[DelsFan]

Has anyone tried this?  Insert their low-end DAC (like Schitt Modi 2 Uber or Bifrost, Bel Canto DAC-1, etc.) between their cable box or Blu-Ray player, and Sound Bar or Sound Base?  Without a dedicated DAC, one is relying on either the $5 DAC in their Blu-Ray player or the $4 DAC in their sound bar.  It seems inserting ones inexpensive DAC (or leftover DAC, from before they upgraded their headphone setup with a new $800 - $1500 unit) should provide several orders of magnitude of improvement in their television listening experience.  
 
Sorry if this is a little off topic, but by the same token people here are likely to (at the beginning of their journey at least) have an inexpensive DAC that would take about three minutes to insert between their cable box, Blu-Ray player, or receiver, and their low to medium cost sound bar setup (or, if you are like me, ZVOX sound base).  I start here, because I expect most of the people here would not be able to stomach listening through their TV speakers while watching TV.
 
I know a Surround System is better, but I've had three low-end soundbars (well, two low-end and my current pretty-good sound base) using analog interconnects and power cords that perhaps cost more than the units themselves - and for sure the accessories cost more than the speaker if you include the PS Audio Duet power conditioner I use - that had a degree of realism and soundstage; they were not terrible for listening to music, especially if you were listening in the other room.  
 
It seems to me even the (for many of us, really low-cost) $149 Schiit Modi2 Uber should be a leap forward of several magnitudes for Television watching/listening.  Comments or experiences?
 
 
 
 
Back Story, if anyone cares:
a) I am upgrading to DirecTVs latest DVR, the HR-54, and it doesn't have RCA analog outputs, just HDMI, digital coax, and digital optical outputs.  It does have a 10-pin A/V out plug which can be used with their $6 10-pin dongle (with two RCA audio connectors on the other end and three component video connectors - of course this would be unacceptable  

 !
 
b) Therefore, I have to find a way to get an analog signal to my ZVOX sound base, which I love dearly (for non-surround applications) but the DAC in it is fair to poor, as one would expect.  (Yes, I know I can hook up a RCA interconnect to my television and run it to my sound base, but then I'm relying on the same $5 DAC in my television.)
 
c) So, using an inexpensive DAC seems like one solution, and it seems a cheap one (by Head-Fi standards) should yield a 100 fold improvement over the one in one's cable box, blu-ray player, or sound bar.  Anyone try this yet?

 

[DelsFan]

Being as this is a headphone forum, I can understand the underwhelming response to my question.  Although I'm sure many of you have DACs, and several of those people do have sound bars or sound bases - maybe someone will get curious and try their DAC in their TV to sound bar/base audio chain.
 
For your edification, let me tell what little I found out - and later when I have more time I'll investigate further.
 
I received a nice response from the tech department which designed my sound base - his response was (paraphrasing):
 
1) Before the signal goes to the speakers in my sound base, it goes through an on-board digital processor and/or digital amplifier (as I expect is the case with almost all sound bars/bases).
 
2) If you send my soundbase a digital signal it takes the signal, "operates" on it, converts it to analog, and sends it to the speakers.
 
3) If you send my soundbase an analog signal it takes the analog signal, converts it back to digital, operates on it, converts it to analog, and sends it to its speakers.  [Somewhat competently, as this is what I'm doing now, albeit with $200/pair interconnects; although it seems this would not be the preferred method since it involves an extra conversion using, presumably, a not too expensive analog to digital converter.]
 
4) Since the analog signal gets converted back to digital when it arrives at the sound base, the technician said there would be little or no improvement if I inserted a decent $200 to $400 DAC (like Schiit Modi2 uber, or Bifrost) between my receiver or Blu Ray player and my sound base.
 
