[Jimster480]

  They will charge more anyways. An R2R is expensive by design and not necessarily better, this is why it's a dying breed. There are pros and cons for both, some swear by DS, some by R2R, but R2Rs will die out sooner or later. There's also a good thread about this in the sound science section, but we are really going off topic here.

I have read quite a bit into that thread and nothing conclusive is there. Mostly its just people arguing about satire and post content.
From a technical perspective R2R should be better as D/S is approximating, it also makes sense why every DAC company has a "signature" sound if the DAC's run algorithms vs direct processing audio.
 
But yes its a more expensive design that also isn't very portable due to its enormous (by comparison) power usage. Something that they did find out in that thread though is that the current ways to measure audio output aren't really capable of actually measuring performance in music or at different frequencies.
 
But there is no other standard which was produced, nor any other testing methods which would allow us to effectively compare different products side by side.

 

[castleofargh]

  I have read quite a bit into that thread and nothing conclusive is there. Mostly its just people arguing about satire and post content.
From a technical perspective R2R should be better as D/S is approximating, it also makes sense why every DAC company has a "signature" sound if the DAC's run algorithms vs direct processing audio.
 
But yes its a more expensive design that also isn't very portable due to its enormous (by comparison) power usage. Something that they did find out in that thread though is that the current ways to measure audio output aren't really capable of actually measuring performance in music or at different frequencies.
 
But there is no other standard which was produced, nor any other testing methods which would allow us to effectively compare different products side by side.

to this day I haven't seen clear evidence of this so you must know something I don't.
R2R isn't approximating? you think each resistor used for the conversion is exactly at the desired value? ^_^  you think that analog music expects the signal to hold a discrete value all the way to the next sample? ^_^
don't fall for marketing. in both designs it's a mess where filters(and noise shaping for DS) come to save the day. 
also let's not forget how you can find the same DS chip in 30$ DACs and in 2000$ DACs and they won't measure the same. it would be really misleading to dumb down the quality of a DAC to 1 chipset type.
 
I also don't get why the multibit name came out to define R2R? as dukefx mentioned, for many years now DS dacs have used more than one bit. the chip in the Odac isn't one bit as far as I know. in fact even DSD DACs dealing with 1bit signal, tend to use more than one bit nowadays.I guess R2R feels old(for good reason) so it needed some little rebranding to appeal to people again.
the audio industry has already given up on R2R, I don't know if there are still R2R chips designed for the purpose of audio anymore? but then again it's exactly the kind of reason that would make some audiophiles desire R2R. "can't have it? I want one!". ^_^ not a very technical reason.
as for Shiit, I remember Baldr saying(I'm paraphrasing) that making DS was boring because all you had to do was follow the manufacturer's advice. also not too sure how technical that reason is

.
 
 
now about measurements, there are logical limitations, when a DAC has better linearity but a little more noise(like it could happen with DS vs R2R), it's apples and oranges. how do we design a measurement technique to tell which has superior fidelity?
the other problem is that we're ultimately interfacing with music subjectively. so if we try 2 devices and prefer the one that measures worst, then we want to believe that the wrong thing was measured. it could be so, but there is also the very likely possibility that my personal taste isn't a fidelity measurement tool.
 
 
I'm not off topic, I said Odac.. twice now ^_^.   sorry

 

[AverageGuyNC]

Nah this is just what they decided to use.


its their nomenclature, I don't really see a problem with it. 

Their stuff has good reviews and the company seems very honest.

Yeah I'm just kidding around. I wish I had something good to add but I'm not familiar with R2R or DS or whatever and didn't bother to look it up. I'm sure they thought it sounded best and went with it.

Another question. Do you think it's best to go with something like jotunheim over burson or O2 because it will power the th900 to basically their max (around 1800mw] if it has same or less distortion level? And would burson be too high at 3 ohm output for a 25 ohm headphone? I have heard several recommend it tho so maybe it's just about right?

