Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › best DAC EVER MADE?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

best DAC EVER MADE? - Page 2  

post #16 of 62
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoiL View Post

So, WHY do you even ask such a ridiculous question in head-fi? 

 

There is no such thing as a perfect DAC, imho. Theoretically you may have best DAC in the world but pairing it with certain HP`s is totally another thing.

Additionally, ppl hear differently and have different taste of what "clean pure sound" sounds like. Thats the thing about DAC`s - you can`t say it' s perfect until YOU YOURSELF have found something FOR YOURSELF without noticing any shortcomings. That`s the truth - take it or leave it. 

 

Now, stop asking supid questions and good luck with finging best DAC in the world (YOUR OWN WORLD).

its not a stupid question,the DAC that sends out waveform closest to the original,the one that comes in,in digital form is the best,theres nothing personal about it,its just straight logic/science

post #17 of 62
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by paaj View Post

ODAC... ?

 

 

 

 

 

tongue.gif

lol.... it would be funny if I spend money on Ayre Q9,and then I learned latter that dacs are just conspiracy deception,that ODAC was perfectly fine

post #18 of 62
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by robeeert1 View Post

The best DACs ever produced are Audio Note DAC5 and LAMPIZATOR LEVEL 5 and 6   wink.gif

thanks,that Lampiator Level 5 ( the name... lol ) looks delicious, and its 32bit  384 right?

post #19 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by goobicii View Post

are you sure? I heard Benchmark DAC HDR with HD 800 and LCD-2 week ago...
but I also used it as amp so I am not sure if its the amp fault or dac fault but that thing was stupidly extremly BRIGHT
its like the thing have internal +6db boost around 10k hz

IT MADE EVEN LCD-2 TOO BRIGHT!        can you believe that? LCD-2?? the dark sounding headphone?!

then I tried it with HD800 and that was worst headphone sound I have ever heard in my life,I heard 30 dollar headphones that sounded far better than HD800 + Benchmark DAC HDR... it was like only treble and harshness,no bass,no mids,just crapload of treble
It sounds like whatever you are used to hearing those headphones on rolls off the high frequencies by about 6dB then, and possibly has a non-zero ohm output, because the Benchmark DACs are ruler flat.

There have been tests done where a signal has been routed through Benchmark's DAC1 & ADC1 20x, and the output has still matched the input - it's pro-grade studio gear.

These DACs costing significantly more are not going to sound better. And if they sound different, it's because they are less accurate in ways that some listeners might find more pleasing.

And you don't need more than 24/48. The limits of our hearing is 20kHz, and 48kHz reproduces samples up to 24kHz perfectly. And once you get above 70kHz or so (176.4kHz) all you are reproducing is high frequency noise that should be removed before playback.
Edited by StudioSound - 3/6/13 at 11:17am
post #20 of 62
There is no definite best dac. The best one is the one that synergizes with your rig the best. Everything else people here that are posting are dacs they havent heard or compared and are probably going by the reviews or price tag....worthless.
post #21 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingStyles View Post

There is no definite best dac. The best one is the one that synergizes with your rig the best. Everything else people here that are posting are dacs they havent heard or compared and are probably going by the reviews or price tag....worthless.
DA conversion and amplification are not things you choose based on how they "sound". Either it's converting the digital signal to analogue accurately, or it's not. Similarly, an amplifier either has a flat frequency response, or it's poorly designed.

You pick your headphones/speakers based on the sound you like, not your DAC/Amp.

If you don't like how your headphones sound through a Benchmark DAC, you don't like how those headphones sound.

Anything that sounds different is inaccurate, and trying to change the sound of a pair of headphones that you don't like, into ones that you do, which is completely backwards.
post #22 of 62
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by StudioSound View Post


It sounds like whatever you are used to hearing those headphones on rolls off the high frequencies by about 6dB then, and possibly has a non-zero ohm output, because the Benchmark DACs are ruler flat.

There have been tests done where a signal has been routed through Benchmark's DAC1 & ADC1 20x, and the output has still matched the input - it's pro-grade studio gear.

These DACs costing significantly more are not going to sound better. And if they sound different, it's because they are less accurate in ways that some listeners might find more pleasing.

And you don't need more than 24/48. The limits of our hearing is 20kHz, and 48kHz reproduces samples up to 24kHz perfectly. And once you get above 70kHz or so (176.4kHz) all you are reproducing is high frequency noise that should be removed before playback.

that is not true,I done my personal study and expreriments with sample rate and the 48khz is only good to about 5000hz and 192 is the lowest samplerate capable of producing close to fully sustained sine wave to the upper edge of human hearing that is 17-20.000hz

 

but even at 192.000,the upper freqencies have very small number of  samples to change volume value in mid phase of wave.... 384 is much needed remedy,in future there will be even far bigger resolution for more precise curves of wave....

 

I know,theres horde of angry people that gonna attack me for this and argue... I dont care,the physics dont lie,the mathematics speaks clearly a signal that is played directly,with no upsampling and things like that,with sample rate 96, CANT reproduce sustained tones to upper edge of our hearing becose theres too little samples to make up a full phase of wave

 

when volume value changed but theres no sample point at exact point when this is happening,that is clearly technical fault,a wrong sound becose of low  sample rate.... I am not saying that 384khz sounds so much better than 96,my hearing is imperfect like my headphones,dac and amp,but anybody who knows this stuff properly,not just forum broscience knows this is truth


Edited by goobicii - 3/6/13 at 12:22pm
post #23 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by goobicii View Post

its not a stupid question,the DAC that sends out waveform closest to the original,the one that comes in,in digital form is the best,theres nothing personal about it,its just straight logic/science

Then seems that you have no logic. DAC alone won`t play music to your ears and if you don`t get that, it`s stupid question. 

