[bluecar]

I haven't seen any evidence that a DAC quality matters in any audio system. Digital analog conversion is a solved problem. From my understanding, the main thing a DAC, and more specifically the "bit depth" of a DAC affects, is the "noise floor," which is distortion introduced into the output signal from the difference between the original signal and the quantized signal. The noise floor of DACs is not something to consider when buying one, because it's well below the threshold of human hearing, even for "low end" DACs. I also have seen no evidence that a separate DAC is "better" than any laptop or phone DAC. I also haven't seen any evidence that DAC clock "jitter" is a problem in any modern DAC, regardless of price. I wonder if audio / electrical engineers are _more_ biased into believing DACs add magical sound properties, because they understand all of the mechanics of how and where things can go wrong.

If a DAC changes the sound in any way, like increasing the sound stage, or making it "warmer," it's a bad DAC, because it shouldn't do any of those things. It's just converting a signal from digital to analog.

Can't work out if this is nerd-bait, or serious

I'll go with Edison on this one "If a man has seen no evidence to dispute his theories, the most likely explanation is that he never looked for it".

nighty night

 

[rangerid]

Thanks everyone for their inputs. I can't say I am surprised there's opposing points of views regarding how much difference a DAC can make. I've been researching on my part and came across this video regarding DACs and in particular regarding the price to performance:


I am inclined to agree to his assessment but I am still interested to hear more inputs from everybody. The ideal situation as many have pointed out would be to demo some but unfortunately there is no audio store near where I live that carry any of the dacs I am interested in stock, not to mention covid has non essential business closed at the moment.

My "perfect" or "ideal" sound signature is warm, natural, slight bass/treble emphasis, wide & deep soundstage so if anyone has any suggestions for that I will be very happy to hear it.

 

[Ciggavelli]

Thanks everyone for their inputs. I can't say I am surprised there's opposing points of views regarding how much difference a DAC can make. I've been researching on my part and came across this video regarding DACs and in particular regarding the price to performance:


I am inclined to agree to his assessment but I am still interested to hear more inputs from everybody. The ideal situation as many have pointed out would be to demo some but unfortunately there is no audio store near where I live that carry any of the dacs I am interested in stock, not to mention covid has non essential business closed at the moment.

My "perfect" or "ideal" sound signature is warm, natural, slight bass/treble emphasis, wide & deep soundstage so if anyone has any suggestions for that I will be very happy to hear it.

Chord Hugo TT2 with the warm filter on

 

[rangerid]

Chord Hugo TT2 with the warm filter on

That one's near to top of my list! I really like the aesthetic and smaller footprint of Chord products.

I forgot to mention another dac that caught my eye is the XI audio sagraDac. From the review here it seems to align with what I am looking for: https://www.headfonia.com/xi-audio-sagradac-review/

I couldn't find much info on headfi for that dac, does anyone own/heard that dac?

 

[audioandy]

Can't work out if this is nerd-bait, or serious

I also can't work out if you have objective blind tests that show humans can hear DAC quality differences.

Would you be so kind to specify which DACs in which system you have heard?

The only dedicated DAC I own is is the Objective2 DAC. I run it through an O2 amp, from a laptop. I've also run it through a Magini 3, but normally I leave that plugged directly into a laptop. I notice no sound difference between this dac and amp directly into aux of the laptop. I mostly listen on LCD X, Clears, and Aeon closed. I've heard higher end systems, like the HE1, and the HD 800S through a HDVD 800, but I have no comparison of those on a different dac.

 

[Ragnar-BY]

Objective2 is not a good example to draw conclusions about DACs in general. I hate to sound like a snob, but inexpensive DACs do often sound the same. At this level it is very easy to believe that DACs are less important than, say, amplifiers.

If you are curious, try Schiit Modi Multibit or Chord Mojo as a DAC. These are very good examples of a good sub1000 DAC. Both are very popular and easy to buy and sell here at Head-Fi.

 

[number1sixerfan]

Thanks everyone for their inputs. I can't say I am surprised there's opposing points of views regarding how much difference a DAC can make. I've been researching on my part and came across this video regarding DACs and in particular regarding the price to performance:


I am inclined to agree to his assessment but I am still interested to hear more inputs from everybody. The ideal situation as many have pointed out would be to demo some but unfortunately there is no audio store near where I live that carry any of the dacs I am interested in stock, not to mention covid has non essential business closed at the moment.

