[littlej0e]

Wadia is out of business (bought for parts by some buyers). So just know this before buying any Wadia product.

I also don't know why Solution charges so much for BurrBrown 1792 chip dac. It's really old stuff and not SOTA. SOTA dacs have all moved to pure FPGA-based decoder or R2R (just MSB actually)

I didn’t know Wadia proper was sold off again (after 2011). When did that happen? Regardless, what you said about support is absolutely true. But you can find vintage stereo repair folks pretty easily though, especially if you live near a major city (having the 270SE CD player tray fixed, lubed, and serviced as we speak. Only cost me $100).

Agree completely about the Soulution DACs. I’m not sure why those chips in particular seem to cost so much. Great quality builds though and one of the few DAC makers that have actually figured out the analog stage. I love me some MSB Select though. Best sounding DAC on planet earth in my opinion. That price is beyond eye-watering though…

I personally didn’t care for dCS DACs. Sounded very unnatural and processed and also very expensive. Meanwhile, I’ve never heard DACs as musical, addictive and engaging as these old Wadias. They are flat out mesmerizing. Plus, when one of them actually comes up for sale (which seems to be rare) you can normally nab one for a fraction of what any of the DACs you mentioned would cost.

One of the best things about this hobby is chasing and attaining things that fit your individual preferences and these old Wadias sound like real, actual, music to my ears instead of a “Hi-Fi” representation of it.

 

[normie610]

Outstanding! I’m queuing up a Qobuz purchase. Are there others you recommend (I know this could potentially take a lot of time and be a very long list, so no worries)?

Yep that could be long

 

[chesebert]

I didn’t know Wadia proper was sold off again (after 2011). When did that happen? Regardless, what you said about support is absolutely true. But you can find vintage stereo repair folks pretty easily though, especially if you live near a major city (having the 270SE CD player tray fixed, lubed, and serviced as we speak. Only cost me $100).

Agree completely about the Soulution DACs. I’m not sure why those chips in particular seem to cost so much. Great quality builds though and one of the few DAC makers that have actually figured out the analog stage. I love me some MSB Select though. Best sounding DAC on planet earth in my opinion. That price is beyond eye-watering though…

I personally didn’t care for dCS DACs. Sounded very unnatural and processed and also very expensive. Meanwhile, I’ve never heard DACs as musical, addictive and engaging as these old Wadias. They are flat out mesmerizing. Plus, when one of them actually comes up for sale (which seems to be rare) you can normally nab one for a fraction of what any of the DACs you mentioned would cost.

One of the best things about this hobby is chasing and attaining things that fit your individual preferences and these old Wadias sound like real, actual, music to my ears instead of a “Hi-Fi” representation of it.

They got sold a couple of times and finally got absorbed into McIntosh and the whole team is no longer there and McIntosh is not servicing anything from the Wadia brand.

Wadia was the SOTA for sure.

I think I agree on your view on dCS, although my experience was with the last gen gear and not the current and not the new apex upgrade.

 

[Miller]

This is absolutely fascinating to me. It begs the inevitable follow up question; what is so different about the recording and mastering processes between eras that resulted in this disparity? One was typically recorded on analog tape and the other direct to digital? Or perhaps I’m over thinking it and it all boils down to personal preference?!?

Regardless, looks like it’s time to consult the Googlizer and learn more about recording and mastering technology.

Tape and time was really expensive for lot of the bands in the early days. That resulted in them playing the whole take live into just a set of few microphones/tracks, sometimes it has just taken a single take so the wear on the tape is at minimum. So you basically captured a well adjusted combo at their fullest attention in a room playing together with minimum mixing involved. That is one of the reasons why many of the old recordings just sound natural and great.

Today they record many tracks and process it all in the mix, sometimes the musicians never even meet. A simple piano has multiple microphones to capture it. Two directly on top to record the impact, one at the bottom to capture the body and at the extreme one for the room. With all that it becomes pure art to create something sounding natural…

There are some recording studios moving to the other extremes like single mic recordings, and you can easy understand why. Or someone like 2L recording mainly in natural buildings which does produce the reverb to create the natural envelope without the need for processing.

 

[Crashem]

I didn't know where to post this and didn't want to hijack an existing thread, so I decided to start one.

