[AlanU]

The point I was making is that most of the R2R DACs should be audibly transparent according to the measurements. You would be paying extra for nothing, rather some audible distortion/ pleasant colouration.
If people can actually hear differences then it's the measurements that are sub-optimal and there might be more to the R2R vs DS argument.

The difficulty is the entire chain of components. Having an extremely expensive DAC with an average headphone amp and brand/type of headphone completely distorts any discussion of viewing DAC graphs/specs/measurements.

I've auditioned a tonne of headphones as my local shop has a massive selection. Regardless of what DAC, headphone amp I used there was always a strong sense of distinct sound signature/colouration on every headphone. A long time ago there was great hype in the Audioquest Nighthawk. I absolutely hated the sound signature but I assure you the dac and amplification was not the mediocre sort. My point is the collective effort in producing a certain "sound" is a blend of everything in the chain.

I'll admit I love solid state sound some days due to convenience. If I really want to sit down and enjoy the musical qualities of music I love analog vinyl or digital getting some added flesh with tube gear.

I've auditioned a fair share of high end 2 channel stereo gear (not headphones). Even the high end solid state gear provided overload of detail getting technical rather than kicking back and enjoy toe tapping rhythm. I was auditioning some SPA/Meditation type music with high resolution recordings of ocean waves. "So called" transparent digital dacs had intense hyper details. In my home using the same identical recording the Space tech tube dac with super rectifier setup has less detail but this envelope of holographic 3d sound that literally gives you the impression your feet are getting wet. The added harmonics, distortion provides a realistic experience I've yet to really experience with your average $25++++++ grand hifi stereo system.

The beauty of headphones is that your average high end gear will not require a car loan to achieve happiness.

I've mentioned this earlier but my Parasound Halo P6 preamp has an onboard DAC. ESS Sabre32 Reference DAC capable of DSD & 384kHz/32 bit PCM. I'm floored how such an inexpensive $2100 CDN preamp sounds refined, smooth and detailed. It has some meat on the bones which is rather surprising. It's easily comparable to so many other higher end solid state dacs costing 3x to quadruple. I've tested my Astron linear power supply feeding my Mytek Liberty dac (same dac as the older gen 1 Brooklyn) and the onboard DAC in my Parasound Halo is extremely apparent level beyond the Mytek. The musical quality without graph analysis is how I determine my purchase of gear. Yes it's my ears and my perception...... I do not justify my spending either. I honestly never even considered using the onboard dac at all.


Comparing any solid state dac with my Tube dac…….. I've yet to hear any 3d realism from solid state. My geeky audiofile friends (me included) are always pleasantly surprised how a tube dac can have qualities unheard from majority of all solid state dacs. There was a company called Blue Circle Audio and Gilbert was a boutique one stop shop. He had $6000+++ dac that had more AC line filtration than many high end Power amp manufacturers. His goal was musical bliss with solid state components and some with tube buffer conditioners line out. Many high end mainstream DAC solid state manufacturers only wish they can sound that good!!!

I think colouration is what provides musical enjoyment. For technical analysis having hyper detail with in your face transparency isn't my kind of system.What indicates real transparency?? When so many solid state dacs are engineered with a predetermined soundstage. They do not communicate with the sound engineer of the original recordings. Also different dacs put different placement of the instruments and vocals. Some will present the singer 3-5 feet forward or back in the "imaging". Real life in live events the instruments are not pin point located as the room bounces sound. These are all topics beyond comparing graphs. Not sure how a graph dictates the amount of air around the instruments. There is so much more than graph analysis.

 

[Koei]

I don't think you quite understand what acoustically transparent means.

Besides, any comparison that isn't a double blind ABX is invalid. Even the color of the gear has influence on our sound perception.

 

[AlanU]

I don't think you quite understand what acoustically transparent means.

Besides, any comparison that isn't a double blind ABX is invalid. Even the color of the gear has influence on our sound perception.

When you discuss "acoustically transparent" your talking about a movie/projector screen material

I know people that are happy with a Schiit Gumby DAC. Each to their own on how they enjoy music.

What I find is when I audition from "average" to $100,000+ Hifi systems I get a reality check on imaging and how every system sounds different.

