• 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 Totaldac d1-six DAC

THW

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
412
Likes
630
There's also an option for those finding that a noise floor of -160dB with -122dB of music injected is too low / not natural.
Ask for price.

View attachment 30283

i do wonder if there’s an option to introduce sprays of distortion products across the entire frequency range for those of us big brained enough to appreciate the art behind such things.
 
Last edited:
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,381
Location
Seattle Area
Amir, I wrote about why we see an incorrect rise at HF for both curves while they show the (more or less) correct relationship to each other (the ZOH drop). It's the same type of measurement error that we sometimes see from measuring D/S-DACs with their strong rise of modulation noise above 20kHz which gives incorrect values for S/N and THD+N measurements wrt to what's actually relevant for perception. Or if you measure PWM amps and don't mask the influence of the carrier residual on the noise part.
A PWM (switching amplifier) has a carrier frequency in 100 to 500 kHz. It is very difficult to make a case that such ultrasonics are reproduced by the system. In that regard, filtering them as I do in my tests, works and few will complain about adding a filter that normally doesn't exist in customer systems.

Here, you are advocating that I cut off everything at way lower frequency of 22 kHz. That does not remotely justify the same treatment. High-end audiophiles for one thing, assume that ultrasonic content impacts in-band playback of audio. Don't we want them to know that the Totaldac d1-six pollutes that spectrum to no end?

It is very easy to imagine that the amplifier and speaker will try to do something with this ultrasonic energy. We can't tailor all of these tests to hide them.

At high level, what you are asking me is to place a low-pass, or said another way, reconstruction filter in my measurements. Problem is, normal users of this DAC doesn't use such a filter. So I am measuring a behavior that is not representative of real use.

Your new measurement looks better but I can tell you the only way to measure amplitude and phase response with great robustness is the Farina log sweep. I don't know how steep the bandlimit filter is in your AP model but I know it's not steep enough in my own personal 2322 and the 2722 which I have years of experience with (besides other analyzers, like DScopeII, R&S UPL/UPD, etc).
Robustness? No. Compromise, yes. You are trying to tell me how to bend backwards to extract the low-pass output of this DAC, leaving behind the rest of what it spits out.
 
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 not blaming you for making an error (we're all human and things happen), rather that you just took everything the AP spits out for real without questioning what you see when it seems to be too odd, before publishing. And yes, the THD+N vs frequency graph is completely off as well for the same reason
Mistake? What mistake? Not questioning the output of the analyzer? Did you read the same review I wrote? I routinely analyze strange results of standard tests with spectrum analysis. This review was no exception. I did that by showing the much more expanded spectrum of 1 kHz tone:

index.php


I then dug into the spectrum of harmonic distortion to separate it from everything else:

index.php


When the IMD results shows excessive distortion, I picked one of the points of interest and not only showed the spectrum, but compared it to the performance of the analyzer itself:

index.php


Of note, this spectrum is absolutely limited to 20 kHz.

This is a lot of evidence to have been ignored with that comment.

I have to assume that you have some affinity or interest in NOS DACs to come up with such strong jabs. Do you?
 

Sir Sanders Zingmore

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
May 20, 2018
Messages
947
Likes
1,898
Location
Melbourne, Australia
You know everything about psycho accoustics? congrats.


Aah... that explains it, why didn’t you just say so?
The measurements we are seeing are expected and are a deliberate part of the design. The dac behaves that way on purpose because you designed it that way for pleasing psychoacoustics?
Right?
 

Xulonn

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
1,828
Likes
6,311
Location
Boquete, Chiriqui, Panama
This is one weird thread, I'm starting to wonder if we are witnessing a Ratner.
Although Mr Ratner made an unbelievable comeback years later - will Vincent Brient of TotalDAC stage a similar comeback if he crashes and burns?

As for Ratner?

After losing everything, he toiled in misery for years — but he eventually made an improbable comeback. In 1997, he took out a £155k (US$203k) loan on his house, built up a health club business, and sold it for £3.9m (US$5.1m). He then used the profits to start an online jewelry company. (The Ratners Group rebranded as Signet in 1993; today, it is the largest diamond retailer in the world.)
 

sweetsounds

Active Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2019
Messages
140
Likes
278
I am sure it is a shock to many of their high-end customers. After all, they all believe digital is bad because of "steps." Now we have a DAC that produces said steps.

