DACs; quality and sound

[tparmer]

DACs-quality and sound; help me understand

I'm between and rock and hard place and am seeking advise. I currently have an Arcam AVR250 which for my 2-channel listening I love. However, my room is being used more and more for video oriented sessions instead of critical listening.

I recently bought a PS3 and am really enjoying Blue Ray movies; but I wish I could switch HDMI and decode uncompressed audio, something it appears most consumer level receivers now do.

Here is my question, I read that Onkyo and Yamaha are both using "high-end Burr Brown DACs." Well, are they high end simply because they are Burr Brown or are they high end Burr Brown DACs? My Arcam uses very nice Wolfson units and I can't imagine an $800 Yamaha or Onkyo receiver has the guts of my current piece ($1799 retail), but I could be wrong!

Lastly, I typically use my Arcam CD player with analog stereo interconnects for my two channel stuff, so maybe I should just get over my snobby aversion to Japanese mass-produced nameplates and move the Arcam upstairs and buy something new for the theater (TX-DS805 just reduced to $700 seems to be a ridiculously good deal...)??

Your thoughts?

Thanks.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

So which Wolfson DACs are in the Arcam?
Just like Burr-Brown/Texas Instrument, there are various models.

Just because it's Wolfson DACs doesn't mean it's top-of-the-line, which is the same case with Burr-Brown.

I know the top-of-the-line Burr-Brown DACs are the (#1) PCM 1792 and (#2) PCM 1796. The Burr-Brown PCM 1796 DACs are in the $7,000 flagship Denon AVP-A1 Pre-Pro and $5,200 AVR-5308. The PCM 1792 DACs are in the $3,800 DVD-5910 SACD/DVD-Audio-Video player.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Arcam vs Yamaha, Denon, Onkyo

View attachment 5736

Actually, if you look at the Arcam receiver vs the Yamaha, Denon, Onkyo receivers, you will see that the 3 Japanese receiver brands have better Frequency Response, THD%, and Crosstalk than the more expensive Arcam.

 

[tparmer]

Interesting .pdf, thanks. I'm checking into the Wolfson DAC question. I like the fact that Denon lists the actual DAC on their site, wish more companies did that (onkyo and Yammie). The 3808 and 2808 look pretty solid (1792s). Nice to have options I guess. Would be interesting to see if the DACs in the Denon's above, Onkyo 805 and Yamaha 863 are actually superior to the ones Arcam is using; all of this almost be a moot point (power supply in Arcam 250 likely no better than these new models), only thing I guess I would have to experiment with is the voicing of different brands with my JM Lab Chorus speakers. My Arcam is actually slightly more forward than I would prefer at times and maybe Denon or Marantz would be better suited!

Thanks again.

Trevor

 

[Seth=L]

The TX-SR805 does represent a good bargain, but I don't think it fits your needs (it's overkill being that it is very large). It also produces a lot of heat and some other reported issues such as popping over speakers when using HDMI audio.

If you are looking to get a pre/pro you might look at the Yamaha RX-V663 (if you want to get it right away) or wait for the Emotiva UMC-1 pre/pro to become available. The UMC-1 has tons of useful features and plenty of processing power to handle most anything.

I am finding out what DACs the Emotiva UMC-1 uses as soon as possible.

 

[Seth=L]

Interesting .pdf, thanks. I'm checking into the Wolfson DAC question. I like the fact that Denon lists the actual DAC on their site, wish more companies did that (onkyo and Yammie). The 3808 and 2808 look pretty solid (1792s). Nice to have options I guess. Would be interesting to see if the DACs in the Denon's above, Onkyo 805 and Yamaha 863 are actually superior to the ones Arcam is using; all of this almost be a moot point (power supply in Arcam 250 likely no better than these new models), only thing I guess I would have to experiment with is the voicing of different brands with my JM Lab Chorus speakers. My Arcam is actually slightly more forward than I would prefer at times and maybe Denon or Marantz would be better suited!

Thanks again.

Trevor

Onkyo and Yamaha both have been using Burr Brown DACs, I am not sure which chip sets they have been using though.

 

[ThA tRiXtA]

What's the story with the Onkyo and speaker pops during HDMI use?

 

[tparmer]

I love the aesthetics of the Emotiva stuff! Have wanted to learn more about their gear, but have not taken time to research it to this point. Any more data you can share would be great!

Thank you.

 

[Seth=L]

What's the story with the Onkyo and speaker pops during HDMI use?

I haven't experienced it myself, but AVS forums have mentioned this problem countless times.

*I don't own any of the 07' Onkyos*

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

...The [Denon] 3808 and 2808 look pretty solid (1792s)...

No, actually the Denon 3808 & 4308 have the Burr-Brown PCM 1791, which is Third in line. The Numbering system is messed up: #1 is PCM-1792, #2 is 1796, #3 is 1791.

