R2R RIP or Resurrection?

[Diet Kokaine]

My Yggdrasil MIB R2R DAC has 119-120 dB SINAD BTW and so is Holo Audio May KTE R2R DAC

Swoosh
Went right over your head

Decibel levels is not the issue.
The ability to measure ^^^^ the intricacies of a musical presentation " is.
Anyways
I know I'm preaching to the comitted believers, so I'll see my way out of this thread

 

[theveterans]

Swoosh
Went right over your head

Volume is not the issue.
The ability to measure ^^^^ the intricacies of a musical presentation " is.
Anyways
I know I'm preaching to the comitted believers, so I'll see my way out of this thread

You should try demoing the Yggdrasil MIB to your system. You'll probably be mesmerized with its sonic prowess . This 120 dB SINAD R2R DAC is sounding so musical and analog free of grain and digititis

 

[Diet Kokaine]

I'm good.

 

[bagwell359]

You should try demoing the Yggdrasil MIB to your system. You'll probably be mesmerized with its sonic prowess . This 120 dB SINAD R2R DAC is sounding so musical and analog free of grain and digititis

For $1100 less the Gungnir 2 is also a striking purveyor of music.

 

[theveterans]

For $1100 less the Gungnir 2 is also a striking purveyor of music.

Definitely, but it's not a 120 dB SINAD DAC which is the magical number that is considered the ultimate of transparency

 

[Diet Kokaine]

For $1100 less the Gungnir 2 is also a striking purveyor of music.

I have a Rockna.
Fully kitted out.
My 2 channel sound system sounds like a mushroom trip.

Be happy with your 200 dollar piece of junk. Live and let live.. right?

 

[theveterans]

I have a Rockna.
Fully kitted out.
My 2 channel sound system sounds like a mushroom trip.

Be happy with your 200 dollar piece of junk. Live and let live.. right?

Rockna Wavedream is one helluva lively sounding DAC. No doubt your speakers are thumping mad with it!

 

[bagwell359]

Definitely, but it's not a 120 dB SINAD DAC which is the magical number that is considered the ultimate of transparency

Ah yes Amir's favorite measurement. I'd like his hearing tested since he listens at damaging volumes.

 

[bigshot]

I know I'm preaching to the comitted believers, so I'll see my way out of this thread

You keep making promises you don’t keep.

 

[JamoBroGuy]

See that's the difference between you and I - I see things one way, you see them another. Fine. But whether you agree or not is irrelevant to how I feel about my gear. I stand by my comments, as I'm sure you do yours.

Peace

Just to be clear, Gregorio is NOT trying to change your opinion on your gear nor how much you enjoy it. The ONLY issue here is that you stated your opinions on your gear as fact in a science forum. That’s it, nothing more. You’re entitled to your own opinions, but as this is a science forum you generally shouldn’t state your opinions as fact.

I keep saying this, but I'll say it again. R2R DACs are like high-end watches. They don't actually do anything better, but they're cool. Tube amps are similar, IMO.

Exactly.

Non science in this science forum never ends either.

Can you give an example of “non science” posted by a regular here in a serious context?

Deleted:

This crap is not worth my time.
Enjoy the Science section and your 200 dollar DACs.

I don’t even own a 200 dollar DAC, I own a 450 dollar dongle. I’m pretty sure Bigshot owns a DAC that costs significantly more.

Decibel levels is not the issue.
The ability to measure ^^^^ the intricacies of a musical presentation " is.

I’ve already explained to you that the reason why we don’t see musical qualities measured is because they’re qualities of the music, not the gear. Yet you choose to completely ignore what I said and not even consider that maybe what you believe isn’t entirely true.

I have a Rockna.
Fully kitted out.
My 2 channel sound system sounds like a mushroom trip.

Be happy with your 200 dollar piece of junk. Live and let live.. right?

What’s the point of this? Are you just trying to insult us? Enjoy your gear of course, I’m sure it’s great, but why attempt to insult us for not having such expensive gear?