Don't know about steps or not as an Argument for or against. People tend to argue that quantization leads to loss of Information and artifacts, which later need to be cured by filters.
I myself stopped listening to vinyl around 1986. I don't support the crackles and noise.

How? Harmonic distortion is clearly visible:

<Spectrum removed>

This is the spec for the product:

View attachment 30290
Clearly it says it supports 24 bits. It at least dithers down to 24 bit as shown in the linearity test.

All agreed. Looking at the intermodulation distortion, there are 96dB harmonics. I wonder what causes those.

My question was: what data-rate did you feed into the DAC for the 1kHz tone and the intermodulation tests?
I guess, you used 44.1kHz with 16Bit (24Bit?) data and your analyzer was set to 192kHz A/D conversion.

My recommendation is to use 96kHz/24Bit data for the intermodulation test. It should shift the HF aliases out and I am curious to see what happens to the infinite harmonics.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,381
Location
Seattle Area
My question was: what data-rate did you feed into the DAC for the 1kHz tone and the intermodulation tests?
I guess, you used 44.1kHz with 16Bit (24Bit?) data and your analyzer was set to 192kHz A/D conversion.
24-bit 1 kHz digital stream was output at 44.1 kHz sampling. Capture is at 48 khz with 22.4 kHz bandwidth.
 

PaulD

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2018
Messages
453
Likes
1,340
Location
Other
It is really a pity but all that thread is going nowhere now. It is useless to attack TotalDac and Vincent Brient for almost everything now (price, bad looking, profits, website, etc).
The real facts are the one stated by Amirm and are not good at all as compared to many / almost all other DACs measured by Amirm.

I said repeatedly that this bad measurements are not translated into what I am hearing, as I have the priviledge to have one TotalDac among other DAC. This argument is weak in an audio science forum, and is weak because it is only the say of one individual (valid argument, but apart from Amirm and myself, who in that thread has ever listened to TotalDac?).

It is for me really a pity that Vincent Brient, who is absolutely not a marketer (see his answers...) but an entrepreneur and an engineer, is not taking advantage of that thread to explain himself. Yes, I do hope for him that he is making money, but it is mostly a company of one so do not believe it is a gold mine. As compared to the big audio brands, he certainty doesn’t have the money and marketing surface to influence with money all the guys who said great things about his products.

I am hearing some other voices in that forum who try to come with some arguments related to NOS DAC. It is a pity as well that they are not taken seriously, as the thread is now mostly going to killing Vincent.

I admit he is killing himself with his answers, but it is very sad.

The thread went and did exactly what it was supposed to, it reviewed the DAC without bias or prejudice and presented the results. Some people have an emotional response to that and cannot accept the results and insist that a) they were flawed [they were not] or b) it sounds better than it measures [maybe].

If you hear it differently, please present the statistical analysis of the level matched (better than 0.1dB please) ABX double blind listening tests that you have done so that we can be sure you are not biased because; you own one, you paid a lot of money for it, you like the way it looks, the designer is a friend, you like the review, etc etc.

Bias is everywhere, all of us are biased - being human means being biased - and the only way to overcome it is to rely on measurements, and properly controlled double blind tests. As someone else said recently either in this thread or another, the medical research community got this right a long time ago because the consequences are measured in mortality. Applying the same rules to audio evidence is just good practice. I am happy that you like your DAC, but please do not tell me that Amirm or the tests are wrong unless you have equally rigorous proof, and casual listening is not proof of anything.
 

Dialectic

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
1,738
Likes
3,090
Location
a fortified compound
Although Mr Ratner made an unbelievable comeback years later - will Vincent Brient of TotalDAC stage a similar comeback if he crashes and burns?
Ratner jokingly made fun of some of his company's cheaper products and got fired.

In contrast, here we have a company founder whose products have been shown to be (almost certainly) badly engineered and wildly overpriced. Rather than mount a defense of his products by pointing out genuine flaws in the measurement protocol or questioning the relevance of the measurements (both a priori valid approaches), he has attempted to have it both ways, asserting that the measurements are all misleading and that his DAC is subjectively superior to most or all others. When pressed for justification for these assertions, he demurs, stating that he prefers to keep it a mystery.

He has also sought help from a technical ignoramus, Michael Lavorgna, a man whose most basic positions on audio are internally inconsistent ("I prefer the TotalDac, and I don't care if you do because it is all subjective. But I'm a reviewer and can pronounce some things better than others."). Over the weekend, Lavorgna made an unfunny video ridiculing Amir's measurement. Today he posted a "pet peeve" that transparently referred to criticism of the TotalDac and misattributed a sentiment to users of this forum. (I will not dignify either the video or the blog post with a link.)

