Teardown of the Emotiva DC-1 DAC

[Xulonn]

If nothing else, I gave it a longer life. I junked the garbage electrolytic capacitors it came with. Sound is cleaner . Transparent is a meaningless audio reviewer term. Like saying a wine is oakey with hints of cherries and lemon.

You have much yet to learn, grasshopper. It looks like you are new to ASR and science as it applies to audio.

You stated that, in an apparently sighted and non-controlled comparison situation that defies know audio science, "The difference is immediately noticeable" when you changed the op-amps. If the sound did indeed change, you have altered the signal by adding "distortion" to an accurate, transparent device. And therefore the signal exiting the DAC is no longer "transparent" with respect to what it was upon entering the DAC and as a result, it sounds different to you.

Most of us who are objectivists with respect to audio differences perception use "transparent" to mean that a DAC or other component in the signal path neither adds nor subtracts from the signal. We know that if the signal doesn't change, the sound doesn't change. The term is sometimes used interchangeably with "accuracy", e.g., measured and documented accuracy - not what someone thinks they hear.

Here is an ASR thread with an interesting discussion of "transparency."

 

[Justamusicfan]

You have much yet to learn, grasshopper. It looks like you are new to ASR and science as it applies to audio.

You stated that, in an apparently sighted and non-controlled comparison situation that defies know audio science, "The difference is immediately noticeable" when you changed the op-amps. If the sound did indeed change, you have altered the signal by adding "distortion" to an accurate, transparent device. And therefore the signal exiting the DAC is no longer "transparent" with respect to what it was upon entering the DAC and as a result, it sounds different to you.

Most of us who are objectivists with respect to audio differences perception use "transparent" to mean that a DAC or other component in the signal path neither adds nor subtracts from the signal. We know that if the signal doesn't change, the sound doesn't change. The term is sometimes used interchangeably with "accuracy", e.g., measured and documented accuracy - not what someone thinks they hear.

Here is an ASR thread with an interesting discussion of "transparency."

ah it is one of those sites. Hmmmmm. It is a myth that an electronic gadget in the signal path can be completely “ transparent” grasshopper!

Seems you are the one who has much to
Learn. Having not heard nor “scientifically “ tested the unit you assume I have added “ distortion”. I find this humorous. this is an obviously unsupported and biased assumption.

a difference can be a rise in sound level, or a reduction of the noise floor. Granted I did not apply a meter if any kind to the unit either before or after, however, t assumption that any change equals distortion is silly.

then again anyone who decides what audio equipment to buy solely by some graph from a meter ....well..... never mind.

 

[Sal1950]

Maybe I should have replaced those no name electrolytic caps while I was in there.

If nothing else, I gave it a longer life. I junked the garbage electrolytic capacitors it came with.

So which was it, did you or didn't you replace the cap's???

Transparent is a meaningless audio reviewer term. Like saying a wine is oakey with hints of cherries and leman.

Actually exactly the opposite. It's says that the device has added no colorations or flavors of it's own. I rarely if ever have heard an audio "reviewer" use the term.
But I'm glad your satisfied with the results of your mods.

 

[Xulonn]

ah it is one of those sites. Hmmmmm. It is a myth that an electronic gadget in the signal path can be completely “ transparent” grasshopper!
...blah, blah, blah...
then again anyone who decides what audio equipment to buy solely by some graph from a meter ....well..... never mind.

LOL...electronics cannot be transparent? I guess that you havent read today's "UpTone Audio EtherREGEN Switch Review" That piece of snake oil is unintentionally the most transparent audio component I have ever seen measured!

Resorting to straw-men, non-sequiturs, and downright b.s. doesn't help your case. And you are utterly and completely off-base and clueless about my audio gear buying decisions, a complicated process about which clues are scattered amongst my many posts here at ASR.

Regarding my critisicm of your purely subjective comments, you said that "The difference is immediately noticeable [in your non-level matched sighted listening sessions] and eliminates any complaint of the DAC sounding “lean” and "The sound is cleaner." Does not "cleaner" mean "less distortion." But how can it sound "cleaner" if the distortion is already at -111dB - below audibility?

You also mentioned that you replaced the crappy capacitors - a good move based on Amir's evaluation in this tear-down report, but unless the capacitors were actually already "defective" they should not change the sound. There were many other layout and assembly issues mentioned that you might have been able to modify or correct to improve as reliability and safety as well, but those were not audible issues. This DAC was a pretty good performer - just not well constructed and with some inferior components.

