Thoughts on a bunch of DACs (and why delta-sigma kinda sucks, just to get you to think about stuff)
May 13, 2015 at 4:31 PM Post #5,341 of 6,500
 
I'm afraid that you've passed my level of knowledge and understanding with your quoting of "lsb" levels, although I am aware of the different grading and tolerances of the 3 most popular versions of the 1541a; I think that they just got better at making them, as time went on.
 
ENOB? Ok, I'm new to that term (it seems like you've certainly done more research than I have), but I understand the meaning: the usable number of bits. As far as I understand, the bit rate mainly effects the dynamic range; more bits = more headroom for louder and quieter sections of music. So, maybe it's not quite so important for all music types.
Anyway, I do recall that the later PCM chips are 18 bit (and later maybe 20). Apparently they do measure better than the tda1541, but of course, measurements don't mean everything. And besides, the media is still only 16 bit!
 
I think I've heard of Pedja; the guy who sourced, and basically rebuilt, my music player seems to be a disciple of his. He was suggesting that NOS is the way to go, but I had concerns about high frequency distortion, interference and perhaps even damage to downstream components, like ribbon tweeters. So he suggested using a Cambridge Audio DAC 3, the original Stan Curtis model with 4x tda1541s1 chips. The logic being that with that dac starting at 16x OS, the bypassing of the horrible OS filter chip still leaves it at a more standard 4x OS. This is done by the configuration of the dac chips. This also allows a simpler analogue output to be used, than if it was NOS.
I don't know what 'damage' this remaining OS is doing, but my 'engineer' said that it's definitely a superior solution to the 7220 filter chip.
 
Incidentally, sorry if you've already explained, but why, with your Yggy affording budget, do you have a specific requirement for NOS?

 
Ah, well, I've only just started learning some of this stuff myself, so my understanding of it all is somewhat basic. Guys like purrin can do a much better job explaining these topics like INL/DNL errors in terms of LSB, ENOB, etc.
 
I do believe ENOB is indeed tied to dynamic range, but I think it can also be related to a general level of low-level detail extraction that might not necessarily be considered entirely related to dynamic range. But, in a nutshell, ENOB means what it sounds like. A DAC might be listed as, say, a 16-bit DAC, but it's accuracy and performance in terms of distortion, noise, crosstalk, INL/DNL errors, and so on, might mean that it really only portrays 14 of those 16 bits. And, on the other hand, I've seen DACs that might only be 14 ENOB but show excellent dynamic range in subjective and static objective tests. Like I said, my understanding of this all is rather basic, and I'm still learning. Someone else would need to step in to better explain or correct me where I'm wrong.
 
So far, I have not had any components that had issues with my non-oversampling DAC, though I do believe some various amplifiers and drivers can have issues with it due to all the ultrasonic "garbage" too close to the audible spectrum caused by the lack of a digital filter. No issues on my end yet, though, subjectively and mechanically, from headphones, speakers, all sorts of amps (including a vintage stereo receiver), and so on.
 
What I mean by having a "requirement" for non-oversampling more comes down to my hearing sensitivities and personal tastes. I am rather treble sensitive, sometimes in weird ways, but it's not that DACs usually bother me in this way outright. I've just noticed that, in general, I get listening fatigue very, very easily and quickly, often for reasons I cannot explain or fully understand. It's much worse on headphones, even at low-level listening, though does happen on speakers to a small extent. As it so happens, non-oversampling has been the best thing for me so far to help with this fatigue. Oversampling DACs have some immediate benefits and differences sonically, sure (though I think non-oversampling has its unique benefits too), but something about oversampling tends to bother me over time, where as NOS does not.
 
There's also something about NOS aside from that aspect that resonates with me. Something about the sense of presence and body it gives instruments and vocals, and not in a warm, thick sort of way. Things tend to sound more flat and 2D to me with oversampling despite oversampling generally having a wider, airier soundstage and presentation. Tone and timbre sounds more "real" to me on some aspects of music, especially vocals, with NOS. Stuff like someone finger picking a nylon guitar on most oversampling DACs make it sound like, instead, someone is using a pick on a guitar with a weird metal + nylon hybrid string. Like a sort of slightly oversharpened timbre. Maybe I'm too young. :) On non-oversampling, it sounds like what it should to me...someone finger picking a nylon guitar. On the other hand, cymbals often sound a bit softer than they do in reality on NOS DACs, where as they sound more real on oversampled DACs. Neither is perfect to me...tradeoffs either way...so I just go with what moves me most.
 
May 13, 2015 at 7:10 PM Post #5,342 of 6,500
Hi.. Just curious .. Is there any actual digital high res music file which can utilise all the dynamic range says even at full 16 bit? If yes does it mean we have to turn on the volume i.e in excess of 100dB to hear the peak? thks
 
May 13, 2015 at 7:56 PM Post #5,344 of 6,500
I read abt this
http://www.head-fi.org/t/415361/24bit-vs-16bit-the-myth-exploded

It seems 16 bit is enough in practical... If that is true there is no point going higher multibit ....even top of the line TotalDac only arnd 14 to 16 bit....

