[Whazzzup]

Depends on how much discretionary capital one has.

 

[tlite]

Looks like most of you can definitely hear a difference between DACs!

I have an A/B switch setup using an RCA switch box.

Understanding that there's more to it, would the same chip, even used in different DACs, contribute to some similarity? (The MOTU M4 and Dragonfly Red both use the same DAC chip - a Sabre ES9016. That said, the iFi Zen DAC v2 has an XMOS 16-core chip with proprietary software, and I still didn't hear a difference between that and the others.)

I don't have any access to the higher end stuff some folks have mentioned here (Chord DAVE, Gustard x26 Pro, etc.) but maybe I'd hear it with one of those?

And there's the other possibility, which is... I just can't hear the difference.

 

[Mark200]

Looks like most of you can definitely hear a difference between DACs!

I have an A/B switch setup using an RCA switch box.

Understanding that there's more to it, would the same chip, even used in different DACs, contribute to some similarity? (The MOTU M4 and Dragonfly Red both use the same DAC chip - a Sabre ES9016. That said, the iFi Zen DAC v2 has an XMOS 16-core chip with proprietary software, and I still didn't hear a difference between that and the others.)

I don't have any access to the higher end stuff some folks have mentioned here (Chord DAVE, Gustard x26 Pro, etc.) but maybe I'd hear it with one of those?

And there's the other possibility, which is... I just can't hear the difference.

The iFi Zen DAC Signature V2 does have a 16-core processor, but the basic DAC conversion is done with a Burr-Brown True Native chipset (aka "bit prefect"). Burr-Brown is a trademark of Texas Instruments, and has been making various DAC chips for many years (with improvements over the years). I believe the V2 uses two Burr-Brown DAC chips, but not sure.

Just about all advanced DAC's have a processor in addition to the basic DAC chipset to process things like MQA, etc. According to iFi, the V2 upgrade to 16 cores (form 8 on previous model) allows faster MQA processing and the ability to be a MQA decoder rather than just a renderer.

 

[iFi audio]

The iFi Zen DAC Signature V2 does have a 16-core processor, but the basic DAC conversion is done with a Burr-Brown True Native chipset (aka "bit prefect").

Yup, that processor is our XMOS chip does signal processing and it also is a part of our digital receiving end and then some. And yes, Burr-Brown is our DAC of choice that does digital-to-analog conversion once it gets digital data from that XMOS. Hope this helps, thanks!

 

[gregorio]

Assuming same headphones, no EQ, and same amp- can you really hear a difference?

Not sure how to answer your poll. Given the obvious conditions of level matched and a reasonable listening level, then generally there are no audible differences between the vast majority of DACs.

There are some pathological exceptions though, some audiophile DACs which are deliberately designed to have audibly lower fidelity, some NOS DACs for example. As I have heard the difference using such a DAC should I vote “yes”, even though there is no audible difference with all the others?

G

 

[Runrunsmithfly]

I have five budget DACs and they all bring something different to the table. My Modi 3E, Modi 3+, Modi multibit, Modius, and Cambridge DacMagic100 all have there own sound signature. I could not tell the difference between my Bifrost multibit ( not Bifrost 2 ) and Modi multibit or my Bifrost 4490 and Modi 3+.

 

[reggiegasket]

Comparing the internal DAC in my Hegel H120 to an external Qutest DAC is simple and easy and highlights how good the Qutest is. The Hegel's DAC is more than fine, and sounds more forward/brighter but the Qutest is smoother and more natural, and easier to listen to over extended periods.

[This is using a Node 2i streamer, with an optical feed from the Node direct to the Hegel's DAC, and a coax lead from the Node to the Qutest, then a decent RCA interconnect from the Qutest to the Hegel.]

 

[Ufanco]

Definitely in the camp of hearing a difference btw Dac’s. I feel it become’s more noticeable the higher the quality of headphones/iem’s that are used.
Honestly surprised to see so many votes that couldn’t hear a difference. I just thought it was a fact different dac’s sound different.

