[Spektrograf]

It seems that neither Chord nor Holo produce correct dynamic respone. Chord - for sure, it is a weakness of the conversion technology - Holo presumably as I never heard it. It is why Holo is placed againt Chord in first place, as none of them re-produce it properly. Maybe you should look for something like DI-20HE/R-7HE Mk2 pair and in the next turn upgrade it with a 10MHz external clock to remove any residue of a digital glare. There is a newly appointed dealer in US.

On the other side, our brain needs few weeks time to remove simplified sound templates of a Delta Sigma DAC. Two or three weeks is a time we start to appreciate a natural sound. So lets hope you will not sell May very quick (it provide at least a hint what should be heard), so you will be ready for the Audio GD stack.

Haha, ahh…feeding the beast. I'll do more reading on your suggestion.
There's a buyer already, so I probably wouldn't be able to do a in situ comparison even if I made the purchase now. The nudge is appreciated regardless. Thank you!

 

[Spektrograf]

Well it turns out a friend of mine has ordered a Holo May as being the only realistic way of getting to hear one in his own system. I prefer not to assume how it sounds so he has offered to bring it to my house so I can hear it in my system to compare to a DC4 Dave (with Mscaler as well).

Okay, now THAT's exciting! Let us know how it goes on your audition of it. The DAVE is on my radar as an upgrade path for me still (perhaps with the DC4 after reading your post on it)—either that or a Tambaqui or Bartok…all really next year though, if at all.

@Palyodgree has a Tambaqui and May, so while not a direct comparison with the DAVE, impressions are still great to read.

 

[capisi]

I had a Bricasti M1 SE and sold it to get the Dave. In my opinion the Bricasti is nowhere near as good as the Dave.

Thanks for the tip.

 

[GoldenSound]

I only presented facts, which are technical nature. What is confrontational in reminding you well known consequences of chosing a particular technology or what is wrong in investigating internal operation, especially when something looks suspicious?

You've done nothing of the sort.

It's fine to have an opinion be it subjective or on objective design.
But don't confuse your subjective opinion as objective fact.

 

[GoldenSound]

It seems that neither Chord nor Holo produce correct dynamic respone. Chord - for sure, it is a weakness of the conversion technology - Holo presumably as I never heard it. It is why Holo is placed againt Chord in first place, as none of them re-produce it properly. Maybe you should look for something like DI-20HE/R-7HE Mk2 pair and in the next turn upgrade it with a 10MHz external clock to remove any residue of a digital glare. There is a newly appointed dealer in US.

On the other side, our brain needs few weeks time to remove simplified sound templates of a Delta Sigma DAC. Two or three weeks is a time we start to appreciate a natural sound. So lets hope you will not sell May very quick (it provide at least a hint what should be heard), so you will be ready for the Audio GD stack.

What do you mean?

Chord and Holo products both have significantly higher dynamic range than the Audio GD dacs.

What 'weakness of the conversion technology'??

What are they not reproducing properly?

"On the other side, our brain needs few weeks time to remove simplified sound templates of a Delta Sigma DAC"...what?

Please back these up with something...
Again, it's fine to have opinions, but please don't try to present your preferences as 'fact'

 

[Currawong]

Do we know what the settings were when those measurements were taken? Posting random measurements that look bad without knowing the set-up ignores that they may have been taken when the DAC was set in a mode that has poor measured output, such as NOS. We also have to consider that measurement forums tend to choose one manufacturer to hate, and deliberately trash their products, so they can attract attention to themselves.

 

[GoldenSound]

Do we know what the settings were when those measurements were taken? Posting random measurements that look bad without knowing the set-up ignores that they may have been taken when the DAC was set in a mode that has poor measured output, such as NOS. We also have to consider that measurement forums tend to choose one manufacturer to hate, and deliberately trash their products, so they can attract attention to themselves.

That's feeding the DAC via coax SPDIF, 48khz. calculating in the 20khz band. R8 says 5v out on the spec sheet, and given as it's 3.9v here it's probably about -2dbfs digital signal, though almost all dacs measure better at around -3dbfs than they do at 0dbfs anyway so that's not an issue.)
It is NOS, which will measure worse than OS, but won't affect PSU noise like what is shown there, and won't reduce harmonics by a particularly drastic extent.

