Dac Chips- ES9038Q2M or AK4490 delta sigma (thoughts-opinions)

[sterling shoote]

I've got DACs galore: preamp, source components, even 2 in my OPPO-205. And of these, only the OPPO's DACs can natively accomodate my 24/192 digital music downloads. In experiments contrasting and comparing the OPPO's digital to analog conversion with preamp, X-FI HD, Sony PCM-7010, Airport Express, and several CD/SACD Player DACs, I can't say any sound distinctive, or could be discerned to sound better in any manner better could be discerned; thus, I don't have any interest in chasing DACs as a means of upgrading my multi-channel music system. And, of course, my attitude about it may be moot, since about the only way you can get an affordable DAC today that will play multi-channel music is via a digital pre-pro or Universal Player, the stand alone multi-channel DACs costing as much as a pretty good used car. At any rate, what little divergence between the DACs I have at hand comes from the OPPO, which on occasion might seem to deliver greater tail end detail and the Sony PCM-7010F DAT Recorder, which gives definition to instruments and vocals, although that unit is first recording LPs, not commercially recorded DATs.

 

[John Parks]

This is a very interesting thread and I am glad you posted @Truthslayer ! I can only imagine a drunken argument over DAC chips (*breaking a bottle on the counter* "Burr Brown will kick your ESS's a**!"). I am not one to fret over the merits of one DAC chip over another and believe the biggest differences lie in the implementation. There is big controversy in the audiophile world over the Border Patrol SEi as it sounds supposedly fantastic but uses "ancient" tech in its delta-sigma DAC and apparently does not measure all that swell: https://www.stereophile.com/content/borderpatrol-digital-analogue-converter-se So...

Recently, I had experiences with a few different DAC chips. My ex-Oppo BDP-103 had a Cirrus Logic CS4382 and I preferred the sound of the ESS ES9010K2M DAC in my Yamaha A-S801 by a very slight margin via coax (of course, the Oppo could play SACDs, so I could not compare in that regard). The Oppo sounded just a tad steelier or glassier if that makes sense. I am not sure of the chip in my Bluesound Node 2i, but the comparison between it and the Yamaha is a wash, even with the MQA unfold from Tidal via the Node. I might can kinda hear a teeny difference, but not always and it depends on time of day, lights on or off and how many joints my neighbor has smoked that evening.

Now to the interesting part: I recently purchased a Pioneer UDP-LX500 to take advantage of native 4K and, well, just because (also the latest generation of Oppos are ridiculously priced). It uses an AKM AK4490EQ. In direct comparisons (CD, analog out) with the Yamaha (CD, coax in) and the Bluesound (streaming Tidal or Amazon HD, analog out) the Pioneer has a fuller, more pronounced bass. Midrange and treble sound about the same. The most noticeable difference, though, is how quiet the Pioneer is. I don't mean quiet as in a difference in sound level, but a sense of quiet between notes, if that makes any sense. I guess it is what reviewers describe as a "black background". It is also not that the other units make any sound (they are silent in operation and I cannot hear anything with my ear pressed up to the tweeter). There is just a sense, hard to describe as it is, of less there there, when nothing is there. It's a pretty neat aspect to the performance and one I have never really thought about or pursued but am now aware of when it is not, well, there!

 

[sterling shoote]

This is a very interesting thread and I am glad you posted @Truthslayer ! I can only imagine a drunken argument over DAC chips (*breaking a bottle on the counter* "Burr Brown will kick your ESS's a**!"). I am not one to fret over the merits of one DAC chip over another and believe the biggest differences lie in the implementation. There is big controversy in the audiophile world over the Border Patrol SEi as it sounds supposedly fantastic but uses "ancient" tech in its delta-sigma DAC and apparently does not measure all that swell: https://www.stereophile.com/content/borderpatrol-digital-analogue-converter-se So...

Recently, I had experiences with a few different DAC chips. My ex-Oppo BDP-103 had a Cirrus Logic CS4382 and I preferred the sound of the ESS ES9010K2M DAC in my Yamaha A-S801 by a very slight margin via coax (of course, the Oppo could play SACDs, so I could not compare in that regard). The Oppo sounded just a tad steelier or glassier if that makes sense. I am not sure of the chip in my Bluesound Node 2i, but the comparison between it and the Yamaha is a wash, even with the MQA unfold from Tidal via the Node. I might can kinda hear a teeny difference, but not always and it depends on time of day, lights on or off and how many joints my neighbor has smoked that evening.