 
I expect the truth is, sound bars and sound bases are not high end products; and they all feel the need to create some sort of faux surround field - digitally.  Maybe there are none sold which allow for an analog signal to go (only through crossovers and then) directly to the speakers - whereupon the inclusion of a dedicated DAC, bypassing the DAC in the sound bar/base, would present a much better analog signal to the speakers of the sound bar/base - and yield impressive results for (relatively) little money. Truly inexpensive if we already own the "good" DAC for our headphone setup. 
FOR MY MONEY, I'd be happy to utilize a sound base that would simply take an analog 2.1 signal and reproduce it well - I'll suggest a better soundstage could be had that way (with real good equipment) than with cheap integrated DACs and the resulting fake processing found in most sound bars/bases - and the accuracy of the sound (guitars sound like guitars, violins and cellos sound like they are there with you in the room) would be a lot better.  I'm sure I'm in the minority for wanting this type of product though - I want great sound but not a surround receiver and speaker system.
 
Canton and Cambridge make sound bases (and sound bars) but I've got real work to do now, work which allows me to indulge in musical and theatrical pursuits.  Maybe in a few weeks I'll investigate these two "higher-end" companies' offerings and see if anyone makes a unit that would allow the audiophile to avoid cheap the digital processing in their sound bar/base in order to enjoy "better" sound without all the extra equipment.

 

[ProtegeManiac]

Originally Posted by DelsFan /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 

Has anyone tried inserting their DAC between Blu-Ray player and Sound Bar/Base?

Has anyone tried this?  Insert their low-end DAC (like Schitt Modi 2 Uber or Bifrost, Bel Canto DAC-1, etc.) between their cable box or Blu-Ray player, and Sound Bar or Sound Base?  Without a dedicated DAC, one is relying on either the $5 DAC in their Blu-Ray player or the $4 DAC in their sound bar.  It seems inserting ones inexpensive DAC (or leftover DAC, from before they upgraded their headphone setup with a new $800 - $1500 unit) should provide several orders of magnitude of improvement in their television listening experience.  

 

Why spend several hundred dollars on a DAC for what ultimately will be a transducer system with no real stereo imaging? Even headphones with some Crossfeed at least have better stereo imaging on account of how compact the system is (ie, it's not taking up that much space in the living room) and you can listen a bit louder. On a soundbar you'll sit 2m or so away from it but you're not going to get a 2m wide soundstage anyway. Besides, some soundbars have optical input - it's not just for getting a digital signal from the BluRay, it's for getting a signal from the TV using HDMI ARC. It's basically for everybody who can buy a large TV and wants "big sound" despite not having the money or space for an A/V  receiver.

 

Plus if it's a "surround" soundbar with 5.1 physical channels you have even smaller drivers, and with a stereo DAC, you now lose all the other channels apart from FL and FR, so even if you just relegate an older stereo DAC to the living room, it's still not worth it.

 

A soundbar is really for convenience and compactness with minimal wiring. If you'll complicate the wiring and the entire set up by adding a stereo DAC in there you might as well just get an A/V receiver and  small surround speakers and run the wires around the room. At least you'll get real surround out of it.
 

 
Back Story, if anyone cares:
a) I am upgrading to DirecTVs latest DVR, the HR-54, and it doesn't have RCA analog outputs, just HDMI, digital coax, and digital optical outputs.  It does have a 10-pin A/V out plug which can be used with their $6 10-pin dongle (with two RCA audio connectors on the other end and three component video connectors - of course this would be unacceptable  

 !
 
b) Therefore, I have to find a way to get an analog signal to my ZVOX sound base, which I love dearly (for non-surround applications) but the DAC in it is fair to poor, as one would expect.  (Yes, I know I can hook up a RCA interconnect to my television and run it to my sound base, but then I'm relying on the same $5 DAC in my television.)
 
c) So, using an inexpensive DAC seems like one solution, and it seems a cheap one (by Head-Fi standards) should yield a 100 fold improvement over the one in one's cable box, blu-ray player, or sound bar.  Anyone try this yet?