Recently, a friend of mine was kind enough to pass along a small portion of his considerable knowledge and experience, and in doing so casually threw down a gauntlet: compare a 20+ year old DAC from the late 90’s with my beloved Soulution 560 as well as my recently acquired Mola Mola Tambaqui. I confidently accepted his challenge assuming there was no possible way a DAC that old could compete with modern design, components and performance. I was technically right in couple of areas. But so very, very wrong in so many others. The DAC is question was a Wadia 27ix v3.0.

I’m still fairly new to this hobby and I had never heard of Wadia. It turns out they were one of the very first companies, and almost certainly the best, to focus on digital audio reproduction back in the late 1980's. They remained among the best in the business until the mid-to-late 90's when Wadia began to suffer from poor direction and mismanagement. The meandering continued until they were finally sold in 2000, then again in 2011. The Wadia name still lives on today, but the soul and performance of their products is long dead and gone. After the sale, some of the engineers responsible for driving many of the innovations at Wadia defected to what is now McIntosh (yep...this one: https://www.mcintoshlabs.com/). A couple others started another company, Exogal, that recently shut it's doors just over a month ago. Quite sad really as many of these gents will go down as some of the best and most pioneering audio engineers ever.

Right. History lesson over. Back in the late 90's, the 27ix DAC + 270SE CD player combo retailed for around 25k (approx. 43k today) and I fully understand why. This DAC is a perfect example of the not-so-subtle differences between "Real-Fi" music reproduction and “Hi-Fi” music representation. I finally understand why so many older audio purists consider many of the old Burr Brown DAC chips like the 63, 1702 and 1704k to be the absolute pinnacle of "ladder" style chip performance. The 27ix has eight 1702 chips that make music sound so incredibly authentic, engaging, life-like, dynamic, musical and supremely addicting. The 27ix just begs you to keep listening. For example, three hours just flew by like 10 minutes. Multiple playlists were devoured. Multiple genres drawn and loosed. And here I sit...typing this diatribe while desperately searching for another vein in which to push the Wadia needle. This is the only headphone system I've ever experienced that has gotten me out of my chair dancing with headphones on. The sound out of this setup is so highly textured, liquid and musical that you could pour it into a glass. It is a legitimate tragedy that whatever voodoo Wadia put in this thing isn't regularly reproduced in modern gear at a reasonable price (none that I've ever heard anyway).

I ultimately chose the 27ix over the $43,000 Soulution 560, despite the 560 wrecking the 27ix in raw performance, resolution and clarity (while also being the better overall DAC in my opinion). The 27ix is just so much more musically engaging and addictive to my ears and makes the 560 sound slightly "dead" by comparison. The Mola Mola Tambaqui wasn't a particularly close rival either, save for the usual "Hi-Fi" tropes of ridiculous levels of detail combined with a digitally manufactured sense of "analog" sound. For the record, the MMT will absolutely give you one of the best digital renditions of "analog" sound you can get at it's price point, but it doesn't sound even remotely as natural, balanced, textured, liquid, engaging or addictive as the 27ix.

If you want to squeeze every last drop of detail and bit of resolution out of music, the 27ix probably isn't for you (though it is still highly resolving when paired with modern high-end gear). If you want your wife to divorce you because you installed a toilet in your listening room so you never have to leave, the 27ix (along with other older Wadia DACs like the 9, 15, 25, 27, 27i, and 931) should be very high on your list. Many of these older Wadias aren't nearly as handicapped as you might think. Quite the opposite actually. Many of them absolutely dunk on the majority of DACs produced today. Try one and let your ears decide. The words "musically addictive" would be gross understatements. Nothing is quite as pleasing to me as experiencing true-to-life impact, tonal accuracy, and the rising storm of dynamics like that of...Real. Live. Music. And that is very close to what the 27ix provides in my system.

Lastly, for any Abyss AB-1266 Phi TC owners out there, the 27ix does something very similar to the WA33: it breaths the soul of music in to TCs. Using the HIFIMAN Susvaras on this setup did unspeakable things to my brain that may or may not have triggered an unscheduled cleaning of both the front and back of my pants.

