DAC testing, not much difference? - Page 3

From the quotes below I think the reasons why you do not hear much of a difference are -

1. That you are more interested in the music than the kit, so you do not listen analytically.

2. You prefer a more lush deeper sound for want of a better descriptive over a detailed and bright sound. The differences are in the detail, which to hear clearly you need them to be presented in what is often called a forward sound.

You have also realised that a lot of nonsense is spouted and over the top descriptives are used to try and differentiate between kit. I prefer detailed and bright, but I still do not find the huge differences in DACs that others seem to find.

One thing which helped me in evaluating audio kit was a switch box. Once you have a way to instantly switch between sources and thus avoid the whole audio memory thing, it is perfectly obvious that differences between items are *often* simply to do with volume level differences, a DAC that outputs 2.5V sounds different from one that outputs 2.0V.

Rigth now I have my media streamer and my bog-standard PC line out connected to my speaker rig and by rapid switching it is clear that there is little if any difference between the two, though the streamer is louder but I measured this before so I am not surprised. The other benefit of a switch box is it lets you see obvious problems like the fact that, bizarrely, my mini-to-rca has the channels reversed (or the streamer perhaps) a rapid switch shows this for what it is, if you introduce a long delay it is harder to identify this flaw for what it is and you might be tempted to characterise this as a *real* difference in sound. Once you have the knack for carefully time-aligning tracks it is a lot of fun...

IMO you should completely reserve judgment on dacs until you get a dedicated transport and either more neutral speakers or more neutral amp. However most importantly you should engage in long term listening. I'm under the impression that your amp and speakers are not a good combination for noticing immediate differences between sources. With a setup like that, it's going to be long term listening where you will notice differences. Listen to one source for a few weeks and you will start to become familiar with how it sounds. Then switch it with another source and you should be able to note some differences. Testing properly involves long term listening. Some of the "hyped up" reviews are due to the fact we have lived with a source for a long time. Thus, we are very familiar with how it sounds. So when we switch it for another source, the difference is often immediately apparent.

Words of wisdom. Over the years, this is what I've come to understand as well. I urge everyone starting out in this hobby to follow Currawong's advice.

Long-term listening impressions and comparisons are the only reliable way to realize the sound differences in audio equipment, unless by chance, you find components that have a very dissimilar MO.

I was referring to being able to spot differences immediately, not overall. You have contradicted yourself by saying it's not a question of neutrality rather the gears ability to reveal. Neutral does NOT mean boring, cold, or analytical. A setup that is neutrally balanced will always reveal better than a setup that is not. Anyway my point was balance. IMO your setup is not optimally balanced and leans too far to the warm side of things. Yes it will sound musical but not as transparent as it could, thus veiling to an extent.The Viennas are nice sounding speakers, but the Primare is holding them back. Same with the Primare, it's a nice amp but the Viennas are holding it back. If you switch out your amp OR speakers for something more neutral, the differences between sources will be more immediately apparent. I went from a B&K receiver (which was very musical and warm) with Wharfedale speakers (also laid back and musical). I then upgraded to Classe separates while keeping the Wharfedales and the difference is amazing. It is still musical but it is now much less veiling and much easier to tell immediate differences between sources. Where as before with the B&K, I would have to engage in much longer term listening before noting ANY kind of difference between sources. Also, I recommend a dedicated transport because a cd player's clock and power supply are not optimized for sending digital signals. More often than not, cd players will impart their own dac's character into the sound of the digital signal and that will make it even more difficult to tell the differences between sources. In a more balanced setup, that Wadia will be anything but dark sounding. I have owned it and it's not far off from the 15 which was highly praised in its day. It's probably the best sounding dac you have there IMO.

No problem. IMO yes I think that Wadia should be the best in that group, especially in your setup. Although I can't say anything about the Denmark, but it sounds more like a professional product rather than one to use for personal enjoyment. IMO much of the older stuff sounds better than today's stuff until you get into the no compromise price range. Main reason again, IMO is due to upsampling. Out of all the upsampling dacs I tried, only one sounded like it was doing things right. But it was also the most expensive dac I ever owned. If memory serves correctly, the Wadia 12 originally sold for at least $2500, but could have been more. $375 is a good price, I see them usually go for around $450. It was one of best dacs I ever owned along with a Theta and Audio Research dac. Two things I noted that the Wadia excelled in was transparency and pin point imaging. Happy listening.

Glad to hear you like the Wadia. It's one of those rare little gems these days. Not sure about the wyred for sound stuff. Like I said, I'm a fan of the older stuff lol. 192/24 is a very high sampling rate. I know of some dacs that can accept that high of a signal but they are very expensive. MBL and DCS come to mind. The new Audio Research Dac 7 might but I'm not sure on that one. Just curious but what do you have that is sending a signal with that high of a sampling rate?