Digital-to-Analog Converters (DACs) Comparison

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Okay, not that we can actually hear the difference, but JUST in case anyone wants to compare the DACs for themselves, here is the low-down on the high-end DACs:

Flagship Burr-Brown DACs: PCM1792 (THD 0.0004%, SNR 129dB, Crosstalk -124dB).

Second Burr-Brown DACs: PCM1796 (THD 0.0005%, SNR 120dB, Crosstalk -119dB).

Flagship Analog Devices DACs: AD1955 (THD 0.0006%, SNR 120dB, Crosstalk -125dB).

Flagship Cirrus Logic DACs: CS4398 (THD 0.0007%, SNR 120dB).

Flagship Wolfson Microelectronics DACs: WM8741 (THD 0.001%, SNR 128dB).

Third Burr-Brown DACs: PCM1791 (THD 0.001%, SNR 113dB, Crosstalk -110dB).

The $7,000 Pioneer Elite SC-09TX features the Wolfson WM8741 DACs. The $7,000 Denon AVP-A1HDCI, $5,200 Denon AVR-5308CI, and $5,500 Yamaha Z11 feature the Burr-Brown PCM1796 DACs. The Onkyo SR-805, 875, & 905 also feature the PCM1796. The Denon AVR-5805CI, 4308CI, & 3808CI feature the Burr-Brown PCM1791 DACs. Mark Levinson and Lexicon use the Analog Devices DACs. Harman Kardon uses the Cirrus Logic DACs.

 

[GlocksRock]

What DACs are in the Yamaha RX-V1800, and how do they compare to other DACs?

 

[Biggiesized]

What DACs are in the Yamaha RX-V663? I can't get a straight answer to that.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

What DACs are in the Yamaha RX-V1800, and how do they compare to other DACs?

In the RX-V1800 Service manual, page 78:

It uses the Burr-Brown PCM1791 DACs, which is the same one used in the $7,200 Denon AVR-5805CI, and the newer AVR-4308 & 3808.

The V3800 also has the PCM1791 DACs (Service manual).

 

[Biggiesized]

What DACs are in the Yamaha RX-V663? I can't get a straight answer to that.

Also, does anything use the PCM1792s?

 

[bandphan]

Yamaha RX-Z9, Denon 5805ci and DVD-5910 all disco'd

 

[Biggiesized]

Yamaha RX-Z9, Denon 5805ci and DVD-5910 all disco'd

???

They are all "disco'd?" What does that mean?

 

[Jeepers]

???

They are all "disco'd?" What does that mean?

"Discontinued" I would think.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Yamaha RX-Z9, Denon 5805ci and DVD-5910 all disco'd

The DVD-5910 was upgraded to the 5910CI, which is now the current & latest model.

Thus, the 5910CI is the only current model still in production that uses the best DACs: PCM1792.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

PCM1792 (THD 0.0004%, SNR 129dB, Crosstalk -124dB).
PCM1796 (THD 0.0005%, SNR 120dB, Crosstalk -119dB).

Analog Devices DACs: AD1955 (THD 0.0006%, SNR 120dB, Crosstalk -125dB).
Cirrus Logic DACs: CS4398 (THD 0.0007%, SNR 120dB).
Wolfson Microelectronics DACs: WM8741 (THD 0.001%, SNR 128dB).

The $10,000 Krell Evolution 505 uses the Burr-Brown PCM1738 (THD 0.0004%, SNR 117dB, Crosstalk 115dB).

Again, it's purely academic, but I'm not sure if I would even rank this $10K Krell's Burr-Brown DACs as good as the PCM1796 that is in a $800 Onkyo?

 

[Beans]

this is a good idea for a thread and I am amazed at how little info or discussion there is around DACs. I mean essentially isnt that in large part what we are paying for?


I have the Rotel 1069 which only has "Burr Brown" written in the specs. I know DACs arent everything, but for me who has 5 sources all being sent digital to the 1069 knowing the quality of the DAC would be very useful.

the Rotel RCD 1072 which has been considered by many as "the best CD player under $1000 "uses the "Burr Brown 1732". I dont understand why other Rotel ( or many other brands) dont list in the specs which specific DAC is used and what the numbers mean.

As little of a difference DACs make they make more of a difference then different cable brands, yet there are 100s of threads dedicated to cables and this is one of the only threads I have seen purely dedicated to DACs.

Is it because we can see cables and not DACs?

 

[bandphan]

this is a good idea for a thread and I am amazed at how little info or discussion there is around DACs. I mean essentially isnt that in large part what we are paying for?


I have the Rotel 1069 which only has "Burr Brown" written in the specs. I know DACs arent everything, but for me who has 5 sources all being sent digital to the 1069 knowing the quality of the DAC would be very useful.

the Rotel RCD 1072 which has been considered by many as "the best CD player under $1000 "uses the "Burr Brown 1732". I dont understand why other Rotel ( or many other brands) dont list in the specs which specific DAC is used and what the numbers mean.

As little of a difference DACs make they make more of a difference then different cable brands, yet there are 100s of threads dedicated to cables and this is one of the only threads I have seen purely dedicated to DACs.

