So level matching then?
-
Welcome to ASR. 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!
Will the AK4499EX successor come out in 2025?
- Thread starter tyanlion
- Start date
- Thread Starter
- #62
Well I told them to make sure everything was the same sound wise apart from the dac, sounded leveled to me. They ran it through the amp which had the same level db the whole time
Randyman...
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2023
- Messages
- 335
- Likes
- 366
- Thread Starter
- #64
lolDoesn't "sound" like it
It’s not lol. It means your little experiment was totally pointless.
- Thread Starter
- #66
Lol. Yes I am sure it doesn't hit your high and mighty standards.
It’s not a high standard. Proper level matching is the bare minimum that is needed for such tests. This has been proven time and time again: level differences trump any other audible differences in these devices by a wide margin.
oleg87
Addicted to Fun and Learning
If basic controls are "high and mighty standards" you might be on the wrong forum
Randyman...
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2023
- Messages
- 335
- Likes
- 366
It is the very-fallible human perceptions that get fooled with minute level mis-matches - even in the .5dB range. There is nothing "wrong" with your method of auditioning DAC's - it just wasn't level matched for the best chance of being totally valid w/o a subconscious volume bias (louder is almost always experienced as being better - even if you think {are told} the levels are identical).
Not really high and mighty .
We have this tread where all DAC's sound diffrent fud eventually ends up
www.audiosciencereview.com
tldr .
Of course a really badly designed DAC can potentially sound different .
But if you in any experiment managed to get two reasonable well designed DAC's to sound different . You made an experimental error it's a simple as that .
They do not sound different . its like being "the one" in the matrix if you actually heard differences, not very likely .
Main obstacles , sighted not double blind, not close enough level match ( use volt meter not spl meter acoustically ) and picked different filters , for some reason both ESS and AKM provides some filters that's not transparent and does not fulfill the requirements of the sample theorem.
We have this tread where all DAC's sound diffrent fud eventually ends up
How can DAC's have a SOUND SIGNATURE if they measure as transparent?
I know there are people out there that think cables affect sound, which is much worse, but there really is no response to something like that, but just to smile and nod. But what about people who talk about DACS as if they were headphone drivers or speakers, and talk about the SOUNDSTAGE...
www.audiosciencereview.com
tldr .
Of course a really badly designed DAC can potentially sound different .
But if you in any experiment managed to get two reasonable well designed DAC's to sound different . You made an experimental error it's a simple as that .
They do not sound different . its like being "the one" in the matrix if you actually heard differences, not very likely .
Main obstacles , sighted not double blind, not close enough level match ( use volt meter not spl meter acoustically ) and picked different filters , for some reason both ESS and AKM provides some filters that's not transparent and does not fulfill the requirements of the sample theorem.
It’s not about justifying the question. Anyone can ask almost anything they like. This is about understanding the context of the question. Meanwhile, the real question was the very first sentence of the OP:
And this is what most sensible answers focuses on and rightfully concluded that it’s basically never a good time to invest in a high-end DAC, because it’s been a solved problem for decades. So this:
Isn’t off-topic at all. Because the belief that DACs sound different is the whole reason why the question came up in the first place.
nanook
Senior Member
It's quite obvious that no one reading this thread knows - including you.
AKM would be stupid to share rumours about a new top-of-the-line chip as this would screw up their current sales and make their customers really unhappy because their products will start to gather dust.
I for one am fed up - people here try to help you get the optimum sound for little money and you just keep complaining that we don't know what AKM is going to do.
And yes, I don't know either.
nanook
Senior Member
I just can emphasise the argument of proper level matching. 0.2dB louder does not sound louder - it just sounds a little better, punchier, etc.
For those interested:
Master Thread: Are measurements Everything or Nothing?
Nowadays you are more likely to get: 'Duck Dunn's bass took me back to a time when I was seventeen, lounging on the porch with the smell of fresh bread baking wafting lazily out of the kitchen window.' Agreed. Plenty of subjective reviewing is awful. Among my biggest pet peeves is when a...
www.audiosciencereview.com
Jimster480
Major Contributor
Found this thread in a web search... not sure why there would even need to be a new chip released this year.... While they certainly tend to release new chips every 3 years.... the 4499EX was just a redone 4499 from 2019 to fix some issues.
