What's Benefit of DAC ???
Jan 18, 2008 at 11:47 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 27

SunWarrior

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Posts
187
Likes
58
Location
Hudson Valley NY
My main source is an Arcam CD93 player. Its built-in digital-to-analog converter upsamples Red Book CDs to 192-kHz, 24-bit audio.

So, what would the benefit of an external DAC be for that source? Thinking of boxes like the Benchmark DAC-1 or the PS Audio Digital Link III Audio DAC.

Since the Arcam's DAC already upsamples, tell me why I might want to spend $1K for such a device.

Dave, who would certainly consider an external DAC if real SQ improvement were likely
 
Jan 19, 2008 at 12:02 AM Post #2 of 27
Taking the DAC out of the main box yields the same results as making any system out of separates (amp/preamp/receiver...headphone amp/power supply).
You are removing the conversion process from any transformers or power supplies which help eliminate vibration, RFI, and EMI.
 
Jan 19, 2008 at 12:23 AM Post #3 of 27
Quote:

Originally Posted by immtbiker /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Taking the DAC out of the main box yields the same results as making any system out of separates (amp/preamp/receiver...headphone amp/power supply).
You are removing the conversion process from any transformers or power supplies which help eliminate vibration, RFI, and EMI.



confused.gif
confused.gif
confused.gif


Lots of DAC's have internal power supplies. Most would, in fact.

Transport technology isn't generally as much different from lower-end to high end and has tended to develop more slowly than DAC's (both chips and overall design including the output stage).....so it's possible to upgrade the D/A conversion without buying a new player altogether.

DAC's have different characters, in the way phono cartridges and phono preamps do.....another way to tailor/balance the overall sound of a system.
 
Jan 19, 2008 at 1:08 AM Post #5 of 27
Quote:

Originally Posted by sejarzo /img/forum/go_quote.gif
confused.gif
confused.gif
confused.gif


Lots of DAC's have internal power supplies. Most would, in fact.



Gee..I understand one
confused.gif
, but three
confused.gif
confused.gif
confused.gif
?

Pretty excessive. It's nice to be nice!

There is plenty of room in a separate DAC to isolate the power supply instead of being in close proximity to the other components, and the power supply isn't pulling multiple duty powering the transport and tray and other components in a separate.
 
Jan 19, 2008 at 3:16 AM Post #6 of 27
"Because... they're just better" - so say the audiophiles and headphiles.

And... that's good enough for me.

Actually... I doubt most people could tell the difference between a good CDPs and good DAC + Transport combo.

However... there is most certainly a difference between SS and Tube CDPs and DACs and fundamental design. There is very little out there that has anywhere near the SQ of the now vintage California Audio Labs Delta Transport + Delta, or Sigma II DACs, or the Monarchy M24 Tube DAC. Though, I suspect the Cambridge 840C, or Rega Saturn, or some of the Lite Audio, or other Chinese stuff might come close (see Pacific Valve site).
 
Jan 19, 2008 at 8:34 AM Post #7 of 27
As a long time DAC user, I'd like to argue that they are not always the optimum route. I've owned a couple of NOS DACs, 7510, Meridian DACs, and MF unit, Bel Canto DAC2 and have heard a whole bunch more.
IMO, keeping the DAC within the same box as the transport has genuine benefits as it eliminates the SPDIF interface.

So whilst I've heard a NOS DAC mated with a DVD player as a transport outperform an £850 CDP, I've also seen how a good CDP will show a clean pair of heals to most transport/DACs.
 
Jan 19, 2008 at 10:37 AM Post #8 of 27
Quote:

Originally Posted by SunWarrior /img/forum/go_quote.gif
My main source is an Arcam CD93 player. Its built-in digital-to-analog converter upsamples Red Book CDs to 192-kHz, 24-bit audio.

So, what would the benefit of an external DAC be for that source? Thinking of boxes like the Benchmark DAC-1 or the PS Audio Digital Link III Audio DAC.

Since the Arcam's DAC already upsamples, tell me why I might want to spend $1K for such a device.

Dave, who would certainly consider an external DAC if real SQ improvement were likely



One of the dubious benefits of being in the repair trade is the fact that people like me get invited to manufacturers product training courses. Mind you, I expected more than just a sandwich for lunch from Arcam
rolleyes.gif
. Anyhow, Perception and reality are two different thing. Complicated circuit designs involve complicated and very long PCB track routing. That in itself creates audible differences, easily detected by a good set of ears on a revealing system. Throwing everything on a compact PCB involves many compromises that are in the main left to the design engineers. So it is not uncommon to find digital, power supply and analogue signals overlapping each other. The resultant audio mess can and does influence the end result present in the final audio output. By the way, I myself would turn down even a free Arcam player looking at my data on returns rate BNIB
rolleyes.gif
.

A standalone DAC, amp, etc. is in general better laid out and signal paths are less compromised. This allows for a far cleaner and detailed audio signal at the outputs. A typical recent example of exactly just such a product is the TC-7510 DAC that I so much favour. Inputs at one end of the PCB, outputs at the other. Control signals off track on a separate PCB. Short track lengths between components. All of these are important if you want a good signal flowing from one component to another. The end result is that even with less than exotically expensive components the audio output is as pure as you can get for such a carefully engineered DAC.