Hilarious vid and definitely a lot of truth to it. One thing not mentioned; for every person on the extreme high end side that's biased and tries to convince themselves that every penny was worth it, there's one in the mid-fi tier that convinces themselves that more expensive equipment can't possibly be worth it as not to have to spend more money. Both heavily biased extremes tend to annoy me lol

Anyways, the Chord Dave provided one of the largest improvements of any piece of equipment I've ever had. This was with the Mscaler, but from what I assess, it is really more of an icing on the cake additional piece..could live without it but would prefer not to. That was coming from a Hugo 2, which was also a pretty large improvement over my prior DACs. I just never desired the need or felt like spending the money there when headphones typically make the most considerable differences imo (much like speakers), as well as amps in many cases. I don't necessarily wished that I bought a Dave long, long ago.. but I do wish that I took DACs more seriously long, long ago. As the guy mentioned, and the biggest point I agree with: find the highest quality/priced DAC you can and get it for the absolute best price (used, good dealers, etc.). Doesn't have to be a Dave or a Bartok or X amount of dollars or the highest priced to be high end and sound damn good. Whatever it is, get a good deal, keep it in great condition and sale/recoup your money after determining it isn't worth it after *hearing* it.

 

[kumar402]

If the budget is to try DAVE then definitely try out Rockna Wavedream. For me DAC has significant impact on the sound signature and is worth trying out.

 

[silversurfer616]

Personally I always thought everything else is more important than a dac...I was so wrong. Trying out new dacs is now my favourite audio obsession.

 

[Mikem53]

The Schiit Yggdrasil was a life changing experience for me... Finally digital sounded like music.. One listen to the Yggdrasil rendering a good piano recording will convince you or anybody listening.. that DACS make a huge difference.. especially the type of DAC.. I prefer the R2R DACS for their analog like musical sound.. while these DACs don’t always measure well, they are more liquid sounding and analog like.. Mike Moffat has been pioneering DACS for decades and its his proprietary software and design that makes his unit very Special.. regardless of cost.. Even my ”only vinyl“ friends are impressed by the Yggy and its natural presentation..
I also have the Schiit modi multibit in my office system, it too displays the same qualities as the Yggy, but to a lesser degree.. The Yggdrasil is hard to beat regardless of cost.. IME

 

[sajunky]

The Schiit Yggdrasil was a life changing experience for me... Finally digital sounded like music.. One listen to the Yggdrasil rendering a good piano recording will convince you or anybody listening.. that DACS make a huge difference.. especially the type of DAC.. I prefer the R2R DACS for their analog like musical sound.. while these DACs don’t always measure well, they are more liquid sounding and analog like.. Mike Moffat has been pioneering DACS for decades and its his proprietary software and design that makes his unit very Special.. regardless of cost.. Even my ”only vinyl“ friends are impressed by the Yggy and its natural presentation..
I also have the Schiit modi multibit in my office system, it too displays the same qualities as the Yggy, but to a lesser degree.. The Yggdrasil is hard to beat regardless of cost.. IME

I agree with you 100% about how piano sounds on R2R converters including any other acoustic instruments. Actually Yiggy is not the best example, NOS converters do it better along with reproducing true harmonics and timing which is messed up by deploying unnecessary DSP oversampling engine. It is perhaps a topic for another thread.

Problem is that OP do not listen to such type music (it has been repeated three times in a row), but a synthetised waveforms by computers, then such material is mastered for mass consumption, it means mastered to sound equally well on a cheap Delta Sigma equipment. Most of the most popular hits are prepared that way. In this case recommending audiophile type R2R converter for this user doen't make any sense. There will be very little difference between $500 and $5K DAC as the only difference comes out from the quality of the analog stage.

 

[Ragnar-BY]

such material is mastered for mass consumption, it means mastered to sound equally well on a cheap Delta Sigma equipment

There are no mastering techniques for cheap or expensive Delta Sigma equipment. "Bad" mastering is only intended to sound louder, no matter R2R or DS.

 

[sajunky]

There are no mastering techniques for cheap or expensive Delta Sigma equipment. "Bad" mastering is only intended to sound louder, no matter R2R or DS.

Maybe I expressed it wrong. There is no mastering for the expensive DS equipment. Did you understand it such way? It is wrong.

All mastering efforts are made for the only purpose: to sound equally well on a poor equipment. It is usually Delta Sigma junk like Topping D30, just a coincidence.