Like I said - theoretically you may have that "DAC that sends out waveform closest to the original,the one that comes in" but it won`t matter in real world because you must find good match with headphones. Even then, if you find it, it might not sound natural as you would hear it being inside recording room or live concert. And asking about this all from internet from other ppl with different hearing IS stupid question. You may ask for recommendations for certain headphones and you will get good information but asking for best DAC in the world and then thinking it WILL be best for your headphones and hearing.... think more. 

 

Seems you are one of those persons who "listens" music with/based on theory, mathematics, physics etc. but not with you EARS. 


Edited by CoiL - 3/6/13 at 12:25pm
post #24 of 62
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoiL View Post

Then seems that you have no logic. DAC alone won`t play music to your ears and if you don`t get that, it`s stupid question. 

Like I said - theoretically you may have that "DAC that sends out waveform closest to the original,the one that comes in" but it won`t matter in real world because you must find good match with headphones. Even then, if you find it, it might not sound natural as you would hear it being inside recording room or live concert. And asking about this all from internet from other ppl with different hearing IS stupid question. You may ask for recommendations for certain headphones and you will get good information but asking for best DAC in the world and then thinking it WILL be best for your headphones and hearing.... think more.

lol you really hate me and enjoy bashing me

 

o really? I tough the DAC directly sends out signal as microwaves that stimulate my neurons in way that it make me hear it directly in my mind,wow I need acurate headphones too,what a surprise

post #25 of 62
Quote:
DA conversion and amplification are not things you choose based on how they "sound". Either it's converting the digital signal to analogue accurately, or it's not. Similarly, an amplifier either has a flat frequency response, or it's poorly designed.

You pick your headphones/speakers based on the sound you like, not your DAC/Amp.

If you don't like how your headphones sound through a Benchmark DAC, you don't like how those headphones sound.

Anything that sounds different is inaccurate, and trying to change the sound of a pair of headphones that you don't like, into ones that you do, which is completely backwards.

I would disagree. In your line of thinking, you shouldnt be picking the headphones according to sound either. Just buy the ones with the best stats. If the system doesnt sound good it must be your ears or brain. Ludicrous. The music isnt perfect. Your assuming the equipment used to capture the recording is perfect. Everything in the recording process from the mic on down has an effect on the music. A system with less than perfect stats could sound better than one with perfect stats because it could be compensating for the engineering and the equipment used to record it. making it sound closer to what is actually perceivable if you were in the room when it was recorded.
post #26 of 62

omg, what a troll. I don`t hate you. Seems your don`t get it... every person listens sound differently like they see colours littlebit differently. If we all would hear things same, then there would not be any need fpr this DAC madness. 

post #27 of 62

This is a quality thread, thanks for laughs mate.

post #28 of 62
Quote:

Originally Posted by CoiL View Post
 

There is no such thing as a perfect DAC, imho. Theoretically you may have best DAC in the world but pairing it with certain HP`s is totally another thing.

 

It's true there's no such thing as perfect electronics. However, when a DAC is transparent, the idea of "pairing it with certain HP's" isn't exactly meaningful. Transparent is transparent.

post #29 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by StudioSound View Post


DA conversion and amplification are not things you choose based on how they "sound". Either it's converting the digital signal to analogue accurately, or it's not. Similarly, an amplifier either has a flat frequency response, or it's poorly designed.

You pick your headphones/speakers based on the sound you like, not your DAC/Amp.

If you don't like how your headphones sound through a Benchmark DAC, you don't like how those headphones sound.

Anything that sounds different is inaccurate, and trying to change the sound of a pair of headphones that you don't like, into ones that you do, which is completely backwards.


This x 10^9

post #30 of 62

Transparent is a term that refers to optics. Like "as the artist intended" it is a nonsense term IMO. Since for the Nyquist Shannon sampling theorem to work it would require an infinite bit rate, any ADC or DAC is going to be a compromise to some degree. Then that doesn't even get into the electrical considerations of the design which are another whole level of complexity and potential issues, but it is why you can't have a DAC without both pre- and post-ringing on impulse signals that isn't non-oversampling and NOS DACs introduce different distortion issues.

 

Maybe the closest would be a non-oversampling DAC fed high-res "studio master" recordings? But then that doesn't eliminate any digital editing done to the music post-recording. It rather reminds me of the $70,000 turntable rig that is so good that 95% of records are too poorly made or recorded to be enjoyable listening with it or listening only to binaural recordings when listening with headphones. You'd be limited to some direct-to-digital recordings with no post-processing. Ouch. 

 

The thing is, we are here seeking enjoyment of music. For some people, having equipment in shiny, artistically designed boxes is important to help them enjoy listening. Likewise, for some, knowing the DAC measures well* helps them with their ability to enjoy owning it.

 

There are plenty of DACs from about $1000 and up that have "excellent" measurements. Still, they all sound different, often very subtly, to the point that I've seen quite a few recent reviews of $8000-10,000 DACs where the reviewer admitted there was little to nothing in it between them. So I reckon if you have bucket-loads of money, I'd just get an MSB, Esoteric or dCS stack and be done with it. 

 

*Whatever that actually means, as actual music isn't the same as sweeps and tones played into a measurement box.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › best DAC EVER MADE?