[dermott]

My DAC is a Yulong DA8 MKI (circa 2013/2014). This was the FOTM and briefly at the top of the heap when it was the first around. It was touted at the time as one of the first Sabre DACs that had a modicum of warmth vs the sterile sound of other contemporary implementations. I also liked that it was a single solution for me at the time because of the "decent" amp section. When I finally got into external amps (Schiit Jotenheim, then a Drop AAA THX-789) I found out how lacking that amp section really was. It has served me well as a DAC, but now I am wondering if the DACs that can be had now would outpace the Yulong by a simiilar margin. I am particularly interested in R2R/Multibit offerings like the Schiit Bifrost 2 or the Holo Spring 2 (Lvl 1). The thing is that I am only listening now to Tidal for quality and Spotify for convenience/tracks missing from Tidal via my Bluesound Node 2i (coax out, no real hi-rez).

I did run the analog out from the Node 2i to see what that DAC sounded like, but I preferred the way the Yulong sounded. Perhaps that was a level matching thing since the balanced out from the Yulong is probably twice the output voltage of the Bluesound via single ended RCA. Regardless, I thought the sound was just more clear. However, sometimes it can be a bit edgey, hence the interest in R2R/Multibit. If I pick up a Bifrost 2 at half the original price of the Yulong DA8 will I be delighted or disappointed? If I throw down with authority on something more like the Holo Spring 2 Lvl 1, is there anything to be had there? Is a guy just listening to PCM, mostly CD quality going to get any juice for the squeeze given these parameters? Current cans are Audeze LCD-2 (pre-Fazor, DA8- MK1 contemporary).

 

[sajunky]

Getting right the analog section is more important than actual R2R DAC implementation. It directly related is to a choice of a pure NOS vs. pre-processing (DSP filters, noise shaping). Those who use opamps do not offer NOS. It is for convenience, as feeding opamps with a fast transients is not giving good results, so shape of the sound is profiled before entering a ladder. Some companies offering NOS know a problem and decided to use a passive I/V conversion in their entire product line like Denafrips. On the opposite side of design philosophy is Audio GD who use a specially designed discrete class A output stage that delays I/V conversion as much as possible (moving it to the amp input section), it is called ACSS link. Both cases show that a care is taken about SQ.

I can't answer your questions, just wanted to point out what is missing in the shortlist. You had an experience with 789, it is a current trend of using nested feedback opamps for good measurements and is cheap to make. A substance is in a weight.

 

[dermott]

Getting right the analog section is more important than actual R2R DAC implementation. It directly related is to a choice of a pure NOS vs. pre-processing (DSP filters, noise shaping). Those who use opamps do not offer NOS. It is for convenience, as feeding opamps with a fast transients is not giving good results, so shape of the sound is profiled before entering a ladder. Some companies offering NOS know a problem and decided to use a passive I/V conversion in their entire product line like Denafrips. On the opposite side of design philosophy is Audio GD who use a specially designed discrete class A output stage that delays I/V conversion as much as possible (moving it to the amp input section), it is called ACSS link. Both cases show that a care is taken about SQ.

I can't answer your questions, just wanted to point out what is missing in the shortlist. You had an experience with 789, it is a current trend of using nested feedback opamps for good measurements and is cheap to make. A substance is in a weight.

I was interested in the Denafrips Ares II initially, but some have commented on its lack of resolution, even compared to other R2R DACs. I see in the Ares thread that you don't think much of the AAA THX-789 or the A90, or that you think they should only be paired with DS DACs since they would help with those DACs shortcomings. It also seems like the amp needs to be suited to R2R to get the full benefit. Would something like a Flux Lab FA-10 pair with R2R DACs better than say the Schiit Jotenheim or the AAA THX-789?

 

[sajunky]

I was interested in the Denafrips Ares II initially, but some have commented on its lack of resolution, even compared to other R2R DACs. I see in the Ares thread that you don't think much of the AAA THX-789 or the A90, or that you think they should only be paired with DS DACs since they would help with those DACs shortcomings. It also seems like the amp needs to be suited to R2R to get the full benefit. Would something like a Flux Lab FA-10 pair with R2R DACs better than say the Schiit Jotenheim or the AAA THX-789?

Ares lacking resolution? It must be something with a false perceived resolution of DS DACs. My interpretation is like this: dominant tones are presented clean, however it happens on a cost of other tones of a similar frequency. Any instrument that produce reverbation on a decay is flattened to a single tone. Yes, it sound clean, but unnaturally clean. When paired with 789 it produce a dark, sterile sound, with very little happening in the background during fast transients. It will be good sounding setup when your music is EDM type like Calvin Harris.

R2R NOS DAC produce natural sound. To get most of it you can't go wrong with a good low feedback class A amplifier or a tube amp. FA-10 looks fine, it might be to powerful for your needs.

As I wrote before, those who don't offer NOS have a reason for... I would like to have a choice between NOS and OS. Even if I prefer OS, I would rather upsample on PC and feed a DAC with pseudo hi-res 196kHz. DSP chip on the DAC has a constrained processing power and options are very limited.

I don't own Ares, I own Audio GD R2R11, it is very good setup with Sennheiser HD600. When upgrading I would rather chose the same brand R-1 or R-28 (combo with headphone amplifier). Similar to FA-10 is Audio GD A-2, it cost only $315.

 

[Deolum]

The change from the Chord 2Qute to a Metrum Pavane L3 was the biggest improvement i ever had my chain. If your interest then you should really try a R2R Dac. I only listen to Quobuz/Tidal/Spotify as well.

 

[sajunky]

The change from the Chord 2Qute to a Metrum Pavane L3 was the biggest improvement i ever had my chain. If your interest then you should really try a R2R Dac. I only listen to Quobuz/Tidal/Spotify as well.

I can only confirm that the same happen in the range below $1k. Even a $42 device based on 8xTDA1387 chip wins against $150 DACs giving non-fatiguing, musical sound. It is actually 4xOS due to use a standard interface chip, but still don't lose much of natural sound. It doesn't have cheap general purpose opamps, just like Ares it is decided to use a passive I/F conversion. On the other side $350 R2R11 is an absolute beast in terms of a natural sound. Audio GD use a special ACSS link between a ladder and a discrete class A zero feedback amplifier. Similar to the solution seen in Pavane.

Speaking of devil, it is worth to read six Moons Pavane review due to the enclosed technical document, it is explained better than what I wrote before. Start from this page and continue reading through the next one: https://6moons.com/audioreviews2/metrum/2.html