[ScareDe2]

That is very interesting. I will use those facts in my other discussion when people tell me to only focus on what I can hear instead of trying to lower the noise floor. I can't hear the nose floor without cranking my amp to max level on high output. I have find that by lowering that noise floor I do get a smoother sound. In my experience the computer is the number one problem when it comes to noisy floor, especially a hard disk drive, that I have replaced by a solid state driver. Upgrading to GEN5 also helped.

So, a great DAC can actually get rid of all that noise by itself? Or maybe the Bifrost is just more sensitive to those external noises. I would like to understand,

 

[Music Alchemist]

That is very interesting. I will use those facts in my other discussion when people tell me to only focus on what I can hear instead of trying to lower the noise floor. I can't hear the nose floor without cranking my amp to max level on high output. I have find that by lowering that noise floor I do get a smoother sound. In my experience the computer is the number one problem when it comes to noisy floor, especially a hard disk drive, that I have replaced by a solid state driver. Upgrading to GEN5 also helped.

So, a great DAC can actually get rid of all that noise by itself? Or maybe the Bifrost is just more sensitive to those external noises. I would like to understand,

Some of the most unexpected things can be audible. I use a $1,000+ software solution (Windows Server 2016 Standard + AudiophileOptimizer) to change how my computer functions and stop most processes and services, focusing on sound quality alone. In the past, I thought this type of thing was nonsense since it's digital and whatnot...but technically, even digital is comprised of analog electrical impulses, and it turns out it's more sensitive than most think. These software tweaks (which are bit-perfect, by the way; no DSP) result in better sound quality to my ears and many others.

Read through the quotes I shared if you didn't already. (You need to expand the bottom two.)

It's the DAC creating noise in this instance. It's not so much the noise floor itself (listed in some specs) as small bursts of noise and the noise floor moving up and down at certain points in the music. And yes, source jitter (and the lack thereof) can impact the sound as well.

 

[PointyFox]

If you don't want noise, don't power your amp or dac off of a computer or USB hub port and keep your dac and amp far away from noisy electronics such as monitors, computers, cell phones, cordless phones, and fluorescent lights. Other than that, I guess I'm in the minority that thinks all amps and DACs sound the same. I've had the Bifrost multibit and couldn't tell it apart from my soundcard. I also have the CHORD Mojo and can't tell it apart either. It does have pretty lights though. I do have a good ear. I took that digital watermark test and was able to correctly identity which tracks had the digital watermarks 81.25% of the time in a noisy environment.

 

[Music Alchemist]

If you don't want noise, don't power your amp or dac off of a computer or USB hub port and keep your dac and amp far away from noisy electronics such as monitors, computers, cell phones, cordless phones, and fluorescent lights. Other than that, I guess I'm in the minority that thinks all amps and DACs sound the same. I've had the Bifrost multibit and couldn't tell it apart from my soundcard. I also have the CHORD Mojo and can't tell it apart either. It does have pretty lights though. I do have a good ear. I took that digital watermark test and was able to correctly identity which tracks had the digital watermarks 81.25% of the time in a noisy environment.

I think you should spend more time with high-end DACs.

The Chord 2Qute and Schiit Modi Multibit sounded very different when I directly compared them (volume-matched too) with speakers, for example.

 

[PointyFox]

I think you should spend more time with high-end DACs.

The Chord 2Qute and Schiit Modi Multibit sounded very different when I directly compared them (volume-matched too) with speakers, for example.

If DACs just exist to turn digital into analog, there is only one way to do this correctly which can be verified using an oscilloscope.
Let's say that different high end DACs can produce signals that are not just slightly different, but are different enough that the signal is audibly "very different".
As an engineer, I use DACs all the time to acquire data from sensors, often with circuits costing less than $0.50. If the signal can be off enough from DAC to DAC to sound "very different", even with high-end DACs, it should have a HUGE impact on the data I'm getting.
Luckily, this has yet to be the case as shown through calibrations; but I must just be getting lucky and everyone who uses a DAC should be greatly concerned over this. You must inform the scientific community at once!

 

[Music Alchemist]

If DACs just exist to turn digital into analog, there is only one way to do this correctly which can be verified using an oscilloscope.
Let's say that different high end DACs can produce signals that are not just slightly different, but are different enough that the signal is audibly "very different".
As an engineer, I use DACs all the time to acquire data from sensors, often with circuits costing less than $0.50. If the signal can be off enough from DAC to DAC to sound "very different", even with high-end DACs, it should have a HUGE impact on the data I'm getting.
Luckily, this has yet to be the case as shown through calibrations; but I must just be getting lucky and everyone who uses a DAC should be greatly concerned over this. You must inform the scientific community at once!

You clearly don't understand how DACs work. It's nothing so simple as copying a digital file (which can be done on a computer in an instant without error), and it is not digital to digital conversion; it's digital to analog conversion. The true job of a DAC is to reproduce the original analog waveform; not to merely reproduce the sampled data. This requires enormously complex technology.

DACs differ dramatically in all sorts of ways. As I touched upon earlier, there is timing accuracy, tap lengths, noise shaping, noise floor modulation, jitter, distortion, output impedance, noise floor, dynamic range, and all sorts of other factors that can be measured.

The fact that there is identical data between two cheap DAC chips (or whatever it is you're measuring) from the sensors at your job—or that you can accomplish certain tasks with cheap DAC chips—proves nothing, and I'd venture to guess that it has nothing to do with high-end audiophile DACs, etc.

