[xenithon]

Ditto...other priorities now; plus he wanted a stupid amount (equivalent of AUD$1000

)

 

[tourmaline]

Quote:

Originally Posted by xenithon /img/forum/go_quote.gif You said "not that black and white" - and I agree....hence the words "grey area"

That's what you usally get in the middle. Although some older dacs and cdp's are more black and some more white.

meaning; some older stuff is not as good as new components and some are as good or even better as new components.

 

[tourmaline]

Quote:

Originally Posted by d-cee /img/forum/go_quote.gif had to let the Meridian 203 go... upcoming travel expenses take priority for now =\

To bad. meridian makes wonderfull stuff and you could have had a nice deal there.

 

[germanium]

I have yet to see a 24 bit D/A converter at any affordable price exceed 120db dynamic range. that is 20 bit resolution guys not 24 bit. Musch of the sound of any converter setup is not determined by the DAC itself. There are many causes for the differences. Powersupply impedance & quality of regulation or lack of any regulation in some cases is just one area to look.

I have completely changed the sound of a CD player without altering the filters, amps or cables just by lowering the output impedance of the power supply. This by the way did not alter measurable frequency response but did alter the sound to be somewhat brighter & way more detailed as well as actually being smoother at the same time.

I have also altered filters & changed the coupling with equally rewarding results again without significantly altering measured frequency response but vastly improved the sound.

While I haven't changed out opamps I do know they can make a large difference as I have done this with other componants, just not digital sources.

 

[germanium]

Quote:

Originally Posted by d-cee /img/forum/go_quote.gif had to let the Meridian 203 go... upcoming travel expenses take priority for now =\

Not everthing Meridian makes is cream of the crop. Not even all of thier digital players & proccessors. That said they do make or at least have made some of the best available digital sources available. I've been out of the loop as far as where they stand for a while so I cannot comment on any of thier new equipment but in the past thier one box CD players sounded better than any of thier other digital gear as well as most of the other highend makers players as well. Even thier expensive digital processors didn't hold a candle to thier one box CD player with crystal semiconductor 20bit converters & the later ones that had the 24 bit converters were no better (thankfully no worse either).

 

[Dept_of_Alchemy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by markl /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you are looking at DACs within the 2-5 year old range, you are MUCH better off going for the used high-end DAC. It's no contest.

Seems to me that older higher end DACs have much better components (caps, resistors, layout) and more robust power supplies/voltage regulation that if nothing else should translate into better quality sound. Modern budget DACs, even with newer chips (which may or may not sound better), are limited by cheap components.

The astonishing rate at which digital front ends depreciate makes getting a used DAC an even better bargain relative to say getting an older amp.

Not to mention that every now and then a deal like the Entech 203/205 comes along, that's something you'd never encounter in the amp world (except perhaps with second hand HeadRoom amps, what's up with those anyway?)

 

[lator]

My current DAC (ECD 1) falls in the category ~5 years old. I thought about this topic back when I had an opportunity to "upgrade" X-Dac v3 / X-Psu v3 combo to ECD 1. Could a lot older DAC be better than the MF combo? Happily ECD 1 hit the spot and has stayed in my reference setup since. Improvements are not with the details but instead in a sheer musical presentation. Thank you Per Abrahamsen

 

[dmk005]

I thought this thread was kind of a no-brainer going into it but reading through it has definitely made me re-think things a bit. I had been thinking that DACs are really more of a "computer component" because the most key element to a DAC is the chip applied. As new chips are innovated, DAC improvements should ensue.

Now I am shifting a bit. Ha Ha Ha didn't mean that pun but it works!

DMK

 

[xenithon]

I suspect there are actually two grey areas. The first is when you start looking at the really older DACs (10 years plus) and how they stack up to their modern, el-cheapo brethren. The second has to do with the previous generation high-end DACs (be it 2, 5, 10 years old etc.) and how they stack up against the more expensive but still well-priced modern counterparts - the likes of the DAC1, DA100, DA10, MiniDAC etc.

 

[tbonner1]

Quote:

The D1 wipes the floor with the DAC1

I agree and have had similar experience with older "audiophile" DAC's vs. highly touted new DAC's. The Aragon D2 is one that I have found sounds outstanding and is over 10 years old.

Although I think the newer DAC chips themselves are technically improved, that is only part of the equation. You must take into account the audio sections after the DAC. The old Levinson and Meridain DAC's still get top dollar today for good reason.