 

I'd much rather get rid of the ZVOX than use a nice DAC with a soundbar. In fact, since it's going to be used with a TV and for watching, I'd sooner get an HTiB, or at least a decent receiver with one of those wood cabinet 5.1 sets. If you don't want to run wires for surround going behind you or to the seats, mount the surrounds above the HDTV with a lot of toe-out.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Yamaha-NS-P40BL-Speaker-Package-Black/dp/B00CN45XHG/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1487456113&sr=8-5&keywords=5.1+home+theater+speakers

https://www.amazon.com/Pioneer-VSX-530-K-Receiver-Bluetooth-Technology/dp/B0141JVEHS/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1487456177&sr=8-2&keywords=av+receiver

 

If you really just want to try if a DAC improves anything on it then go with the Modi2. You're not going to get any benefits from a better DAC which usually just improves imaging a little bit, and that's on headphones. You might get better improvement on speakers, but that assumes stereo speakers far apart from each other, not crammed into a single box.

 

 

 
1) Before the signal goes to the speakers in my sound base, it goes through an on-board digital processor and/or digital amplifier (as I expect is the case with almost all sound bars/bases).
 
2) If you send my soundbase a digital signal it takes the signal, "operates" on it, converts it to analog, and sends it to the speakers.
 
3) If you send my soundbase an analog signal it takes the analog signal, converts it back to digital, operates on it, converts it to analog, and sends it to its speakers.  [Somewhat competently, as this is what I'm doing now, albeit with $200/pair interconnects; although it seems this would not be the preferred method since it involves an extra conversion using, presumably, a not too expensive analog to digital converter.]
 
4) Since the analog signal gets converted back to digital when it arrives at the sound base, the technician said there would be little or no improvement if I inserted a decent $200 to $400 DAC (like Schiit Modi2 uber, or Bifrost) between my receiver or Blu Ray player and my sound base.

 

Even without the ADC-DAC circuit it would really have to be a piss poor DAC chip and implementation for the sound to jut be horrible that an outboard DAC will improve it, considering that, barring having a comparo where one DAC has a narrow response range or a skewed curve, or at worst some variance in the line level output voltage, the only difference DAC upgrades have is in imaging and microdetail, and you don't even have any real imaging on soundbars apart from any DSP that adds reverb to it.
 
 

 
I expect the truth is, sound bars and sound bases are not high end products; and they all feel the need to create some sort of faux surround field - digitally.  Maybe there are none sold which allow for an analog signal to go (only through crossovers and then) directly to the speakers - whereupon the inclusion of a dedicated DAC, bypassing the DAC in the sound bar/base, would present a much better analog signal to the speakers of the sound bar/base - and yield impressive results for (relatively) little money. 

 

It's not a matter of being high end or not, it's a matter of not having any real imaging because they're two speakers in one box, unlike two real stereo speakers on stands or two tower speakers set 1.5m++ away from each other. And given they're designed for convenient living room or bedroom HT, and movies have surround sound, they factor in an ADC so all incoming signals run through the DSP which simulates some kind of surround effect. Otherwise, you'd have five physical channels with everything coming from the front, you might as well use 2.0 digital going into 2.1 physical channels.
 
 

  FOR MY MONEY, I'd be happy to utilize a sound base that would simply take an analog 2.1 signal and reproduce it well - I'll suggest a better soundstage could be had that way (with real good equipment) than with cheap integrated DACs and the resulting fake processing found in most sound bars/bases - and the accuracy of the sound (guitars sound like guitars, violins and cellos sound like they are there with you in the room) would be a lot better.  I'm sure I'm in the minority for wanting this type of product though - I want great sound but not a surround receiver and speaker system.

 
At best you'll have to use a 2.1 soundbar with larger drivers like this Klipsch.
ttps://www.amazon.com/Klipsch-R-20B-Bluetooth-Soundbar-Subwoofer/dp/B00N3RW64K/ref=sr_1_2?s=aht&ie=UTF8&qid=1487456543&sr=1-2&keywords=Soundbar&refinements=p_89
 
I cannot tell however if it has a DSP chip. If you really just want a 2.1 system with a natural sound you'd be better off getting decent 2.1 speakers like this one along with a DAC...
https://www.amazon.com/Swans-Powered-Bookshelf-Speakers-Subwoofer/dp/B002TG3B7C/ref=sr_1_1?s=aht&ie=UTF8&qid=1487457363&sr=1-1&keywords=HiVi+M50W
 
...or just set up a system with a compact stereo receiver, speaker, and powered sub, like these:
 
