Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Nov 2, 2018 19:49:05 GMT
Having played with a few external DACs lately I’m trying to work out what it is that matters most. DSJR was of the belief that the DAC chip itself didn’t really matter too much. I really do t know. Many bitstream players have sounded weak compared to multibit. I have tried NOS and no digital filter DACs and neither did a lot for me, suggesting neither is that important. Bigger and more power supplies seem to be important and so does separating the DAC from the other electronics. Anyone got any thoughts?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2018 22:50:41 GMT
Well, typically, like a lot of things in life, the issue isn't really as simplistic as you imagine.
Years ago in Hi Fi World, David Price wrote a piece on the first Marantz cd player fiddled with by Ken Isi-Whatshisname. It was the first of what became the KI Signature series. Anyway, Ken I looked at the various processes in the player and gained an insight into how and what effected the end sound. The DAC itself, he thought, constituted something like (and I'm not actually sure of the exact figure. I could look it up.) 26% of the end sound quality. Less than I was imagining.
That, of course, leaves 74% for everything else.
From what I've read elsewhere, I gather Dave isn't allowed to post. If he was, perhaps he might enlighten you further. There does seem to be the accepted notion that bang in a modern outboard DAC, and you get an improvement. But is that really so? Dunno. I haven't tried it for myself.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2018 22:54:03 GMT
DAC's are a bit of a mystery to me. I don't concern myself with what's in the box, I just listen to them. I do have one opinion though, old DAC's tend to sound good with CD.
I've owned more DAC's than I can remember, but settled on my Monarchy Audio units years ago as they are the best by far that I've heard in my system. No idea about the innards apart from them being 20 bit spec.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Nov 2, 2018 23:11:03 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2018 7:56:28 GMT
Well, what is in a dac ?
The receiver chip can make a difference i believe (spdif etc). Then there is board layout, parts used -capacitor changes can be heard. Decoupling is a make or break thing. Reclocking. The dac chip itself should not be underestimated. Does it have multiple power supply pins seperating digital and anologue. Bistream, R2R modern sigma delta ( a continuation of the bistream technology).
Then there is IV conversion and the anologue output stage. Probably the output stage is the biggest contributor to sound signature. It is quite a revealing exercise to actually bypass it (if dac chip allows) and listen straight off the dac. The output stage ime colours the sound, removes detail and makes the sound artificial. All in my limited experience of course.
Last but not least the psu. What type of transformer makes a difference as does rectifiers, smoothing caps and of course regulators. Was it designed for lowest noise or where other parameters considered - phase, flat impedance. I would suggest that the more individual psu's the better. At least one for anologue stage and at least one for the dac, but more is more is better imo.
But then what do i know. I try to go for simple so one box cdp's are more appealing to me. None of that converting i2s to spdif sending it down a long cable, converting to what ever at the other end, all those plugs and sockets. At RF like this signal is impedance matching matters, layout of pcb etc is critical. I like the decoder to be right next to the dac chip. Simple and no need for all the bollox i just described. But then some would say getting the dac and anologue stage away from the noisy digital citcuits pays off sonically. I dont know about that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2018 9:07:54 GMT
As I said, it's not a simple issue.
