or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Dac for Swans M200MKIII
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dac for Swans M200MKIII - Page 2

post #16 of 40
Thread Starter 
Yea, but I find that it's hard to get a good value DAC.. Those that many recommend are mostly on a high side, while those budget ones aren't that good.. What I feel is if I wanna get a DAC, at least get an above average ones.. I think those budget ones won't give u much sound difference as compared to DAC-less. This is as good as wasting your money and taking up unnecessary space

Anyway what's your take on HRT microstreamer? I've found quite a lot of good reviews on this
post #17 of 40
I bought the ODAC before the HRT Microstreamer came out, so I haven't really paid much attention the Microstreamer. The ODAC is a straight DAC (no headphone amp like the Microstreamer). Here's a thread about it: http://www.head-fi.org/t/611778/brief-odac-impressions
post #18 of 40
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post

I bought the ODAC before the HRT Microstreamer came out, so I haven't really paid much attention the Microstreamer. The ODAC is a straight DAC (no headphone amp like the Microstreamer). Here's a thread about it: http://www.head-fi.org/t/611778/brief-odac-impressions

Alright..I know this, as I've bought before it's O2 portable amp..based on my memory, the O2 amp is a neutral amp..so u are still using the odac?
post #19 of 40
Yep. I have the ODAC running to an Asgard 2 headphone amp (used to have the O2) which has line outs for my speaker amp, and I can control the volume of the speakers with the Asgard 2 volume knob.
post #20 of 40
Thread Starter 

Odac must be good since i presume you must have been using it for quite long already? no plans of upgrading your dac? 

post #21 of 40
I'm happy with it. If you've had the O2, then know that the ODAC is definitely the same tier of quality in a DAC. And the thing about DACs is that their are extremely diminishing rate of returns as you spend more money. After all, the goal of a good DAC is to convert the music transparently (accurately) from digital to analog, not make the music sound better. By all measurable characteristics, the ODAC easily accurately converts the sound without adding any distortion in the audible hearing range.
post #22 of 40
Thread Starter 

yup i know, O2 is a very transparent amp and doesnt add any color to the original sound, so i suppose odac should be somewhere around that signature. your words make sense, but going by logical thinking, if one thing is more expensive than the other, there must be something in it to warrant that premium, which is what everyone is so curious about that leads to upgrading and upgrading :(

post #23 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capri87 View Post

yup i know, O2 is a very transparent amp and doesnt add any color to the original sound, so i suppose odac should be somewhere around that signature. your words make sense, but going by logical thinking, if one thing is more expensive than the other, there must be something in it to warrant that premium, which is what everyone is so curious about that leads to upgrading and upgrading frown.gif

As I said, spending more money on DACs provides the least return on SQ in your whole setup. For instance, if you were debating between the ODAC and a $500 DAC, you should sell your Swans and upgrade them for the best bang for your buck (or add a sub).

And no. Just because something is more expensive doesn't mean it results in better sound. Audiophiles buy expensive stuff all the time that makes no sense scientifically, and the evidence suggests that they are likely convincing themselves that it sounds better. For example, power cables.
post #24 of 40
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post


As I said, spending more money on DACs provides the least return on SQ in your whole setup. For instance, if you were debating between the ODAC and a $500 DAC, you should sell your Swans and upgrade them for the best bang for your buck (or add a sub).

And no. Just because something is more expensive doesn't mean it results in better sound. Audiophiles buy expensive stuff all the time that makes no sense scientifically, and the evidence suggests that they are likely convincing themselves that it sounds better. For example, power cables.

 

ok, i get you. Its just the same with portable gear, to get the most value out of it, it's to upgrade your gears in this priority of order: DAP>>IEM>>Portable amp>>cables. I've been through multiple upgrades of each individual item and have come in consensus with the aforementioned chain. Before, I was into stack-fi but I'm reduced to just a DAP and an IEM now, the only things i'm interested in upgrading for I believe they give me the most distinct improvement in sound. From what you advocate, i think this principle should work the same for PC audio

post #25 of 40
I think the difference with a DAC is that a cheap DAC is not transparently converting the digital to analog, so upgrading is good. However, at some point, a higher quality DAC will reach that quality (ability) where it's perfectly reproducing the sound, where there's nothing you can do to create a DAC that more accurately reproduces the sound for the human hearing. Many people believe that the ODAC is such a DAC.

So it's more like you can buy a ladder that is accurately rated to support your weight. Assuming that rating is accurate, buying a more expensive ladder for a higher weight rating doesn't do anything more for you. The cheaper ladder already supported your weight. If a DAC accurately reproduces the sound for human hearing, a more expensive DAC that measures even better doesn't give you any more benefit.
post #26 of 40
Thread Starter 
Ya, I know what you're driving at, it's about the threshold of a normal person' hearing ability. Anything beyond that level won't be worth you spending money on since u have limitations distinguishing the sound difference
post #27 of 40

Just FYI, the Swans sound wonderful even without an external DAC so unless you're planning on playing 24-bit+ tracks, you can get away without one for a while.

post #28 of 40
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolguyalex View Post
 

Just FYI, the Swans sound wonderful even without an external DAC so unless you're planning on playing 24-bit+ tracks, you can get away without one for a while.

 

i've demoed it using my ak120 as the source. It sounds good to me thats why im buying it. Just that out of curiosity, im wondering if there's anything i can improve on the already fantastic sounding m200MKIII :tongue_smile:

post #29 of 40
Thread Starter 

guys, what's your say if i pair M200MKIII with audio-gd NFB 11.32 DAC?

post #30 of 40
The Audio-GD DAC should definitely be an improvement for you over onboard PC audio and is one of the best options for better SQ at its price point. Whether or not its enough to make the purchase worthwhile to you depends on your assessment, not ours smily_headphones1.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Dac for Swans M200MKIII