-lj

I find your discovered love of the Wadia interesting. Your Solution 560 is using more modern pcm1792 chip Vs the pcm1702 on the wadia. However, even though the pcm1792 is a multibit dac chip, it is actually a segmented multibit chip vs. The pcm1702 being a “pure” multibit dac. Curious if you have compared/listen to “modern” r2r/mulitbit dacs using some house designed chip/solution (eg. msb, holomay, total dac etc).

If you have tried modern r2r dacs and didn’t find them having the same appeal of the wadia, I would guess you just love the sound of the pcm1702. You wouldn’t be alone. However, the pcm1704 and 1704k were considered superior versions of pcm1702 while sharing the similar sound signature and design. Around 2010, pcm1704 had a renaissance with many declaring that it was the best sounding chip ever using descriptives similar to how you describe your wadia. pcm1702/1704 was basically the last of the pure multibit chips. In fact, the renewed love for the pcm1704 seemed to herald in the era of renewed interest for r2r in general. You can see the development of customized r2r solutions eschewing use of a “generic” dac chip like pcm1702/1704 coming from then.

I think it might behoove you try some pcm1704 designs. Around that 2010 time frame, there were multiple attempts at all out assault on making the best pcm1704 based dac. Now, a dac is much more than just its digital to analog conversion engine. analog stage, filters, pre dac chip processing, etc. all play a part. So it is possible that wadia happened to hit on great combo. But I have a feeling some of the all out assaults from 2010 time frame will give you the pcm1704 sound and superior results.

I don’t remember the names of most of the all out assaults on pcm1704 based dacs. However i do remember one that some considered the best at the time. It was the Trinity DAC. Don’t know if they still make that pcm1704 version anymore as it must be getting hard to get genuine and good pcm1704 chips now. Cost was around 30k. No idea what the used cost is today. A cheaper way to test this is to get one of the audio-gd master7 pcm1704 based dacs. I think audio-gd still makes it today. Audio-gd does a great job and designed with care. If the audio-gd has the same magic as your wadia but maybe not as superior or maybe it is superior to wadia, considering it has more modern design concepts and using superior pcm1704 chip, then might be worth going down the rabbit hole of the all out assaults on pcm1704 based dacs.

As historical tidbit, the criticism of the pcm1704 was that it wasn’t as dynamic, or not enough punch in bass, too polite, etc. You get the idea. If you find that is the case compared to your wadia pcm1702 based dac and that is why you prefer it, you might have to go down the PCM63K based dac rabbit hole. Some would say pcm1702, which was successor chip of pcm63, was more dynamic, punchier, etc. than pcm1704. If I remember correctly, pretty much anyone who preferred the pcm1702 over the pcm1704 would then say they liked the pcm63k better than the pcm1702. Point is that I don’t remember any talk about the pcm1702 being the pinnacle of dac sound. Plenty of pcm1704 talk. And a few arguing that the pcm63k was better than both of them.

 

[littlej0e]

I find your discovered love of the Wadia interesting. Your Solution 560 is using more modern pcm1792 chip Vs the pcm1702 on the wadia. However, even though the pcm1792 is a multibit dac chip, it is actually a segmented multibit chip vs. The pcm1702 being a “pure” multibit dac. Curious if you have compared/listen to “modern” r2r/mulitbit dacs using some house designed chip/solution (eg. msb, holomay, total dac etc).

If you have tried modern r2r dacs and didn’t find them having the same appeal of the wadia, I would guess you just love the sound of the pcm1702. You wouldn’t be alone. However, the pcm1704 and 1704k were considered superior versions of pcm1702 while sharing the similar sound signature and design. Around 2010, pcm1704 had a renaissance with many declaring that it was the best sounding chip ever using descriptives similar to how you describe your wadia. pcm1702/1704 was basically the last of the pure multibit chips. In fact, the renewed love for the pcm1704 seemed to herald in the era of renewed interest for r2r in general. You can see the development of customized r2r solutions eschewing use of a “generic” dac chip like pcm1702/1704 coming from then.

I think it might behoove you try some pcm1704 designs. Around that 2010 time frame, there were multiple attempts at all out assault on making the best pcm1704 based dac. Now, a dac is much more than just its digital to analog conversion engine. analog stage, filters, pre dac chip processing, etc. all play a part. So it is possible that wadia happened to hit on great combo. But I have a feeling some of the all out assaults from 2010 time frame will give you the pcm1704 sound and superior results.