Though my comment wasn't about whether or not it sounded good. Audio GD products have plenty of people who like them and having not heard one myself I make no judgement whatsoever about the sound as to do so would be silly and unfair.

I was just taking issue with @sajunky making very absolute statements about non-existent objective problems in other dacs/topologies.
If he and others like AGD dacs more than others that's totally fine. Everyone should be free to choose what they subjectively like best. It'd be a boring hobby if everyone liked the same thing, and if SINAD was all that mattered then we could go buy a THX 789 and E30 and be done with hifi forever. And if high THD meant something inherently sounded bad then tube amps wouldn't be a thing.
I'm not taking issue with his subjective preference.

I'm taking issue with him presenting that subjective preference as something being objectively better (or rather that he is asserting other products are objectively flawed)

 

[VintageAudio]

I've missed a week's worth of reading so to react to Zeos's (re)view; I have watched a lot of his reviews lately and I really enjoy them. There is absolutely no filter between his brain and his mouth. This is mostly a good thing except where he is clearly out of his depth. And he is in the case of the Holo dac. I remember his 'review' of the SMSL SU-8 (iirc, the 1k+ dac) and he was equally dismissive and it was clear he didn't know how to appreciate it. He was literally dropping it on his desk. I mean... What? That really turned me off and I avoided him for a while. Let's say 'You still have much to learn padawan'. Listening takes training.

I understand that high prices can be revolting, especially when your alone in your big empty cold house with a (cute) cat called Chewbacca. I myself can't afford a Holo May, let alone a Kitsune 'tuned' edition (I'd rather do that myself anyway). But I own a Denafrips and that should compare. Someone considered the Ares better than the Spring. I don't know if that's true but i believe it. I also found that my really, really cheap NOS filterles TDA1543 that I modified myself (to something out of spec but much better sounding) dac sounds better than the Ares II (only it maxes at 24-96). Finding out how and what makes it sound better took me over a year. But it taught me that it's not a matter of fancy power supply, silver wire and fancy caps. Ok, i did use silver-plated wire. But most important is using the right values and leaving out what you don't strictly need and use good quality parts where it's really useful. What's the use of solid silver toroidal power transformers where I couldn't even tell between a wall-wart and linear PS. And there's no cost saving in getting the right output impedance but it makes a huge difference in sound.

So I get it. High prices can be off-putting. But you shouldn't dismiss expensive items (envie?) or low cost gear (snobism?) based on just feelings or on lack of hearing differences. No evidence of existence is not evidence of non-existence! Often it's because of prejudice or lack of trying that evidence is not accepted or there.

I mean isn't it hypocritical to advise people they shouldn't spend more than x$ on a DAC because he can't hear the difference but yet, make money from affiliate links from reviewing gear and encouraging people to keep buying the next best thing?

 

[GoldenSound]

I've missed a week's worth of reading so to react to Zeos's (re)view; I have watched a lot of his reviews lately and I really enjoy them. There is absolutely no filter between his brain and his mouth. This is mostly a good thing except where he is clearly out of his depth. And he is in the case of the Holo dac. I remember his 'review' of the SMSL SU-8 (iirc, the 1k+ dac) and he was equally dismissive and it was clear he didn't know how to appreciate it. He was literally dropping it on his desk. I mean... What? That really turned me off and I avoided him for a while. Let's say 'You still have much to learn padawan'. Listening takes training.

I understand that high prices can be revolting, especially when your alone in your big empty cold house with a (cute) cat called Chewbacca. I myself can't afford a Holo May, let alone a Kitsune 'tuned' edition (I'd rather do that myself anyway). But I own a Denafrips and that should compare. Someone considered the Ares better than the Spring. I don't know if that's true but i believe it. I also found that my really, really cheap NOS filterles TDA1543 that I modified myself (to something out of spec but much better sounding) dac sounds better than the Ares II (only it maxes at 24-96). Finding out how and what makes it sound better took me over a year. But it taught me that it's not a matter of fancy power supply, silver wire and fancy caps. Ok, i did use silver-plated wire. But most important is using the right values and leaving out what you don't strictly need and use good quality parts where it's really useful. What's the use of solid silver toroidal power transformers where I couldn't even tell between a wall-wart and linear PS. And there's no cost saving in getting the right output impedance but it makes a huge difference in sound.