There are two types of people who arrive at ASR with a low level of technical audio knowledge about the science and engineering behind audio. First, there are those who come here to learn and secondly, those who appear to think they know more about audio science than the experts. Even after 60 + years of playing with audio, I have learned much here at ASR, and I learn more almost every day. This place can be humbling - even to knowledgeable and experienced amateurs.

When a person comes here and make unsupported, unverified subjectivist claims, they will often be challenged with reality-based corrections or criticism. Making such claims is clear evidence that a new visitor is likely unaware of the philosophy and mission of this forum website.

ASR members who know and understand science and engineering, and that includes an incredible group of experienced science and electronic engineering professionals from around the world, as well as those like me who have worked in "support roles" in science and engineering, will hold you to task, and ask you to confirm your claims with objective evidence.

 

[Justamusicfan]

LOL...electronics cannot be transparent? I guess that you havent read today's "UpTone Audio EtherREGEN Switch Review" That piece of snake oil is unintentionally the most transparent audio component I have ever seen measured!

Resorting to straw-men, non-sequiturs, and downright b.s. doesn't help your case. And you are utterly and completely off-base and clueless about my audio gear buying decisions, a complicated process about which clues are scattered amongst my many posts here at ASR.

Regarding my critisicm of your purely subjective comments, you said that "The difference is immediately noticeable [in your non-level matched sighted listening sessions] and eliminates any complaint of the DAC sounding “lean” and "The sound is cleaner." Does not "cleaner" mean "less distortion." But how can it sound "cleaner" if the distortion is already at -111dB - below audibility?

You also mentioned that you replaced the crappy capacitors - a good move based on Amir's evaluation in this tear-down report, but unless the capacitors were actually already "defective" they should not change the sound. There were many other layout and assembly issues mentioned that you might have been able to modify or correct to improve as reliability and safety as well, but those were not audible issues. This DAC was a pretty good performer - just not well constructed and with some inferior components.

There are two types of people who arrive at ASR with a low level of technical audio knowledge about the science and engineering behind audio. First, there are those who come here to learn and secondly, those who appear to think they know more about audio science than the experts. Even after 60 + years of playing with audio, I have learned much here at ASR, and I learn more almost every day. This place can be humbling - even to knowledgeable and experienced amateurs.

When a person comes here and make unsupported, unverified subjectivist claims, they will often be challenged with reality-based corrections or criticism. Making such claims is clear evidence that a new visitor is likely unaware of the philosophy and mission of this forum website.

ASR members who know and understand science and engineering, and that includes an incredible group of experienced science and electronic engineering professionals from around the world, as well as those like me who have worked in "support roles" in science and engineering, will hold you to task, and ask you to confirm your claims with objective evidence.

This is a very testy and pompous bunch here it seems.
I agree the caps could do nothing for the sound except possibly eliminate noise the cheap ones infused. I believe the op amps replacement increased the output level making is sound less “lean” as some have described it. Read the first reply to my post. It wasn’t me who initially got confrontational!

as happens all too often these days, you seem to have fallen victim to hypersensitivity. I never claimed superior technical knowledge, I only posted my observations which you attacked for some unknown reason.

 

[Thomas savage]

If nothing else, I gave it a longer life. I junked the garbage electrolytic capacitors it came with. Sound is cleaner . Transparent is a meaningless audio reviewer term. Like saying a wine is oakey with hints of cherries and leman.

Ah , we will just say ' cleaner ' then .

 

[Justamusicfan]

Ah , we will just say ' cleaner ' then .

Sure, that works. Not here to cause trouble.

 

[Justamusicfan]

So which was it, did you or didn't you replace the cap's???


Actually exactly the opposite. It's says that the device has added no colorations or flavors of it's own. I rarely if ever have heard an audio "reviewer" use the term.
But I'm glad your satisfied with the results of your mods.

I replaced the caps on a subsequent tear down.

 

[Justamusicfan]

Just curious, if we can’t trust our ears to tell us what sounds accurate or realistic, why are we in an “audio” hobby? Just seems counterintuitive to me. IDK just a thought.
Anyway I am not an anti science and I do enjoy learning how these interesting gadgets work.

 

[Xulonn]

This is a very testy and pompous bunch here it seems.

...I only posted my observations which you attacked for some unknown reason.