 

[dougq]

Definitely in the camp of hearing a difference btw Dac’s. I feel it become’s more noticeable the higher the quality of headphones/iem’s that are used.
Honestly surprised to see so many votes that couldn’t hear a difference. I just thought it was a fact different dac’s sound different.

Nah. I had my wife switch between sources for me on some Arya, focal clear mg, and stellias. It’s actually common from what I have read (and even some companies hint at this) that people won’t be able to hear the differences when blind tested.

The biggest difference I’ve heard is through functionality with something like an rme where It had a built in peq so I can color the sound how I want.

 

[Ufanco]

Nah. I had my wife switch between sources for me on some Arya, focal clear mg, and stellias. It’s actually common from what I have read (and even some companies hint at this) that people won’t be able to hear the differences when blind tested.

The biggest difference I’ve heard is through functionality with something like an rme where It had a built in peq so I can color the sound how I want.

Interesting i‘m not doubting you. I was surprised to hear they sound the same to some people. I definitely hear a different sound when using different sources with a different dac‘s in them.
Wish I didn’t it would have saved me money on upgrades.

 

[gregorio]

Definitely in the camp of hearing a difference btw Dac’s.

There isn’t really “a camp” of hearing a difference between DACs. There’s a camp that believe they do (but actually can’t) and another camp that cannot hear a difference between DACs (with a few pathological exceptions).

Honestly surprised to see so many votes that couldn’t hear a difference.

Assuming you’re not comparing one of the pathological exceptions, this quote and the next one is probably why you perceive a difference.

I just thought it was a fact different dac’s sound different.

That’s effectively a circular argument, although you might not realise it and it’s effectively proof that marketing works!

If your brain sees two different DACs and/or knows they’re different, but doesn’t actually hear a difference, that’s a conflict of information that your brain will typically try to resolve. It will often do that by changing what you’re hearing/perceiving, so it agrees with your other senses and knowledge. In a controlled double blind test you can’t see the different DACs, have any other conscious or subconscious clues and don’t even know if the DAC being played is the same or a different one. So now there is no conflict of information between your sight/knowledge and your hearing and what you hear is not altered by your brain. The obvious differences you believed you could easily hear previously, you suddenly can’t anymore.

BTW, it doesn’t matter how good your audio reproduction equipment is, the actual audio differences between the vast majority of DACs are below, or typically way below audibility.

It’s actually common from what I have read (and even some companies hint at this) that people won’t be able to hear the differences when blind tested.

It’s not just common, it’s always! (with the pathological exceptions already mentioned in this thread). There are some conditions that should be obvious though, a reasonable listening level and of course different DACs often have different output voltages, so they need to be volume matched.

A very few audiophile manufacturers/sellers are somewhat more honest about the above facts than others. Most aren’t though, because obviously not so many audiophiles would buy expensive DACs if they knew there’s no audible difference with a $100 or even cheaper DAC. And, this doesn’t just apply to DACs but a surprisingly wide range of audiophile products; the vast majority of amps, audiophile cables, to name just two.

I definitely hear a different sound when using different sources with a different dac‘s in them.

Different sources can produce differences that are audible. However, it’s not because they have different DACs, it’s for other reasons. For example, they may apply some sort of DSP; compression, loudness normalisation, EQ, etc.

G

 

[Merkurio]

We're at Head-Fi, obviously most people are going to hear even the number of electrons passing through the cable and other fantasies created in their minds by mere confirmation biases. Some of them get very angry reading this and become sarcastic-elitist as a defense mechanism (against the irrationality of their purchases) telling you that "you can't hear the differences because you're poor and can't afford the proper gear to be able to do so" (gear they do have and you don't, of course).

Then, in a proper controlled blind test (matching voltages and everything correctly), the results would be remarkably funny as expected, but don't try to dig the hole of rationality here, at least use the Sound Science subforum.