So I get it. High prices can be off-putting. But you shouldn't dismiss expensive items (envie?) or low cost gear (snobism?) based on just feelings or on lack of hearing differences. No evidence of existence is not evidence of non-existence! Often it's because of prejudice or lack of trying that evidence is not accepted or there.

Ares 2 is a good dac for the money but it certainly doesn't beat a spring 3.
Not exactly same price bracket though so

 

[]eep]

Ares 2 is a good dac for the money but it certainly doesn't beat a spring 3.
Not exactly same price bracket though so

I wouldn't state it in those terms. I fell in love with the Holo Spring years ago as something to aspire to as a definitive dac. Only the price was simply way too high so I put the idea on hold. But I did keep tags on it. Then a few years later upon researching a question I came across Denafrips. I never heard of them before but the reviews were very favorable. And the Ares was within reach! And the inside... Just what I wanted. Some reviews preferred it over the Spring even. Level 2 that is. Personally (not trying to be arrogant but) I think I can do that myself. Not the silver toroidal but I don't think that's as useful as parts in the signal path anyway.

The Ares II did give me a good new reference point. I know now that it's certainly not endgame (yeah, thanks a lot) since my own little dac still outperforms it in freedom of sibilance, sheer joy of playing music, naturalness and air. Very important. The Ares has wider soundstage, quieter background and a sort of buttery, sirupy sound. Technically, the inputs are just next century. Very pleasant but it could use some spice every now and then. And some fff notes, especially soprano and piano, can distort like every other dac I have ever heard does. Except mine. Those things you can't 'unhear' once you know the problem.

Frankly, the Ares is great but it made me fall in love with my first love all over again. I'll be making an i²s input for it soon. The Spring has lost its appeal. The May is tempting but that price... Really! Given the shaky service and uncertain performance improvement over my current €45 dac, my entire system, return on investment... I would much rather buy a better turntable for that price. Or make my own reference speakers. Thinking about what you can do with €5000 makes me angry, one must be snobby or elitist or plain criminal to earn so much money that such kind of expense is no problem.

 

[GoldenSound]

I wouldn't state it in those terms. I fell in love with the Holo Spring years ago as something to aspire to as a definitive dac. Only the price was simply way too high so I put the idea on hold. But I did keep tags on it. Then a few years later upon researching a question I came across Denafrips. I never heard of them before but the reviews were very favorable. And the Ares was within reach! And the inside... Just what I wanted. Some reviews preferred it over the Spring even. Level 2 that is. Personally (not trying to be arrogant but) I think I can do that myself. Not the silver toroidal but I don't think that's as useful as parts in the signal path anyway.

The Ares II did give me a good new reference point. I know now that it's certainly not endgame (yeah, thanks a lot) since my own little dac still outperforms it in freedom of sibilance, sheer joy of playing music, naturalness and air. Very important. The Ares has wider soundstage, quieter background and a sort of buttery, sirupy sound. Technically, the inputs are just next century. Very pleasant but it could use some spice every now and then. And some fff notes, especially soprano and piano, can distort like every other dac I have ever heard does. Except mine. Those things you can't 'unhear' once you know the problem.

Frankly, the Ares is great but it made me fall in love with my first love all over again. I'll be making an i²s input for it soon. The Spring has lost its appeal. The May is tempting but that price... Really! Given the shaky service and uncertain performance improvement over my current €45 dac, my entire system, return on investment... I would much rather buy a better turntable for that price. Or make my own reference speakers. Thinking about what you can do with €5000 makes me angry, one must be snobby or elitist or plain criminal to earn so much money that such kind of expense is no problem.

I've not heard spring 1, though its of course fairly old now.