My knowledge is limited in this area... Please share your opinion ... Thks
 
May 13, 2015 at 8:33 PM Post #5,345 of 6,500
I read abt this
http://www.head-fi.org/t/415361/24bit-vs-16bit-the-myth-exploded

It seems 16 bit is enough in practical... If that is true there is no point going higher multibit ....even top of the line TotalDac only arnd 14 to 16 bit....

My knowledge is limited in this area... Please share your opinion ... Thks

 
From what I understand, sigma delta dacs like ESS Sabre like more bits and more samples/sec. It gives the accumulator more data to work with. Also the TI PCM179x dacs has lower 18bit sigma delta with upper 6bit R2R. So you only get to utilize the R2R part at louder sections/transients?
 
Most of the time you won't need >16bit(unless you want to playback explosion) or >48KHz(unless you are a bat/dog/animal). What you should be more concern about is DAC Linearity, SNR, THD, Inter-harmonic distortion, Stereo Separation, Noise Rejection, EMC/RFI, Jitter, and the post dac(digital and hardware analog) Filters.
 
here's plenty of info here about the things I mentioned above:
http://www.thewelltemperedcomputer.com/KB/Linearity.htm
 
May 13, 2015 at 8:35 PM Post #5,346 of 6,500
Hi.. Just curious .. Is there any actual digital high res music file which can utilise all the dynamic range says even at full 16 bit? If yes does it mean we have to turn on the volume i.e in excess of 100dB to hear the peak? thks

 
No, if anything, Yggy shows us that most "24-bit" DACs can't resolve worth ****.
 
May 13, 2015 at 8:45 PM Post #5,347 of 6,500
MUCH RESPECT GOING OUT TO THE YGGDRASIL:
 ​
 ​
 
This is not a review, just a few impressions of how I hear the gear I have, specifically the Yggdrasil and the TotalDac., so YMMV.
 
The Yggdrasil landed at my home on Monday May 4th.  I plugged it in and had music playing through it from Monday May 4th through Tuesday May 12tn continuously. 
 
The TotalDac landed at my home on that Tuesday May 12th.  I had music playing through it all of two days.  Vincent – the TotalDac creator said to give the Dac 8 hours to stabilize  - Yes, 8 hours – that’s it.
 
I used the Abyss, LCD-3F and the HE-6 headphones.  My HD800s are out on loan.
The amp used is the Pass Labs INT-30A.
 
I used all kinds of music:  From Hard Core Rap to Classical to Jazz to EDM to Rock.
 
Again YMMV.
 
First up the Yggdrasil. 
 
I’ve been one of the skeptics of this DAC as soon as “Captain Hype a lot” and the “Hype Master” started ranting a raving about this DAC. 
 
Hype Twins:
“I can hear things I never heard before”
 
Me:
Yeah Right – the same ole cliché.
 
Hype Twins:
“I can hear the band members farting at each other” 
 
Me:
Get the F%^ outta hear. 
 
Lots of red flags went up and the "BS" meter went crazy.  All the technical talk about bits, burrito filters and Delta-Sigma vs. Ladder DAC chips don’t really concern me. 
 
How does the damn thing sound?
 
Well, I’ll be the first to say, “Pass me a slice of that crow pie”
 
While I can honestly say I don’t hear band members farting at each other -  but yeah, this is a DAMN good DAC.  It’s good at reproducing music in a sort of natural kind of way.  It has very good dynamics, the bass hits hard when it’s suppose to.  This puts “some” of my previous DACs to shame.  I wish this DAC were around a few years ago.  I may have never gone on the DAC hunt I did. 
 
A few things I don’t quite like about the Yggdrasil:
 
I find the tone a little lean.  It doesn’t have that magic with female vocals like the AMR did.  However, it beats the AMR in just about everything else. 
 
Will sound bright / analytical with the wrong amp.
 
Background is not ink, pitch or midnight black. 
 
Midrange does not pop
 
To my ears it sacrifices natural instrumental timbre for resolution.
 
Not as engaging as I would like.
 
I‘m experiencing a clicking noise after each sample rate change.  About 1 second is cut off the start of each track after each sample rate change. 
 
Things I do like about the Yggdrasil:
 
Price / Performance – you really can’t beat it nowhere in the audio industry.
 
The edges are nice and sharp, very good dynamics, good soundstage depth, fast bass that hits hard and very resolving. 
 
Next up the TotalDac (TD). 
 
When listening to the Yggdrasil before the TD came, I was all ready to send it back.  The Yggdrasil had me thinking like yeah – this is it, those F$%&ers was right - better than all my other DACs in just about every way, but I was missing the midrange of the AMR. 
 
One great thing off the bat was Vincent said the TD only needed 8 hours to become stable.  He had no issues with turning the DAC on and off.  
 
