[Skidood]

Equipment:
 
Luxman LV-112 Integrated Amp ($550.00 US  in 1991)
Home crafted double-chamber reflex 3 way speakers, Vifa woofers, Seas tweeters, double-wall construction w/ beach sand core layer.  (Weight: about 120 lbs) (I have built several pairs of loudspeakers and crossover networks, one of my previous hobbies)
Pioneer CD player about 10 years old.
Acer Aspire laptop with J River Media Center.  No enhancements were enabled.
SPC Technologies hi-speed USB cable
 
Method:
 
During listening, I repeatedly switched back and forth between CD player and the Music Streamer using the input switches on the amp.  The same song was playing at the same point in the song on both devices.  I tried several different songs and types of music.  The files on my laptop were of CD quality (ripped from CD using either FLAC and APE)
 
Result:  No audible difference in sound quality, although I do think I detected a slight difference in the sound stage and/or imaging.
I will try again later this afternoon to see if I can detect more, but I doubt I will.  As someone recently said on here, a DAC is a DAC. 
I feel that in terms of sound quality, there are no audible differences between DACs.  But I do believe there might be differences in tone, warmth  etc.
 
Cheers.
 
Update:  another listen.  soundstage/imaging =  no detectable difference.
I did notice a little more presence in the midrange with the CD player. The bass and the highs sounded exactly the same.   
 

 

[oaklandrkg]

Thanks for your thoughts. Yeah, the Music Streamer IIs are getting pretty popular.
 
There's a lot in your post I'm confused by, but I think I share some of the same general sentiment that modern DACs effect on the music is generally greatly exaggerated, and they are often, for all intents and purposes, transparent. With the Music Streamer II +, I myself really wonder how many people could potentially successfully ABX the Music Streamer II + ($350) from the non-plus Music Streamer II ($150). I do think DACs can potentially have audible differences, however, even with the cheapest DACs I believe that these differences will still be on the smaller side of minimal (outside of hearing the effects of improperly matching the DAC's output impedance).
 
However, it seems this opinion on DACs is not the popular one on head-fi, but that shouldn't come as much of a surprise considering that this is a forum centered around hi-fi equipment, so of course the people on here will also be the ones most willing to believe in the value/impact of the various products they are interested in; why else would they be interested in them?
 
Quote:

I feel that in terms of sound quality, there are no audible differences between DACs.  But I do believe there might be differences in tone, warmth etc.

To me if there's a difference in tone and/or warmth, and I can hear it, I would consider that an audible difference.

 

[Skidood]

Agreed..warmth for example is an audible difference.... but has nothing to do with sound "quality" IMO....warmth is character...PS...I updated my original post after one more test.

 

[oaklandrkg]

As of this moment, my basic working definition of 'sound-quality' for equipment is the proficiency in which it can produce transparently. Additional presence or lack there of of warmth, tone, sound stage, etc, is, to me, a knock against 'quality', and the more transparent the piece of equipment, the higher its sound quality.
 
And like I said, I think that even cheap DACs these days are still incredibly transparent.
 
However, sitting around talking about how transparent equipment is is not all that much fun, so generally it's the people who are most convinced that there are huge leaps between the sound quality/sound signature of relatively similar devices that are also the most vocal/active members of thecommunity.

 

[oaklandrkg]

the term "hi-fi" is short for "high fidelity"
 
high = of greater degree, amount, cost, value, or content than average, usual, or expected
fidelity = accuracy in details; exactness
 
hi-fi = very accurate
 
... It's really amazing though; all the wonderfully erroneous descriptions and adjectives that are constantly being attached to hi-fi equipment. I'm constantly hearing people say things like 'this is a very warm sounding amp with amazing sound quality', which IMO is just another way of saying 'discount what my opinions and views are on matters relating to audio equipment'

 

[Skidood]

 
lol....
What's your view on tube amps and the fans thereof?

 

[oaklandrkg]

I personally swear by my TV that runs on tubes... no color and not even in the same universe as HD, but that only makes the picture look that much better. I've noticed that the picture on all these new TVs look way too cold and clinical; I love that warm look of my tube TV!!

 

[MattTCG]

Quote:

I personally swear by my TV that runs on tubes... no color and not even in the same universe as HD, but that only makes the picture look that much better. I've noticed that the picture on all these new TVs look way too cold and clinical; I love that warm look of my tube TV!!

You are joking...right?

 

[ShadowVlican]

about time people like oaklandrkg come out and post... i reek when i hear people talking about studio monitors being too clinical and analytic 

.. of course that applies to solid state vs tube amps

 

[Skidood]

Aaahhh....I was wondering what the funny smell was....
 
Oh, by the way, my bit-perfect  $37,000 sound system has always produced a somewhat fruity and sticky-sweet quality to it, lately it seems to be changing to a more frosty minty sound...
Weird, eh?