[goldwerger]

 

[BassicScience]

what is your take on play back design dacs vs emm?

OT to this thread, but since you asked:

I haven't heard any of the Playback Designs products. AFAIK, PBD (like EMM Labs) DACs upconvert everything to single-bit DSD for ultimate accuracy, so I'd guess they generally sound similar. Some people opine that DSD DACs sound "soft", but........... they're wrong.

Andreas Koch, the founder of PBD, worked for SONY's DSD recording equipment division in the early 2000s, as did I. Ed Meitner was contracted by SONY to develop the ADC technology for our projects. After Koch left SONY, he went to work for EMM Labs for a few years before founding PBD.

Honestly, for people who listen strictly to headphones (and don't have an unlimited budget), spending huge bucks on a DAC isn't a particularly good allocation of funds, IMHO. EMM Labs offers lower cost DACs with similar tech under the Meitner brand.

 

[M700LTR]

Does anyone have thoughts on Benchmark AHB2 vs Burson Timekeeper 3X GT? Couple of new Youtube reviews on the Burson Timekeeper 3X GT - guessing a loan tour was done. Given how promising the reviews were, surprised there's hardly any discussion of the Timekeeper 3X GT on Susvara forums.

 

[F208Frank]

OT to this thread, but since you asked:

I haven't heard any of the Playback Designs products. AFAIK, PBD (like EMM Labs) DACs upconvert everything to single-bit DSD for ultimate accuracy, so I'd guess they generally sound similar. Some people opine that DSD DACs sound "soft", but........... they're wrong.

Andreas Koch, the founder of PBD, worked for SONY's DSD recording equipment division in the early 2000s, as did I. Ed Meitner was contracted by SONY to develop the ADC technology for our projects. After Koch left SONY, he went to work for EMM Labs for a few years before founding PBD.

Honestly, for people who listen strictly to headphones (and don't have an unlimited budget), spending huge bucks on a DAC isn't a particularly good allocation of funds, IMHO. EMM Labs offers lower cost DACs with similar tech under the Meitner brand.

Why would you say for headphones only, allocating to dac (too much) is a bad thing? In what way are the funds wasted vs if dac is used for speakers?

Serious question, not trolling.

 

[BassicScience]

Why would you say for headphones only, allocating to dac (too much) is a bad thing? In what way are the funds wasted vs if dac is used for speakers?

Because, in my experience, differences between DACs are more apparent/pronounced on (high end) speakers than on headphones. Also, there are a number of superb DACs available at relatively reasonable prices. The bottom line is: buy whatever makes you happy.

 

[hifixman]

Because, in my experience, differences between DACs are more apparent/pronounced on (high end) speakers than on headphones. Also, there are a number of superb DACs available at relatively reasonable prices. The bottom line is: buy whatever makes you happy.

I feel you both! @BassicScience I really admire Emm Labs DV2 you own which I am so excited to have it in my systems this coming weekends, to my ears it doesn’t sound close to cheaper Meitner MA3 which I also respect what it does. DV2 is my favorite DAC at the recent Capital Audio Festival.

I feel PBD is more Hifi sounding, full bodied, musical, technical, weighted and detailed while DV2 is more natural and neutral to me, while they are both top ceiling DACs.

Personally I’m a big fan of Delta Sigma (ΔΣ) modulation, due to its neutrality, naturalism and ability to stay invisible, based on my personal experience and preferences. The top one (price wise) headphone system in the industry utilize ESS dac chips. I don’t think R2R and FPGA (which per se is algorithmic method, not necessarily DAC configuration) are definitely superior. Too many R2R/FPGA DACs sound overly processed to my ears with a strong and overpowering “house sound” as you always know you are listening to that DAC. In China there is a saying, if you want fun sound, go R2R; if you want neutrality, go chip dacs.

I feel more funds shall be allocated on Amp and cans first which are the foundation and core.

