn't too shabby either.
Regarding the price: The DAC DAC 1 HS (an TL "tube like" version) was lowered to $990 (LIST) about half a year ago. We occasionally sell near-perfect condition demos for $690 and sometimes lower in light of our new 130dB+ DAC DAC 2 HS and HSV (analog pot controlled digital attenuation, see attached photo).

-Tommy O
 

Attachments

  • Best_of_draft.jpg
    Best_of_draft.jpg
    12.4 KB · Views: 151
  • 1_DX0024 SMALL.png
    1_DX0024 SMALL.png
    481.5 KB · Views: 165

Veri

Master Contributor
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
9,596
Likes
12,036
I think btw that on diyaudio site it was speculated this TOTL BB chip seems to always be slightly worse with one channel than the other. Very weird but inherent to th design?

Same thing happened with the Gala DAC too.
 

Headphonaholic

Active Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2018
Messages
222
Likes
283
We aren't about bells and whistles or fancy cases.
I think it's fair to ask that for this price you get something that doesn't look like it was made in someones garage. But we can argue till we're blue in the face as to whether or not a product costing more than $1000 should come in a professional or diy case but at the end of the day, bells and whistles or not, user experience should be considered. The complete lack of labels makes the device not user friendly.
 

MetalheadRich

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
40
Likes
12
-The price is ridiculous.
-Undoubtedly a part of "The Beauty and the Beast"
-The DAC has normal TI quality. A little too much distortion. A little bit of asymmetry. AKM is little better.
-I do not understand the rating of the filter. I call that almost perfect (cut off 22kHz). Are there better ones?

Why no photo from the PCB?
-7dB at Nyquist is almost no filter at all. There are many, many better filters.
 

MetalheadRich

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
40
Likes
12
Regarding the DAC DAC enclosure: We aren't about bells and whistles or fancy cases. We focus on circuit design and sonic performance. The case is also designed to be stacked with our 60V 1kW amp power supplies, Cherry USB, as well as our Stereo Maraschino (STM) Amplifiers.
Regarding "the audio beatnik" review: Our DAC DAC 1 HS won "Digital Product of the Year 2017" (see attached graphic).
Regarding the DAC DAC design in general: The analog signal path is about one inch long. The outputs are double differential, requiring dual DAC chips. Internal power supply reconstruction allows >1Vpp noise without affecting the measurements, plus the external power supply is regulated as well. Sonic performance is outstanding, and testing of full scale square wave reproduction doesn't say anything about what you hear. I'm a huge fan of measurements as opposed to "subjective testing", but the DAC chip was selected among several current market contenders, and some things don't show up in the measurements as far as perceived performance. 124dB+ and 0.0004% THD+N isn't too shabby either.
Regarding the price: The DAC DAC 1 HS (an TL "tube like" version) was lowered to $990 (LIST) about half a year ago. We occasionally sell near-perfect condition demos for $690 and sometimes lower in light of our new 130dB+ DAC DAC 2 HS and HSV (analog pot controlled digital attenuation, see attached photo).

-Tommy O
it's certainly not all bad, but clipping the FS output is inexcusable and the poor anti-alias filter is almost as bad. No thanks at $200 nevermind the actual price.
 

graz_lag

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 13, 2018
Messages
1,296
Likes
1,583
Location
Le Mans, France
Regarding the DAC DAC enclosure: We aren't about bells and whistles or fancy cases. We focus on circuit design and sonic performance. The case is also designed to be stacked with our 60V 1kW amp power supplies, Cherry USB, as well as our Stereo Maraschino (STM) Amplifiers.
Regarding "the audio beatnik" review: Our DAC DAC 1 HS won "Digital Product of the Year 2017" (see attached graphic).
Regarding the DAC DAC design in general: The analog signal path is about one inch long. The outputs are double differential, requiring dual DAC chips. Internal power supply reconstruction allows >1Vpp noise without affecting the measurements, plus the external power supply is regulated as well. Sonic performance is outstanding, and testing of full scale square wave reproduction doesn't say anything about what you hear. I'm a huge fan of measurements as opposed to "subjective testing", but the DAC chip was selected among several current market contenders, and some things don't show up in the measurements as far as perceived performance. 124dB+ and 0.0004% THD+N isn't too shabby either.
Regarding the price: The DAC DAC 1 HS (an TL "tube like" version) was lowered to $990 (LIST) about half a year ago. We occasionally sell near-perfect condition demos for $690 and sometimes lower in light of our new 130dB+ DAC DAC 2 HS and HSV (analog pot controlled digital attenuation, see attached photo).

-Tommy O

It is very nice of you taking the time to post, thank you very much.
AFAIAC, I like a lot the PCM1794A DAC chip from TI, that is the reason for which I am keeping posting in this thread although I am quite well fed up with my current DACs ...