I don’t remember the names of most of the all out assaults on pcm1704 based dacs. However i do remember one that some considered the best at the time. It was the Trinity DAC. Don’t know if they still make that pcm1704 version anymore as it must be getting hard to get genuine and good pcm1704 chips now. Cost was around 30k. No idea what the used cost is today. A cheaper way to test this is to get one of the audio-gd master7 pcm1704 based dacs. I think audio-gd still makes it today. Audio-gd does a great job and designed with care. If the audio-gd has the same magic as your wadia but maybe not as superior or maybe it is superior to wadia, considering it has more modern design concepts and using superior pcm1704 chip, then might be worth going down the rabbit hole of the all out assaults on pcm1704 based dacs.

As historical tidbit, the criticism of the pcm1704 was that it wasn’t as dynamic, or not enough punch in bass, too polite, etc. You get the idea. If you find that is the case compared to your wadia pcm1702 based dac and that is why you prefer it, you might have to go down the PCM63K based dac rabbit hole. Some would say pcm1702, which was successor chip of pcm63, was more dynamic, punchier, etc. than pcm1704. If I remember correctly, pretty much anyone who preferred the pcm1702 over the pcm1704 would then say they liked the pcm63k better than the pcm1702. Point is that I don’t remember any talk about the pcm1702 being the pinnacle of dac sound. Plenty of pcm1704 talk. And a few arguing that the pcm63k was better than both of them.

Wow, this is amazing info…You clearly have intimate knowledge of this topic as you absolutely nailed all the comparisons!

The relevant comparisons I’ve tried are:

- Holo May KTE (used to own it): great performance for what it is and likely unbeatable anywhere at or near it’s price range. Doesn’t hold a candle to the Wadia save for staging, physical inputs, digital filtering options, and measured performance.

- MSB Select: best DAC I have heard. Bar none. Period.

- CH Precision C1: wrecks the Wadia in almost every way save musical engagement.

- Soulution 560 (used to own it): wrecks the Wadia in almost every way save musical engagement. Most accurate DAC I’ve heard.

- Trinity: I didn’t get much time with it and didn’t get to try it with my components, but wow... Unfortunately, I couldn’t find one for sale at a reasonable price (the last one I saw was around 30k used). I wanted a Trinity Silver Reference in the worst way, but couldn’t afford it lol (cost approx. 45k…after discount and currency conversion). The thing I loved most about these is they seemed to have a very transparent, yet engaging sound. The sound would change based on the source material. Amazing.

My problem with all the aforementioned DACs, save for the MSB Select (because it’s flat out stunning) and the Trinity SR (because I haven’t tried it), is the musical engagement. Absolutely nothing makes me dance like this old Wadia. I would also say it has wonderful linearity and excellent low end punch, but I can’t say for certain it is better than the 1704s. I suspect most of the engagement comes from the 1702 combined with Wadias custom filters (or even more likely just the custom filters themselves), but again I can’t be sure without doing a direct comparison. But based on your feedback, it looks like I need to try a 63 chipped DAC along with a audio-gd master 7 singularity. That DAC in particular looks awesome and affordable too!!!

That is amazing info on all the 1704 DACs in the 2010s. I’ll start looking in that era. Recently, it seems like the industry has been pushing for better “performance,” usually through measurements, but they are all seemingly designed for critical listening - not for actual musical engagement. The few that are generally end up sounding so artificially colored and unnatural (i.e. denafrips terminator) they mostly defeat the purpose of going R2R in the first place. I don’t understand why so many people seem to value measurements, detail and resolution over engagement of the actual music they are listening to. Bragging rights? Purchase justification? A new element of music to focus on? Different strokes for different folks I guess.

Anyway, thanks so much for the information, feedback and recommendations. Very much appreciated.

 

[littlej0e]

As a side note, irrespective of single device performance, the Susvaras combined with the 27ix is probably the best combination I’ve heard in a headphone system (for my tastes obviously). Ever. My only wish would be for a slightly more accurate and natural tone, tonal depth and differentiation. My god, this is an amazing pairing. Very live, textured, musical, dynamic and incredibly addictive. I’m quite tempted to try a higher-end amp between them and see how far this pairing can go. But I need to wait until my new Susvara cable gets here before switching anything else.

