[tamahome77]

I have heard many good things about the perfect wave dac and I'm also interested in listening to one sometime in the future.
 
Quote:

what about the dac I linked here? is it decent?


 

 

 

[jackmccabe]

I don't agree I found the emu 0404 to add/subtract nothing to the sound, maybe you like a coloured dac.
I personally look for a completely neutral dac and leave the amp or headphones to add colourations.

 

[dadab12]

Guys, it's really confused cause it seems like noone is certain if a dac is worth the price and whether is really improving the actual sound. I wouldn't wanna spend 1000+ dollars for only beauty really.

 

[tamahome77]

The reference 1 dac is slightly and I mean very slightly on the warm side but it's still fairly realistic.  IMO, the tone of the emu0404 is on the colder side.  I think the headamp usb dac is more neutral sounding and more realistic than the emu0404.

 

[some1x]

Buy a used DAC in the price range you are looking for. if you can't hear a difference compared to your current source, then just resell. You won't lose much in the process. 

 

[dadab12]

Thank you, I'm always looking at the used forum in either audiogon or here, nothing interesting so far. 
The problem is I live outside the u.s so most of the ads are irrelevant to me...
I feel like there are alot of new dacs coming out with better technlogy along the way, so perhaps I should hold myself with the dac? ;/
I'm looking for ther most natural sounding dac and realness, I ain't looking for any coloration as I hate colored sound

 

[jackmccabe]

I suggest you perform an abx blind test between some sources, it is the only way for sure you will know whether you want to spend $1000+ on a dac.
I am fairly certain you will come to the conclusion that expensive dacs are not worth it.

 

[Ridleyguy]

Sennheiser used the RWA Isabellina HPA (the original version without tubes) to demo the HD800 at CanJam last year in Chicago.  

 

[dadab12]

Yeah, I'm looking for a balanced dac thank you though

 

[sridhar3]

Quote:

tamahome77, what's wrong with the emu 0404, it measures better than the audio-gd reference series and I actually preferred it to the reference 7 as it didn't have any treble roll.

Where are these measurements you keep talking about?  I'd like to see them, if you don't mind.  I'd appreciate a link.
 
Thanks in advance.

 

[sridhar3]

Quote:

Yeah, I'm looking for a balanced dac thank you though

The Lavry DA11, Grace m903 and Calyx all have balanced output.  The MHDT Havana can also be purchased in a balanced configuration.

 

[jackmccabe]

emu 0404 http://www.amb.org/rmaa/
audio-gd http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/435290/rmaa-test-results-for-audio-gd-dac-19mk3-and-reference-1
also if you look on audio-gd's website you will see the specs of their dac's aren't that great http://www.audio-gd.com/Pro/dac/RE5/RE5EN.htm
If I was going to spend a lot on a dac it would definitely be an anedio d1 as it measures amazingly well, has great build quality and a great headphone amplifier.
I personally find very little difference between dac's so I am fairly skeptical of all $300+ dac's, as I think the money can be much better spent elsewhere.

 

[sridhar3]

Quote:

emu 0404 http://www.amb.org/rmaa/
audio-gd http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/435290/rmaa-test-results-for-audio-gd-dac-19mk3-and-reference-1
also if you look on audio-gd's website you will see the specs of their dac's aren't that great http://www.audio-gd.com/Pro/dac/RE5/RE5EN.htm
If I was going to spend a lot on a dac it would definitely be an anedio d1 as it measures amazingly well, has great build quality and a great headphone amplifier.
I personally find very little difference between dac's so I am fairly skeptical of all $300+ dac's, as I think the money can be much better spent elsewhere.

From your second link (http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/435290/rmaa-test-results-for-audio-gd-dac-19mk3-and-reference-1), it seems as though the consensus opinion is that the measurements aren't indicative of sound quality. Peete wrote:
 
Quote:

Jeez...not this pointless graph/measurement BS again. When are people going to learn to ignore measurements and judge equipment with their ears and not their eyes ?

Sigh...

Peete.

PS: That high frequency noise is from quantization (error) and has to do with algorithms used to covert digital to analog being imperfect representations (mathematically speaking) to their analog sine wave counterparts IIRC. The reason why first gen CDP's were almost universally rejected was because of the lack of decent filtering, no oversampling and strict adherence to the stupid 20-20khz spec which is fine for analog but terrible for pcm (any digital actually speaking). Until gentle roll off filters were implemented and oversampling applied to get the artifacts being filtered well out of the audible range we were stuck with ice pick highs and a bad case of listener fatigue from rampant digititis. Since filtering effects travel downward as well as upward in the freq spectrum you can well imagine why oversampling became one of the big break throughs in 85-87. That and the whole sale abandonment of NOS dacs and the requisite super steep brick wall analog filtering they employed which caused all kinds of problems well into the audible range. My first high end CDP I bought in 85 for 700USD, Carver unit with a special digital time lens circuit. It was worlds better than my first gen Sony machine was. Care to guess what was different vs the 1st gen SONY ? It also measured worse than the 1st gen machines in the highs and yet sounded worlds better. Go figure. I find it amazing that 37 years on we are still looking at 20-20khz and taking it seriously. As long as the freq response is good between 20-14Khz your pretty much good to go. Most instruments even synth stuff does not reach anywhere near 5K. Listen to test tones and try to correlate anything that is musical above 10Khz made by any instrument. I can only think of 2nd or 3rd order harmonics on something like triangle or a splash cymbal...even then that's a bit of a stretch.

 
Peete isn't the kind of guy who believes in pseudoscience and myths.  Every argument I've ever heard him put forth was well-grounded in reason.  He's a pretty smart guy IMO, and I have to lend credence to what he says.

 

[jackmccabe]

I tend to test with my ears first and then look at measurements. When I am looking for neutrality like the op I look at the specs because they can easily show what is the most neutral.
The emu 0404 to me sounds exactly the same as every other neutral dac so I don't see any point spending more.
If the op was looking for a coloured dac this would be a whole different story as measurements display absolutely nothing in terms of musicality.

 

[sridhar3]

Quote:

Guys, it's really confused cause it seems like noone is certain if a dac is worth the price and whether is really improving the actual sound. I wouldn't wanna spend 1000+ dollars for only beauty really.

 
Quote:

I tend to test with my ears first and then look at measurements. When I am looking for neutrality like the op I look at the specs because they can easily show what is the most neutral.
The emu 0404 to me sounds exactly the same as every other neutral dac so I don't see any point spending more.
If the op was looking for a coloured dac this would be a whole different story as measurements display absolutely nothing in terms of musicality.

I see your argument regarding helping the OP find a neutral DAC.  However, by the same token, it also appears that your comments have been somewhat misleading, as you've called into question the merit of spending more money on a DAC *in general*.  That is to say, even if one won't get a better *neutral* DAC at a higher price point, one might be able to find a DAC with a sound signature better attuned to his or her own ears that costs more.  For example, though the OP said he wanted neutrality, that only really refers to frequency, but does not take into consideration detail, soundstage, speed, attack/decay, PRaT to name a few.  These elements might be improved in a higher-end DAC.