A testy bunch indeed, but no pomposity. @Justamusicfan , from the "nice-guy" nature of your posts, it appears that you are definitely not a troll, but just not used to the rough and tumble world of science and the way claims and conclusions are challenged, especially when such claims defy current scientific knowledge and evidence-based conclusions. Scientists have to have a thick skin to handle such an environment, but such a combative environment helps to assure that scientific findings are valid. I challenged your "observations" because they run counter to scientific knowledge.

You posted a personal opinion based a method of attempting to discern audio differences that has been proven by science to be completely unreliable. Being reasonably well-versed in science and rebutting subjective, unconfirmed claims does not make one "pompous."

Part of my basis for challenging you about op-amps and sound is the fact that @amirm , the owner of this website who is a digital audio engineering expert and a high-level "trained" listener, rolled op-amps and found that they made no difference in sound quality. Measurements showed very little difference - way below the threshold of audibility - in the audio signal. (See the quote below for his conclusions.)

Like anyone else with a decent knowledge of audio science and psycho-acoustics, I am aware that listening tests that are hours or days apart are completely useless for detecting sonic differences. You stated specifically that you "believe" you heard a difference, but science is not based on beliefs. You may have indeed "heard differences" because that's the way the human brain works. You can actually "hear" differences when the sound waves striking your tympanic membranes are identical. Don't feel bad that your brain fooled you - it happens to all of us. Many of us who have been around audio for decades have had our "beliefs" challenged now and then over the years, and learned to accept that we were occasionally wrong about some things.

I suspect that you came here because you discovered the old posting of the tear-down and analysis of the Emotiva DC-1 DAC, a component that you said that you bought used and have modified. The particular example that @amirm tore down apparently measured well and sounded fine, but had lousy and dangerous wiring layout, no proper chassis ground, poor hand soldering, and used cheap, inferior capacitors.

Regarding op-amps, although I am not an expert on them, I do read a lot at ASR. @amirm tested op-amp rolling with both a cheap and an expensive DAC, and inexpensive and expensive op-amps, and came to this conclusion:

Conclusions
A while ago I rolled the op-amps in the Topping D10 DAC with no resulting difference. The story repeats here with the much more expensive op-amp from Sparko's Lab showing no improvement whatsoever in the performance of Gustard H20. The H20 has excellent performance in balanced output and so it makes sense that this is all that it can produce even if the Sparko's lab is better...

So the message remains the same: don't waste your money on such "upgrades" unless they come with tangible, measurable performance improvement. Don't "trust your ears" because you don't know what they are hearing. All you know is what you are perceiving and after spending $160, you may talk yourself into these upgrades sounding better. They do not and cannot.

 

[Sal1950]

Just curious, if we can’t trust our ears to tell us what sounds accurate or realistic, why are we in an “audio” hobby?

I would think because first we love music, and second are searching for the best way to accurately reproduce what the engineers put on the source.
The problem you put forth is that that brain can't be trusted to give you correct conclusions without using extremely tight controls.
You didn't mention if you made any before and after measurements of how the DC-1 performed.
Then you would need to take a unmodified unit and introduce it into a DBT against your mod'ed one and see what the results would be.
You can't modify a component and then just listen to it and declare "it sounds much better".
The bias's are just too strong to "trust your ears" in a situation like this.

BTW, If you read the complete thread you may have learned that the DC-1 under Amir's microscope was my personal unit. It is still in my system and providing very pleasing sound whenever called upon.

 

[Justamusicfan]

A testy bunch indeed, but no pomposity. @Justamusicfan , from the "nice-guy" nature of your posts, it appears that you are definitely not a troll, but just not used to the rough and tumble world of science and the way claims and conclusions are challenged, especially when such claims defy current scientific knowledge and evidence-based conclusions. Scientists have to have a thick skin to handle such an environment, but such a combative environment helps to assure that scientific findings are valid. I challenged your "observations" because they run counter to scientific knowledge.

You posted a personal opinion based a method of attempting to discern audio differences that has been proven by science to be completely unreliable. Being reasonably well-versed in science and rebutting subjective, unconfirmed claims does not make one "pompous."

Part of my basis for challenging you about op-amps and sound is the fact that @amirm , the owner of this website who is a digital audio engineering expert and a high-level "trained" listener, rolled op-amps and found that they made no difference in sound quality. Measurements showed very little difference - way below the threshold of audibility - in the audio signal. (See the quote below for his conclusions.)

