[Drewligarchy]

I am 38 years old and a child of the 80s. While I played around with vinyl a little, I grew up on CDs. I want my digital music to sound like digital music - not analog. I like my music to sound "Hi-Fi". I don't think that's a dirty word. I am learning to avoid devices that are described as "Natural". I am an unabashed treble head.

I love Sabre Dacs. Rob Watts said noise floor modulation is the MSG of digital audio. I enjoy chinese food too. I put way too much salt on things. I like MSG/Salt in my audio.

Over the past few years, as I've advanced in head-fi and audiophilia in general I have had the opportunity to demo and own a ton of DACs. I have numerous TOTL headphones from dynamics to planars to electrostats - and TOTL amps.

A couple years ago I bought in Auralic Vega. It was absolutely the best DAC I had ever owned and still does some things better than all other DACs I've tried. I've also owned a Wadia 121, Chord Hugo/Chord2Qute, NAD M51, Marantz HDAC, Simaudio 230HAD, and a Schiit Yggrdasil - in addition to the Vega.

I've demo'd a Hugo TT. That was a little bit of a disappointment. It's dark. It misses the vividness I was used to from the 2Qute and Hugo. I briefly demo'd a Chord Dave with Ether Flows at CanJam but couldn't get a great impression under show conditions. Simply in terms of sound signature, is it closer to the Hugo/2Qute, or TT?

I had the Yggdrasil for a couple years connected to my Stax rig. After a while, I realized I didn't really like it that much. Sure, it had fantastic staging, was incredibly detailed, and very analog sounding. I can tell why so many people love it. However, for me, a DAC's tonal colors are most important - and it just sounded a tad bit dull to my ears (and yes, it was fully burnt in and on for that entire period). For 2 years, I've had 2 DACs in my main Rig; An Yggy for my Stax and the Vega for my LCD4s. I could ultimately never get the Vega to play consistently in exact mode - however - with my LCD 4s specifically - I actually prefer auto mode.

Ultimately, as great as the Vega was, it was a little too bright for my Stax rig.

I finally bought my end game DAC; a Bricasti M1 SE, fully updated, with ethernet. Its the perfect DAC for both my LCD4 and Stax setup.

The ethernet card is supposed to be excellent. To me it makes the Bricasti M1 SE sound like an R2R DAC. The sound stange was awesome, the imaging pinpoint, the microdetail second to none. It sounded better than the yggy, but close, and a bit to dark to me. Needed a bit more salt. For the first time, I plugged a USB cable directly from my Macbook Pro into the M1, and everything clicked. It was perfect. It was the best DAC I ever heard. In my mind perfectly balanced.

The USB is brighter than the Ethernet port. Don't get me wrong though - it's an excellent usb implementation. In a similar way to the Vega, and the NAD and the Simaudio and the 2Qute - I hear a rich tapestry of colors and timbres while retaining the imaging, microdetail, and most of the soundstage of ethernet - it just does it better than any DAC I've ever heard before. Basically, all the positive traits of R2R - but with the tonality I want.

I've mirrored Purrin/Marvey's famous thread - which includes his DAC chart of awesomeness. I generally agree with the chart, my preference just lies a lot more up and to the right. I've read Torq's thread as well. It's an amazing piece of work - and I've used what those to gentleman to choose what I'll demo.

I'd like to start a discussion around people who like their digital to sound digital. I'm not talking ultra compressed modern music on a DAC that leaves your ears ringing, I'm talking the vividness and the "better than reality, hyper realistic sound".

Am I the only one that feels this way? Everyone forum I read and every audiophile publication I come across describes good digital as close to analog. How about the best digital reproduction based instead on vividness, "better than reality", precision, etc.

What are your thoughts?

One additional thing - based on the sound I like, have I failed to audition anything superior to the Bricasti? Is the PSA DSD, with current firmware (Redcloud I believe) excellent digital - or is it aiming for being more analog soundingg like everything else. How is the Vega G2? Berkeley is a bit expensive, but how does that stack up? What's the best Sabre Dac you've ever heard? For that matter, what's the best delta sigma DAC you've ever heard? By how polarized the Mytek Manhattan is - it makes me think I should try it.

I want a DAC that engages me and pulls me into the music like anyone else. To do that, I want the types of things mentioned.

I'm curious what the community thinks. There has got to be others who feel this way.