 

[tourmaline]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbonner1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I agree and have had similar experience with older "audiophile" DAC's vs. highly touted new DAC's. The Aragon D2 is one that I have found sounds outstanding and is over 10 years old. Although I think the newer DAC chips themselves are technically improved, that is only part of the equation. You must take into account the audio sections after the DAC. The old Levinson and Meridain DAC's still get top dollar today for good reason.

Agree completely.

The commercial guys want to trick the masses with new shiny dacs and sell fairytales. It doesn't mean some newer dacs are really good but it doesn't mean either they wipe the floor with older good equipment.

The "problem" here i think is that the dac's might improve a bit but they still skimp on quality components. While the dacs are getting better, the components are getting cheaper, all 10-50 cents components! So, if you do the equasion it might be a toss up or not even as good as modded or former high end equipment.

People that are really into audio know this, but the masses that go to ordinairy shops are talked into buying newer stuff while their old equipment might still be better! I bet even some really evil salesmen are having their eyes on high end equipment traded in for cheap stuff so they can make a good deal of money.

 

[Roam]

Quote:

Originally Posted by xenithon /img/forum/go_quote.gif The reason I raise the question of which to go for, is because I have seen how quickly the DAC landscape changes, especially with the advances in the actual processing chips. It makes me wonder if the high-end DACs from, lets say, 2 years ago, are inferior to the newer budget DACs - even though the former often having been priced at $2000+.

Progress? In the DAC chips themselves? No. In the last few years we've actually regressed, the pinnacle of DAC chip technology was reached with the Burr-Brown PCM63 and PCM1704, everything after has been made with an eye towards cost reduction.

All DAC chips I know of these days are of the delta-sigma type, either single or multi-bit. Cheap to make as they don't require countless thousands of precision laser trimmed resistors in each chip, the problem is their signal outputs require a lot of fancy filtering, processing & noise-shaping which is very hard to correctly implement. Doing it right, as in the Audio Aero Capitole costs a lot of money and even then the sound still lacks the solidity of a good R2R DAC such as the PCM63.

From my viewpoint, we've spent the last few years taking 3 steps backwards and 2 steps forwards. Delta-sigma DAC chips which are an inherently flawed cost-cutting measure have become almost universally adopted by the audio world, and we've wasted far too much time coming up with advanced processing & filter schemes trying to fix the problems introduced by the new DAC chips. We've traded in a Ferrari for a Honda Civic, and now we're trying to make the Civic perform like a Ferrari.

To sum up, I would not touch any one of the new budget DACs unless they use an R2R DAC chip such as the PCM63, 1702, or 1704, for example the Monarchy M24. I'll sum it up with the following slogan: Good sound, Delta-sigma DAC, Low price. Pick two.

 

[dmk005]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roam /img/forum/go_quote.gif Progress? In the DAC chips themselves? No. In the last few years we've actually regressed, the pinnacle of DAC chip technology was reached with the Burr-Brown PCM63 and PCM1704, everything after has been made with an eye towards cost reduction...... To sum up, I would not touch any one of the new budget DACs unless they use an R2R DAC chip such as the PCM63, 1702, or 1704, for example the Monarchy M24. I'll sum it up with the following slogan: Good sound, Delta-sigma DAC, Low price. Pick two.

Can you name any others? The newest Monarchy does not have a balanced output and no USB. I would like to compare.

 

[keyid]

every so often i see the old Theta Digital DS Pro Basic variants show up, anyone have an opinion on these?

 

[Ori]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roam /img/forum/go_quote.gif Progress? In the DAC chips themselves? No. In the last few years we've actually regressed, the pinnacle of DAC chip technology was reached with the Burr-Brown PCM63 and PCM1704, everything after has been made with an eye towards cost reduction.

That's only partially true. Like all products fabricated on silicon, it takes time and expertise to optimize a design. You will find that the quality of the final product is directly proportional to the R&D invested in product engineering after the initial design was released. You will also find many instances where a lesser product on paper outperforms competing products because of the extensive product enhamcement by the manufacturer. In the silicon fabrication business you usually want to "go with the flow". That's where the money is and that's where eventually the better quality will be reached.
I have to say that only a few years ago I too was partial to parallel DACs. I feel that newer designs have reached a point where the converter chip itself is not anymore the weakest link in a DAC system.
We still have manufacturers who invest enormous amonuts of money in archaic transports and proprietary digital processing, while employing a cheaper approach to the analog section or the power supply. Maybe that's why digital is "only" where it is today...