 

[Koei]

When you discuss "acoustically transparent" your talking about a movie/projector screen material

I know people that are happy with a Schiit Gumby DAC. Each to their own on how they enjoy music.

What I find is when I audition from "average" to $100,000+ Hifi systems I get a reality check on imaging and how every system sounds different.

Those differences are created by the transducers or non-acoustically transparent design choices. In pro-reference audio it's just the transducers that make the difference.

 

[TimSchirmer]

If we are talkin about anything under 1500 or so I would just go with a benchmark and call it a day.

 

[AlanU]

Those differences are created by the transducers or non-acoustically transparent design choices. In pro-reference audio it's just the transducers that make the difference.

fantastic speakers/headphones aka transducer will not sound optimum with mediocre source or amplification.

Everything counts and makes a difference.

 

[Koei]

fantastic speakers/headphones aka transducer will not sound optimum with mediocre source or amplification.

Everything counts and makes a difference.

That is completely correct, but you don't need to spend a lot to reach that. You can get a transparant source and amplification under $2000,-. That's a setup that will drive pretty much any speaker on the market and is 100% transparant. If you want to be absolutely sure you can go for some overkill and get the Benchmark DAC3 in combination with the AHB2 and you done. From that point on you only have to worry about your transducers.

 

[AlanU]

That is completely correct, but you don't need to spend a lot to reach that. You can get a transparant source and amplification under $2000,-. That's a setup that will drive pretty much any speaker on the market and is 100% transparant. If you want to be absolutely sure you can go for some overkill and get the Benchmark DAC3 in combination with the AHB2 and you done. From that point on you only have to worry about your transducers.

For headphones I think you can get away with such budgets.

When it comes to actual 2 channel gear it's not so easy since synergy is so important. The AHB2 does sound interesting to trial. I do often find wattage ratings do not tell the full story as current delivery is much different. Even my A21+ has 108,000 uF filter caps and outputs 60A current. If you're into holographic realistic sound, tube gear or vinyl I do not think the Benchmark DAC3 would meet your needs in note decay and analog sound.

 

[439598]

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-measurements-of-holo-audio-spring-dac.10047/

This is the best one I've seen measurements of. You won't hear the difference, but this measured performance can already be hit by $200 DS DACs with ease. SOTA SINAD for DS is at 120dB.

Most R2R DACs have distortions that seem to hearable, but this one hasn't.

You said there were ABX tests that showed no difference, not measurements. I know R2R can measure well enough to be transparent, I already linked that holospring DAC in my first post.

btw spending $1500 on Benchmark DAC when you can get transparent measuring DAC for less than $100 makes as much sense as buying an R2R DAC.

 

[439598]

Just noticed there is newer Holo Audio DAC that measures astonishingly good, better than a lot of DS DACs in fact
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...may-probably-the-best-discrete-r2r-dac.10161/

 

[Koei]

You said there were ABX tests that showed no difference, not measurements. I know R2R can measure well enough to be transparent, I already linked that holospring DAC in my first post.

btw spending $1500 on Benchmark DAC when you can get transparent measuring DAC for less than $100 makes as much sense as buying an R2R DAC.

We are not disagreeing, I'm just giving the Benchmark example for the guy who thinks you can't get transparent results on cheaper gear.

The Benchmark also has analog inputs and can be used as a full preamp so that's also pretty cool.

For headphones I think you can get away with such budgets.

When it comes to actual 2 channel gear it's not so easy since synergy is so important. The AHB2 does sound interesting to trial. I do often find wattage ratings do not tell the full story as current delivery is much different. Even my A21+ has 108,000 uF filter caps and outputs 60A current. If you're into holographic realistic sound, tube gear or vinyl I do not think the Benchmark DAC3 would meet your needs in note decay and analog sound.

The Benchmark AHB2 is a reference level amplifier. Benchmark is an engineer's brand. Their ultimate goal is perfect, benchmark, performance. It drives speakers down to 1.4 ohm at full output. The Parasound has very high distortion compared to the Benchmark. Even if you compare normal listening levels on the Parasound to the AHB2 at full power. You can just look up the specifications yourself. Parasound is masking a lot of them by making them very vague. That should be a warning bell. Probably still won't hear it and if you would I'd say you would still prefer the Parasound's higher noise and distortion because it's closer to the tube sound you like.


