Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Toward higher end DACs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Toward higher end DACs - Page 6

post #76 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverlordXenu View Post
The transport doesn't matter
tell that to the engineers at esoteric or the many companies that want to license out the patented esoteric drive.
post #77 of 142
My experience is that transports can make a big difference - but it has to be a especially well designed and mated transport/dac. Otherwise there isn't much of a difference/noticeable difference.

Neil
post #78 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by neilvg View Post
My experience is that transports can make a big difference - but it has to be a especially well designed and mated transport/dac. Otherwise there isn't much of a difference/noticeable difference.

Neil
I'll go along with that.
My old Bel Canto DAC2 used the same type of "jitter reduction" circuit that's in the Benchmark DAC1. That didn't stop the DAC sounding substantially better when given an improved transport, and is the reason why I started with a Pioneer DVD player as transport and moved to a clock modded Meridian 500 with improved PSU cable and supports.
post #79 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by facelvega View Post
After all, the quality of the analog signal out is what all this trouble is about in the first place.

Exactly, it doesn't mater how little jitter there is if you have an opamp analog stage you basically have a glorified CMOY in your signal path.

Thats why I could never understand why people will put a good discrete amplifier after something like a Lavry or Dac1.

It explains why tube head amps are so well received now days; the tube's harmonic distortion masks the "cmoy" in their DAC. Nothing wrong with that
but the sound should be much improved with a good analog stage

This is why people love Oritek or Zapfilter analog stages so much, no more CMOY! However I am not convinced in the passive I/V used on these, I think the Borbeloy or Pass D1 is better for a current out DAC. Though they are perfect for a voltage out DAC chip.
post #80 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by regal View Post
Exactly, it doesn't mater how little jitter there is if you have an opamp analog stage you basically have a glorified CMOY in your signal path.

Thats why I could never understand why people will put a good discrete amplifier after something like a Lavry or Dac1.

It explains why tube head amps are so well received now days; the tube's harmonic distortion masks the "cmoy" in their DAC. Nothing wrong with that
but the sound should be much improved with a good analog stage

This is why people love Oritek or Zapfilter analog stages so much, no more CMOY! However I am not convinced in the passive I/V used on these, I think the Borbeloy or Pass D1 is better for a current out DAC. Though they are perfect for a voltage out DAC chip.
Well, opamps can be made to sound pretty good, and the potential glorifications of the cmoy circuit have come a long way since good ol' Chu Moy got us started, and it's not so hard on the chip to produce a line out as to drive a load, but yes, point taken.

But come to think of it, what would you say about the more expensive opamp-based amps, like the Corda Opera? Overpriced ripoff or proof that opamp output stages can perform to a high level?
post #81 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by facelvega View Post
But come to think of it, what would you say about the more expensive opamp-based amps, like the Corda Opera? Overpriced ripoff or proof that opamp output stages can perform to a high level?

I'de say nothing like that is available in a DAC.
post #82 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roam View Post

A transport reads the bits off the disc. Full stop. End of story. It does not upsample, oversample, nor resample, all that is done by the DAC.
It does error correction though. The worse the signal recovery is from the CD surface, the more error correction has to be done. This corrected signal will, with all its errors, be decoded by the DAC. So a good transport can have a bigger influence than any amount of sampling or re-clocking.
post #83 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by regal View Post
Exactly, it doesn't mater how little jitter there is if you have an opamp analog stage you basically have a glorified CMOY in your signal path.
There's just so much wrong with that statement that I don't even know where to begin.
post #84 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by n_maher View Post
There's just so much wrong with that statement that I don't even know where to begin.

I didn't mean all opamps output stages, but if you look at most of what's out there in the under $2000 price range I stand by my statement.

For my money spending $1000 for a DAC I don't want some $25 opamp analog stage. And that it what I see on the majority of DAC's these days.
post #85 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by regal View Post
For my money spending $1000 for a DAC I don't want some $25 opamp analog stage. And that it what I see on the majority of DAC's these days.
And I'd say that I'll let my ears be at least part of the judge and not dismiss what may or may not sound good solely based whether or not something uses an opamp in it's output stage. There are plenty of very, very good sounding devices that use IC's instead of discrete circuits. It might be argued that it's harder to properly implement a discrete output stage than one that uses an integrated circuit. Examples might include a lot of the top Wadia and Meridian players that aren't exactly known for sounding like a Cmoy and use IC's in their output stage.

So my advice - avoid broad sweeping generalizations that at best are only right part of the time.
post #86 of 142
I'de argue that a good cmoy sounds as good as a Wadia or Meridian.

Notice I never said that a Cmoy sounds bad. I have heard some amazing implementations.

However I think most who prefer a good discrete amp would prefer a good discrete analog stage in their DAC.

Which is why I don't understand the quest for expensive opamp free amps while keeping an opamp DAC in the signal path. Which is so common these days.
post #87 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by regal View Post
I'de argue that a good cmoy sounds as good as a Wadia or Meridian.
Please list the Wadias and Meridians that you've heard.

Quote:
Which is why I don't understand the quest for expensive opamp free amps while keeping an opamp DAC in the signal path. Which is so common these days.
You still haven't explained why discrete would be any better or what makes an opamp inherently worse.
post #88 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by n_maher View Post

You still haven't explained why discrete would be any better or what makes an opamp inherently worse.

all said was some people prefer discrete analog equipment.

We need more options for those of us with that preference.

Better/Worse, I'm not touching that with a 10 foot pole. People have preferences when it comes to listening music. My ears are no better than anyone else's, I just have preferences in sonic signatures and would like to see more options for DAC's.
post #89 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by regal View Post
I just have preferences in sonic signatures and would like to see more options for DAC's.
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f7/all...an-buy-197674/
post #90 of 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by granodemostasa View Post
I love that thread... Thanks for keeping it updated, granodemostasa.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Toward higher end DACs