Trying to understand this

[cd45123]

Hi All,

New to the forum and have read some of the DAC threads, but trying to get a grasp on DAC measurements.

My understanding is all DACs sound the same. However is it true that DACs which are in the top tier are simply measuring better and therefore are the most transparent DACs? The THD is audible for DACs measuring at the mid and bottom tiers,

If that is true, then let’s say a Mola Mola Tambaqui should be indistinguishable from a Matrix Element X?

This is another thing I’m trying to understand. Manufacturers always say that it isn’t the DAC chip, it’s how the chip is implemented that matters. Does anyone know what that actually entails? What is good implementation vs bad implementation?

If digital is just 1s and 0s, are there any differences occurring in the analogue stage. I hear this too from manufacturers that say there was a greatly improved analog stage.

I’m willing to accept that most of the manufacturers claims are bs. Amps seem to have become commoditized now with Hypex and Purifi, but will DACs follow suit.

 

[Jimbob54]

Fill your boots. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-a-dac-has-a-sound-signature.9245/post-486555

2 things to remember- "transparency" is a fuzzy concept and the job of a DAC is only to convert digital signals to analog. There is little scope in that definition for adding or subtracting from that sound. A "bad" DAC or one designed intentionally to have a "sound" many would argue is not fulfilling its core job well.

 

[Purité Audio]

Yes no difference in Sq between Tambaqui and here Soncoz,Benchmark,RME, just features, the more interesting question is how badly designed does the dac have to be before you can hear a difference.
Keith

 

[o7_brother]

Most of the DAC measurements here don't really matter. If you did a blind test comparing a DAC with 122 SINAD with a 90-something one, you would most likely hear no difference at all.

It may not always seem that way, but the point of this forum is not "buy the DAC with the best numbers" but "buy whatever fits your budget and has decent enough numbers".

If you're worried about distortion, the transducers are the weak link nowadays (headphones and speakers).

 

[BDWoody]

If you're worried about distortion, the transducers are the weak link nowadays (headphones and speakers).

Amen.

P.S: And the room... A little treatment can go a long way.

 

[solderdude]

Hi All,

New to the forum and have read some of the DAC threads, but trying to get a grasp on DAC measurements.

Welcome... plenty to read here.

My understanding is all DACs sound the same.

No they don't .

However is it true that DACs which are in the top tier are simply measuring better and therefore are the most transparent DACs?

Above a certain point when it concerns frequency response, distortion (various kinds) they are equally 'transparent' to us mortals. Just not to to people who can hear a gnat fart a mile away .

The THD is audible for DACs measuring at the mid and bottom tiers.

For the lower tier it might. It also depends on the type of distortion and what is causing it.

If that is true, then let’s say a Mola Mola Tambaqui should be indistinguishable from a Matrix Element X?

Well yes, but there is more than sound quality alone. connectivity, format support, mains leakage, ease of operation, usage of quality components, looks/feel to name but a few.

This is another thing I’m trying to understand. Manufacturers always say that it isn’t the DAC chip, it’s how the chip is implemented that matters. Does anyone know what that actually entails? What is good implementation vs bad implementation?

It means that the DAC chip used isn't the only important component. There are heaps of components connected to it. receivers (USB, SPdif, optical) digital filtering, jitter reduction, clock circuits, analog post filtering, buffering (used components), power supply, PCB layout these all matter when it concerns measurable differences. Just look at measurements of various DACs using the same chip. All of them perform differently on the test bench.
Doesn't mean they are audible different though.

If digital is just 1s and 0s, are there any differences occurring in the analogue stage. I hear this too from manufacturers that say there was a greatly improved analog stage.

Well that kind of depends on the construction of the actual device and how well separated the digital and analog section are 'separated' (don't influence each other) and how much 'leakage' occurs and whether or not this can make it into the analog path.
Let's call this proper engineering.

I’m willing to accept that most of the manufacturers claims are bs. Amps seem to have become commoditized now with Hypex and Purifi, but will DACs follow suit.

DACs are commodotized already and manufacturers need to sell their products. After all people don't believe washing detergent manufacturers BS stories either but they need to do something to sell their stuff. Audio is exactly the same. Mostly BS swallowed by fanboys and regurgitated on several media.

 

[cd45123]

Thanks everyone for the replies. I really appreciate all the insight and time that you took to answer these questions.

 

[raistlin65]

It also depends on what you are using the DAC with. With closed headphones with a very clean amp, you would likely need a higher SINAD than with a DAC used in a speaker setup. Speaker setups generally have some amount of room background noise which prevents hearing the low levels of noise that you might can with headphones.

In fact, I think this greatly contributes to the "all DACs sound the same" mantra. I remember a dozen years or so ago, many people over at AVS forum saying that most DACs sound the same. But they were talking about speaker setups. And then the headphone crowd tended to resist that notion a lot more. So naturally, there are more DACs that would sound the same with speaker setups than with headphones.

Also, the "all DACs sound the same" is a sweeping generalization that subjectivists use to discredit objective understanding of DACs. They claim that's what people like those of us at ASR believe, which as you now know is not true.

 

[Alexanderc]

Most of the DAC measurements here don't really matter. If you did a blind test comparing a DAC with 122 SINAD with a 90-something one, you would most likely hear no difference at all.

It may not always seem that way, but the point of this forum is not "buy the DAC with the best numbers" but "buy whatever fits your budget and has decent enough numbers".

If you're worried about distortion, the transducers are the weak link nowadays (headphones and speakers).

To the OP: this (above) is the way to approach DAC measurements on this site. The measurements here show which DACs (specifically DACs—you can’t necessarily extrapolate) are the best engineered. No one is making claims that the top DAC is the one that sounds the best.

It’s sort of like If you own a car that can go 100 mph and all you do is commute, why get a sports car? Because they’re fun/cool/interesting/well designed/well engineered. Same with DACs.

 

[weasels]

It may not always seem that way, but the point of this forum is not "buy the DAC with the best numbers" but "buy whatever fits your budget and has decent enough numbers".

Good advice for virtually any kind of purchasing decision.

 

[weasels]

It's also worthwhile taking a listening test to determine how much you personally can actually hear. No sense in paying for superior measurements if your ears can't hear it.

(I have the same philosophy for wine. Took a wine tasting course, discovered that I can tell the difference between a $10 bottle and a $30 bottle, but I can't tell the difference between a $30 bottle and a $100 bottle. Saves me a ton of money.)