Now to the interesting part: I recently purchased a Pioneer UDP-LX500 to take advantage of native 4K and, well, just because (also the latest generation of Oppos are ridiculously priced). It uses an AKM AK4490EQ. In direct comparisons (CD, analog out) with the Yamaha (CD, coax in) and the Bluesound (streaming Tidal or Amazon HD, analog out) the Pioneer has a fuller, more pronounced bass. Midrange and treble sound about the same. The most noticeable difference, though, is how quiet the Pioneer is. I don't mean quiet as in a difference in sound level, but a sense of quiet between notes, if that makes any sense. I guess it is what reviewers describe as a "black background". It is also not that the other units make any sound (they are silent in operation and I cannot hear anything with my ear pressed up to the tweeter). There is just a sense, hard to describe as it is, of less there there, when nothing is there. It's a pretty neat aspect to the performance and one I have never really thought about or pursued but am now aware of when it is not, well, there!

Could the Pioneer bass have anything to do with the Pioneer's bass management?

 

[John Parks]

Could the Pioneer bass have anything to do with the Pioneer's bass management?

That's a good question. From what I have been able to glean, the Pioneer does not offer any kind of bass management via the 2 channel analog output (or any bass management via digital, for that matter). The two ways to perhaps change the audio output are digital filter settings (sharp [default] short and slow - I have not played with those yet) and dynamic range control, which, when set to "Auto" affects only Dolby TrueHD (not applicable to me).

That being said, the differences are not as pronounced as, say, turning up the bass, or engaging the loudness button. It is very subtle and is not obvious - i.e., I can't just walk into the room and tell which player is actually playing, but only when doing side-by-side, instant comparisons. It is just interesting is all and I'm not about to trumpet the superiority of the Pioneer as the end all to be all.

 

[Kvn_Walker]

I don't mean quiet as in a difference in sound level, but a sense of quiet between notes, if that makes any sense. I guess it is what reviewers describe as a "black background".

Wow! I mentioned that in another post myself! It was the main thing I noticed when I ditched my internal sound card and started buying DAC's for my computer. It's a strange kind of silence that took me some time to get adjusted to.

 

[Truthslayer]

This is a very interesting thread and I am glad you posted @Truthslayer ! I can only imagine a drunken argument over DAC chips (*breaking a bottle on the counter* "Burr Brown will kick your ESS's a**!"). I am not one to fret over the merits of one DAC chip over another and believe the biggest differences lie in the implementation. There is big controversy in the audiophile world over the Border Patrol SEi as it sounds supposedly fantastic but uses "ancient" tech in its delta-sigma DAC and apparently does not measure all that swell: https://www.stereophile.com/content/borderpatrol-digital-analogue-converter-se So...

Recently, I had experiences with a few different DAC chips. My ex-Oppo BDP-103 had a Cirrus Logic CS4382 and I preferred the sound of the ESS ES9010K2M DAC in my Yamaha A-S801 by a very slight margin via coax (of course, the Oppo could play SACDs, so I could not compare in that regard). The Oppo sounded just a tad steelier or glassier if that makes sense. I am not sure of the chip in my Bluesound Node 2i, but the comparison between it and the Yamaha is a wash, even with the MQA unfold from Tidal via the Node. I might can kinda hear a teeny difference, but not always and it depends on time of day, lights on or off and how many joints my neighbor has smoked that evening.

Now to the interesting part: I recently purchased a Pioneer UDP-LX500 to take advantage of native 4K and, well, just because (also the latest generation of Oppos are ridiculously priced). It uses an AKM AK4490EQ. In direct comparisons (CD, analog out) with the Yamaha (CD, coax in) and the Bluesound (streaming Tidal or Amazon HD, analog out) the Pioneer has a fuller, more pronounced bass. Midrange and treble sound about the same. The most noticeable difference, though, is how quiet the Pioneer is. I don't mean quiet as in a difference in sound level, but a sense of quiet between notes, if that makes any sense. I guess it is what reviewers describe as a "black background". It is also not that the other units make any sound (they are silent in operation and I cannot hear anything with my ear pressed up to the tweeter). There is just a sense, hard to describe as it is, of less there there, when nothing is there. It's a pretty neat aspect to the performance and one I have never really thought about or pursued but am now aware of when it is not, well, there!

John, great explanation, and eloquently put. I understand exactly what you are saying. Sometimes explaining audio sound is hard to formulate correctly and have it come across where others understand what you are saying.