Is it because we can see cables and not DACs?

can you list the components of your speakers? ie the drivers, bd posts, crossovers, ect... and adtg was just reminding us of his knowledge on crosstalk

 

[mr-ben]

There's a lot more to the output than the DAC itself. My SACD player has two sets of outputs: multi-channel and two-channel. It uses the Burr-Brown PCM-1796 on all channels, but they're configured differently. The multi-channel outputs have three 1796 chips each running in stereo mode, for six channels of output. The two-channel outputs each have their own 1796 chip. Both sets are active, so I can play a CD and A/B compare them easily, and the two-channel outputs sound quite a bit better than the fronts from the multi-channel output.

 

[fmw]

this is a good idea for a thread and I am amazed at how little info or discussion there is around DACs. I mean essentially isnt that in large part what we are paying for?


I have the Rotel 1069 which only has "Burr Brown" written in the specs. I know DACs arent everything, but for me who has 5 sources all being sent digital to the 1069 knowing the quality of the DAC would be very useful.

the Rotel RCD 1072 which has been considered by many as "the best CD player under $1000 "uses the "Burr Brown 1732". I dont understand why other Rotel ( or many other brands) dont list in the specs which specific DAC is used and what the numbers mean.

As little of a difference DACs make they make more of a difference then different cable brands, yet there are 100s of threads dedicated to cables and this is one of the only threads I have seen purely dedicated to DACs.

Is it because we can see cables and not DACs?

Probably it is because DAC's are really not an issue. They represent a mature and perfected technology. Different brands of DAC's do things differently but they all end up at the same place because the the data is same. An ADC encolded it and a DAC decodes it. We're back to where we started.

DAC's can't be differentiated from one another in bias controlled listening tests. We take them for granted and that's probably what we should do. We should take cables for granted too.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

can you list the components of your speakers? ie the drivers, bd posts, crossovers, ect... and adtg was just reminding us of his knowledge on crosstalk

Well, actually I keep on listing all these specs so that someone else can educate me on it!

I mean I read The Audio Critic saying that you should not hear any differences if the crosstalk is < -30dB (20Hz-20kHz). Yet at the same time, The Audio Critic keeps on mentioning crosstalks of various preamps/amps and saying how one has "great" crosstalk, while another is only "good" or "okay" crosstalk. If we cannot hear any differences beyond that -30dB threshold, why would a crosstalk of -90dB be "Outstanding" and -50dB be only "Okay"?

And on these DACs, practically all the crosstalks are < -100dB!

I mean the differences are so insignificant. We can't hear a difference between THD of 0.0004% vs 0.04%, or SNR 129dB vs SNR 90dB, or Crosstalk of -100dB vs -129dB, right?

But professional reviewers keep on labeling them as "Outstanding" or "Reference Quality" vs. just "Good" as if we can tell the difference?

Or can we?

I don't know. It's all academic. But I suppose it gives us something to talk about.

 

[bandphan]

diminishing returns, as mentioned, most of the advances in this science are now inaudible.

 

[Jeepers]

Well, actually I keep on listing all these specs so that someone else can educate me on it!

I mean I read The Audio Critic saying that you should not hear any differences if the crosstalk is < -30dB (20Hz-20kHz). Yet at the same time, The Audio Critic keeps on mentioning crosstalks of various preamps/amps and saying how one has "great" crosstalk, while another is only "good" or "okay" crosstalk. If we cannot hear any differences beyond that -30dB threshold, why would a crosstalk of -90dB be "Outstanding" and -50dB be only "Okay"?

And on these DACs, practically all the crosstalks are < -100dB!

I mean the differences are so insignificant. We can't hear a difference between THD of 0.0004% vs 0.04%, or SNR 129dB vs SNR 90dB, or Crosstalk of -100dB vs -129dB, right?

But professional reviewers keep on labeling them as "Outstanding" or "Reference Quality" vs. just "Good" as if we can tell the difference?

Or can we?

I don't know. It's all academic. But I suppose it gives us something to talk about.

The question is "do the professional reviewers label them based on the measurements or based on what they think they hear ?"

 

[Seth=L]

I don't buy my equipment based on my dog's hearing.

*I don't even have a dog, wtf?*

 

[Jeepers]

I don't buy my equipment based on my dog's hearing.

*I don't even have a dog, wtf?*

Good for you.
So we agree it's based on the measurements and it only indicates how well a certain DAC does its task even if it's inaudible.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

There's a lot more to the output than the DAC itself. My SACD player has two sets of outputs: multi-channel and two-channel. It uses the Burr-Brown PCM-1796 on all channels, but they're configured differently. The multi-channel outputs have three 1796 chips each running in stereo mode, for six channels of output. The two-channel outputs each have their own 1796 chip. Both sets are active, so I can play a CD and A/B compare them easily, and the two-channel outputs sound quite a bit better than the fronts from the multi-channel output.

Thanks a lot!

Now you're making me wonder if I should try the 2-Ch outputs for 2Ch CDs instead of also using the 5.1 outputs.

So you really think the 2Ch output sounds better for 2Ch CDs than the 5.1 output, huh?

Great!

EDIT: So the 2Ch output has monaural or 2 mono DACs and the 5.1Ch has 3 Stereo DACs. The mono DACs do have better specs (SNR). But, again, can we actually hear the difference between 132dB and 129dB (PCM1792)?