NAD stereo receiver with SPDIF and subwoofer output
https://www.amazon.com/NAD-3020-Hybrid-Digital-Integrated/dp/B00F0OMUGS/ref=sr_1_1?s=aht&ie=UTF8&qid=1487457443&sr=1-1&keywords=D3020
 
Dayton speakers with Ribbon tweeters
https://www.amazon.com/Dayton-Audio-B652-AIR-Bookshelf-Speaker/dp/B00NOA58RS/ref=sr_1_1?s=aht&ie=UTF8&qid=1487457444&sr=1-1&keywords=B652+AIR
 
Dayton subwoofer
https://www.amazon.com/Dayton-Audio-SUB-800-Powered-Subwoofer/dp/B0063NU30K/ref=sr_1_2?s=aht&ie=UTF8&qid=1487457523&sr=1-2&keywords=Dayton+subwoofer

 

In other words, the natural sound you're looking for isn't going to come from tiny drivers squeezed into a single box made to fit under the display. What you need are large drivers in low resonance wood enclosures, and if you're using large drivers that don't fit under the HDTV anyway, you might as well get standmounts and a sub, or one pair of large towers.

 

[DelsFan]

 

 

...Even without the ADC-DAC circuit it would really have to be a piss poor DAC chip and implementation for the sound to jut be horrible that an outboard DAC will improve it, considering that, barring having a comparo where one DAC has a narrow response range or a skewed curve, or at worst some variance in the line level output voltage, the only difference DAC upgrades have is in imaging and microdetail, and you don't even have any real imaging on soundbars apart from any DSP that adds reverb to it...
 
 

 

 
Thanks very much for your detailed reply.  I've had 2-channel systems with expensive interconnects and speaker wire (OK, $200 and under stuff), vibrapods, tube preamp, spikes for speakers, a Linn Sondek turntable that didn't play 45s and didn't pick the tonearm up at the end of the record (now that I think about it, it had its own tubular metal, spiked, stand too); you get the idea.  And also the odd 5.1 surround system (I remember in the late 1980s when surround was pretty new, getting my surround processor, running speaker wire under the house for the rear speakers, and watching John Goodman and Richard Dreyfuss in "Always".  Off VHS tape.  When one of their airplanes exploded near the beginning of the movie, it was spectacular!).  For the room I have now I really like my sound base (some houses, like mine, have Great Rooms that are nice and open, but useless for serious listening - or in our case, even a surround system).  If you've never listened to one properly set up, you'd be surprised at how "airey" a sound bar/base can be, and semi-accurate for music.  I had a Boston Acoustics TV2 (I think), $200 with wireless sub, several years ago and it did real well.  There was a little bit of width, but a lot of height and depth. (Now that I think about it, there was no internal digital crap to mess up the sound, because its single input option was a solitary L and R RCA connection - an honest 2.1 bar that didn't try and do anything else.  It's at my Mom's; maybe I need to retrieve it!)  Even more width and depth can be heard with my (more expensive) ZVOX sound base - connected with left over $200/pair RCA interconnects.  When I hear a siren or the phone ring (from television programming) I sometimes have to mute the television to make sure it's not "real".  However, when I try either of its two "surround" modes a (very) little bit happens to the left and right and maybe rear, but the purity of the sound is muddied a little - I use the normal (perhaps unprocessed) mode as I'm all about accuracy and don't care about faux surround.
 
Really, what I'm looking for is a simple 2.1 box that doesn't degrade the sound by trying to perform magical tricks - just a simple box, five to seven forward facing speakers along with one or two downward facing subs.  The kind that isn't such a weak link that no "high-end" accessory or equipment added in could possibly help it.  I doubt it exists, because people aren't interested in sound quality (or reviewers either), they want bluetooth connectivity, HDMI inputs and outputs, and several surround options (all of which make the sound worse, not better).
 