If you prefer the best analog reproduction you need a DAC that provides the exact waveform stored in the media. That's what the DAC3 does. You talk about decay and such, but I doubt any of the DACs you prefer provide actual specs with regards to that. And indeed the DAC3 does not provide all the distortion and noise you prefer, so it probably isn't for you. Which is fine, not everybody is into Hifi some prefer Myfi.

 

[439598]

We are not disagreeing, I'm just giving the Benchmark example for the guy who thinks you can't get transparent results on cheaper gear.

The Benchmark also has analog inputs and can be used as a full preamp so that's also pretty cool.



The Benchmark AHB2 is a reference level amplifier. Benchmark is an engineer's brand. Their ultimate goal is perfect, benchmark, performance. It drives speakers down to 1.4 ohm at full output. The Parasound has very high distortion compared to the Benchmark. Even if you compare normal listening levels on the Parasound to the AHB2 at full power. You can just look up the specifications yourself. Parasound is masking a lot of them by making them very vague. That should be a warning bell. Probably still won't hear it and if you would I'd say you would still prefer the Parasound's higher noise and distortion because it's closer to the tube sound you like.


If you prefer the best analog reproduction you need a DAC that provides the exact waveform stored in the media. That's what the DAC3 does. You talk about decay and such, but I doubt any of the DACs you prefer provide actual specs with regards to that. And indeed the DAC3 does not provide all the distortion and noise you prefer, so it probably isn't for you. Which is fine, not everybody is into Hifi some prefer Myfi.

ok fair enough but Im more concerned about the ABX tests, 90% of DACs , R2R or DS, are audibly transparent according to measurements, yet there is a huge number of people who argue they arent. Ok, it could be confirmation bias, but there is no up to date data to conclude that, I want to see the ones claiming a difference to take the tests.
There are scattered reports of people passing ABX tests around the web with supposedly inaudible difference, even nwavguy himself showed that people had a preference for a Benchmark DAC in his blind tests, which he guessed was due to ''peer bias''

 

[AlanU]

We are not disagreeing, I'm just giving the Benchmark example for the guy who thinks you can't get transparent results on cheaper gear.

The Benchmark also has analog inputs and can be used as a full preamp so that's also pretty cool.



The Benchmark AHB2 is a reference level amplifier. Benchmark is an engineer's brand. Their ultimate goal is perfect, benchmark, performance. It drives speakers down to 1.4 ohm at full output. The Parasound has very high distortion compared to the Benchmark. Even if you compare normal listening levels on the Parasound to the AHB2 at full power. You can just look up the specifications yourself. Parasound is masking a lot of them by making them very vague. That should be a warning bell. Probably still won't hear it and if you would I'd say you would still prefer the Parasound's higher noise and distortion because it's closer to the tube sound you like.


If you prefer the best analog reproduction you need a DAC that provides the exact waveform stored in the media. That's what the DAC3 does. You talk about decay and such, but I doubt any of the DACs you prefer provide actual specs with regards to that. And indeed the DAC3 does not provide all the distortion and noise you prefer, so it probably isn't for you. Which is fine, not everybody is into Hifi some prefer Myfi.

There's clearly a difference in how an engineer develops a product. This is with everything in life.

Koei, you're clearly a specifications man. If you walked into your local headphone shop or hifi shop you should put your ears to the test.

Some love Bryston and some love Mcintosh amplifiers. Both worlds are different in how they present music. Maybe your average inexpensive Schiit Gumby will not sound that much different from other 1000+ dollar dacs so many will be greatly appreciative. How is it that there is such a following for the Schiit Yggy...... I guess the Gumby is on par LOL!! Perhaps it's deliberately engineered or just how things all came together upon assembly of components.

The term "Musical" or "Analytical" is commonly thrown around in the audio world. If it was so simple to have cheap dacs that are on par with substantially more expensive that would be the ideal world. There are far too many "measurbators" analyzing graphs and specs but these are not the end all be all when waveforms hits your eardrums. As this is a hobby and wallet reducing fun pastime auditioning gear can be an eye opener. Vince Bruzzese the founder of Totem acoustic said to me speakers are like comparing a lamborghini and Bentley. Some speaker takes you for a wild ride or some just is easy listening. This goes along the lines of the Totem Metal vs Totem Wind. Speakers/headphones is only a piece of the puzzle.