ESS has a much more aggressive release schedule. AK tends to release when there are optimizations.
ESS has a much more aggressive release schedule. AK tends to release when there are optimizations.
better get last generations chip in a modern dac. It’s more likely that the manufacturers are actually using most of it’s features and implement some of them properly.
Broken filters , DSD not really working as intended.. looking at topping and SMSL especially
Broken filters , DSD not really working as intended.. looking at topping and SMSL especially
Roland68
Major Contributor
What will the next generation of DAC chips bring?
The last two generations no longer offered any real advantage.
The DAC at the top of the current Sinad list is still equipped with an ES9038Pro, not a 9039. One Sinad behind is the Topping E70 with the older and smaller ES9028Pro. And below that, there are some current DACs with the latest flagship DAC chips.
But when a new DAC chip is introduced, you might want to buy one of the DACs released 2-3 months later? How can high-quality development and testing take place in such a short period of time? Quite simply, it's completely ignored!
The buyers are the beta testers, and firmware updates that still contain bugs are only released if too many customers return the device; otherwise, the manufacturer saves the effort.
Developers typically need about a year to familiarize themselves with a new DAC chip and get to grips with it. Smart developers learn the most from faulty devices on the market and from users' experiences with them.
Topping has been bringing its DACs to market later than other manufacturers for some time now, investing significantly more time in development.
Jimster480
Major Contributor
Yep, there won't be any real advancements from here I don't see.... we have already far passed the threshold of audibility.
nanook
Senior Member
Sure, if it's about audibie differences all modern top-of-the-line DAC chips have long passed this border - and most consumer DAC chips as well.
If you are using DAC and ADC for audio measurements you want to have a performance vastly beyond audibility.
- The "grass" (non harmonic spurs) in the spectrum that changes with level has been annoying.
- Harmonic distribution as a function of level (in the end this popped up as the "ESD-hump" in the IMD plots and is visible in THD vs. level plots as well) was also something that is annoying when measuring serious audio gear.
According to my measurements the ES9039q2m still shows some hump (THD vs. level) if you dig into the noise floor, whereas the ES9039pro did not show this increase in harmonics above ca -40dBFS.
The measurements Archimago showed comparing ES9038q2m and ES9039q2m also indicate a remarkable step forward.
The AK4493S (measured in a small USB bus-powered device, PO100AK) did not show a hump at intermediate level as well - it might have been hidden in the noise floor, so I'd be curious to see a THD - level plot of a unit with double AK4493S, e.g. the SMSL D6.
We will see which chips Audio Precision will use for their Audio Analysers when they run out of stock - afaik they use AKM ADC chips.
Of course engineers try to optimize their designs and marketing is demanding a new product every couple of years. The advancing technology nodes allow better matching of structures and companies may even save production cost when moving on.
The ASR is a fairly down-to-earth forum and yet we are fueling the "SINAD-race", even though the DACs have reached an incredible performance.
In other words I do appreciate the effort the companies take when pushing the limits and there are good reasons beyond audibility.
Sure, the next step will make more use of the high-scale integration and chips will eventually have fast roll-off filters for the higher sampling rates (ESS already has) and digital filtering such that PEQ and crossovers or crossfeed do not even need an additional uC. ESS has just started a product line.
Infineon had a PWM power amplifier chip in a small package ca. 13 years ago. It was implemented in a 130nm CMOS technology that includes power devices. It had 2 channels with differential outputs capable to drive 2+1. Each of the 3 resulting channels had a couple of IIR filters and even some FIR capability to allow independent phase alignment. The chip used a feedforward compensation scheme to minimize the effect of transient supply voltage variation.
They shelved this development for a while - I guess the market was not yet appreciating such a feature set - and other products were cheaper.
There has been huge progress in the consumer segment like soundbars and portable speakers. Speaker arrays allowing beam forming etc., so knowhow, technology and chips for this market segment are available.
That said I'm expecting more features being integrated in future DAC chips, but of course this affects the development effort for those implementing these chips in their products.