 

[littlej0e]

Tape and time was really expensive for lot of the bands in the early days. That resulted in them playing the whole take live into just a set of few microphones/tracks, sometimes it has just taken a single take so the wear on the tape is at minimum. So you basically captured a well adjusted combo at their fullest attention in a room playing together with minimum mixing involved. That is one of the reasons why many of the old recordings just sound natural and great.

Today they record many tracks and process it all in the mix, sometimes the musicians never even meet. A simple piano has multiple microphones to capture it. Two directly on top to record the impact, one at the bottom to capture the body and at the extreme one for the room. With all that it becomes pure art to create something sounding natural…

There are some recording studios moving to the other extremes like single mic recordings, and you can easy understand why. Or someone like 2L recording mainly in natural buildings which does produce the reverb to create the natural envelope without the need for processing.

Now THIS is fascinating. It explains why I hear and prefer what I do. Now I have actual technical reasoning and understanding behind my preferences. It feels so much better than randomly declaring, “I dunno…just sounds better to my ears.”

I also own a couple of 2L albums (Nordic Sound is amazing) and now I know why.

Thanks for sharing your knowledge! I never thought the recording and mastering process would be so different between eras. Also explains why I often find the “soul” lacking with newer material. Now I know why. Fascinating…

 

[Crashem]

Wow, this is amazing info…You clearly have intimate knowledge of this topic as you absolutely nailed all the comparisons!

The relevant comparisons I’ve tried are:

- Holo May KTE (used to own it): great performance for what it is and likely unbeatable anywhere at or near it’s price range. Doesn’t hold a candle to the Wadia save for staging, physical inputs, digital filtering options, and measured performance.

- MSB Select: best DAC I have heard. Bar none. Period.

- CH Precision C1: wrecks the Wadia in almost every way save musical engagement.

- Soulution 560 (used to own it): wrecks the Wadia in almost every way save musical engagement. Most accurate DAC I’ve heard.

- Trinity: I didn’t get much time with it and didn’t get to try it with my components, but wow... Unfortunately, I couldn’t find one for sale at a reasonable price (the last one I saw was around 30k used). I wanted a Trinity Silver Reference in the worst way, but couldn’t afford it lol (cost approx. 45k…after discount and currency conversion). The thing I loved most about these is they seemed to have a very transparent, yet engaging sound. The sound would change based on the source material. Amazing.

My problem with all the aforementioned DACs, save for the MSB Select (because it’s flat out stunning) and the Trinity SR (because I haven’t tried it), is the musical engagement. Absolutely nothing makes me dance like this old Wadia. I would also say it has wonderful linearity and excellent low end punch, but I can’t say for certain it is better than the 1704s. I suspect most of the engagement comes from the 1702 combined with Wadias custom filters (or even more likely just the custom filters themselves), but again I can’t be sure without doing a direct comparison. But based on your feedback, it looks like I need to try a 63 chipped DAC along with a audio-gd master 7 singularity. That DAC in particular looks awesome and affordable too!!!

That is amazing info on all the 1704 DACs in the 2010s. I’ll start looking in that era. Recently, it seems like the industry has been pushing for better “performance,” usually through measurements, but they are all seemingly designed for critical listening - not for actual musical engagement. The few that are generally end up sounding so artificially colored and unnatural (i.e. denafrips terminator) they mostly defeat the purpose of going R2R in the first place. I don’t understand why so many people seem to value measurements, detail and resolution over engagement of the actual music they are listening to. Bragging rights? Purchase justification? A new element of music to focus on? Different strokes for different folks I guess.

Anyway, thanks so much for the information, feedback and recommendations. Very much appreciated.

Few notes:

1) Careful with the Trinity: It is unclear if the newer ones use PCM1704 chips (it seems like they don't). I know the original one did. BTW, here is a quote from the designer of Trinity about his original DAC (note his comment about the PCM1704) from another forum:
"I am Dietmar the designer of the TRINITY devices. My task is it to design electronic, which are better than the available measurement instruments. That means Ultra linear. That is what I did over 20 years in the research department of Thomson Multimedia, where I designed all the electronic for the standardisation of all digital recording standards from DVC to blu ray. By the way I had developed the first blu-ray laser driver with rise time of 350ps, which was essential for the blu-ray standardisation. During my 30 years as design engineer I have developed almost any kind of electronic from PLLs, frequency synthesizer, clock recoveries, channel codes, C-MOS ICs, GaAS ICs and so on. So actually I am not a dedicated audio designer. I personally think that is an advantage, since I solver problems in a different way.
Another point of my philosophy is, what you see is what you get, that is the reason why I deliver every product with complete measurement protocols. I do not like to publish typical value like almost all other companies. The measurement protocols can be seen on our webpage. So it is very easy to compare my results with the one published in “Stereophile”.
Back to the DAC, the PCM 1704 is in my eyes the best DAC architecture on the market. They are expansive, but they are worth every cent. I have developed and patented an architecture, which I call LIANOTEC, which stand for Linear Analog Oversampling TECnique. This circuit creates additional sampling point without using a digital filter in the analog domain. If you download the manual you can get a rough overview about this unique design. With this architecture you can built a ultra linear real multi-bit DAC.
Yes all my products use special SMPS units even the Phono and as you can see on the measurement results published on the web, the noise level is extreme low at 0.5nV/Hz1/2. Conclusion if it works for such low level signals it will work for all others also as well.
Of course I will try to answer all your questions, but before you ask RTFM.
The USB Interface supports DSD64.
Dietmar"

2) PCM63k: Look for a Theta GenV. Should be cheap now and good version of 63K

 

[Doug2507]

When my old kps20i mech gave up the ghost (fairly specific cdm 9 pro) I decided to switch to dac with imac, ended up demoing most of what was available at the time including the weiss 202 which was flavour of the month (didnt like it). I ended up getting a pretty good deal on a MSB DAC IV which ended up with diamond modules. Still got it to this day. Ive not heard any msb past that and even though the pricing back then was eye watering, it was nothing like the insane pricing its at now.

I'd happily take a pcm63 again any day of the week. The krell sounded superb and wiped the floor with any other transport I'd used (many). Wadia was constantly on my window shopping list but just never got around to hearing them. By that time tech was moving heavily towards server based replay and away from discs. Good to see a thread here for the old gear, some absolute bargains to be had from pre 2000 era providing you've got someone that can service them.

 

[littlej0e]

When my old kps20i mech gave up the ghost (fairly specific cdm 9 pro) I decided to switch to dac with imac, ended up demoing most of what was available at the time including the weiss 202 which was flavour of the month (didnt like it). I ended up getting a pretty good deal on a MSB DAC IV which ended up with diamond modules. Still got it to this day. Ive not heard any msb past that and even though the pricing back then was eye watering, it was nothing like the insane pricing its at now.

I'd happily take a pcm63 again any day of the week. The krell sounded superb and wiped the floor with any other transport I'd used (many). Wadia was constantly on my window shopping lost but just never got around to hearing them. By that time tech was moving heavily towards server based replay and away from discs. Good to see a thread here for the old gear, some absolute bargains to be had from pre 2000 era providing you've got someone that can service them.

Yet another recommendation for a pcm63 DAC. At this point, I definitely need to hear one. Why do these older DACs sound so much more musical to my ears than most newer DACs? I don't get it. It can't just be that older chips "sound better". I has to be more than that, does't it? With all the focus on measurements, detail, resolution, SNR, dynamic range, etc. of modern design, why don't newer DACs blow the doors clean off the older ones in the musicality department? I mean, it's not even a debate as to which "perform" better as modern DACs almost universally have better resolution, measurements, etc. But they just don't sound like real, textured, live, head-bobbing music to my ears (save for the MSB Select). The post from @Miller was quite enlightening as to why older music seems to sound so much better and more soulful compared to newer music. I guess my audio trials and tribulations just so happened to lead me down a path towards older gear and recordings? Maybe it all boils down to preference and I'm just a younger generation/digital-era guy that just so happens to prefer analog-era sound?!?