I tried two other soundbars, with digital inputs, and they were terrible - unlistenable (un-watchable, since the sound is a great part of the viewing experience).  One was a $199 Sony I was testing for someone else, so it was Sony's low-end unit - I'm sure they make good products otherwise.  BUT, with the two units I didn't like, yes, the sound was excruciatingly planer: at most a foot or two in width wider than the soundbar itself, three or four feet in height, and zero depth.  With my current setup the width isn't great and there is nothing behind me, but the depth is phenomenal (for the price, and several speakers in a small thin box).  And the sound goes back at an angle - while the width in front of the television isn't much, a sound coming from 10 feet behind the television has a lot more width than one would expect.
 
As for neatness, an outboard DAC that I would also use for my headphone setup would fit neatly in my TV cabinet; and to avoid any degradation from using my Television's "straight-through" audio, I run analog cables directly from my DVR and Blu-Ray player to my sound base.  So putting a tiny (compared to any other piece of equipment in the chain) DAC on the shelf and inserting it between the source and the sound base in the audio chain would be neat and simple.
 
The improvement I've heard from "tweaks" like power conditioners, vibrapods, and/or speaker wire and interconnects - or in this case, a great DAC as opposed to the cheap DAC in the sound base - are as follows:
1) Listening to Dolly Parton sing "Those Memories" on the Trio Album (with Linda Ronstadt and Emmylou Harris), the improvement is instead of hearing her voice vibrate at 100 times per second, it seems like it is 1000 times for second.
2) Harmonies I couldn't hear before are now part of the listening experience - for those who don't believe in qualitative differences in cables, especially digital ones, hearing clearly a vocal part or backing instrument you weren't sure was even there before can't really be argued away by saying the listening test wasn't double blind...
3) The sound stage is wider and deeper.  There is more "air" around strings, horned instruments sound like they are really there in the room with you.  Again, this is not a subtle difference; if you go from living room "presence" to auditorium "presence" the difference isn't minimal or subjective.
I could go on.
 
[HEY, for you guitarists out there with single speaker amps like the Fender Blues DeVille or VOX AC15 (and a decent guitar, not your original $199 special), get an 18" length of Kimber 4TC speaker wire and replace your speaker wire with that - you'll be shocked at the improvement in clarity and if you can do it yourself (work the soldering iron competently) it won't cost you $15 to give it a try.]
 
 
OK, enough of even more off-topic postulations.  I will borrow a small but good DAC from one of my nearby headphone buddies and insert it in the chain; it will take five minutes or less to hook it up.  Literally, 10 minutes from the time my friend walks in the door we'll have it hooked up and have listened to one or two songs - and will have arrived at an initial opinion: quantitative change anyone could hear, or 0.5% change one can only discern by playing the same song over and over, swapping the DAC in and out.
 
I know this isn't the sound bar forum, but we've come this far.  I'll report back.

 

[ProtegeManiac]

  If you've never listened to one properly set up, you'd be surprised at how "airey" a sound bar/base can be, and semi-accurate for music.  I had a Boston Acoustics TV2 (I think), $200 with wireless sub, several years ago and it did real well.  There was a little bit of width, but a lot of height and depth. (Now that I think about it, there was no internal digital crap to mess up the sound, because its single input option was a solitary L and R RCA connection - an honest 2.1 bar that didn't try and do anything else.  It's at my Mom's; maybe I need to retrieve it!)  Even more width and depth can be heard with my (more expensive) ZVOX sound base - connected with left over $200/pair RCA interconnects.  When I hear a siren or the phone ring (from television programming) I sometimes have to mute the television to make sure it's not "real".  

 

I didn't say it cannnot totally be any good at all, I just meant it can't totally sound like a proper stereo system, which I thought was what you were gunning for. I've listened to distributors' set ups at the annual HiFi show here, and that includes HTs and yes, sound bar set ups, but they're still not the kind of imaging I like. Tonally yes, they can still be good enough, but not where the midwoofer needs to meet the bass because even the ones with 4in speakers are still using 4in speakers in a bar enclosure rather than 6in mids with 2x6in woofers in towers.
 

  However, when I try either of its two "surround" modes a (very) little bit happens to the left and right and maybe rear, but the purity of the sound is muddied a little - I use the normal (perhaps unprocessed) mode as I'm all about accuracy and don't care about faux surround.
 