There's also variations in the DAC chip itself. You might think that this wouldn't/shouldn't be an issue; I did, but apparently, according to those that have investigated the matter, have found that examples of the same DAC chip can sound different.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Nov 3, 2018 9:27:33 GMT
Well, what is in a dac ? The receiver chip can make a difference i believe (spdif etc). Then there is board layout, parts used -capacitor changes can be heard. Decoupling is a make or break thing. Reclocking. The dac chip itself should not be underestimated. Does it have multiple power supply pins seperating digital and anologue. Bistream, R2R modern sigma delta ( a continuation of the bistream technology). Then there is IV conversion and the anologue output stage. Probably the output stage is the biggest contributor to sound signature. It is quite a revealing exercise to actually bypass it (if dac chip allows) and listen straight off the dac. The output stage ime colours the sound, removes detail and makes the sound artificial. All in my limited experience of course. Last but not least the psu. What type of transformer makes a difference as does rectifiers, smoothing caps and of course regulators. Was it designed for lowest noise or where other parameters considered - phase, flat impedance. I would suggest that the more individual psu's the better. At least one for anologue stage and at least one for the dac, but more is more is better imo. But then what do i know. I try to go for simple so one box cdp's are more appealing to me. None of that converting i2s to spdif sending it down a long cable, converting to what ever at the other end, all those plugs and sockets. At RF like this signal is impedance matching matters, layout of pcb etc is critical. I like the decoder to be right next to the dac chip. Simple and no need for all the bollox i just described. But then some would say getting the dac and anologue stage away from the noisy digital citcuits pays off sonically. I dont know about that. It’s always dangerous to draw conclusions from only one example, but my recent experience with the Dryden DAC suggests getting the DAC away from the transport somehow makes a positive difference. As far as I can see it’s the exact same DAC and near identical size transformer of the same make. Haider said it sounded very different nonetheless and he was right. There’s an obvious lift in presence and the sense of believability. It just sounds so much more sure-footed and powerful. Like Stu, I much prefer single box players, but the Dryden improves things so much, it’s a no brainier to keep it. Incidentally, I can’t find a single other player that uses this DAC chip. |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Nov 3, 2018 9:30:31 GMT
There does seem to be the accepted notion that bang in a modern outboard DAC, and you get an improvement. But is that really so? Dunno. I haven't tried it for myself. I had a try of the Xiang Sheng DAC and it was a different sound from just using the cd player. On balance better in some areas not in others although my initial perception was of an overall improvement, it was only on longer listening that I started having reservations. Also tried a Young DAC which is quite pricey and could not hear any noticeable difference. Most of what is said about DACs is bollocks. Blind tests tend to show people cannot reliably distinguish a difference between them so it can't be that much of a big deal. The source feeding the DAC is more important, it's the power supplies in that that matter - at least that is my theory based on owing dozens of CD players. You feed noise from the source into the DAC along with the signal you are going to get worse sound. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2018 9:47:58 GMT
As I said, it's not a simple issue. There's also variations in the DAC chip itself. You might think that this wouldn't/shouldn't be an issue; I did, but apparently, according to those that have investigated the matter, have found that examples of the same DAC chip can sound different. Just out of curiosity, recently I sent for some PCM54KP DAC chips to try in my Technics SL-P1200. It has the standard PCM54HP ones. The KP versions are the higher spec version. They are Chinese re-makes, so could sound worse (or better) than the genuine Burr Brown originals. I'll find out when they arrive. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Nov 3, 2018 10:01:04 GMT
Should be an interesting experiment. I really wish I’d took the opportunity to listen to the SL-P1200 when I had it. Serves me right for not trusting my eyes. It was beautifully built which suggested quality.
|
|
|
|
Post by nonuffin on Nov 3, 2018 13:07:20 GMT
I have played with dozens and dozens of DACs over the years and to be truthful all the NOS ones and the high bit rate ones leave me rather unimpressed. My favourites of all time are the old 20 bit ones from the states like the PS Audios and the Monarchy M22 with the double piggy back DAC chip which has me still hankering after another one.
One of the best I have reviewed recently is the Roksan K3 (now discontinued so I hear) which sounds very good and the best bit for me was being able to link it directly to my PC via their USB bluetooth dongle, rather than the phone or tablet which has limited battery life whereas the computer has no such handicap.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2018 14:37:27 GMT
There does seem to be the accepted notion that bang in a modern outboard DAC, and you get an improvement. But is that really so? Dunno. I haven't tried it for myself. Most of what is said about DACs is bollocks. Blind tests tend to show people cannot reliably distinguish a difference between them so it can't be that much of a big deal. The source feeding the DAC is more important, it's the power supplies in that that matter - at least that is my theory based on owing dozens of CD players. You feed noise from the source into the DAC along with the signal you are going to get worse sound. Ha ha ha  Yes your first sentence is so true. I reckon most of what is written on the hifi sites should be taken with a pinch of salt. People need to make their own journey and find out for themselves rather than relying on somebody else's opinion. I am of the same opinion about the importance of power supplies. But i am yet to do much with the supply for the purely digital side of things ie laser, rf amplifier, power drivers, ram chip, digital filter, decoder. That is because people have told me it does not make any difference past a certain level. I respect the view of these people but i am just too curious to leave it alone. Watch this space as i play with more psu's, regulator mods, oscon chip decoupling capacitors. Just when i thought the cdp was nearly finished |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Nov 3, 2018 15:23:23 GMT