 

[rangerid]

Hilarious vid and definitely a lot of truth to it. One thing not mentioned; for every person on the extreme high end side that's biased and tries to convince themselves that every penny was worth it, there's one in the mid-fi tier that convinces themselves that more expensive equipment can't possibly be worth it as not to have to spend more money. Both heavily biased extremes tend to annoy me lol

Anyways, the Chord Dave provided one of the largest improvements of any piece of equipment I've ever had. This was with the Mscaler, but from what I assess, it is really more of an icing on the cake additional piece..could live without it but would prefer not to. That was coming from a Hugo 2, which was also a pretty large improvement over my prior DACs. I just never desired the need or felt like spending the money there when headphones typically make the most considerable differences imo (much like speakers), as well as amps in many cases. I don't necessarily wished that I bought a Dave long, long ago.. but I do wish that I took DACs more seriously long, long ago. As the guy mentioned, and the biggest point I agree with: find the highest quality/priced DAC you can and get it for the absolute best price (used, good dealers, etc.). Doesn't have to be a Dave or a Bartok or X amount of dollars or the highest priced to be high end and sound damn good. Whatever it is, get a good deal, keep it in great condition and sale/recoup your money after determining it isn't worth it after *hearing* it.

That's just the thing, I've always thought that headphones/amps are more important than the DAC. The idea of spending 2-3x+ more on DACs is very strange to me. I am very happy with my headphones/amp but I definitely feel my dac is the weakest part of the chain hence the search for a better one. I still have to figure out how much I am willing to spend and then try to see if the cost is worth the improvement I hear. I don't doubt a 5k dac sounds better than a 500 one, just how much better and if it's worth the money is something I gotta figure out, since we all hear differently and prioritize different things.

If the budget is to try DAVE then definitely try out Rockna Wavedream. For me DAC has significant impact on the sound signature and is worth trying out.

I am definitely interested in Rockna products but I remember reading somewhere they are made to order and takes 6-8 weeks? If I knew I'd like it I wouldn't have an issue with it but to try it out seems to be too long. I will keep an eye out on the forums/other used markets to see if any pops up.

The Schiit Yggdrasil was a life changing experience for me... Finally digital sounded like music.. One listen to the Yggdrasil rendering a good piano recording will convince you or anybody listening.. that DACS make a huge difference.. especially the type of DAC.. I prefer the R2R DACS for their analog like musical sound.. while these DACs don’t always measure well, they are more liquid sounding and analog like.. Mike Moffat has been pioneering DACS for decades and its his proprietary software and design that makes his unit very Special.. regardless of cost.. Even my ”only vinyl“ friends are impressed by the Yggy and its natural presentation..
I also have the Schiit modi multibit in my office system, it too displays the same qualities as the Yggy, but to a lesser degree.. The Yggdrasil is hard to beat regardless of cost.. IME

On paper R2R dacs seems to be more inline with what I am looking for in terms of sound signature over a DS, but I really don't know at this point, I think I gotta just take a dive and buy one of them to try, even as a baseline because right now I have never owned a proper desktop dac.

I agree with you 100% about how piano sounds on R2R converters including any other acoustic instruments. Actually Yiggy is not the best example, NOS converters do it better along with reproducing true harmonics and timing which is messed up by deploying unnecessary DSP oversampling engine. It is perhaps a topic for another thread.

Problem is that OP do not listen to such type music (it has been repeated three times in a row), but a synthetised waveforms by computers, then such material is mastered for mass consumption, it means mastered to sound equally well on a cheap Delta Sigma equipment. Most of the most popular hits are prepared that way. In this case recommending audiophile type R2R converter for this user doen't make any sense. There will be very little difference between $500 and $5K DAC as the only difference comes out from the quality of the analog stage.

Wait, if I am understanding your post correctly are you saying since most of the music I listen to, EDM, pop, for example, are synthesized by computers, the music won't actually benefit from a higher quality DAC as opposed to if I listened to music with more piano and acoustic instruments? Some songs I listen to do have acoustic guitars/pianos and such, though granted most of them do not.

 

[audioandy]

Thanks everyone for their inputs. I can't say I am surprised there's opposing points of views regarding how much difference a DAC can make. I've been researching on my part and came across this video regarding DACs and in particular regarding the price to performance:

This seems like an argument _against_ believing in dac quality. He vaguely hints that different parts of a dac can go "wrong," like the connection (really? a usb connector is a lossy connection?) and then shows graphs of "diminishing returns" and pictures of stars to demonstrate quality differences . This video doesn't offer anything towards believing DACs have objective sound differences.

Instead I'd suggest watching this video, which at the beginning uses a 10 year old piece of usb 1.0 garbage to test digital audio conversion, and he shows it produces a 20k sine wave _exactly_ with no deviation from the original signal.