Looking at the PCBs of many other products one can detect this same pattern from other manufacturers. The messy ones internally tend to also be the least good sounding ones. The properly laid out ones are a piece of sonic mastery. All in one CD/DVD solutions are a heavy compromise. Luckily, using them as just a transport means that the internal compromised analogue signal
is taken out of the audio loop. Only the relatively clean and less to distortion prone digital signal is used, and that is processed in a far more suitable design environment. The resultant audio output is therefore far better sounding in all but the worse DACs.
 
Jan 19, 2008 at 10:46 AM Post #9 of 27
Quote:

Originally Posted by Gradofan2 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
There is very little out there that has anywhere near the SQ of the now vintage California Audio Labs Delta Transport + Delta, or Sigma II DACs, or the Monarchy M24 Tube DAC. Though, I suspect the Cambridge 840C, or Rega Saturn, or some of the Lite Audio, or other Chinese stuff might come close (see Pacific Valve site).


I don't know about that. South Korea and Taiwan produce DACs that are way ahead of most, if not all, of the Chinese DACs in the same price range. Having been in the repair trade for so long and having been woken up to the harsh reality that most Chinese manufactured audio and video products uses integrated circuits that are in the main impossible to buy anywhere once a repair is required, I avoid buying Chinese.
 
Jan 19, 2008 at 2:55 PM Post #10 of 27
Apart from the physical layout and design (and perhaps the reliability)... in reality... there just isn't a huge difference in the SQ in any of the stuff - except possibly between tube and SS, or NOS and upsampling DACs/CDPs.

After you've got some good basic equipment (say $500 to $1,000) the SQ changes very little as you invest more and more money... unless... you're really "obsessive / compulsive." A 5-10% improvement in SQ, for another $1,000+ just doesn't impress me enough to part with the additional funds. And... some of the older NOS stuff... actually sounds better than the newer more sophisticated stuff.

"Audiophiles and headphiles" tend to "magnify" the differences in the sound... in their attempts to justify and rationalize the ridiculous amounts of money they spend on their stuff. Don't "fall into that abyss"... just get some good, basic units and be happy that you've got 90% of the best sound available - that last 10% simply isn't worth the huge investment, or the frustration.
 
Jan 19, 2008 at 3:01 PM Post #11 of 27
Quote:

Originally Posted by Herandu /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I don't know about that. South Korea and Taiwan produce DACs that are way ahead of most, if not all, of the Chinese DACs in the same price range. Having been in the repair trade for so long and having been woken up to the harsh reality that most Chinese manufactured audio and video products uses integrated circuits that are in the main impossible to buy anywhere once a repair is required, I avoid buying Chinese.


Then you haven't heard the Cal Audio and Monarchy stuff with a good amp and phones - they quite literally sound as good as anything available. Not just my impressions, but several reviewers.
 
Jan 19, 2008 at 3:38 PM Post #12 of 27
Quote:

Originally Posted by Gradofan2 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
[/SNIP]
Don't "fall into that abyss"... just get some good, basic units and be happy that you've got 90% of the best sound available - that last 10% simply isn't worth the huge investment, or the frustration.



Wait a moment, Gradofan2, isn't the mission statement of Head-Fi something about each member encouraging others to empty their wallets?

Dave, the OP who wishes he could try some of these gizmos before going through that wallet-emptying-procedure

========================================
Headphones: AKG K701, Grado SR-80, Etymotic 4P/S
Amps: Little Dot MK V, Headroom Total AirHead, Arcam A80
Sources: Arcam CD93, iPod Classic
Interconnects: RS Audio Solid Silver
========================================
 
Jan 19, 2008 at 3:54 PM Post #13 of 27
Quote:

Originally Posted by SunWarrior /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Wait a moment, Gradofan2, isn't the mission statement of Head-Fi something about each member encouraging others to empty their wallets?

Dave, the OP who wishes he could try some of these gizmos before going through that wallet-emptying-procedure

========================================
Headphones: AKG K701, Grado SR-80, Etymotic 4P/S
Amps: Little Dot MK V, Headroom Total AirHead, Arcam A80
Sources: Arcam CD93, iPod Classic
Interconnects: RS Audio Solid Silver
========================================



Hey... I guess you're right... and "our economy" could sure stand the extra boost - that is if you believe the ignorant, biased media.

"Just... go for it, Dave."
 
Jan 19, 2008 at 8:29 PM Post #15 of 27
Quote:

Originally Posted by Gradofan2 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Apart from the physical layout and design (and perhaps the reliability)... in reality... there just isn't a huge difference in the SQ in any of the stuff - except possibly between tube and SS, or NOS and upsampling DACs/CDPs.


If you truly believe this statement is true, then I invite you over to my house any time to listen to the same recording comparing my Meridian G08 and my Emm Labs Dac 6e and CDSD.

Apples and oranges.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top