What I don’t like about the TD:
 
Price
 
Edges not as sharp as the Yggdrasil.
 
Soundstage width is not very expansive
 
 
Things I like about the TotalDac:
 
Tonality - An obvious difference between the TotalDac and the Yggdrasil is a richer tonality in favor of the TotalDac.
 
Deep bass that’s fast, agile, hefty and hits hard when asked
 
It’s deep black, midnight background.  Maybe because of the separate PSU
 
This DAC has an amazing timbre and sounds extremely fluid
 
The TD has an organic and natural treble presentation.
 
The 3D presentation compared to the flat 2D presentation of the Yggdrasil
 
 
Rapping this thing up:
 
I never heard a more realistic sounding DAC that’s highly resolving – airy, intimate, effortless and very engaging. (Other than the Audio Note 5 Signature)
 
If you like the sound of female vocals – the TotalDac D1-Dual is the DAC for you.
 
I prefer the Total DAC for its more lifelike approach. This DACs biggest advantage to me and why I like it so much seems to be its vivid tone. It has amazing timbre and sounds extremely fluid. It doesn’t sacrifice resolution for natural instrumental timbre it gives you both.


 



 

 
May 13, 2015 at 9:11 PM Post #5,349 of 6,500
 
I do believe ENOB is indeed tied to dynamic range, but I think it can also be related to a general level of low-level detail extraction that might not necessarily be considered entirely related to dynamic range. But, in a nutshell, ENOB means what it sounds like. A DAC might be listed as, say, a 16-bit DAC, but it's accuracy and performance in terms of distortion, noise, crosstalk, INL/DNL errors, and so on, might mean that it really only portrays 14 of those 16 bits. And, on the other hand, I've seen DACs that might only be 14 ENOB but show excellent dynamic range in subjective and static objective tests. Like I said, my understanding of this all is rather basic, and I'm still learning. Someone else would need to step in to better explain or correct me where I'm wrong.

 
Pretty much my understanding too - DACs generate errors and the ENOB is telling how 'loud' those errors are when the DAC's playing out a real-world signal. The number of bits a DAC has is only loosely related to the ENOB - generally speaking with more bits (i.e. physical switches or resistor elements) in the DAC the higher the ENOB but no DAC in the world comes anywhere close to 24 ENOB except at exceedingly low frequencies.
 
A point worth highlighting is that ENOB is a strong function of the DAC's update rate (sample rate in digital audio). The faster a DAC goes, the lower its ENOB rating in general. The ADI DAC in the Yggy for example only comes close to 20 ENOB at low frequencies. The DS gives the THD at 10kHz sample rate - that's displaying around 16 ENOBs. In the Yggy the chips are updating at 8XOS so you might begin to see how crucial the 'secret sauce' deglitcher is in maintaining the ENOB for a 2.8uS intersample period.
 
May 13, 2015 at 9:13 PM Post #5,350 of 6,500
Good stuff prep, very useful :beerchug:
Where to now? You keeping the TD or the Ygg? Got any more listening planned for the Ygg? (Just wondering if there might be more to come despite the advertized 160 hours?)
 
May 13, 2015 at 9:32 PM Post #5,352 of 6,500
I read abt this
http://www.head-fi.org/t/415361/24bit-vs-16bit-the-myth-exploded

It seems 16 bit is enough in practical... If that is true there is no point going higher multibit ....even top of the line TotalDac only arnd 14 to 16 bit....

My knowledge is limited in this area... Please share your opinion ... Thks

Thanks for the link! Try this exchange between Barry Diament and another poster. I found it helpful on this topic:

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f13-music-downloads-and-streaming/yes-close-edge-hdtracks-15303/index11.html#post225145
 
May 13, 2015 at 9:32 PM Post #5,353 of 6,500
Depends on many things I think. If this hobby has taught me anything its that what we learn is highly conditionally specific. At this stage I am constantly re-evaluating previous judgment I have made. Some of them stick, others don't.

Regarding detail presentation this can be distracting, but I no longer use the term detail as a primary criteria. My system is detailed enough in terms of gross detail. improvement tends to be in qualities such as nuance, dynamics, physicality or the absence of negatives such as noise, blurr etc.

12 months ago I was concerned with different criteria. I guess the point I am getting to is a dac will not right in every system if it does not deliver the kind of improvement that person is looking for. It may or may not be right once that system devlops and the owner shifts their goalposts. It might still be wrong for them or their system.
 
May 13, 2015 at 9:53 PM Post #5,354 of 6,500
[COLOR=FF0000]MUCH RESPECT GOING OUT TO THE YGGDRASIL:[/COLOR]

(Review in larger font size so no one can miss it.)





Thanks for the review. TOTL comparisons were pretty sparse until now.

One other thing:

Yggdrasil - $2,299
TotalDac D1-Dual - 9,100 euros ($10,332)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top