Most of what is said about DACs is bollocks. Blind tests tend to show people cannot reliably distinguish a difference between them so it can't be that much of a big deal. The source feeding the DAC is more important, it's the power supplies in that that matter - at least that is my theory based on owing dozens of CD players. You feed noise from the source into the DAC along with the signal you are going to get worse sound. Ha ha ha Yes your first sentence is so true. I reckon most of what is written on the hifi sites should be taken with a pinch of salt. People need to make their own journey and find out for themselves rather than relying on somebody else's opinion. I am of the same opinion about the importance of power supplies. But i am yet to do much with the supply for the purely digital side of things ie laser, rf amplifier, power drivers, ram chip, digital filter, decoder. That is because people have told me it does not make any difference past a certain level. I respect the view of these people but i am just too curious to leave it alone. Watch this space as i play with more psu's, regulator mods, oscon chip decoupling capacitors. Just when i thought the cdp was nearly finished I’m so glad you aren’t just taking someone’s word for it. You’ve come this far, it would always be an untapped area you’d regret not exploring. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2018 18:35:01 GMT
I was quite relieved getting rid of two psu's on the output stage. Now it seems this thing maybe breeding some more  . Oh well, if there is no improvement then at least i can put it back to just one on the transport side. I have some tiny little pcb mount EI transformers on the dac chip and clock and they work beautifully. Maybe i will buy some more of them. About 10VA each and with less voltage so the regs dont have to drop so much voltage and that will lower the heat they give off. Turn all of the regs into tracking pre regs with a capacitance multiplier on the front and put them right next to their prospective load. Seperate transformer on each regulator - an array of transformers  Sorry, this is a bit off topic. Move it to my diy thread if you want Andrew. Dac chips - there are a million different views on these. Most popular seems to be tda1541. New chips are said to be super detailed but without the musical qualities of the old school R2R chips. Couldn't comment on that. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Nov 3, 2018 19:26:30 GMT
To me, the TDA1541 has usually been musically satisfying but sonically restricted in terms of detail and space. Best implementation I’ve heard is Naim CDI and CDS.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2018 19:39:02 GMT
To me, the TDA1541 has usually been musically satisfying but sonically restricted in terms of detail and space. Best implementation I’ve heard is Naim CDI and CDS. Ah well at least i dont feel like i am missing out now  I was going to buy an old cdp with one in just to see what the fuss was about. Not sure i will bother now. |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Nov 3, 2018 21:06:03 GMT
It's hard to distinguish what is the character of the chip from anything else in the player that might also be 'adding character.' I suppose DAC designers will have an idea. I've had a couple of players with TDA1541 and derivatives. Maybe they have a 'darker' sound to them than some others, I don't know. The 'musicality' thing is nonsense though. How can a computer chip be more or less musical? It's absurd.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Nov 3, 2018 21:10:10 GMT
I have no idea what causes the phenomenon. I believe the 1541 requires the designer to do almost everything else via discrete components. It might be this that make sure the sound musically satisfying, but it’s been a consistent element to every 1541 based player I have heard. Not to the same degree, but I hear do it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2018 23:13:50 GMT
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Nov 4, 2018 1:14:45 GMT
Well at least it looks much better made than the £5 jobbie and also better than some more expensive ones like the Audioquest Dragonfly stuff. The TDA1543 is probably most famously used by Audio Note and Consonance in their players.
I had a Consonance player with this chip. It had no digital filter and switchable oversampling. It was ok but didn’t quite do it for me. Might be different in other applications though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2018 7:03:31 GMT
16 tda1543 in parallel. No good for me, just think how many psu's that thing would breed I read an interesting thread on diyaudio about pimping up a marantz cdp with tda1549. Not many players have that chip in them. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Nov 4, 2018 10:14:40 GMT
16 tda1543 in parallel. No good for me, just think how many psu's that thing would breed I read an interesting thread on diyaudio about pimping up a marantz cdp with tda1549. Not many players have that chip in them. Tbh I hadn’t even heard of it. I’ll be googling it tho |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Nov 4, 2018 10:18:48 GMT
The way I see it 'music' is just variations of frequency response and amplitude and all DAC chips will have more than sufficient FR and dynamic range to handle any recording. Not to say that different chips will not have their own sonic character but on the list of things to worry about it's way down there.