Yet after you have that level of amplification and cans, it is natural to do level matching ( not price matching) in source. Source matters a lot as much as other link in the system, from streamer, CD transport. Master clock, DDC and etc.

“The experience of superb high-fidelity sound is peculiar in that it defies imagination until experienced. One can read innumerable descriptions of the performance of a stereo system or component but really understanding what is so significant is a necessarily empirical exercise.”

I also agree with @F208Frank Frank that source is equally if not more important in headphone systems. There is no room factors and other variances affecting the sound, so what we hear via a headphone system is more close to the what the source truly is, making the source more essential in my opinion.

Of course it is possible to build a badass source system without spending too much ( failed already in terms of spenditure lol) but then the knowledge to tweak and improve the sound must be paid by previous “tuition” as well. I aim to build a source system without paying that too much, but all my experience and knowledge have been paid by my hard earn money as well. Plus it is rather difficult to expect one source as the best for various different types of systems. The way to approach that is to make your source as netural, void of colorization, as much as possible to ensure broader compatibility.

The game of source is way complicated with much higher threshold and deeper water than headphone amplifiers as you know A,B,C are the best headphone amplifiers for SUS.

 

[F208Frank]

Wonderful discussion, thank you.

 

[F208Frank]

Because, in my experience, differences between DACs are more apparent/pronounced on (high end) speakers than on headphones. Also, there are a number of superb DACs available at relatively reasonable prices. The bottom line is: buy whatever makes you happy.

Very interesting perspective, my take on my decision also includes potential future possibility of building 2 channel (likely on day of divorce) if that ever happened. Haha.

 

[iFi audio]

I tried a lot of Class D modules: Purifi, Pascal, Hypex and icepower…

That still doesn't cover the entire range of class D devices out there

Also, I vote against that battle of classes. This honestly doesn't make much sense given topological differences between them and their ideal use case scenarios. Class D works where class A won't and vice versa.

Because, in my experience, differences between DACs are more apparent/pronounced on (high end) speakers than on headphones.

I agree, speakers can be very revealing here

 

[Roybenz]

Because, in my experience, differences between DACs are more apparent/pronounced on (high end) speakers than on headphones. Also, there are a number of superb DACs available at relatively reasonable prices. The bottom line is: buy whatever makes you happy.

I tried several high end dacs with susvara. The differences is very small. But once you’ve heard it gets a little better, it’s hard to let go source/power is just as important imho.

 

[Polygonhell]

source/power is just as important imho

It's all important at some point.
For some DAC's streamers/sources can be night and day differences, the Chord Dave is particularly susceptible to this if it isn't paired with the MScaler.
I'll agree great Speaker systems can be more revealing than headphone systems, but even at Lampizator Pacific levels of DAC with the right amplification, there is no mistaking the impact of the DAC in a system, it can be as big a change or larger that a change in amplification.
And that's before we get into cables.

 

[goldwerger]

I feel you both! @BassicScience I really admire Emm Labs DV2 you own which I am so excited to have it in my systems this coming weekends, to my ears it doesn’t sound close to cheaper Meitner MA3 which I also respect what it does. DV2 is my favorite DAC at the recent Capital Audio Festival.

I feel PBD is more Hifi sounding, full bodied, musical, technical, weighted and detailed while DV2 is more natural and neutral to me, while they are both top ceiling DACs.

Personally I’m a big fan of Delta Sigma (ΔΣ) modulation, due to its neutrality, naturalism and ability to stay invisible, based on my personal experience and preferences. The top one (price wise) headphone system in the industry utilize ESS dac chips. I don’t think R2R and FPGA (which per se is algorithmic method, not necessarily DAC configuration) are definitely superior. Too many R2R/FPGA DACs sound overly processed to my ears with a strong and overpowering “house sound” as you always know you are listening to that DAC. In China there is a saying, if you want fun sound, go R2R; if you want neutrality, go chip dacs.