...And I come from the future anticipating that this thread will end up closed sooner or later and most replies will be deleted by the mods (including this one, probably) because they're not in line with the "rules and principles" of Head-Fi, AKA you can annoy their sponsors. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Merkurio]

Yup, that processor is our XMOS chip does signal processing and it also is a part of our digital receiving end and then some. And yes, Burr-Brown is our DAC of choice that does digital-to-analog conversion once it gets digital data from that XMOS. Hope this helps, thanks!

Hi, iFi audio!

From an honest manufacturer and even giving a sponsor perspective, do you agree with the prevailing sentiment of this thread (and Head-Fi overall) stating that budget DACs -including yours- are not on pair with higher-end offerings from your summit-fi competitors?

Do a budget DAC from your product portfolio (only a DAC, not the amplifiers) fails short in the very basic task of converting the signal in the most transparent and faithfully way possible to the degree of making an audible difference compared with a $3,500 DAC?

I would really appreciate your sincere opinion about this subject.

 

[DJW50]

Comparing the internal DAC in my Hegel H120 to an external Qutest DAC is simple and easy and highlights how good the Qutest is. The Hegel's DAC is more than fine, and sounds more forward/brighter but the Qutest is smoother and more natural, and easier to listen to over extended periods.

[This is using a Node 2i streamer, with an optical feed from the Node direct to the Hegel's DAC, and a coax lead from the Node to the Qutest, then a decent RCA interconnect from the Qutest to the Hegel.]

Same here, my Pathos Inpol Ear has a very good DAC (optional) but I had a Qutest on loan and as good as the built in DAC is I bought a Qutest straight away. I've splashed out on a LPS for the Qutest too that seems to help as well.

 

[Ufanco]

There isn’t really “a camp” of hearing a difference between DACs. There’s a camp that believe they do (but actually can’t) and another camp that cannot hear a difference between DACs (with a few pathological exceptions).

Assuming you’re not comparing one of the pathological exceptions, this quote and the next one is probably why you perceive a difference.

That’s effectively a circular argument, although you might not realise it and it’s effectively proof that marketing works!

If your brain sees two different DACs and/or knows they’re different, but doesn’t actually hear a difference, that’s a conflict of information that your brain will typically try to resolve. It will often do that by changing what you’re hearing/perceiving, so it agrees with your other senses and knowledge. In a controlled double blind test you can’t see the different DACs, have any other conscious or subconscious clues and don’t even know if the DAC being played is the same or a different one. So now there is no conflict of information between your sight/knowledge and your hearing and what you hear is not altered by your brain. The obvious differences you believed you could easily hear previously, you suddenly can’t anymore.

BTW, it doesn’t matter how good your audio reproduction equipment is, the actual audio differences between the vast majority of DACs are below, or typically way below audibility.

It’s not just common, it’s always! (with the pathological exceptions already mentioned in this thread). There are some conditions that should be obvious though, a reasonable listening level and of course different DACs often have different output voltages, so they need to be volume matched.

A very few audiophile manufacturers/sellers are somewhat more honest about the above facts than others. Most aren’t though, because obviously not so many audiophiles would buy expensive DACs if they knew there’s no audible difference with a $100 or even cheaper DAC. And, this doesn’t just apply to DACs but a surprisingly wide range of audiophile products; the vast majority of amps, audiophile cables, to name just two.

Different sources can produce differences that are audible. However, it’s not because they have different DACs, it’s for other reasons. For example, they may apply some sort of DSP; compression, loudness normalisation, EQ, etc.

G

So basically your saying there no difference in sound between different dac chips and we just hearing the differences is how each source change the sound?
I never really considered that since always heard there was a different in sound signature between say a burr chip compared to ESS, AKM or R2R. Guess going have to read more on this subject since your offering a different view and one I haven’t considered in the past.