Im referring to spring 2 or spring 3.
I have the ares 2 and spring 3 here at the moment and it's not really even close.

Both are great dacs especially at their price points but there is a significant jump between them

 

[ShenaRingo326]

I've not heard spring 1, though its of course fairly old now.

Im referring to spring 2 or spring 3.
I have the ares 2 and spring 3 here at the moment and it's not really even close.

Both are great dacs especially at their price points but there is a significant jump between them

looking forward to a review on ares 2!

 

[GoldenSound]

looking forward to a review on ares 2!

Ares 2 is a lovely DAC especially for the price. At the moment it and the D1SE are my recommendations at that pricepoint depending on user preference.
There are only two things I don't like about the Ares 2:

1) The Delay makes it a no-go for movies/games. But of course not an issue for music
2) Denafrips 'NOS' is not NOS. It's linear interpolation oversampling, so it's somewhat misleading for them to call it NOS.

But it sounds great

 

[sajunky]

2) Denafrips 'NOS' is not NOS. It's linear interpolation oversampling, so it's somewhat misleading for them to call it NOS.

Prove it.

 

[GoldenSound]

Prove it.

Sure!

Firstly, we can show it by simply looking at the impulse response. Here's what a NOS impulse would be expected to look like:

Output rises to the value of the sample, holds, and then moves back down to value of next sample. No oversampling or interpolation, resulting in a square output IR.
This for example is the impulse response recorded from the Phasure NOS1A dac:

Exact behaviour described above, only difference from the theoretical is that the transition is limited by slew rate of the dac and there is a little overshoot on the square wave likely due to impedance matching or something.

If there is analog reconstruction or a low pass filter then it will look something like this:

Still the described sample and hold behaviour, just with visible LPF modifications as you would expect (interesting visual/interactive demo of this is available here: https://demonstrations.wolfram.com/ResponseOfLowPassRCFilterToPeriodicWaveforms/ )

And yet when we go to denafrips 'NOS', we see this:

No NOS/Sample and hold behaviour at all, it is simply linearly interpolating from sample to sample.
In fact, if we record this at a 2.5mhz sample rate on the APx555 we can see this:

A stepping behaviour at 32x the 44.1khz sample rate being fed to the DAC. Implying it is oversampling at a 32x rate, and using linear interpolation.

This means if we play something such as a 15khz sine wave, then you can clearly see the linear interpolation between samples:

Secondly - Demonstrate by change in slew/transition time dependent on sample rate.
If it were NOS, slew rate would be identical for any sample rate. It would simply move up to the value of the sample at the fastest rate it can. However because it is interpolating, adding extra samples in, it moves at a different rate dependent on the time between samples/sample rate.

44.1khz:

192khz:

Much faster! Even though it shouldn't be


This is already quite conclusive, but just to be sure, we can prove it mathematically as well.

Linear Interpolation gives a squared sinc frequency response

PI/2 ( so 22.05k @ 44.1k sample rate ) SIN(PI/2) / (PI/2) gives us -3.9dB droop for a NOS
PI/2 ( so 22.05k @ 44.1k sample rate ) (SIN(PI/2) / (PI/2))^2 gives us -7.84dB droop for a for a linear interpolate

(Note graph is offset about 0.2dB)

Can see here that the may in NOS behaves exactly as the maths for NOS would predict.
And the Ares 2 does not, instead behaving exactly as the maths for linear interpolation oversampling would predict. Rolling off at -7.84dB by 22.05khz (almost 4dB more than NOS)

So yes, denafrips 'NOS' is simply linear interpolation oversampling. It is not actually NOS.


One final thing, in John Atkinson's linearity measurements, denafrips' DSP prevented the measurement from working properly, showing that there is signal processing/alteration happening. Though this is hardly unexpected, denafrips literally has their 'DSP board' in the dac. And has revised it several times.

And just to be clear: This is NOT me saying 'grr denafrips bad'. Far from it. I like denafrips dacs and I think that some especially the Ares 2 are amazing value for money.
I just hate misleading or dishonest descriptions/features/specs on products.