Few notes:

1) Careful with the Trinity: It is unclear if the newer ones use PCM1704 chips (it seems like they don't). I know the original one did. BTW, here is a quote from the designer of Trinity about his original DAC (note his comment about the PCM1704) from another forum:
"I am Dietmar the designer of the TRINITY devices. My task is it to design electronic, which are better than the available measurement instruments. That means Ultra linear. That is what I did over 20 years in the research department of Thomson Multimedia, where I designed all the electronic for the standardisation of all digital recording standards from DVC to blu ray. By the way I had developed the first blu-ray laser driver with rise time of 350ps, which was essential for the blu-ray standardisation. During my 30 years as design engineer I have developed almost any kind of electronic from PLLs, frequency synthesizer, clock recoveries, channel codes, C-MOS ICs, GaAS ICs and so on. So actually I am not a dedicated audio designer. I personally think that is an advantage, since I solver problems in a different way.
Another point of my philosophy is, what you see is what you get, that is the reason why I deliver every product with complete measurement protocols. I do not like to publish typical value like almost all other companies. The measurement protocols can be seen on our webpage. So it is very easy to compare my results with the one published in “Stereophile”.
Back to the DAC, the PCM 1704 is in my eyes the best DAC architecture on the market. They are expansive, but they are worth every cent. I have developed and patented an architecture, which I call LIANOTEC, which stand for Linear Analog Oversampling TECnique. This circuit creates additional sampling point without using a digital filter in the analog domain. If you download the manual you can get a rough overview about this unique design. With this architecture you can built a ultra linear real multi-bit DAC.
Yes all my products use special SMPS units even the Phono and as you can see on the measurement results published on the web, the noise level is extreme low at 0.5nV/Hz1/2. Conclusion if it works for such low level signals it will work for all others also as well.
Of course I will try to answer all your questions, but before you ask RTFM.
The USB Interface supports DSD64.
Dietmar"

2) PCM63k: Look for a Theta GenV. Should be cheap now and good version of 63K

Thanks for the notes on Dietmar and Trinity. I've spoken with him personally and it seems the 1704s are indeed used in the TSR. I'm not sure where he gets stock from. That said, I still can't afford 45k to buy one...lol! It's older/2010 1704 chipped DACs for me. I have a good friend that specializes in upgrading old Wadias (he's the one that originally challenged me to try one and compare it with modern DACs). His reasoning for focusing on old Wadias is that the designs are reportedly fantastic and way ahead of their time. He uses them as a base on which to upgrade and provide modern levels of performance. Sounds quite similar to the "great 1704 DAC wars of 2010" that you mentioned.

On that note, I did get to try a couple of older 1704 DACs and I finally understand what you mean and why they are so coveted. They don't sound quite like the 1702s. The 1704s sound a bit smoother, more textured, and slightly more musical to my ears. I also understand why you mentioned they may sound a bit less impactful and dynamic compared with the 1702s. I just haven't heard enough 1702s to make a fair comparison, but the 27ix was definitely more impactful than the 1704s I heard (due to custom filters maybe?!?). I didn't notice much difference in dynamics, but I did notice slightly more accuracy with the 1702 as it provided a bit more real and "live" sounding presentation. But again, I don't know if this was specific to the Wadia 27ix, the 1702 chip, or anything else as I just don't have enough experience to make a definitive statement and reliably tell the difference. Too many variables, too many unknowns, and too little experience...especially compared to you.

All things being equal, if I had to pick one I would almost certainly go with a 1704 dac, especially for a traditional 2 channel speaker system. For a headphone system though, I do wonder if a 1702 would be a slightly better fit as dynamics and impact are usually a bit harder to come by. Likely depends on the headphones at that point, but it's an interesting thought experiment.

 

[littlej0e]

When my old kps20i mech gave up the ghost (fairly specific cdm 9 pro)

Forgot to say... Deeply sorry for your loss

 

[Doug2507]

Forgot to say... Deeply sorry for your loss

Yeah, always knew the day would come but miraculously found a spare in the depths of the Internet and the new owner had it service / replaced. Happy ending after all!

 

[chesebert]

Yet another recommendation for a pcm63 DAC. At this point, I definitely need to hear one. Why do these older DACs sound so much more musical to my ears than most newer DACs? I don't get it. It can't just be that older chips "sound better". I has to be more than that, does't it? With all the focus on measurements, detail, resolution, SNR, dynamic range, etc. of modern design, why don't newer DACs blow the doors clean off the older ones in the musicality department? I mean, it's not even a debate as to which "perform" better as modern DACs almost universally have better resolution, measurements, etc. But they just don't sound like real, textured, live, head-bobbing music to my ears (save for the MSB Select). The post from @Miller was quite enlightening as to why older music seems to sound so much better and more soulful compared to newer music. I guess my audio trials and tribulations just so happened to lead me down a path towards older gear and recordings? Maybe it all boils down to preference and I'm just a younger generation/digital-era guy that just so happens to prefer analog-era sound?!?