When I spoke of the noise issue, hiss/hum, and I should have explained better regarding the black background as you stated. My quest is of course to get a good DAC for my daughter, but also for myself. The DAC in the P5 is ok just not great. I am missing that sound ( or lack of sound ) from a Philips player that I had about 20 yrs ago. (made the mistake of selling it) It probably didn't have the fancy new chips in it like those of today.
But what it did have as you have noticed from the Pioneer you spoke of. Was just a full complete sound, with the quietness (blackness) between the notes. I know these things may not make much sense or come across right to some readers, but I think you get where i'm coming from.
Anyways the hunt is still on, hopefully I can find what I am chasing, for a reasonable price.

 

[PENG]

As expected, the argument "implementation..." also popped up in such discussion. Logically though, let's assume the following:

Specs:

DAC A better than DAC B, say by 6 dB in both THD+N and DNR

Implementation B better than A, also by 6 dB in both THD and DNR

You can see that in theory, DAC A + implementation scheme A = DAC B + implementation B, but just as clearly, we can see that:

DAC A + Implementation scheme B would be superior, audible or not is a different matter/topic.

Now, let's take consider a real example, RX-A3080 has the ES9026 Pro, THD+N: -110 dB, DNR: 124 dB
compared to the A-S801's ES9010k2M's THD+N: -106, DNR: 116

One would think that the AVR RX-A3080's DAC plus implementation should, better or worse, come very close to that of the A-S801, and that's assuming the A-S801's implementation is in fact done in some sort of superior way, such as balanced/differentially wired. Based on what I saw in the schematics, I doubt it was wired this way.

I really think this so called implementation being more important than using a better DAC chip is BS most of the time in the low to mid range gear. Then again, even if the gear is truly high end, then if an excellent implementation scheme is used, such as being fully balanced/differential all the way (e.g. the ADTG hated Denon AVP..),why wouldn't they go with the best available DAC chip too?? So I would say probably most of the time (not always,/always exceptions..) to claim that "don't worry about the chip, its implementation that counts blablabla... are excuses, and/or hearsay that got repeated enough times to be taken as facts. Just my 0.00002 cents, feel free to ignore.

To the OP's question, the ES9038Q2M has better specs in both THD+N and DNR, but the AK4490's numbers are already excellent. The AKM chip was in fact a flagship just a few years back. In terms of implementation, it would be hard to compare without the necessary information such as a full set of schematics, parts list, and the ability to analyze such information. It may be better to just base your decision on other factors, such as features, look, prices and bench measurements.

 

[Truthslayer]

As expected, the argument "implementation..." also popped up in such discussion. Logically though, let's assume the following:

Specs:

DAC A better than DAC B, say by 6 dB in both THD+N and DNR

Implementation B better than A, also by 6 dB in both THD and DNR

You can see that in theory, DAC A + implementation scheme A = DAC B + implementation B, but just as clearly, we can see that:

DAC A + Implementation scheme B would be superior, audible or not is a different matter/topic.

Now, let's take consider a real example, RX-A3080 has the ES9026 Pro, THD+N: -110 dB, DNR: 124 dB
compared to the A-S801's ES9010k2M's THD+N: -106, DNR: 116

One would think that the AVR RX-A3080's DAC plus implementation should, better or worse, come very close to that of the A-S801, and that's assuming the A-S801's implementation is in fact done in some sort of superior way, such as balanced/differentially wired. Based on what I saw in the schematics, I doubt it was wired this way.

I really think this so called implementation being more important than using a better DAC chip is BS most of the time in the low to mid range gear. Then again, even if the gear is truly high end, then if an excellent implementation scheme is used, such as being fully balanced/differential all the way (e.g. the ADTG hated Denon AVP..),why wouldn't they go with the best available DAC chip too?? So I would say probably most of the time (not always,/always exceptions..) to claim that "don't worry about the chip, its implementation that counts blablabla... are excuses, and/or hearsay that got repeated enough times to be taken as facts. Just my 0.00002 cents, feel free to ignore.

To the OP's question, the ES9038Q2M has better specs in both THD+N and DNR, but the AK4490's numbers are already excellent. The AKM chip was in fact a flagship just a few years back. In terms of implementation, it would be hard to compare without the necessary information such as a full set of schematics, parts list, and the ability to analyze such information. It may be better to just base your decision on other factors, such as features, look, prices and bench measurements.