 

[Jimster480]

Yeah I'm just kidding around. I wish I had something good to add but I'm not familiar with R2R or DS or whatever and didn't bother to look it up. I'm sure they thought it sounded best and went with it.

Another question. Do you think it's best to go with something like jotunheim over burson or O2 because it will power the th900 to basically their max (around 1800mw] if it has same or less distortion level? And would burson be too high at 3 ohm output for a 25 ohm headphone? I have heard several recommend it tho so maybe it's just about right?

If you really want to listen at max?
I mean I guess im not really the person to ask about this since Amp's aren't my specialty. But its all about the power draw vs your listening levels.
Some Amps are too strong for headphones causing them to be too loud.

 

[AverageGuyNC]

Its being able to get to see what they can do i guess. like I had a pair of Senn 598 Cs that I returned but when hooked up to the O2, they got so loud when I turned them up it was unbearable. but the he400i on some songs wont go as loud as I want unless I turn the gain up. I know they are not quit as efficient as the th900 but I want to make sure I can power all well. I like to listen to them pretty loud some, but not always.

 

[AverageGuyNC]

And off subject but i saw a marantz hd dac1 for $600 on ebay and I thought those were supposed to be terrific amp/dac right? I know they go for $800 normally

 

[Jimster480]

  And off subject but i saw a marantz hd dac1 for $600 on ebay and I thought those were supposed to be terrific amp/dac right? I know they go for $800 normally

Personally from a technical aspect I don't think it would be any better or even as good as the ODAC/AMP.

The only thing I have actual faith in being better is a Schiit Multibit DAC just from the technical prospects of R2R decoding.
 
Otherwise after all the articles I have read I don't think that DAC's do that much overall. I think its more about the AMP itself and the analog stages and if it can really power your headphones.
 
But in many blind tests I have found not only on this forum but in other places around the net, most people couldn't tell a Benchmark DAC2 from an Asus Xonar or a Chord Mojo from a FiiO E17k or even a Xonar from a O2DAC, etc.
And this is with a good pair of headphones, so I believe that really the sound quality has to be quite comparable amongst most offerings and honestly over the years I have found that speakers/headphones make so much more of a difference than the player as long as their is ample power.
 
Its found actually that the most difference is noted because of volume, one output may have slightly more volume than another one and therefore sounds "better". But in volume matched blind testing, it proved as I said that many components both high end and "low end" could not be told apart.

 

[AverageGuyNC]

Personally from a technical aspect I don't think it would be any better or even as good as the ODAC/AMP.


The only thing I have actual faith in being better is a Schiit Multibit DAC just from the technical prospects of R2R decoding.

Otherwise after all the articles I have read I don't think that DAC's do that much overall. I think its more about the AMP itself and the analog stages and if it can really power your headphones.

But in many blind tests I have found not only on this forum but in other places around the net, most people couldn't tell a Benchmark DAC2 from an Asus Xonar or a Chord Mojo from a FiiO E17k or even a Xonar from a O2DAC, etc.
And this is with a good pair of headphones, so I believe that really the sound quality has to be quite comparable amongst most offerings and honestly over the years I have found that speakers/headphones make so much more of a difference than the player as long as their is ample power.

Its found actually that the most difference is noted because of volume, one output may have slightly more volume than another one and therefore sounds "better". But in volume matched blind testing, it proved as I said that many components both high end and "low end" could not be told apart.

I've wondered about that and heard similar stuff. The burson and jotunheim have significant more power but the o2 really should push the th900 great as sensitive as it is.

And I emailed schiit asking about Modi vs Bifrost both in multidac and they said that for the money, yeah the Modi Multibit is probably better if you were not worried about upgrading. They do think multidac is the way to go though.

 

[Jimster480]

I've wondered about that and heard similar stuff. The burson and jotunheim have significant more power but the o2 really should push the th900 great as sensitive as it is.