Thanks for the notes on Dietmar and Trinity. I've spoken with him personally and it seems the 1704s are indeed used in the TSR. I'm not sure where he gets stock from. That said, I still can't afford 45k to buy one...lol! It's older/2010 1704 chipped DACs for me. I have a good friend that specializes in upgrading old Wadias (he's the one that originally challenged me to try one and compare it with modern DACs). His reasoning for focusing on old Wadias is that the designs are reportedly fantastic and way ahead of their time. He uses them as a base on which to upgrade and provide modern levels of performance. Sounds quite similar to the "great 1704 DAC wars of 2010" that you mentioned.

On that note, I did get to try a couple of older 1704 DACs and I finally understand what you mean and why they are so coveted. They don't sound quite like the 1702s. The 1704s sound a bit smoother, more textured, and slightly more musical to my ears. I also understand why you mentioned they may sound a bit less impactful and dynamic compared with the 1702s. I just haven't heard enough 1702s to make a fair comparison, but the 27ix was definitely more impactful than the 1704s I heard (due to custom filters maybe?!?). I didn't notice much difference in dynamics, but I did notice slightly more accuracy with the 1702 as it provided a bit more real and "live" sounding presentation. But again, I don't know if this was specific to the Wadia 27ix, the 1702 chip, or anything else as I just don't have enough experience to make a definitive statement and reliably tell the difference. Too many variables, too many unknowns, and too little experience...especially compared to you.

All things being equal, if I had to pick one I would almost certainly go with a 1704 dac, especially for a traditional 2 channel speaker system. For a headphone system though, I do wonder if a 1702 would be a slightly better fit as dynamics and impact are usually a bit harder to come by. Likely depends on the headphones at that point, but it's an interesting thought experiment.

You should try more high-end dacs. I think your experience with modern SOTA dacs is not complete. While older SOTA R2R/multibit chips do have a nice analog and organic sound and I suspect bests all the modern "digital" sounding dacs, they suffer from lack of dynamics (both micro and macro), resolution and detail. This will be reflected in deficient sound stage, lack of detail between the notes, fuzziness in image solidity and not quite accurate timbre and tone.

 

[littlej0e]

You should try more high-end dacs. I think your experience with modern SOTA dacs is not complete. While older SOTA R2R/multibit chips do have a nice analog and organic sound and I suspect bests all the modern "digital" sounding dacs, they suffer from lack of dynamics (both micro and macro), resolution and detail. This will be reflected in deficient sound stage, lack of detail between the notes, fuzziness in image solidity and not quite accurate timbre and tone.

These are just some of the DACs I’ve tried thus far:

- Wadia 9
- Wadia 25
- Wadia 27ix
- Levinson 30
- Levinson 30.6
- Levinson 36
- Schiit yggdrasil
- Schitt Modi Uber
- RME ADI-2
- Chord Dave
- Chord TT2
- Holo Spring 2
- Holo May KTE
- Soulution 560
- Soulution 760
- MSB Descrete
- MSB Select
- dCS Rossini
- dCS Bartok
- dCS Vivaldi
- Rockna Wavedream Signature
- CH Precision C1
- Trinity DAC
- Mola Mola Tambaqui

Honestly, I’m less concerned with hearing someone’s nose hair than I am actually enjoying music. There is no question that newer DACs are much more resolving and detailed. But from the perspective of accuracy, naturalness, musicality, texture and straight up musical engagement, there are the MSB Select, Trinity, Soulution 560/760, Wadia 25 (custom moded)/27ix, Levinson 30.6 and a handful of other 1704 chipped DACs I just tried. That’s it. Nothing else I’ve heard comes close to these DACs in terms of musical engagement. Regarding the old Wadias specifically, the dynamics are excellent as is the overall timbre and tone, though it does lean a bit warm. I suspect the “magic” I hear from this DAC is a special blend of 1702 goodness and proprietary digital filters. Have you actually tried any of these old high end Wadia DACs and compared them directly with newer DACs?!?

If so, would you please be kind enough to recommend another modern DAC that might be a better fit for my tastes?