SMSL SU-8 Version 2 Balanced DAC

[ColinMacLaren]

Has anyone played with the little sounding options the DAC provides? What is the difference between the "rich" and the "Tube" EQ setting. Wahts the difference between "Standard" and "Original".

 

[Ultrasonic]

Has anyone played with the little sounding options the DAC provides? What is the difference between the "rich" and the "Tube" EQ setting. Wahts the difference between "Standard" and "Original".

They add various amounts of harmonic distortion. Ultimately you just have to try them and see what you think.

Edit: this post has some measurements of what the effects are:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ments-of-smsl-su-8-dac.3778/page-6#post-91324

 

[Pulkass]

Funny how a chip can or not reproduce a 'tube' sound. Two of my dac s have tube output stage, marvellous, real tubes,

 

[Ultrasonic]

Funny how a chip can or not reproduce a 'tube' sound. Two of my dac s have tube output stage, marvellous, real tubes,

Personally I've always found the idea of adding tubes to a DAC somewhat comical but ultimately musical enjoyment should be the real goal (outside of recording studios) and so if people like this then great.

 

[Pulkass]

In fact among the best dacs in the world, www.lampizator.com

 

[badyard]

Funny how a chip can or not reproduce a 'tube' sound. Two of my dac s have tube output stage, marvellous, real tubes,

While some more "amateurish" music can greatly benefit from tubes, I think most good piece of music out there have already that "tube sound" due to the different tube stages in the tracking, mixing and/or mastering stages of the production.
And remember that serious mixing and mastering engineers are paid shit loads of money to make a song sound good in every aspect, and most of the times this imply tube stages in a way or another.
And ultimately nowadays they're all reproducing their work through solid state gear for reference.

hence I like to have my audio chain transparent enough from source to power amp, and then let the headphones or speakers dictate the sound by choosing those that are sounding smooth to my ears without fatigue.

 

[Pulkass]

Pure chip sound can be very harsh, very blocky, very digital, music per second is analogic, late dacs do sound smoother, l love tube sound not because l seek smoothness, on the contrary, tube have an openess on higher frequencies,

 

[Killingbeans]

Pure chip sound can be very harsh, very blocky, very digital

I'm sorry, but that's just complete nonsense. The end result is always an analog waveform. Any notion of "blockiness" comes from the usual illustrations of how DA conversion works. It has nothing to with what hits your ears. If there was a difference it would be in the form of noise or distortion.

music per second is analogic, late dacs do sound smoother, l love tube sound not because l seek smoothness, on the contrary, tube have an openess on higher frequencies,

I'm no expert on tubes (..far from), but I'd bet it's actually the smoothness (caused by harmonic distortion?) that gives you the perception of "openess on higher frequencies". That is presuming there's a difference to begin with.

 

[badyard]

Pure chip sound can be very harsh, very blocky, very digital, music per second is analogic, late dacs do sound smoother, l love tube sound not because l seek smoothness, on the contrary, tube have an openess on higher frequencies,

Dude, nowadays music is digital, from the recording process to the mastering process there are at least a few AD-DA conversions. You are talking nonsense.

 

[Killingbeans]

In fact among the best dacs in the world, www.lampizator.com

I think that's highly dependent on how you define "fact" and "best"

 

[Ultrasonic]

Pure chip sound can be very harsh, very blocky, very digital, music per second is analogic, late dacs do sound smoother, l love tube sound not because l seek smoothness, on the contrary, tube have an openess on higher frequencies,

If you enjoy the sound of tubes then that's perfectly fine but that stuff about 'blocky, very digital' sound is just nonsense. (There are example output waveforms at the start of the thread if this helps at all.)

Adding tubes into the mix adds harmonic distortion, which means the output waveforms look less like the original waveform, not more so. Which is OK if you like the result but don't try to argue this somehow 'fixes' flaws in a solid-state DAC to give a result closer to the intended original.

If you do like tubes though then I'm not really sure the DAC section of this forum is a good place for you to be basing purchasing decisions on. A DAC with a tube output stage would score very poorly in terms of SINAD, but you might prefer it to ones that are rated highly here.

 

[Pulkass]

Do we have a place here to talk of a sounding apparatus, 'as it is ' in the room, not considering specs????

 

[Killingbeans]

Yes, there's a whole subsection for that: Psychoacoustics: Science of How We Hear

 

[Pulkass]

If you enjoy the sound of tubes then that's perfectly fine but that stuff about 'blocky, very digital' sound is just nonsense. (There are example output waveforms at the start of the thread if this helps at all.)

Adding tubes into the mix adds harmonic distortion, which means the output waveforms look less like the original waveform, not more so. Which is OK if you like the result but don't try to argue this somehow 'fixes' flaws in a solid-state DAC to give a result closer to the intended original.

If you do like tubes though then I'm not really sure the DAC section of this forum is a good place for you to be basing purchasing decisions on. A DAC with a tube output stage would score very poorly in terms of SINAD, but you might prefer it to ones that are rated highly here.

My Polish tube and DAC world class guru answered : For the record - nothing is as pure and beautiful as dac chip sound directly at the source on chip legs. So hope you ll be satisfied. Cheers

 

[Ultrasonic]

My Polish tube and DAC world class guru answered : For the record - nothing is as pure and beautiful as dac chip sound directly at the source on chip legs. So hope you ll be satisfied. Cheers

So we agree then .

My post was genuinely to help you by the way. In that I didn't want you to end up spending money in a way you'd regret. I'm not trying to get rid of you but this is the most measurement-focused audio forum I know of so you might be better off exploring some others as well.

I will comment on what I think of the sound of the SU-8 in time but right now I've been a 'bad scientist' and changed too many variables at once to distinguish the DAC change from other factors.

 

[Killingbeans]

My Polish tube and DAC world class guru answered : For the record - nothing is as pure and beautiful as dac chip sound directly at the source on chip legs.

What does that have to do with opamp vs. tube? Most DAC chips work as current sources and will not give you anything "pure and beautiful" if you utilize the output directly. Even the chips (ESS for instance) that can also work in voltage mode will take a big performance hit if you do so.

Or are you saying that a tube I/V stage will automatically add less nonlinearities and distortion to the signal than an opamp based one?

BTW, I'm not trying to start a war here. I'm just genuinely confused

 

[Pulkass]

I just reported his words. www.lampizator.com. I cannot afford his 5000 u$d DACs!!!

 

[Ultrasonic]

I just reported his words. www.lampizator.com. I cannot afford his 5000 u$d DACs!!!

If you ever did have $5k to spend I'd personally suggest you spent it (or more) on better speakers instead.

(I've not heard the DACs in question though.)

 

[Killingbeans]

I just reported his words. www.lampizator.com. I cannot afford his 5000 u$d DACs!!!

Don't believe words from the horse's mouth if the horse is trying to sell you a $5000 DAC. Use your brain instead

 

[badyard]

Don't get lampizated by their words