I feel more funds shall be allocated on Amp and cans first which are the foundation and core.

Yet after you have that level of amplification and cans, it is natural to do level matching ( not price matching) in source. Source matters a lot as much as other link in the system, from streamer, CD transport. Master clock, DDC and etc.

“The experience of superb high-fidelity sound is peculiar in that it defies imagination until experienced. One can read innumerable descriptions of the performance of a stereo system or component but really understanding what is so significant is a necessarily empirical exercise.”

I also agree with @F208Frank Frank that source is equally if not more important in headphone systems. There is no room factors and other variances affecting the sound, so what we hear via a headphone system is more close to the what the source truly is, making the source more essential in my opinion.

Of course it is possible to build a badass source system without spending too much ( failed already in terms of spenditure lol) but then the knowledge to tweak and improve the sound must be paid by previous “tuition” as well. I aim to build a source system without paying that too much, but all my experience and knowledge have been paid by my hard earn money as well. Plus it is rather difficult to expect one source as the best for various different types of systems. The way to approach that is to make your source as netural, void of colorization, as much as possible to ensure broader compatibility.

The game of source is way complicated with much higher threshold and deeper water than headphone amplifiers as you know A,B,C are the best headphone amplifiers for SUS.

This is a good discussion.

I agree with much of the above from @hifixman as well as with @BassicScience

For me, this boils to some mundane but significant practicalities around budget, tech, and proportionalities. Namely, a DAC such as the EMM Labs DV2 (unless I'm making a big mistake at looking at the wrong one) costs around $30k -- https://houseofstereo.com/products/emm-labs-dv2?variant=41496899059861

In a 2-channel world, where one can scale almost endlessly in both $ spend and quality, I can see systems where this can be a proportionally rational investment. In headphones, this becomes more challenging. Putting aside the discussion of diminishing returns, as we all make different choices here and they are all valid, the top end of headphones and headphone amps represents a very different cost leve than 2 channels. Adding to that the fact that amps can be used for decades without obsolescence while DACs will be supplanted every few years because of the pace of innovation in technology, they are inherently more expensive to start with if their rate of depreciation is factored.

What does this mean? well, an interesting discussion...

 

[Roybenz]

I have a buzz in the psu. Coming from the transformator on the psu of the brand new unit I just received - cayin ha 300 mk2

Anyone else have experience about this?

I use an isotek Aquarius and also tried it straight in wall outlet. Same noise. See video

Thankful for any help.

 

[BassicScience]

This is a good discussion.

In a 2-channel world, where one can scale almost endlessly in both $ spend and quality, I can see systems where this can be a proportionally rational investment. In headphones, this becomes more challenging. Putting aside the discussion of diminishing returns, as we all make different choices here and they are all valid, the top end of headphones and headphone amps represents a very different cost leve than 2 channels. Adding to that the fact that amps can be used for decades without obsolescence while DACs will be supplanted every few years because of the pace of innovation in technology, they are inherently more expensive to start with if their rate of depreciation is factored.

What does this mean? well, an interesting discussion...

Actually, DAC technology has now very much reached the point of heavily diminishing returns. D/A conversion is essentially a solved problem, and there's very little juice left to be squeezed from the lemon, as it were. Also note that the EMM Labs DACs are internally modular, and any firmware/hardware upgrades can be retrofitted to existing units (for a price). The company also doesn't market external clocks, upsamplers, etc., which needs to be factored into any price comparison of SOTA DACs.

 

[Ragnar-BY]

Actually, DAC technology has now very much reached the point of heavily diminishing returns.

I also feel that new generation of TOTL DACs (from companies like Chord, MSB, dCS et.c.) will show nothing really groundbreaking. Sure, these will be excellent DACs, but their current offers are already excellent to the point where it's hard to wish for something better. We'll probably see more companies like Holo, who can pack a truly great DAC into a four-figure price tag, but I'm not expecting a revolution from this guys either.