1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

Thoughts on a bunch of DACs (and why delta-sigma kinda sucks, just to get you to think about stuff)

Discussion in 'Dedicated Source Components' started by purrin, Dec 5, 2013.
First
 
Back
382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391
393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402
Next
 
Last
  1. DreamKing
    I see, well a 2 dB change would still be transparent though. So no audible difference in DR still. I wonder if anyone's ever compared them on one of those upgradable DAC's. For the time being, I'm just gonna assume it's up to the DAC and not the chip (between these two chips at least).
     
  2. Sapientiam
    Current measurements don't give much, if any guide to transparency. Otherwise the ODAC and O2 would be the last word in fidelity.
     
  3. prot

    Yes they do. And yes they are (one of the..).
    The Odac even carries the amazing "purrin approved" stamp for the faint of heart.
     
  4. DreamKing
     
    In any case, the PCM1704 would still have more DR than the PCM63 if you subtracted the A-weighting average. So unless you've directly compared the chips, these measurements aren't conclusive to its transparency, if anything else from what you're saying. So a bit confused why you started off by mentioning low level linearity.
     
  5. Articnoise
     

    I would ask Mr. Poon which he prefer in this specific DAC and what the SQ pros and cons are. The DAC chip not only has to be good, it really has to synergy well with the filters (they work together) and also the rest of the design.

     

    Regarding PCM63 versus the PCM1704, not everybody share the view of MM. AYON CD-5, NAIM CD555, Aqua Audio La Scala, Mark Levinson 30.6, Trinity DAC are some well regarding DACs that use the PCM1704 and of cause an equally list of good DACs can be made for the PCM63. 

     
  6. Sapientiam
    Answering the question you posed - 'in what way is the 1704 a downgrade?' (relative to the '63).
     
  7. Sapientiam
     
    Cite?
     
  8. thegunner100
    I had the parasound d/ac-1100, which could have been "upgraded" to the pcm1704. But based on my experience with the M7, I did not go for it. The parasound with a cheap usb/spdif converter already sounded better than the M7 to my ears.
     
    But YMMV. Maybe you'll like the thicker, more syrupy sound of the 1704. 
     
  9. purrin
    "PCM1704 bass", softness, and lack of resolution despite more bits. Lots of people like that kind of sound though.
     
  10. Wildcatsare1
    ^Thanks Gents, I am going to stick with the BB PCM63s, the Monarchy 22B should be here Tuesday.

    Appreciate the advice, looking forward to lighting it up!
     
  11. Jones Bob

    Kludge.

    Not only are the physical parameters not interchangeable, neither are the signal parameters. The digital filter needs to be reprogrammed/replaced to be optimized to either 20 or 24 bit, as does the analog anti imaging filter.
     
  12. Wildcatsare1

    Kludge is correct, Monarchy sells an adapter in the chip replacement and it remains at 20 bits. So I am not going to make the change, very happy I decided not to buy the other unit for sale that had been "upgraded".
     
  13. lukeap69

    Why did you chose 22B over the NM24?
     
  14. Wildcatsare1

    I found an M22B at a really good price, so I wanted to give it a shot. Would love to compare them head to head.
     
  15. lukeap69
    Nice. Let us know your impressions.
     
First
 
Back
382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391
393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402
Next
 
Last

Share This Page