Really, what I'm looking for is a simple 2.1 box that doesn't degrade the sound by trying to perform magical tricks - just a simple box, five to seven forward facing speakers along with one or two downward facing subs.  The kind that isn't such a weak link that no "high-end" accessory or equipment added in could possibly help it.  I doubt it exists, because people aren't interested in sound quality (or reviewers either), they want bluetooth connectivity, HDMI inputs and outputs, and several surround options (all of which make the sound worse, not better).

 

You can't have a physical 2ch DAC send a 2ch electronic signal into a system - soundbar or not - with "5 to 7 (physical) speakers" without the need to "perform magical tricks," like Dolby Pro Logic, which converts a 2ch CD (or whatever, like MP3, FLAC, cheap DVD without surround encoding) signal into "surround" sound. Pro Logic I just sends L and R signal to both FL/FR and Surround L/R, ProLogic II AFAIK "performs magic tricks" to take what is recorded across both channels to come out only in the Center channel.

 

If anything, having 2ch sound coming out of 5 to 7 (plus sub) physical channels is what makes it necessary for the system to rely on "perform(ing) magic tricks" with DSP," and at minimum, one other reason for why HT gear relies on digital transmission plus ADCs on analogue inputs is to run them through the DSP, with the minimum feature applied being the subwoofer crossover.

 

In short, to bypass the ADCs in soundbars and most HT receivers, you should just do away with HT systems altogether and do a 2.1 set up like the NAD D3020 with two speakers and a sub. The alternative is for you to try out 2.1 to 5.1/7.1 soundbars and see what produces the kind of sound you like despite it "perform(ing) magic tricks."
 

 
I tried two other soundbars, with digital inputs, and they were terrible - unlistenable (un-watchable, since the sound is a great part of the viewing experience).  One was a $199 Sony I was testing for someone else, so it was Sony's low-end unit - I'm sure they make good products otherwise.  BUT, with the two units I didn't like, yes, the sound was excruciatingly planer: at most a foot or two in width wider than the soundbar itself, three or four feet in height, and zero depth.  With my current setup the width isn't great and there is nothing behind me, but the depth is phenomenal (for the price, and several speakers in a small thin box).  And the sound goes back at an angle - while the width in front of the television isn't much, a sound coming from 10 feet behind the television has a lot more width than one would expect.

 

These are using the speaker equivalent of Dolby Headphone. That one takes a 5.1 to 7.1 signal and processes it into 2ch headphone audio. Not simply downmixing it, but it "performs magic tricks" so that even on headphones people using them will get some kind of sense that the Kraut shooting at them from 10m away on Battlefield 1 while not literally sounding like he's 10m away will still sound like he's not inside the player's head. In your case, if you were feeding it a 2ch signal, the "properly set-up" system might have a lot to do with a receiver or the soundbar's DSP knowing how to add reverb to a soundbar in a room to create the illusion that the sound is coming from where the speakers aren't.

 

And yes, as such, in your current set up since it uses an analogue input to go through an ADC, that's so it can run it through a DSP before its own DAC. In other words, some aspects that you liked were due to the DSP "perform(ing) magic tricks." If you really think about it, to profess dislike for "magic tricks" as such is like if Muggles, consumed by fear of wizards and sorcery especially after the whole Voldemort affair, started using Aveda Kedavra on Harry Potter and his friends to wipe them out. Which, going into a different fictional universe now, is what prompted some Space Marines to turn against the Emperor, after finding out that his slaughter of Psykers had more to do  with draining their Magick for immortal life than for fear of how Psykers can open passages for the armies of Chaos to pass from the Immaterium.