That's not how TotalDac should have handled this.

This forum thread has been one of the few recent instances in which we have been able to see an audiophile-oriented manufacturer respond to careful technical criticisms of its products (outside of the very brief, unsatisfying manufacturer's responses in Stereophile, where measurements are presented as an afterthought). When one side in a debate marshals evidence to buttress its position, and the other makes assertion after assertion without evidence--appealing even to "mysteries"--anyone with a triple-digit IQ knows which side has the stronger position.
 

FredYves

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Messages
31
Likes
44
The thread went and did exactly what it was supposed to, it reviewed the DAC without bias or prejudice and presented the results. Some people have an emotional response to that and cannot accept the results and insist that a) they were flawed [they were not] or b) it sounds better than it measures [maybe].

If you hear it differently, please present the statistical analysis of the level matched (better than 0.1dB please) ABX double blind listening tests that you have done so that we can be sure you are not biased because; you own one, you paid a lot of money for it, you like the way it looks, the designer is a friend, you like the review, etc etc.

Bias is everywhere, all of us are biased - being human means being biased - and the only way to overcome it is to rely on measurements, and properly controlled double blind tests. As someone else said recently either in this thread or another, the medical research community got this right a long time ago because the consequences are measured in mortality. Applying the same rules to audio evidence is just good practice. I am happy that you like your DAC, but please do not tell me that Amirm or the tests are wrong unless you have equally rigorous proof, and casual listening is not proof of anything.

First, your end statement is wrong. I never said Amirm measurements were wrong.
Now, I have spent time listening to music all my life. I did listen to the products I bought, as I do not rely on external reviews from hifi magazine. Neither do I believe that I should select an audio component based only on measurements.
I did listen carefully to the products I chose. At the end of the day I prefer TotalDac so far. I hope I didn’t hurt anyone as it seems it is the case. My occupation is not in permanent blind testing neither in measurements but in enjoying the music. Which I do with TotalDac, Chord H2 and RME - and even more with Mozart, Mahler, Schubert and many others.
 

agtp

Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2018
Messages
95
Likes
60
Hi Amir,

How is this DAC any different than your Mark Levinson amps?

For those not paying attention, allow me to clarify.

Here we have a DAC which is said to be overpriced, measures poorly, but has positive subjective reviews/feedback from reviewers/customers. For these reasons, it is criticized here.

Amir owns overpriced ($50k!) Mark Levinson mono block amps, which measure poorly, and have received negative subjective reviews/feedback.

Yet, Amir has stated on numerous occasions how much joy his system brings him, despite the poor measurements, ridiculously high price and negative subjective feedback.

There seems to be some inconsistency here.

Note: Please do not misinterpret or misrepresent my post as a defense of this DAC or critique of the measurements, that’s clearly not the point being made.
 

FrantzM

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
4,335
Likes
7,717
OT ..
Such is the power of the Internet.

What's becoming clearer" Companies will from that point on be careful about posting BS measurements. They know now that there is a site who harbors people with the credentials and let's be honest, intellectual wherewithal to squash them with a moutain of established, published, verified studies.

This DAC is one of many examples that exist in this strange universe called High End Audio. When it comes to amplifers the amount of BS is in megatons. Amps that can't swing 20 watts at 10% THD sell routinely, well over $10,000 ...
When a website such as this can prove to you that a product costing $9 can do better than one costing $13,000 we should be happy and thankful. Long Live ASR.
 
Last edited:

Xulonn

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
1,828
Likes
6,311
Location
Boquete, Chiriqui, Panama
.
Ratner jokingly made fun of some of his company's cheaper products and got fired.

Actually, it was his company, and he lost everything, but came back over time to become wealthy again. LINK
 

gvl

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 16, 2018
Messages
3,425
Likes
3,979
Location
SoCal
He has also sought help from a technical ignoramus, Michael Lavorgna, a man whose most basic positions on audio are internally inconsistent ("I prefer the TotalDac, and I don't care if you do because it is all subjective. But I'm a reviewer and can pronounce some things better than others."). Over the weekend, Lavorgna made an unfunny video ridiculing Amir's measurement. Today he posted a "pet peeve" that transparently referred to criticism of the TotalDac and misattributed a sentiment to users of this forum. (I will not dignify either the video or the blog post with a link.)

The word on the news is "collusion".
 