 

[nordkapp]

I like the sound of ESS Sabres personally. Owned a Metrum R2R once upon a time. Blah. Boring, lifeless, slow, pale. I'm now on my 4th ESS chipped DAC-Resonessence Labs Veritas, and it's the best I've heard to date. If I had the funds, I'd go all in on the Mirus Pro Signature model. I like my sound way hyped up, crystal clear and vibrant. So i guess you could say we are in the same camp.

 

[Ralf Hutter]

I'm a child of the 60's and grew up on LPs. As an adult, I've been going to live concerts, mostly of unamplified acoustic instruments for 40 years.

I listen to mostly jazz and classical and want it to sound as close to live, unamplified music as possible. My MHDT Pagoda NOS R2R dac sounds more like the sound of real instruments than any other DAC architecture that I've heard.

 

[Drewligarchy]

I'm a child of the 60's and grew up on LPs. As an adult, I've been going to live concerts, mostly of unamplified acoustic instruments for 40 years.

I listen to mostly jazz and classical and want it to sound as close to live, unamplified music as possible. My MHDT Pagoda NOS R2R dac sounds more like the sound of real instruments than any other DAC architecture that I've heard.

A completely valid viewpoint. Genres play a huge role. I listen to a lot of classical as well - but I just prefer an enhanced sound. At least based on what I like today.

An interesting thing happened while I was listening to my 009 on my M1 last night. I kept going back and forth between it's ethernet input and USB.

Now I think the 009's, especially paired with the KGSSHV Cabon, is an electron microscope into the source.

I found the sound via USB initially more pleasing and exciting, but ultimately fatiguing. I found the input via Ethernet initially dull - but precise. Both were bright - largely because of the 009.

I was listening to Anderszeewski's Mozart Piano Concertos 25 & 27. I could hear the individual components of the orchestra on ethernet. On USB, the sound was more exciting, and seemingly had a more vivid color palette, but I couldn't differentiate different elements of the orchestra as clearly. Yes, I could hear some digital junk over the USB input. I think I finally understand what the ethernet input is all about.

Its almost like if you have a nice TV and get it calibrated. The initial reaction, if you haven't done it before, is that color are muted and it's dull. But the calibration allows you to see fine details in the picture (in greys and blacks for instance as an uncalibrated TV - no matter how good - will crush these). Ultimately, you get accustomed to the calibration and the colors become vivid again - with the added benefit of being able to see all of the detail.

Is this what I a missing out on with caffeinated DACs?

The strange thing is this, however. You know how you can set a TV to a cool or warm color temperature - with a cool color temperature highlighting the blues and a warm color temperature highlighting the reds? The ethernet on the M1 actually sounds cool, while the USB sounds warm. On the M1, the ethernet is brighter but less saturated, and the USB is warmer but more saturated. Nonetheless, the USB is more fatiguing. Just trying to make out what I hear going on.

For a different genre of music, the same thing with Al Di Meola's Land of the Midnight Sun. Clearly a recording from 2 inch tape - which sounds nothing like a modern (albeit good quality recording) from Pro Tools for instance.

With ethernet, I could here this like I never heard it before. Its clear as the bell. But again, the USB is pleasing.

Do your ears eventually adjust to the color temperature - so I'll see the vividness of the tonal colors eventually, while maintaining the level of precision I do now? It almost sounds like everything is one color - but I know its not. Its starting to separate. Maybe the Yggy wasn't the right DAC for me, but the Bricasti - through Ethernet - will be my end game once I adjust to the color space?

 

[stevenator]

Is the PSA DSD, with current firmware (Redcloud I believe) excellent digital - or is it aiming for being more analog soundingg like everything else.

I would describe it briefly as having a refined, digital sound. I have a DirectStream DAC, an Yggdrasil and recently acquired a Holo Spring DAC L3/KTE. In my estimation, the Yggdrasil is generally inferior the DirectStream. The Yggdrasil succeeds at retrieving details and bringing life to some recordings like no other DAC I've ever heard, but the DirectStream's sound is more coherent, wider and has more refined textures. Once I realized that the narrowness of the Yggdrasil's presentation and somewhat discontinuous staging, I couldn't un-hear it. It's still a great DAC, but a few levels below the DirectStream.

The Holo Spring DAC is completely different; I could see why you might not like it. The sound is much less "digital" than anything else I've heard. It's more fun at times too. One thing I seem to always notice about it is that (I listen to a lot of jazz) horn parts seem to get unusual emphasis. Details are there, but different.