I don’t enjoy arguing, but what you’re trying to accomplish is beyond my understanding.

 

[gregorio]

My Yggdrasil MIB R2R DAC has 119-120 dB SINAD BTW and so is Holo Audio May KTE R2R DAC

But that is NOT the SINAD, this is a good example of not understanding what the measurement is, or of what it tells us!

Firstly, what is SINAD: SINAD is the total of all distortion + all noise, expressed as a ratio (typically in dB) to the signal.

Secondly, what is this particular measurement telling us: “All distortion” would have to include IMD (as intermodulation distortion is obviously a “distortion”), otherwise it would not be “all” distortion, so a measurement of SINAD must have a wide bandwidth, to include any ultrasonic content that could produce IMD (in the audible band). However your posted measurement has been bandlimited to 20kHz, thereby eliminating all ultrasonic content and all IMD caused by it. It therefore is not a measurement of “all” distortion and therefore not a measurement of SINAD. In addition, it is not “all distortion + all noise” for another, separate reason. The analyser has be set to “A-Wighted”, so all the distortion+noise below 1kHz and above 7kHz has been rolled-off, it is therefore definitely NOT “all distortion + all noise” and not a measurement of SINAD.

It’s as if someone has deliberately applied those settings to falsely demonstrate a much higher SINAD than is actually the case. My guess would be it’s been posted by a Schiit shill, as I’m not sure Schiit themselves would be so blatantly misleading. The actual SINAD of the Yggdrasil is around 89-90dB and 86dB according to GoldenSound and ASR respectively but maybe of different update versions. At the highest end of the “reasonable listening level” (with headphones) at about 85dB SPL, that should still put the Yggdrasil’s issues (distortion and noise) below audibility, at around -1dBSPL or lower. Nevertheless, who in their right mind would consider a ~$2,000 DAC with significantly poorer performance in this regard than a $9 DAC to be a good buy?

This crap is not worth my time.

Either that’s a lie, it was worth your time, because you posted the crap or, you’re claiming it took literally zero time to come-up with, type and post this crap!

Swoosh … Went right over your head
Decibel levels is not the issue.
The ability to measure ^^^^ the intricacies of a musical presentation " is.
Anyways … I know I'm preaching to the comitted believers, so I'll see my way out of this thread

“Right over your head”, that’s got to be the best example of hypocrisy in the history of hypocrisy. If someone sticks their head far enough up their own a$$ then everything, even the most basic of facts, will go over their head! Do you know what “the intricacies of musical presentation” even means, do you know what defines music, let alone its intricacies, and where it exists? Do you know what a DAC does, do you know what the letters D, A and C stand for and which one of them do you think stands for “musical presentation”?

You’re just repeating the same crap, which contrary to your assertion, you’ve proved you do have time for. A DAC outputs an analogue electrical signal (the “A” in the acronym DAC), it does not output “the intricacies of a musical presentation”. Maybe you’d like to explain how there can be an “ability to measure” something at the output of a DAC that it is not outputting? Should there also be the ability to measure the output of a DAC for the flavour of ice cream, as DACs don’t output ice cream either?

And lastly (and again!), “preaching” utter BS to “committed believers” in the science/facts, in an actual science discussion forum is TROLLING! You should have “seen your way out of this thread” (and in fact any thread) long ago, before you even started posting/trolling!

G

 

[2leftears]

OK, let me try to get this debate back on topic with a question related to the OP's post:

This rabbit hole led me to the Delta-Sigma (DS) v R2R debate -well rehearsed on forums I know, so excuse me for bringing it up here…but I’m interested on the science take to cut through the metaphoric analogies that have been gaining traction.

Why is there an "R2R vs DS" debate anyway?

(EDIT: this question isn't aimed at the OP, rather at the other knowledgeable members here)

I'm no expert on the matter but I thought there are many DACs which are neither. Even the venerable TDA1541 wasn't a pure R2R DAC and there were hybrid technologies such as Matsushita's MASH technology. An 'R2R' DAC doesn't have to be pure R2R, and a 'DS' DAC doesn't have to be a 1-bit DAC.