Manufacturers of chips may even hesitate to integrate features like these in their top-of-the-line products because they fear this might put off the high end freaks (purity is important in this scene) and top notch manufacturers like RME do signal processing with specialized chips anyway.
If you are using DAC and ADC for audio measurements you want to have a performance vastly beyond audibility.
- The "grass" (non harmonic spurs) in the spectrum that changes with level has been annoying.
- Harmonic distribution as a function of level (in the end this popped up as the "ESD-hump" in the IMD plots and is visible in THD vs. level plots as well) was also something that is annoying when measuring serious audio gear.
According to my measurements the ES9039q2m still shows some hump (THD vs. level) if you dig into the noise floor, whereas the ES9039pro did not show this increase in harmonics above ca -40dBFS.
The measurements Archimago showed comparing ES9038q2m and ES9039q2m also indicate a remarkable step forward.
The AK4493S (measured in a small USB bus-powered device, PO100AK) did not show a hump at intermediate level as well - it might have been hidden in the noise floor, so I'd be curious to see a THD - level plot of a unit with double AK4493S, e.g. the SMSL D6.
We will see which chips Audio Precision will use for their Audio Analysers when they run out of stock - afaik they use AKM ADC chips.
Of course engineers try to optimize their designs and marketing is demanding a new product every couple of years. The advancing technology nodes allow better matching of structures and companies may even save production cost when moving on.
The ASR is a fairly down-to-earth forum and yet we are fueling the "SINAD-race", even though the DACs have reached an incredible performance.
In other words I do appreciate the effort the companies take when pushing the limits and there are good reasons beyond audibility.
Sure, the next step will make more use of the high-scale integration and chips will eventually have fast roll-off filters for the higher sampling rates (ESS already has) and digital filtering such that PEQ and crossovers or crossfeed do not even need an additional uC. ESS has just started a product line.
Infineon had a PWM power amplifier chip in a small package ca. 13 years ago. It was implemented in a 130nm CMOS technology that includes power devices. It had 2 channels with differential outputs capable to drive 2+1. Each of the 3 resulting channels had a couple of IIR filters and even some FIR capability to allow independent phase alignment. The chip used a feedforward compensation scheme to minimize the effect of transient supply voltage variation.
They shelved this development for a while - I guess the market was not yet appreciating such a feature set - and other products were cheaper.
There has been huge progress in the consumer segment like soundbars and portable speakers. Speaker arrays allowing beam forming etc., so knowhow, technology and chips for this market segment are available.
That said I'm expecting more features being integrated in future DAC chips, but of course this affects the development effort for those implementing these chips in their products.
Manufacturers of chips may even hesitate to integrate features like these in their top-of-the-line products because they fear this might put off the high end freaks (purity is important in this scene) and top notch manufacturers like RME do signal processing with specialized chips anyway.
I own an SMSL D400 PRO that features the latest AKM chipset, that is Ak4191+AK4499EX.
As inexpensive as It IS, it's the DAC I like the most of all the ones I've ever had. IS It transparent enough? I don't know.
Is the DAC IC with the best lab measurements? I don't know.
What I do know IS that I enjoy its sound, and a new DAC IC from AKM or any other brand that can measures better Won't make me buy a new DAC as I'm 51 years old and a new DAC IC with 3 or 5 dB's more of Signal to noise ratio or dinamic range, at my age, I won't notice It. I think even a pair of 20 years old ears Will notice It.
My advice, live the present, test the current D/A converters available that you think might suit your tastes, and buy. Otherwise, this could turn into and endless Game of DAC's and other components buying and swapping.
As inexpensive as It IS, it's the DAC I like the most of all the ones I've ever had. IS It transparent enough? I don't know.
Is the DAC IC with the best lab measurements? I don't know.
What I do know IS that I enjoy its sound, and a new DAC IC from AKM or any other brand that can measures better Won't make me buy a new DAC as I'm 51 years old and a new DAC IC with 3 or 5 dB's more of Signal to noise ratio or dinamic range, at my age, I won't notice It. I think even a pair of 20 years old ears Will notice It.
My advice, live the present, test the current D/A converters available that you think might suit your tastes, and buy. Otherwise, this could turn into and endless Game of DAC's and other components buying and swapping.