For comparison purposes, consider that these are the two setups that I make the above statement based on: Holo Spring L3/KTE DAC ➜ HeadAmp GSX MkI ➜ Focal Utopias and PS Audio DirectStream DAC ➜ Mjölnir Audio KGSSHV Carbon ➜ Stax SR-007 MkI. The Yggdrasil is on loan to a friend at the moment. I would describe both of the amp/headphone combinations as neutral and unforgiving. Note also, that my preference for the SR-007s over the SR-009s is pretty extreme. I have a formerly working pair of SR-009s that I haven't bothered to repair or replace because I find them significantly less enjoyable than the SR-007s.

 

[Thenewguy007]

I would describe it briefly as having a refined, digital sound. I have a DirectStream DAC, an Yggdrasil and recently acquired a Holo Spring DAC L3/KTE. In my estimation, the Yggdrasil is generally inferior the DirectStream. The Yggdrasil succeeds at retrieving details and bringing life to some recordings like no other DAC I've ever heard, but the DirectStream's sound is more coherent, wider and has more refined textures. Once I realized that the narrowness of the Yggdrasil's presentation and somewhat discontinuous staging, I couldn't un-hear it. It's still a great DAC, but a few levels below the DirectStream.

The Holo Spring DAC is completely different; I could see why you might not like it. The sound is much less "digital" than anything else I've heard. It's more fun at times too. One thing I seem to always notice about it is that (I listen to a lot of jazz) horn parts seem to get unusual emphasis. Details are there, but different.

For comparison purposes, consider that these are the two setups that I make the above statement based on: Holo Spring L3/KTE DAC ➜ HeadAmp GSX MkII ➜ Focal Utopias and PS Audio DirectStream DAC ➜ Mjölnir Audio KGSSHV Carbon ➜ Stax SR-007 MkII. The Yggdrasil is on loan to a friend at the moment. I would describe both of the amp/headphone combinations as neutral and unforgiving. Note also, that my preference for the SR-007s over the SR-009s is pretty extreme. I have a formerly working pair of SR-009s that I haven't bothered to repair or replace because I find them significantly less enjoyable than the SR-007s.

Was the Yggdrasil the newer Analog 2 version?

 

[Drewligarchy]

Was the Yggdrasil the newer Analog 2 version?

No it's the original Yggy.

 

[stevenator]

Was the Yggdrasil the newer Analog 2 version?

Mine too is the older version.

 

[audioengr]

The fact that you preferred the USB interface over the Ethernet interface on the Bricasti is curious. Each of these designs have different levels of jitter and maybe the implementation of the Ethernet was not as good as the USB. On the other hand, maybe it has to do with the playback software you are using, or even the cabling.

Having designed 2 virtually identical interfaces, one using XMOS USB and the other Ethernet, I can tell you that the Ethernet when used with the right playback software is superior. I have found that with USB, the best playback software I have found is Amarra. Using Ethernet, the best SQ is using three apps:

1) Linn Kinsky for control
2) Minimserver as server
3) Bubble UPnP as proxy server

I have tried a lot of apps because I am in the business and I design DACs, including: Roon, Audirvana, Jriver, Foobar, Twonky, Amarra, Linn Kinsky, iTunes and others.

The other positive thing about Ethernet is that the computer is much less important, however there are other optimizations that take its place that are simpler, including:

1) use a modded Switch or Router, like the AQVOX
2) always tie the DC common of the router or switch to earth ground
3) use a high-quality Ethernet cable like the Wireworld Platinum or Starlight
4) use an Ethernet isolator in the cable, like the EMO EN-70e - short cable from Router to isolator and longer cable from isolator to DAC

All of these things are essential to getting stellar SQ from Ethernet.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

 

[TimSchirmer]

I'd like to start a discussion around people who like their digital to sound digital. I'm not talking ultra compressed modern music on a DAC that leaves your ears ringing, I'm talking the vividness and the "better than reality, hyper realistic sound".

Am I the only one that feels this way? Everyone forum I read and every audiophile publication I come across describes good digital as close to analog. How about the best digital reproduction based instead on vividness, "better than reality", precision, etc.

What you are describing is a sort of coloration to the sound. Most DAC manufacturers go for a "wire with gain" philosophy that is as original to the source material as possible and would shy away from adding anything to the signal that is not already there. Some manufacturers also go for a sonic signature (warm-ish typically, think Meridian). Once an audio engineer crosses that original-to-the-source line and attempts to exceed what is on the recording, you are going from a playback device to a sound enhancement device, which is a different field altogether.

