Just HOW good is the emu 0404 usb as a dac?
Sep 20, 2007 at 1:27 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 32
jrosenth

jrosenth

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Nov 27, 2004
Posts
1,657
Likes
22
Okay, I've read a number of the threads on this but am still very curious: just exactly how good is this dac (I'd probably be using it with an Original Master amp with an Iron Jellyfish power cord and a recabled AKG 501).

Is it on par with a headroom microdac, better/worse?

Is it a midrange player quality like and Onix 88 or 99, or a modded toshiba dvd player?

I know it's tough to compare it to a no OS dac, but is it ballpark with a Shek or Moodlab or a Monica?

Oh yah, and how about compared to a fubar from Firestone?

I'm really interested so any input would be great - thanks.
 
Sep 20, 2007 at 4:27 AM Post #2 of 32
You know, I'm curious about this too.

I'm still waiting on cables to be able to listen to mine.
Should be here by the end of the week

It would be nice to have a frame of reference to the quality I discover.
 
Sep 20, 2007 at 4:36 AM Post #3 of 32
Because 7 (count them, 7!!) emu0404 threads on page 1 weren't enough!?
 
Sep 20, 2007 at 8:17 AM Post #5 of 32
Most of the issues raised in the other threads talk about the functionality of the 0404. I am interested in some discussion on the sound of it.

It would be nice to have some comparison with others in a similar price bracket.

How does it compare with other USB DACs?

Is it good as a DAC/AMP or is it simply a good DAC?
 
Sep 20, 2007 at 4:00 PM Post #6 of 32
I sold my Musical Fidelity CDPre24, what was a $3000 CD player/preamp combination when it came out in 2002, because I much prefer the sound of hard drive based playback via the 0404 USB. That MF unit has essentially the A3.24 DAC inside, a DAC that had been selling for $650-ish on the used market.

I use it with a CK2III most of the time, unless I am taking only the 0404 USB along on the road. The internal headamp drives HD600's just fine for less-than-totally-critical listening.

My take on it is that one cannot really compare it to a NOS DAC. Apples and oranges.....it's a fact that NOS DAC's have problems with anti-aliasing issues, so I wouldn't ever bother to listen to one myself. Most of my listening is to well-recorded acoustic music, so accuracy is my goal.....not just pleasant euphonics.
 
Sep 21, 2007 at 4:03 AM Post #8 of 32
Quote:

Originally Posted by jrosenth /img/forum/go_quote.gif
"MF" unit? Sorry I'm kind of slow - what's that? thanks


Musical Fidelity.
 
Sep 22, 2007 at 6:14 AM Post #12 of 32
Until there's an objective scale for "sounds good," those are some of the only benchmarks available.
tongue.gif
 
Sep 22, 2007 at 3:07 PM Post #14 of 32
Either one would be better than the DIY CMoy I have now.
lambda.gif


It's true that measurements are not necessarily indicative of a device's sound quality, but they do serve a purpose up to a point, especially if accuracy is a bigger concern than musicality. For example, a mastering engineer would probably pick a DAC with 132 dB SNR @ 24-bit over something with 100 dB SNR @ 24-bit.

In what ways does the Mini v3 measure better than the B22? The B22 must have some advantages on paper...
 
Sep 22, 2007 at 5:17 PM Post #15 of 32
Quote:

Originally Posted by jrosenth /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Is it on par with a headroom microdac, better/worse?


Well the 0404 uses a different manufacturer for it DAC chip, AK4396

However The 1212 & the 1820 use the Cirrus Logic CS4398, which is what is in the MicroDAC.

As 1212 > 0404, I'm guessing that means the CS4398 > AK4396. So worse chip-wise.




I thought seperate DACs were inherently superior to that same chip in a soundcard? Am I wrong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top