If you want to share the fact that you have not heard a difference between the DACs you have used, that's fine...but countless others do hear a difference, and any experienced audiophile can tell you that your claim of all DACs sounding the same is utterly false. I suggest keeping theory-based objectivist "all DACs sound the same" arguments in Sound Science where they belong.

 

[PointyFox]

You clearly don't understand how DACs work. It's nothing so simple as copying a digital file (which can be done on a computer in an instant without error), and it is not digital to digital conversion; it's digital to analog conversion. The true job of a DAC is to reproduce the original analog waveform; not to merely reproduce the sampled data. This requires enormously complex technology.

DACs differ dramatically in all sorts of ways. As I touched upon earlier, there is timing accuracy, tap lengths, noise shaping, noise floor modulation, jitter, distortion, output impedance, noise floor, dynamic range, and all sorts of other factors that can be measured.

The fact that there is identical data between two cheap DAC chips (or whatever it is you're measuring) from the sensors at your job—or that you can accomplish certain tasks with cheap DAC chips—proves nothing, and I'd venture to guess that it has nothing to do with high-end audiophile DACs, etc.

If you want to share the fact that you have not heard a difference between the DACs you have used, that's fine...but countless others do hear a difference, and any experienced audiophile can tell you that your claim of all DACs sounding the same is utterly false. I suggest keeping theory-based objectivist "all DACs sound the same" arguments in Sound Science where they belong.

If not hearing a difference should go into a "Sound Science" board, hearing a difference should go into a "Sound Magic" board. This "everyone hears it so I'm right" argument is also often applied to cables..

 

[Music Alchemist]

If not hearing a difference should go into a "Sound Science" board, hearing a difference should go into a "Sound Magic" board. This "everyone hears it so I'm right" argument is also often applied to cables..

I already clearly explained this...but I guess I have to again...

Stating that you do not personally hear a difference between two or more specific DACs is fine.

Stating that all DACs sound the same is not okay, and such claims belong in Sound Science. (Here is the link)

If you do not hear a difference between DACs, you need to listen to high-end DACs, because the difference is oftentimes very obvious.

 

[ScareDe2]

Just to clarify, the Chord Mojo is a DAC and AMP, whereas the Bifrost is a dedicated DAC. When you say that the Mojo sounds the same as the Bifrost, have you achieve to make the Mojo work as a dedicated DAC? That being asked, the mojo with its integrated amp can not sound the same as a Bifrost with let's say a Lyr amp. It is two different pairs of elements. And the Lyr is a way more powerful amplifier that on its own will reveal more details than the integrated amp in the mojo, right?

 

[leeperry]

There's nothing like cut/pasting commercial bs and then patronizing other members regarding subjective matters, kudos for making a difference.

 

[Music Alchemist]

That being asked, the mojo with its integrated amp can not sound the same as a Bifrost with let's say a Lyr amp. It is two different pairs of elements. And the Lyr is a way more powerful amplifier that on its own will reveal more details than the integrated amp in the mojo, right?

Actually, since the amplification in Chord DAC/amps is in the DAC's analog output stage and is cleaner than even the line outs of conventional DACs, you generally get more accuracy and transparency driving headphones (and even sensitive passive speakers via the right cable) directly from it. This has been the experience of many, including myself. Some prefer an external amp, of course, and whether you perceive more detail from direct drive or an external amp depends on many factors. The Mojo has enough power to drive nearly any headphone, though. When driving the HD 800, I heard almost no difference between the Mojo and $4,300 430HAD. The extra power of more powerful amps is rarely ever used unless we're talking about very hard-to-drive headphones.

Overall, I heard more of an improvement from the Mojo compared to other electronics when driving headphones directly from it rather than using an external amp (whether with headphones or speakers).

 

[Svatopluk]

Actually, since the amplification in Chord DAC/amps is in the DAC's analog output stage and is cleaner than even the line outs of conventional DACs, you generally get more accuracy and transparency driving headphones (and even sensitive passive speakers via the right cable) directly from it. This has been the experience of many, including myself. Some prefer an external amp, of course, and whether you perceive more detail from direct drive or an external amp depends on many factors. The Mojo has enough power to drive nearly any headphone, though. When driving the HD 800, I heard almost no difference between the Mojo and $4,300 430HAD. The extra power of more powerful amps is rarely ever used unless we're talking about very hard-to-drive headphones.

Overall, I heard more of an improvement from the Mojo compared to other electronics when driving headphones directly from it rather than using an external amp (whether with headphones or speakers).

You have opened my eyes and ears to the crappy state of my Gumby and all other non Chord DAC's of the world and I thank you.

 

[leeperry]

Yeah, my full discrete R2R Soekris DAC sounds absolutely horrendous

 

[Music Alchemist]

You have opened my eyes and ears to the crappy state of my Gumby and all other non Chord DAC's of the world and I thank you.

Yeah, my full discrete R2R Soekris DAC sounds absolutely horrendous

I never said anything about R2R DACs sounding bad. They are well-known to sound great, in fact. But they have much lower technical performance: slower timing precision (we're talking microseconds vs nanoseconds), higher distortion and noise, etc. Some prefer euphonic colorations; I prefer strict accuracy.

 

[Svatopluk]

I never said anything about R2R DACs sounding bad. They are well-known to sound great, in fact. But they have much lower technical performance: slower timing precision (we're talking microseconds vs nanoseconds), higher distortion and noise, etc. Some prefer euphonic colorations; I prefer strict accuracy.

It's called sarcasm. Acoustic environment plays a huge role in how we perceive tone so strict accuracy may be an unobtainable goal.