 

[Whazzzup]

TT is amazing. granted it took a world class server to knock my socks off. the darker sound is what i love it gives punch to kick drums, electronic, just provides musical weight. concerning balance just feed TT properly and its end game.

 

[AlanU]

Old thread but what the heck....

I mainly use 2 channel these days. What I find is that we are all critically subjective when it comes to a dac.

There's an Japanese artist named Midori. She has produced some "Zen Music" and there's a track of ocean waves. Regardless of what solid state dac I've used Burson Virtuoso, Mytek Liberty with linear PS, Concero HD none of these dacs produced convincing realism. They all certainly had details, open sound stage, clarity. The Burson Virtuoso has the Burr Brown dac chipset so it was the more analog sounding SS DAC.

The sound of the ocean waves was a wall of detail overloading the listening experience. Using a Stello U3 dumbs down the sound with a warmer easy listening experience going USB to SPDIF. I've used the Uptone Regen for the USB interface and it just "works" and I'm not so critical with it in the chain.

Locally I've purchased a Space Tech Labs tube dac with external power supply tube rectifier. The sound is rolled off a bit. The compromise is that you will not get the hyper details like a solid state dac. Female vocals simply sound extremely convincing and analog. The sound stage take a tad romantic, intimate feel without a fake open sound I often hear with SS DAC's as well as other DAC's I've auditioned. Getting back to the "ocean waves" sound, the tube dac combo I use simply sound like water is literally running by your feet. Tube rolling not only the external rectifier power supply and Tube dac itself can change the sound signature a lot. I even have a full bridge rectifier diode configuration so I can bypass the vaccum tube rectifier cct to solid state while retaining tube buffer stage on my tube dac. This will create more of the typical SS DAC sound with organic warmth from the tube buffer cct.

I find the term holographic to be used with tube gear. So far no solid state DAC even ventures close to vinyl or Tube gear.

At this moment I'm even finding my Parasound P6 pre amp, integrated SS DAC with the ESS Sabre32 chipset has a smooth and refined sound with excellent tone/pace compared to a bunch of Solid state dac's I've listened too. Just think the inexpensive Sabre chipset works well. It still is not close in "moving me" with musical flow. Listening to live music we do not even hear this hyper detail and we are just now accustomed to this "sound quality" as tech has evolved. In life it seems we feel vibrations, experience the sound stage as it envelopes your body and the impact of the music. Even listening to the best digital files with high quality gear the music has this impression of a fake reproduction of the real life stage at a concert. The Concero HD was one of the worst sounding fake open soundstage I've ever heard in a solid state dac.

Listening to the Astell &Kern Kann cube with my Campfire Solaris sounds great but it isn't remotely as good as dialed in 2 channel system.

2 channel and headfi is quite different. Headfi folks seldom ever discuss the effects of a dirty power grid or interconnect or power conditioning. Many things contributes to sound.

 

[gimmeheadroom]

What's 2 channel?

 

[Koei]

What's 2 channel?

Stereo speakers.

Anyway in my 2 cents is that there are two kind of DACs:

• DACs that are acoustically transparent, they just play exactly what you feed them and all of the DACs in this category will sound exactly the same (when level matched) because all the distortion and other issues are below our hearing threshold. Think RME, Benchmark, Matrix Audio, SMSL and Topping.
• DACs where the designers goal wasn't to provide a 1:1 copy of what is being fed to it, notable examples here are all DACs with a tube stage or R2R multibit DACs. But also plenty of DS DACs. Examples of these kinds can be found at Schiit multibits, Audio-GD or PS Audio for example.

The most analogue sounding DACs can be found in the second category because they create errors in the reproduction that are similar to analogue systems (vinyl, tape). They however do not reproduce what was recorded.

 

[AlanU]

The headphones on the market are typically coloured with a lot of sound signature from brand to brand.

Dacs are all over the map as well. The preference of each person varies from brand to brand.

Transparency and resolution plays a major role in the system as well the DAC itself.

Just recently using the built in DAC in my Parasound P6 preamp is quite refined without digititus even using the cheap was Sabre chip. I’m rather shocked to be honest. For organic realism the space tech local built DAC is amazing without mushy vacuum tube bloom.

People must test to hear what they like.