I urge you to join geeky audio groups or visit all of your local shops and shows. If you play with high tier audio gear you can really hear a difference in minute changes. Odd how even my 13yrs old can detect the differences in swapping power cords on my amplifier. The indication of the change in warmth, sound stage, rhythm and pace, realism.... were all from her vocabulary. This is swapping from a $1200.00 power cable vs a $560 dollar Power cord. I hope you can hear a difference between hyper detailed presence of vocal and sound stage presence vs Analog vinyl/Tube with holographic realism. If you have not auditioned such gear I urge you since you are missing the point of the hobby of finding personal audio nirvana. So far all of my family and friends A/B testing prefers the holographic sound while listening to Blues Alley - Eva Cassidy or even Stevie Ray Vaughan - Tin Pan Alley. Their jaws drop in the difference with Tin Pan Alley with my Tube setup. This is coming from non geeky audiofiles............

I use my Tube gear as well as solid state. I'm currently debating on buying a Tube amp to mix things up. At this moment my Source goes from either a tube dac or Solid state feeding a preamp/amp. At this moment my Mytek Liberty with Astron linear PS cannot even match the musical qualities of my onboard DAC found in my preamp. However both units are using the same Sabre chip but it's all about how the electronic engineering puts it together. It's either a blessing or unfortunate to not be able to hear a difference. If you cannot hear a difference those folks should be happy as they can settle for a Gumby dac and think it's on par with higher tier products out there.

Even using "reference" affordable $2200 Benchmark Dac3 would change it's characteristics using different pre amps or headphone amps/integrated amps. Reason is..we listen to the collective combination of gear. The Dac is strictly the source. It doesn't appear that you own the AHB2 amp. What you will find is there's a noticeable difference in how the designer wants to create a sound signature. Listen to the tonality of different amps and you'll hear how music is presented. More filter caps and current delivery all combines a different product. The A21+ is spec'd for a swing of 1.5ohms so it can handle a deep sweep in the music. There are so many varieties of amps to buy. This is where headfi is the most cheapest but versatile audio hobby as it's all small and portable and usually cheaper in many cases.

Dac selection cannot be based on graphs and spec sheets. This also applies to speakers and amplification. There is a difference and if you cannot hear it, I suggest buying the cheapest possible gear that suites your happiness. Warning.....if you empty your wallet in higher transparent gear you will hear every change and tweak you do to your system. This is where a Benchmark Dac3 will soon be "great" to "OK" when comparing other dacs on the market. Biggest change is either headphone swap or for 2 channel the speakers, speaker positioning, room conditioning, room acoustics.

This topic is not so cut and dry easy.....

 

[nordkapp]

Odd how even my 13yrs old can detect the differences in swapping power cords on my amplifier. The indication of the change in warmth, sound stage, rhythm and pace, realism.... were all from her vocabulary. This is swapping from a $1200.00 power cable vs a $560 dollar Power cord.

This is laughable....Sorry but you've just lost me.

 

[AlanU]

This is laughable....Sorry but you've just lost me.

I wont start a cable debate. I simply allowed my 13yrs old daughter sit in front of my 2 channel. Swapped 2 power cords and let her populate the words in what she hears. I had zero influence in her descriptions. Her description was spot on.

Have you performed such experiments? If you do not have access to borrowing/auditioning cords and cabling this is one reason you find this amusing.

If you cannot hear a difference this may indicate the transducer does not provide enough resolution. I've auditioned your cans so I can say they are adequate/good for relaying details.

It does not sound like you've ever auditioned different gear (non headphone). It's very apparent in how every component can change the sound if you have a transparent system.
A decade ago I "laughed" at my Brothers/friends comments on audio cabling. I borrowed and auditioned many cables one evening with a dead silent home environment. I was shocked and ate my words and this was with NO monetary expenditures or gear purchase justification. I was floored in a change in SQ........

If you cannot hear a difference I wish I was you