 

 

 
The improvement I've heard from "tweaks" like power conditioners, vibrapods, and/or speaker wire and interconnects - or in this case, a great DAC as opposed to the cheap DAC in the sound base - are as follows:
1) Listening to Dolly Parton sing "Those Memories" on the Trio Album (with Linda Ronstadt and Emmylou Harris), the improvement is instead of hearing her voice vibrate at 100 times per second, it seems like it is 1000 times for second.
2) Harmonies I couldn't hear before are now part of the listening experience - for those who don't believe in qualitative differences in cables, especially digital ones, hearing clearly a vocal part or backing instrument you weren't sure was even there before can't really be argued away by saying the listening test wasn't double blind...
3) The sound stage is wider and deeper.  There is more "air" around strings, horned instruments sound like they are really there in the room with you.  Again, this is not a subtle difference; if you go from living room "presence" to auditorium "presence" the difference isn't minimal or subjective.
I could go on

 

I can hear the same thing on a regular speaker set up, including my car (because a DSP "performing magic tricks" like time alignment is necessary when you're  not sitting in the center equidistant to each tweeter, midrange, midwoofer, and a subwoofer in front instead of the luggage compartment) but not on anything else. On headphones the main problem is left ear not hearing the right ear, and regarding vibrapods in particular, there are no airborne soundwaves (much less a subwoofer's) shaking the CDP or TT. And in my current headphone system with solid state memory, there are no moving parts - not even HDD parts - to suffer from vibrations. I have a 12AX7 and it's by Shuguang, but I'm going to see if a Mullard will reduce the noise, including the microphonics.

 

For soundbars a DSP will still go a longer way than those tweaks, and again, with your soundbase running an ADC, the reason for it is it has its own DSP "perform(ing the necessary) magic tricks," the same way that getting surround sound for immersion if not competitive advantage in games requires Dolby Headphone on the soundcard/receiver if not a headphone-specific audio embedded into the game's audio engine.

 

[Sam Lord]

+1 ProtegeManiac
 
DelsFan,
 
"Since the analog signal gets converted back to digital when it arrives at the sound base, the technician said there would be little or no improvement if I inserted a decent $200 to $400 DAC (like Schiit Modi2 uber, or Bifrost) between my receiver or Blu Ray player and my sound base."
 
No, it would sound *worse*: never add AD/DA conversions.
 
Look, you *like* the DSP stuff your Zvox is doing and you love the Zvox.  Therefore the DAC in the Zvox, however cheap, is not the weak link: DSP from a crappy DAC would sound worse than crappy.  For better sound, ditch the soundbar and get a pair of speakers, I suggest the Micca B42x at $90/pair.  And note that soundbars don't have subs. 
 
If you *do* get a real sub or two, don't fire them downwards: their direct radiation needs to time-align to the mains, [Edit : and] at the crossover frequency of small monitors the subs' sound will be directional.  The ideal solution is to mount the mains on massive, rigid stands astride and a little aft of the subs, but never mind.  If you *really* want to kick some ass get a Schiit Modibit, Saga preamp, and a Parasound Zamp Z3 to run the Miccas.
 
If the new rig doesn't ring your bells after a couple days send them back.  You could power the Miccas a zillion different ways, but I've had nice sounds from the TEAC ai301da which has a lot of muscle, a decent DAC, and many options.  Remarkably, that TEAC's price just climbed to $400, a sign of strong value.
Cheers

 

[Gravitynaut]

Sorry to resurrect an old discussion, but I've been searching around and can't seem to find an answer to a question I have, and this seems to be the most appropriate place to put it. If I wanted to use my blu ray player as a dedicated CD player for listening with my headphone setup, would there be any way to insert a DAC between the player and my Headphone amp? Would I have to change settings or is audio output through the USB port of a Blu Ray player not even possible? If it is, what kind of DAC/cables would I need?

 

[ProtegeManiac]

Sorry to resurrect an old discussion, but I've been searching around and can't seem to find an answer to a question I have, and this seems to be the most appropriate place to put it. If I wanted to use my blu ray player as a dedicated CD player for listening with my headphone setup, would there be any way to insert a DAC between the player and my Headphone amp? Would I have to change settings or is audio output through the USB port of a Blu Ray player not even possible? If it is, what kind of DAC/cables would I need?

USB on disc players are for playing files on storage media like thumb drives. The hardware configuration and firmware aren't going to allow for digital output through there - you'll have to use SPDIF out of the player and a DAC with the same kind of input.

 

[Gravitynaut]

Alright. Any suggestions for decent DACs of this kind? Or would it be better to buy say, a Fulla and use a converter?