A pure R2R topology for a high number of bits would surely have some inherent accuracy drawbacks (non-linearity & non-monotonous behaviour)? Especially with discrete resistor ladders neatly laid out over a large area of the circuit board, which seems to be the current fashion; it sure 'looks' impressive, but e.g. in terms of ensuring the required homogeneous temperature for an accurate R2R ladder network it sucks.

 

[gregorio]

Why is there an "R2R vs DS" debate anyway?

There isn’t an “R2R vs DS debate”, there was an R2R vs DS debate in the 1960’s but it didn’t last long as far as I’m aware. Then in the mid 1980’s, a few years after digital audio was first introduced to consumers, there was some debate related to the actual practical implementation, the fact that the available DAC (and ADC) chips were only able to handle 1bit DS. Chip technology of course moved on, in the early/mid 1990’s that limitation was no more and the debate which was already pretty much done, was completely done.

The debate now isn’t “R2R vs DS”, the debate is actually “belief in false audiophile marketing vs the actual facts”, which is why the debate only exists in the audiophile community. It doesn’t exist in the pro-audio world, it was over decades ago and there are no pro-audio R2R ADCs or DACs.

An 'R2R' DAC doesn't have to be pure R2R, and a 'DS' DAC doesn't have to be a 1-bit DAC.

As always, when some term used by audiophile marketing starts to negatively affect marketability, they simply redefine the term. That’s why audiophiles have all these crazy ideas of what “fidelity” (and numerous other audio science/engineering terms) means, which has little to do with what it actually means. R2R used to mean a resistor ladder instead of an oversampling DAC chip, today it can mean both, tomorrow it might mean a teapot with a windmill on top, if an audiophile marketer thinks it provides a marketing benefit and can incentivise enough audiophile influencers to successfully push it.

This is different with DS DACs though, (Delta-Sigma) just means a difference and sum modulator, essentially using negative feedback to “sum” (integrate) the “difference”. The definition of a DS converter has never required this “difference” be encapsulated with just a one bit quantiser, that was just the practical limitation of consumer technology in the 1980’s. DS can be any number of bits, just a lower number of bits (at a higher sample rate). Beware of audiophile marketing trying to re-write history; it is very, very common to claim to solve/improve some problem that was actually solved long before. When do you think multi-bit DS converters were invented, doesn’t it sound like a fairly modern audiophile invention? Would it surprise you to learn the patent was filed in 1961 (by an aerospace technology company)?

G

 

[Jimmyblues1959]

I am in the "value for money" group. I have enjoyed both SABRE and AKM dongle DACs and desktop DACs (see sig. below).

I have settled on the FiiO K11R2R in OS mode driving a Schiit Vali3 amp.
With the Loki+ analogue tone controls I can tweak it for every headphone (and every album) to suit my old ears;

I am also in the "trust your ears" group and encourage you to test a relatively inexpensive R2R DAC against a similarly priced DS.

I'm also in the value for money group since the law of diminishing returns comes up quickly in this hobby, and you can pay a fortune to obtain the last few increments of
performance out of your system. For this reason I stopped chasing gear years ago, but I wouldn't trade a second of my time in this hobby, subjective as it is, because it has and continues to be so much fun!

As for those who pay astrobucks for their audio systems, chasing the Holy Grail of this hobby, IMHO if you have the money to do so, good for you!
The point is that life is short and any hobby that gives you enjoyment is worthwhile, as long as you can afford it.

 

[2leftears]

I'm also in the value for money group since the law of diminishing returns comes up quickly in this hobby, and you can pay a fortune to obtain the last few increments of
performance out of your system.

In some cases it is even worse; you can pay a fortune and get a negative return (in terms of fidelity at least).

It all depends on how you define "return". Beyond a certain expenditure the "return" has a strong tendency to bifurcate along different axes and either stay at zero or go negative along the axis of audio fidelity