I'll bet no-one in the world could say what DAC chip was in use just from listening.
Implementation is what matters most. I suspect the fascination with different DAC chips is a result of marketing, the attempt by the salesman to convince you his product is different from the several hundred other products available when in reality they all do exactly the same thing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2018 15:55:01 GMT
The only important decision to make whilst considering Chips is.............
"Plain" - SS
Or
"Salt & Vinegar" - Valves
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 27, 2018 18:31:30 GMT
What puzzles me is how thensame DAC with a slightly bigger PSU can change so much, How does that affect 1s and 0s
|
|
|
|
Post by macca on Jan 2, 2019 18:58:14 GMT
What puzzles me is how thensame DAC with a slightly bigger PSU can change so much, How does that affect 1s and 0s That's the power supply theory. The information transmitted doesn't change, it's what is piggy-backing along for the ride. You know with a good system you get that sort of 'delicacy' to the sound, whereas with a poor system, even if it doesn't sound hard or distorted, makes those sounds 'thick' by comparison? That's the difference. And it also adds a sense of 'power' 'slam' or 'weight' to the music too. There's no scientific basis for this mind, at least not that I've seen so please bear in mind this could be complete bollocks. I came to the conclusion purely by comparing sound (sighted) and specs and looking for a correlation but since then I've noticed quite a few people put the same argument forward. In fact there is a bloke on the Wigwam selling cables that he claims cut out some of this 'noise'. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2019 19:00:42 GMT
What puzzles me is how thensame DAC with a slightly bigger PSU can change so much, How does that affect 1s and 0s That's the power supply theory. The information transmitted doesn't change, it's what is piggy-backing along for the ride. You know with a good system you get that sort of 'delicacy' to the sound, whereas with a poor system, even if it doesn't sound hard or distorted, makes those sounds 'thick' by comparison? That's the difference. And it also adds a sense of 'power' 'slam' or 'weight' to the music too. There's no scientific basis for this mind, at least not that I've seen so please bear in mind this could be complete bollocks. I came to the conclusion purely by comparing sound (sighted) and specs and looking for a correlation but since then I've noticed quite a few people put the same argument forward. In fact there is a bloke on the Wigwam selling cables that he claims cut out some of this 'noise'. Ah! You made it back. Cool. This may hold a fair bit of truth. The better the equipment gets here, the better the PSU is. Makes sense that it would be about cleaner signal, to a layman like me. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Jan 2, 2019 19:46:52 GMT
That's the power supply theory. The information transmitted doesn't change, it's what is piggy-backing along for the ride. You know with a good system you get that sort of 'delicacy' to the sound, whereas with a poor system, even if it doesn't sound hard or distorted, makes those sounds 'thick' by comparison? That's the difference. And it also adds a sense of 'power' 'slam' or 'weight' to the music too. There's no scientific basis for this mind, at least not that I've seen so please bear in mind this could be complete bollocks. I came to the conclusion purely by comparing sound (sighted) and specs and looking for a correlation but since then I've noticed quite a few people put the same argument forward. In fact there is a bloke on the Wigwam selling cables that he claims cut out some of this 'noise'. Ah! You made it back. Cool. This may hold a fair bit of truth. The better the equipment gets here, the better the PSU is. Makes sense that it would be about cleaner signal, to a layman like me. Makes sense to me, and as you say, it does appear to be borne out by listening. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2019 19:59:26 GMT
My dac chip has a 7VA EI transformer with 3 secondary windings. Its tiny but the sound is massive man. I tried 200VA toroids on it and preferred the tiny EI.
Its not as simple as you think IME.
|
|
|
|
Post by macca on Jan 2, 2019 20:28:01 GMT
I think the idea is of having an individual power supply for each bit, keeping bleed down to nothing and good regulation being the key factors, rather than the actual power. But then I know nothing about power supplies so maybe that means more sense to you than it does to me.
|
|
Yes your first sentence is so true. I reckon most of what is written on the hifi sites should be taken with a pinch of salt. People need to make their own journey and find out for themselves rather than relying on somebody else's opinion.
. Oh well, if there is no improvement then at least i can put it back to just one on the transport side.
I was going to buy an old cdp with one in just to see what the fuss was about. Not sure i will bother now.