$690 or lower tending towards $600 is a much more realistic asking price, however the lack of USB input, which requires another $100 for the add-on of an interface, is quite unacceptable, for this class of performance, IMHO.

We (me at least) are confused on this topic of the infeed port(s) :

- on one thread we have @March Audio who - in his DAC1, he has voluntarily omitted the SPDIF infeed, so only the USB one, which is totally coherent with the digital audio market's trend
- here we have an alternative DAC in which only the SPDIF infeed is supplied, no USB

And yes, as written by @Headphonaholic the complete lack of labels is another issue that cannot be justified, even within the most possible minimalistic approach.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,381
Location
Seattle Area
I'm here! My company, my product. I'll be addressing the comments here, but this will take some time, so please bear with me....

Tommy O
Founder
Digital Amp Co
CherryAmp.com
Warm welcome to the forum Tommy. It is always great to see the manufacturer/designer engage with their customers and potential customers on forums, as rough as it might sometime be. :) Certainly I think higher of your product with your participation.
 

Headphonaholic

Active Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2018
Messages
222
Likes
283
We (me at least) are confused on this topic of the infeed port(s) :

- on one thread we have @March Audio who - in his DAC1, he has voluntarily omitted the SPDIF infeed, so only the USB one, which is totally coherent with the digital audio market's trend
- here we have an alternative DAC in which only the SPDIF infeed is supplied, no USB
I was so offended by the lack of labeling and the overall design that I didn't consider that. In my use case USB is a must, so regardless of the price it wouldn't be for me. I've not attempted to manufacture a device like this but it would seem to me that it would be a minor cost (please correct me if I am wrong) to include both USB and SPDIF otherwise why limit your potential market? In the case of March Audio's Dac1 choosing USB as your default or only option I think is a good move since it is the more popular option.

I guess overall my major question is why would someone choose this over the other products that perform in this range? If you're talking to someone that is all about price/performance then this isn't going to be the pick. If you talk to someone that is about having a polished product to be proud of, this isn't it either. Some balked at the Neurochrome HP-1 diy appearance but that had more polish than this and basically unrivaled performance to boot.
 

bennetng

Major Contributor
Joined
Nov 15, 2017
Messages
1,634
Likes
1,692
@AmpDesigner4444 can you explain the decision to have the filter roll off so little at the top of the band? It looks as if you are using a filter for 48 khz for 44.1 khz.
Filter and noise shaping look very similar to ApplePi so it is probably PCM1794's default behaviour. However spikes are obviously defects.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...lo-katana-and-applepi-raspberry-pi-dacs.4164/
index.php


No surprise about intersample clipping since Archimago's TEAC UD-501 (PCM1795) has the same behaviour as well.
http://archimago.blogspot.com/2018/09/musings-measurements-look-at-dacs.html
 

AmpDesigner4444

Member
Audio Company
Joined
Jan 22, 2019
Messages
6
Likes
15
Am I the only one who find the case supercool?
Most of our customers like the look, too! It's minimalist and elegant in person. I attached photos of the PRODUCTION version. The reviewer was examining a "bang and dent" demo that was sold at a very low price due to aesthetics.
DAC DAC BACK DIAG.png
DAC DAC FRONT DIAG.png
DAC DAC FRONT.png
DAC DAC HSV FRONT DIAG.png
 

AmpDesigner4444

Member
Audio Company
Joined
Jan 22, 2019
Messages
6
Likes
15
@AmpDesigner4444 can you explain the decision to have the filter roll off so little at the top of the band? It looks as if you are using a filter for 48 khz for 44.1 khz.
This was done for the way it SOUNDS. One of those things that affects the measurements a bit, but this DAC sounds super clean and smooth at the same time. You don't get that with TI's reference design, which is what almost everybody else implements.

We also have a TL (tube like) version. This version was created much like "sticky notes" -- accidentally! We built a different output stage topology to shorten the signal path even more than the HS (high spec) version. The result sounded awesome but measured higher distortion than expected. After some lab work, we realized that this new output stage can be used to emulate the "warm sounding" distortion of tubes! So there's a great example of a DAC that doesn't measure as well (but still more than 120dB SNR), but sounds very smooth and pleasant. We sold out of these TL DACs twice so far. Customers LOVE them, due to the sound, not the measurements.

Again, I must state that measurements are very important even if they don't tell the whole story. The reviewer confirmed our HS version of the DAC DAC exceeds our specifications of 124dB SNR and 0.0004%, so you know we're not slacking, but realize that the sound quality is always our primary goal. For example, the Cherry MEGAschino Amplifier 1000W circuit had 128dB SNR and 0.0008% THD+N (at 10W) before tweaking for sonics. AFTER tweaking for sound quality, we get 120dB SNR and 0.001% THD+N. However, it sounds AMAZING compared to the "better specs" version because the highs are more controlled and as with all of our Class-D designs, there's no harshness like the other "more mainstream" guys.
 
Top Bottom