Using an 8 channel DAC with a 2 channel system?

[rask33]

Is this a stupid idea? I don't know if the disparity means I will merely be under utilizing the DAC in a 2.1 system or if it means I will be under utilizing the 2.1 system in respect to the DAC. I like to use headphones sometimes, but the system is primarily 2.1.

 

[staticV3]

Is this a stupid idea?

If you have the DAC already, then no absolutely not.
The DAC will work perfectly fine, even if you use just 25% of its output channels.

If you're contemplating buying an 8ch DAC even though you'll never actually use those channels, then I would say yes. Seems like a waste of resources and money.

 

[fpitas]

The only way I can see it being particularly useful is to create an active system. A friend uses an 8 ch DAC that way, with outputs to individual amps for each driver of his 2 ch system.

 

[rask33]

If you have the DAC already, then no absolutely not.
The DAC will work perfectly fine, even if you use just 25% of its output channels.

If you're contemplating buying an 8ch DAC even though you'll never actually use those channels, then I would say yes. Seems like a waste of resources and money.

I would definitely utilize the headphone jack, I just don't want to compromise the main system.

The DAC will work perfectly fine, even if you use just 25% of its output channels.

Ok thanks, because I know ESS makes 2 channel DACs as well and I'm not knowledgeable enough to know whether it's just a matter of being cost effective or not.

 

[rask33]

The only way I can see it being particularly useful is to create an active system. A friend uses an 8 ch DAC that way, with outputs to individual amps for each driver of his 2 ch system.

I don't know what you mean by active but it would go PC -> DAC -> Pre -> miniDSP -> Power. Sub to pre and two speakers to power.

 

[fpitas]

I don't know what you mean by active but it would go PC -> DAC -> Pre -> miniDSP -> Power. Sub to pre and two speakers to power.

An active system uses a crossover at line level, before any power amplification. Here's an article that describes the concept:

Active Vs. Passive Crossovers

Active Vs. Passive Crossovers - what are the factors that make active the only choice for serious hi-fi? Driver control is not well understood, but perhaps this article will help.

sound-au.com

It's not as easy as it sounds, but offers some real advantages.

 

[staticV3]

it would go PC -> DAC -> Pre -> miniDSP -> Power. Sub to pre and two speakers to power.

Does the miniDSP have digital inputs as well? If so, then you're be better off using those. Even the world's best digital to analog converter can't beat no conversion at all.

 

[rask33]

Does the miniDSP have digital inputs as well? If so, then you're be better off using those. Even the world's best digital to analog converter can't beat no conversion at all.

Yes it does. You're saying just use that instead of the DAC?

An active system uses a crossover at line level, before any power amplification. Here's an article that describes the concept:

Active Vs. Passive Crossovers

Active Vs. Passive Crossovers - what are the factors that make active the only choice for serious hi-fi? Driver control is not well understood, but perhaps this article will help.

sound-au.com

It's not as easy as it sounds, but offers some real advantages.

This is definitely interesting, but likely beyond utility for me with my limited experience.

 

[staticV3]

Yes it does. You're saying just use that instead of the DAC?

Yes. The fewer components in your chain, the better.
All you're doing by going PC->DAC->Preamp->miniDSP ADC->miniDSP DSP instead of PC->miniDSP DSP is degrading the signal. You gain nothing.