Like anyone else with a decent knowledge of audio science and psycho-acoustics, I am aware that listening tests that are hours or days apart are completely useless for detecting sonic differences. You stated specifically that you "believe" you heard a difference, but science is not based on beliefs. You may have indeed "heard differences" because that's the way the human brain works. You can actually "hear" differences when the sound waves striking your tympanic membranes are identical. Don't feel bad that your brain fooled you - it happens to all of us. Many of us who have been around audio for decades have had our "beliefs" challenged now and then over the years, and learned to accept that we were occasionally wrong about some things.

I suspect that you came here because you discovered the old posting of the tear-down and analysis of the Emotiva DC-1 DAC, a component that you said that you bought used and have modified. The particular example that @amirm tore down apparently measured well and sounded fine, but had lousy and dangerous wiring layout, no proper chassis ground, poor hand soldering, and used cheap, inferior capacitors.

Regarding op-amps, although I am not an expert on them, I do read a lot at ASR. @amirm tested op-amp rolling with both a cheap and an expensive DAC, and inexpensive and expensive op-amps, and came to this conclusion:

Meh to each his own. I don’t have a drive to prove I am right to people I don’t even know.

 

[Justamusicfan]

You can't modify a component and then just listen to it and declare "it sounds much better".

Well you obviously can, because I did!

Personally I like the risk involved in upgrading components and potentially producing copious amounts of smoke and profane language.

Cheers!

 

[Xulonn]

Just curious, if we can’t trust our ears to tell us what sounds accurate or realistic, why are we in an “audio” hobby? Just seems counter-intuitive to me

A valid question.

Hobbies don't require justification - just don't let them ruin your social life and finances.

My fascination with science and technology has lead me to spend a bit more than I should considering my budgets over the years, but not to the point of harm to my financial wellbeing. But to be honest, even today, I could enjoy music played on most any of the low to mid-range audio systems I have owned over the past 40 years.

So yes, there are indeed "counter-intuitive" aspects to audio as a hobby. I'm in it simply because I enjoy it. And I'm here at ASR because I like interacting with others - young and old - who share my combined interests of science, technology and music.

 

[Justamusicfan]

A valid question.

Hobbies don't require justification - just don't let them ruin your social life and finances.

My fascination with science and technology has lead me to spend a bit more than I should considering my budgets over the years, but not to the point of harm to my financial wellbeing. But to be honest, even today, I could enjoy music played on most any of the low to mid-range audio systems I have owned over the past 40 years.

So yes, there are indeed "counter-intuitive" aspects to audio as a hobby. I'm in it simply because I enjoy it. And I'm here at ASR because I like interacting with others - young and old - who share my combined interests of science, technology and music.

great answer!

 

[Xulonn]

great answer!

OMG - we found common ground!

(Don't give up on ASR just because a couple of us challenged you - lots of interesting stuff here - and interesting people from around the world.)

 

[Justamusicfan]

OMG - we found common ground!

(Don't give up on ASR just because a couple of us challenged you - lots of interesting stuff here - and interesting people from around the world.)

Challenged is an interesting take on it.
No worries, I’m not that easily dissuaded.

 

[pozz]

@Justamusicfan Please see these threads:

• https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ng-replacing-op-amps-in-topping-d10-dac.4576/
• https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...amps-in-gustard-h20-headphone-amplifier.7407/

 

[raindance]

I had a DC-1 for a few years. It wasn't lean, especially on headphones where it had a built in 2dB 20Hz boost which I assume was like a shelving filter with fairly wide impact in the LF. The user could defeat this. It only affected the headphone outs, not the line out. It sounded very good and I used the analog input to feed SACD audio from a player.

 

[dtaylo1066]

I have had the DC-1 for many years. I have no test equipment other than my ears and brain. I did not like its sound very much from the day I first plugged it in. I thought it would be a large upgrade from my earlier Emotiva DAC and it was not. To my ears it sounded worse -- in non-scientific terms it is bright and shrill at times, and fatiguing. Five songs and done. It is feeding via balanced out two Hypex UCD 180 amplifiers that we know measure quite well, and which do not sound fatiguing at all with with my older Emotiva DAC. So if my DC-1 is neutral, than I have had enough of neutral.

I was thinking of selling it since the unit is in mint condition and gets a good price on ebay, often more than $350. I thought with balanced out, an analog input, nice remote, and variable output I would love the DC-1. But in reality I desired a DC-1 divorce from day one.

But maybe I will try some op amps or new capacitors. But I think I may just buy a new DAC.

Anyone on this page who desires a DC-1 is welcome to make me an offer.