Well said Peng. I do look for balanced connections, not sure why more equipment doesn't offer them. I know many think it's not needed, but I prefer them and never have any issues that way.

 

[lovinthehd]

Well said Peng. I do look for balanced connections, not sure why more equipment doesn't offer them. I know many think it's not needed, but I prefer them and never have any issues that way.

What issues did you have with unbalanced connections, tho?

 

[Truthslayer]

What issues did you have with unbalanced connections, tho?

Only in the past, with lower voltage, and some noise interference. Be it RF or ground loops. Never had the issues while using all balanced.

 

[lovinthehd]

Only in the past, with lower voltage, and some noise interference. Be it RF or ground loops. Never had the issues while using all balanced.

I've yet to experience anything like RFI with unbalanced connections altho I did have a ground loop once with an amp that had both types of connections but wasn't due the unbalanced connection particularly (but might have helped with it had I had a balanced pre-amp....but it was due bad grounding by the cable co solved by lifting the ground). What do you mean lower voltage? Less than line level?

 

[Truthslayer]

I've yet to experience anything like RFI with unbalanced connections altho I did have a ground loop once with an amp that had both types of connections but wasn't due the unbalanced connection particularly (but might have helped with it had I had a balanced pre-amp....but it was due bad grounding by the cable co solved by lifting the ground). What do you mean lower voltage? Less than line level?

Yes, sorry I should have clarified, lower line level. And as I said the issues happened long ago in a land far away (LOL) And after that issue trying the modi 3 with that hum issue, makes me want to stick with only balanced products. I know with most of todays gear I probably wouldn't have an issue, but if I can keep with balanced, that's what I will do.

 

[lovinthehd]

Yes, sorry I should have clarified, lower line level. And as I said the issues happened long ago in a land far away (LOL) And after that issue trying the modi 3 with that hum issue, makes me want to stick with only balanced products. I know with most of todays gear I probably wouldn't have an issue, but if I can keep with balanced, that's what I will do.

It just shouldn't matter without mics or long runs or very noisy enviroments....

 

[sterling shoote]

How is the ESS9038Q2M different from the ESS9038PRO?

 

[Truthslayer]

It just shouldn't matter without mics or long runs or very noisy enviroments....

Well balanced for me has always seemed to give a lower noise floor and those deeper black backgrounds. (if that makes any sense) It is hard to explain, but it is definitely audible when you compare the two. (balanced-unbalanced (single ended) )

How is the ESS9038Q2M different from the ESS9038PRO?

Sterling, not sure I could describe the differences. But it's a good question and hopefully someone can chime in with the right answer.

 

[lovinthehd]

Well balanced for me has always seemed to give a lower noise floor and those deeper black backgrounds. (if that makes any sense) It is hard to explain, but it is definitely audible when you compare the two. (balanced-unbalanced (single ended) )


Sterling, not sure I could describe the differences. But it's a good question and hopefully someone can chime in with the right answer.

You'd have to prove that one to me that your hearing is so acute as to hear such a difference (I know what you've said about your hearing)....the black thing....meh.

 

[Truthslayer]

You'd have to prove that one to me that your hearing is so acute as to hear such a difference (I know what you've said about your hearing)....the black thing....meh.

Well I would love to let you borrow my ears, unfortunately im a little attached to them.

 

[Pogre]

How is the ESS9038Q2M different from the ESS9038PRO?

Audibly there's likely no difference whatsoever. I'm sure they both perform very well tho.

 

[lovinthehd]

Well I would love to let you borrow my ears, unfortunately im a little attached to them.

Oh just you picking correctly a significant number of times in a dbx test would do....

 

[sterling shoote]

Audibly there's likely no difference whatsoever. I'm sure they both perform very well tho.

The PRO is of course what's in the OPPO 205, they're 8 channel DACs, one used for stereo, the other for 7.1. I've done a lot of experimentation comparing and contrasting these DACs to others I have at hand as alluded to in my earlier post here; and, I've got to tell ya, I just can't say for sure I hear any divergence between any of them. However, I listen to music pretty much all day long from about 4am to 8pm, sometimes, via Creative Sound Blaster X-FI DAC, OPPO DACs, Sony CDP-601ES DAC, Airport Express DAC, Sony DVP-S9000ES DAC, Sony PCM-7010F DAT Recorder DAC, or Sony TA-E9000ES DAP and of these the OPPO DACs and the 28 year old DAT Recorders DAC might be yielding a tone which is easier on my ears over the course of the day. I'd call the tone smooth and detailed.