Thread: DACs - the core of your system

Posts: 40
Page: prev 1 2 3 4 next

Post by rammiepie August 28, 2015 (11 of 40)
Euell Neverno said:

What I am saying is that I cannot compare the DAC to anything, because the DAC is not stand-alone. The FMJ CD37, which has now been superseded by a newer model, is not of the ilk most would classify as "analytical."

Euell, an outboard DAC would necessitate that you insert it between your player and your Bryston pre/pro via a coaxial cable, which, if you're 'currently' running analogue out from your Arcam into the pre/pro (DSD out) would confuse the issue by causing it to convert to PCM.

Might not be the best option in your case.

Simplicity, simplicity!

Post by Euell Neverno August 28, 2015 (12 of 40)
rammiepie said:

Euell, an outboard DAC would necessitate that you insert it between your player and your Bryston pre/pro via a coaxial cable, which, if you're 'currently' running analogue out from your Arcam into the pre/pro (DSD out) would confuse the issue by causing it to convert to PCM.

Might not be the best option in your case.

Simplicity, simplicity!

No kidding! The Arcam does not, I believe, make provision for using an outboard DAC. The signal from the player is indeed analogue to the preamp. There is no conversion of DSD signal to PCM witin the player, as the 8741 DAC does native DSD without coversion.

An outboard DAC would require a simple transport unit.

Post by rammiepie August 28, 2015 (13 of 40)
Euell Neverno said:


An outboard DAC would require a simple transport unit.

In Rammiepie terms, there is NO simple transport.

Sounds like you're channeling AmonRa.

Keep it simple, Euell. You ALWAYS HAVE!

Post by Euell Neverno August 28, 2015 (14 of 40)
rammiepie said:

In Rammiepie terms, there is NO simple transport.

Sounds like you're channeling AmonRa.

Keep it simple, Euell. You ALWAYS HAVE!

You substitute a transport for a player (with analogue electronics), when you use an outboard DAC. What could be more simple?

Post by Fitzcaraldo215 August 28, 2015 (15 of 40)
Euell Neverno said:

What I am saying is that I cannot compare the DAC to anything, because the DAC is not stand-alone.

I think you are completely right. DAC chips may have their own personality, but they are part of an inseparable system, including the digital signal path before and the analog path after. Even stand alone DAC components using the identical DAC chip inside can have sonic differences. They might be, and often are, more significant than the signature of the DAC chip itself. So, I think the chip spec seldom completely characterizes the resulting sound.

Post by Marpow August 28, 2015 (16 of 40)
Fitzcaraldo215 said:

I think you are completely right. DAC chips may have their own personality, but they are part of an inseparable system, including the digital signal path before and the analog path after. Even stand alone DAC components using the identical DAC chip inside can have sonic differences. They might be, and often are, more significant than the signature of the DAC chip itself. So, I think the chip spec seldom completely characterizes the resulting sound.

I have a McIntosh D150, state of the art external DAC. I absolutely love it. If I am reading a hard disc straight through I use coaxial outs from the CD player. If I am listening via my ripped CD's via Bluesound Vault I hit the D150 with Optical outs and in my opinion the ripped CD's via the optical sounds a tiny bit better , warmer, than the straight though coaxial.

I have read that external DAC's are like loudspeakers, they have there own flavor and it is wise for a person to ask there dealer for loaners to do in home testing. Certain DAC's may be better for classical and others for rock, for instance.

Seems like an awful lot of work, so I take the easy way out and go with my brand of choice, which in my case I can hear the difference and I am happy.

Post by bmoura August 30, 2015 (17 of 40)
Fitzcaraldo215 said:

Even stand alone DAC components using the identical DAC chip inside can have sonic differences. They might be, and often are, more significant than the signature of the DAC chip itself. So, I think the chip spec seldom completely characterizes the resulting sound.

Very true.

Post by sylvian August 31, 2015 (18 of 40)
That is why I started this thread....in my (near) future set-up I would go for standalone DAC(s) definitely.

Post by rammiepie August 31, 2015 (19 of 40)
sylvian said:

That is why I started this thread....in my (near) future set-up I would go for standalone DAC(s) definitely.

With all the DACs flooding the market in the past five years good luck in finding THE ONE!

Post by Chris September 1, 2015 (20 of 40)
rammiepie said:

With all the DACs flooding the market in the past five years good luck in finding THE ONE!

If you are looking for SQ delivered from a DAC as close as possible to how it was recorded,maybe Merging's new Nadac would be an interesting one to listen to?
Many recent recordings both DSD and PCM are made using the Pro version ADC Horus or HAPI.
I am seriously interested in trying out the HAPI,which is cheaper than both Nadac and Horus.
It is a selectable modules based unit that can be used both for recording and playback. It would cost roughly 4k here in Europe for the DXD DSD 256 capable version.
And yes that would allow mch playback and recording.
The much more expensive consumer versions of Nadac seem to be basically the same playback unit, but without the option to add an ADC module.

Page: prev 1 2 3 4 next

Closed