And I emailed schiit asking about Modi vs Bifrost both in multidac and they said that for the money, yeah the Modi Multibit is probably better if you were not worried about upgrading. They do think multidac is the way to go though.

Yea I mean personally compared to anything D/S it will just be better.
If you look at the Texas Instruments website the highest end DAC they sell is actually for car audio and its $12.
The "high end" Burr Brown DAC's are $3-8 lol....
The K1 uses a DAC that is like $2.70 and it sounds great, and the K1 has the same DAC as the ODAC Rev. B.
Same thing with the ESS Sabre it costs upto around $25 depending on the version it seems. But its harder to find the 1000 unit counts, so I would be willing to bet its much cheaper in large quantities.
 
But then again TI is a much larger company and doesn't need the revenue from DAC's the way that ESS does.

 

[dukefx]

Prices are hardly indicators of SQ, especially in the case of TI. For example they sell top notch opamps for peanuts and vice versa. There are "high-end audio" opamps that cost 20 something $ and are mediocre at best. The K1 doesn't use the same DAC as the ODAC. The K1 has the old version while the ODAC has the much newer "A" version.

 

[AverageGuyNC]

​And people will pay a premium for stuff that is hand built in small batches with high end or rare materials, assuming the quality is good as well. Some will pay $2,000-5,000 for one like that, knowing the SQ is going to be on par with many $1,000-1,500 that were more massively built. Same as many will pass over a Mercedes or Corvette to get a Hand built Austin Martin that is probably no more luxurious or faster and costs even more. And then you could bring up Some exotics that aren't even reliable and wayyyy over priced but go for so much because they remain popular and supply is so limited... But if I were rich, I might go for them as well.

 

[Jimster480]

  Prices are hardly indicators of SQ, especially in the case of TI. For example they sell top notch opamps for peanuts and vice versa. There are "high-end audio" opamps that cost 20 something $ and are mediocre at best. The K1 doesn't use the same DAC as the ODAC. The K1 has the old version while the ODAC has the much newer "A" version.

Yes i know but the specs are virtually the same just the ODAC's one is slightly better. Either way this proves that its possible to make high end components for low cost once it gets to production.
 
But I know what you mean that price of chips isn't an indiciator, especially for TI.
 
But what I am saying is that audio companies sell DAC's for thousands with $2 chips in them and the overall cost of building it is somewhere like $30-100.
Looking over many of the offerings especially from big brands, it seems that in many ways you are paying for brand.
 
Now don't get me wrong the K1 isn't as good as an ODAC, but the components inside are very good for the price and it sounds really nice considering its very modest price tag. I honestly have to set it at 25% volume in windows and then i usually end up reducing the volume in spotify too because it has so much power to drive my triples and my RP-HD10's.

 

[dukefx]

The thousand dollar DACs surely cost more than 100$ (if we are talking about respectable companies). Rule of thumb for products of such quality/fidelity is usually about 600% of components. This covers research, marketing and labor with plenty of profit left. The reason for the O2 and ODAC being so cheap is the creative commons license. Basically we are talking about 600-800$ per piece if they were commercial. On top of that they utilize components of "good enough" quality. No overkill, no voodoo, no snake oil.

 

[rizzotti91]

Hi, I'm evaluating to switch from my Xonar U7 to an ODAC. I will connect to it my Logitec Z-2300 and, when I need cans, an Objective 2 with the JVC HA-SZ1000.
Actually, when I play videogames, I activate the virtual surround from the Xonar Dolby panel, but if I switch to the ODAC which software could I use for virtual surrounding? I read good opinions about the Razer software. Any suggestes? Thank you

 

[maheeinfy]

I got the O2 from JDSLabs with inbuilt battery. This battery seems to be the most inefficient cell ever made
 
I charge it for like 6hrs and it lasts may be an hour, with my easy-to-drive Grados. 
 
Is this an issue?