PaulD

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2018
Messages
453
Likes
1,340
Location
Other
First, your end statement is wrong. I never said Amirm measurements were wrong.
Ok, apologies if I misrepresented you, that seemed to me to be what you were saying.

Now, I have spent time listening to music all my life.
I imagine we all have, I have been a professional musician and a professional engineer, like many here, for most of my life.

I did listen to the products I bought, as I do not rely on external reviews from hifi magazine. Neither do I believe that I should select an audio component based only on measurements.
Ok, but that is what you believe, and this is about evidence, not belief.

I did listen carefully to the products I chose. At the end of the day I prefer TotalDac so far. I hope I didn’t hurt anyone as it seems it is the case.
No, I do not think you hurt anyone, i'm glad you are happy, but it is a personal preference (based on understandable bias), not a decision based on objective evidence. As I said before, that's fine, but acknowledge it for what it is, and it's largely irrelevant to this thread.

My occupation is not in permanent blind testing neither in measurements but in enjoying the music. Which I do with TotalDac, Chord H2 and RME - and even more with Mozart, Mahler, Schubert and many others.
My occupation has been in music all my life in one way or another. I also enjoy music, but that often is not the same as the performance of the reproduction system. I have enjoyed music on terrible audio systems and still do, the music is not the same as the reproduction of it, and I think this line of argument is off topic for the thread so I will stop it there.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,381
Location
Seattle Area
Hi Amir,

How is this DAC any different than your Mark Levinson amps?
One is a DAC, the other is an amplifier. :D

For those not paying attention, allow me to clarify.

Here we have a DAC which is said to be overpriced, measures poorly, but has positive subjective reviews/feedback from reviewers/customers. For these reasons, it is criticized here.

Amir owns overpriced ($50k!) Mark Levinson mono block amps, which measure poorly, and have received negative subjective reviews/feedback.

Yet, Amir has stated on numerous occasions how much joy his system brings him, despite the poor measurements, ridiculously high price and negative subjective feedback.

There seems to be some inconsistency here.

Note: Please do not misinterpret or misrepresent my post as a defense of this DAC or critique of the measurements, that’s clearly not the point being made.
There is no inconsistency here. The Mark Levinson is not my recommended list for any of you to buy. So in that regard, it is the same as this DAC. If you ask me to recommend an amp, I would say buy Hypex NC400, Unifi or Benchmark AHB2. No Mark Levinson is on that list, mine or any other model.

Your characterization of my amplifier are incorrect though. My amp produces 1,000 watts/channel. My speakers are inefficient and in a very large space. I tested the speakers against a number of lower powered amps and in all cases I would run out of amplification at max power. As most of you know, my rule about amplification is to have more power than you ever need as amps get ugly when they limit.

JA tested the amp in stereophile. Here is his summary: https://www.stereophile.com/content...erence-monoblock-power-amplifier-measurements

1564459308138.png


1212ML53fig05.jpg


No amp I have tested comes close to this level of power.

JA's subjective views were guarded:

1564459419802.png


The superb control of woofers is why I purchased it after testing it against a number of other amps we had on hand (sign of more than adequate power). Yes, what he giveth, he taketh back at the end. Good news is that subjective reviews are dime a dozen and one can shop for another one in the form of Robert Harley: https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/mark-levinson-no53-monoblock-power-amplifier-tas-213-1/

1564459540332.png


As to the cost, yes, it is expensive. More than expensive. But for twice as much money as this DAC, it comes in an enclosure clocking at 135 pounds or 61 kilograms. There is no stamped sheet metal. What is inside it is incredible compared to what comes in the totaldac d1-six:

1212levin.side.jpg


You could print this picture, put it on the wall and enjoy it as much as listening to the thing. :D With totaldac, I would have to hide it when my high-end friends come over.

When you buy a high-end product, it better give you the feeling that it is high-end. And the Mark Levinson amp does that. It was one of the attractions for me.

Anyway, hopefully we are done with clouding the discussion this way.
 

boXem

Major Contributor
Audio Company
Joined
Jun 19, 2019
Messages
2,014
Likes
4,852
Location
Europe
Why does this nice electroporn reminds me my childhood?
Ah, yes!
Campingaz_cartouches.jpg

(these are small butane bottles that anybody going for camping would have in the car for cooking, lightning,...)
 

Attachments

  • Campingaz_cartouches.jpg
    Campingaz_cartouches.jpg
    236.4 KB · Views: 89
Top Bottom