 

[fianbarr]

It depends hugely what outputs the Blu-ray has. My cheap ass Panasonic only has hdmi out. So I can't insert a dac no matter how hard I try, unless I split the HDMI signal.

As noted by @ProtegeManiac the USB on the front is input, to put files into the player, not to get audio out of the player, so a fulla would be pointless.

If the player has spdif (coaxial or optical) out on the back you could use e.g. a Modi Uber (which has spdif optical and coaxial in). Maybe post a photo of the outputs or list the make/model.

 

[Gravitynaut]

My player does have coaxial and optical outputs if I'm correct so the Modi Uber probably the best way to go if I'm looking for an option to play CDs then.

 

[fianbarr]

There are a few DACs in that price bracket, I have a Modi and am very happy with the sound it produces so the Modi Uber or Modi Multibit should be a good option, but YMMV.

And yes, taking the digital out of the player and feeding that into a dac is the way to go. (I am not touching the optical vs coaxial hornet's nest, but note you can use simple RCA cables to connect the coaxial spdif).

 

[ProtegeManiac]

Alright. Any suggestions for decent DACs of this kind? Or would it be better to buy say, a Fulla and use a converter?

My player does have coaxial and optical outputs if I'm correct so the Modi Uber probably the best way to go if I'm looking for an option to play CDs then.

It likely will not even work. Hardware and software on the USB on disc players is for accessing storage devices, not for sending a digital stream. I'm not 100% on that but I'm at 99%, which you might recognize as practically the same odds.

You can try any generic driver USB DAC but don't put it on us if it doesn't work.

 

[DelsFan]

My player does have coaxial and optical outputs if I'm correct so the Modi Uber probably the best way to go if I'm looking for an option to play CDs then.

There are a few DACs in that price bracket, I have a Modi and am very happy with the sound it produces so the Modi Uber or Modi Multibit should be a good option, but YMMV. And yes, taking the digital out of the player and feeding that into a dac is the way to go. (I am not touching the optical vs coaxial hornet's nest, but note you can use simple RCA cables to connect the coaxial spdif).

Speaking of USB ports, does your blu-ray player even have a USB output? Maybe it does - regardless, as you say, you would want to use your coaxial output and you'll be golden. No need for converters; your blu-ray player will "extract" the digital file off the CD and send it right out its coaxial output to your new DAC (so, there are USB only DACs - of course these would be the wrong equipment to buy since you need a DAC with a coaxial input).


fianbarr is totally correct. You would be using your DVD player as a transport rather than a CD player (which is essentially a transport plus a cheap DAC). Like anything hi-fi, you can spend a grand just on a transport if you wish, but I'll suggest a fair quality transport (like in the Blu-Ray player you already own) is a much less of weak link than a "fair" DAC. (And it would probably be quite charitable to call as "fair" the $5 DAC in your/ours Blu-Ray players.) This has nothing to do with USB; you'd simply be sending the digital signal via coax to your new, $200 or $300 DAC - a great idea. Additionally, in ten seconds you can take your new DAC out of the loop and compare the "improvement" it makes. It won't sound like a $5K headphone system, but I'll suggest it will sound A LOT better, for a small investment, and the addition of only one, small, component (my wife hates clutter).

People can argue about cables too, and again, in ten seconds you'd be able to compare cheap RCA vs "proper" coaxial cable. One option is buy Kimber's least expensive or second least expensive coaxial interconnect (I think $50 and $105 respectively). OR, buy any recently made Audioquest or Kimber or a multitude of other manufacturers' lower-priced cable purpose-designed and built, coxial cable, used on Audiogon (or here), for something resembling $50. Only my experience: using a modestly priced better quality coaxial cable will offer an improvement you will easily notice.

If you do one or both of these things (outboard DAC, low-end but purpose-made coaxial cable), I'm sure a lot of people would like to hear your findings. To me adding an outboard DAC sounds like a great and simple low-cost way to improve the sound of, otherwise, "stuff" you already own.

 

[fianbarr]

I personally would not use a $50 cable to connect a DVD player to a $200 DAC. That feels like overkill to me.

None of my gear is high end enough to warrant more than the $5-$10 "decent" cable. But again YMMV and different people have different opinions.