The Denon 2808 has PCM-1803, which is further down the road.

So, the ultimate Burr-Brown DAC is the 1792 (only found in the $3,800 DVD-5910 SACD/DVD-Audio-Video player).

The #2 DAC is the 1796, which is in the $7,000 AVP-A1 pre-pro, $5,200 AVR-5308 receiver, $2,000 DVD-3800BD blu-ray, & $1,500 DVD-3930 (& DVD-3910) SACD/DVD-A-V.

I have to wonder why they would put the #2 DAC in the $7,000 AVP-A1 pre-pro, but put the #1 DAC in the $3,800 DVD player???

 

[mtrycrafts]

I think you should be more concerned with other aspects of the system than which dac chip is in what unit.
Concentrate on speakers, room acoustics and the recorded quality of the software.

 

[tparmer]

True. My room is pretty well tuned acoustically and I have Focal (JM Lab) Chorus S speakers...what I believe are also very high value units. The source material is another issue altogether, and you are right a lot of what I listen to is not recorded all that well. Thanks for the reply.

 

[Seth=L]

Truth be told, there isn't a huge difference between DACs.

 

[tparmer]

Sure that is true to a point, however I am pretty sure analog audio sounds better when played through a Cambridge Audio 840C vs. a $100 DVD player when running through the 2 channel audio outputs for multiple reasons but largly based on the digital to analog conversion, right?

 

[OttoMatic]

Sure that is true to a point, however I am pretty sure analog audio sounds better when played through a Cambridge Audio 840C vs. a $100 DVD player when running through the 2 channel audio outputs for multiple reasons but largly based on the digital to analog conversion, right?

Yes, and the DAC's surrounding implementation. When I say "surrounding implementation" I'm referring to everything outside of the DAC chip itslef (which, as its own component can have sonic differences as well). The most recent comparison I did was between and Outlas 990 and a Benchmark DAC 1. Both of those devices do their own DAC thing, but both have surrounding circuitry and line level amplification. So, what I'm trying to say is that I don't know if it's the DAC chip, the other components, or their implementation that makes the biggest difference. In the end, there are definitely differences, and I find them to be audible but somewhat subtle.

I must say that I feel like I've made a bit of a dent in the aggressive mentality of this forum! I'm so excited! Usually, everyone comes out, guns blazing, about how everything sounds the same, DACs are all identical, there is no difference whatsoever, etc., etc., etc. It's nice to see some restraint, and some more nuance in the discussion.

 

[tparmer]

Very nicely put, thanks. There is indeed a fine line between silly obsession and a discerning difference, isn't it? I will search this forum for some additional information as I am really interested in what makes a Denon sound different from an Onkyo from an Anthem, etc.... I know there are lots of moving parts and maybe its difficult to define (and maybe even more difficult to hear...), but I am sort of nerdy that way and would like to know.

Anyway, thank you (all) and keep sharing your thoughts.

Trevor

 

[PENG]

As others have said, implementation of the DAC system is probably more important than the DAC itself. The price of DACs are not that significant so I hope people like Denon, Yamaha and Onkyo don't use prices as one of their main selection criteria.

 

[edmcanuck]

I have to wonder why they would put the #2 DAC in the $7,000 AVP-A1 pre-pro, but put the #1 DAC in the $3,800 DVD player???

Probably because the 1792 is shipped DSD-ready for the DVD-A and SACD functions.

I wonder where you got your ranking system from? It's easy to look at numbers and make snap conclusions, but do you really think that any human being on Earth can discern the difference between 0.0004% THD and 0.0005% THD? That's the difference between your "#1" and "#2" DACs. The answer, of course, is no and there's a ton of empirical evidence to support that the answer is no. Humans can't even discern 1% THD.

Also, remember to keep some perspective on DACs. General audiophile phooey would have you believe not only that there are large, detectable differences between them, but that they constitute the whole picture of sound. The 1791 costs $2.95. The 1796 costs $3.70. The 1792 costs $14.55. Anyone who thinks that the entire sound of a $7000 piece of audio equipment is based on a $3.70 DAC is fishing in the wrong river.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Probably because the 1792 is shipped DSD-ready for the DVD-A and SACD functions.

I wonder where you got your ranking system from? It's easy to look at numbers and make snap conclusions, but do you really think that any human being on Earth can discern the difference between 0.0004% THD and 0.0005% THD? That's the difference between your "#1" and "#2" DACs. The answer, of course, is no and there's a ton of empirical evidence to support that the answer is no. Humans can't even discern 1% THD.

Also, remember to keep some perspective on DACs. General audiophile phooey would have you believe not only that there are large, detectable differences between them, but that they constitute the whole picture of sound. The 1791 costs $2.95. The 1796 costs $3.70. The 1792 costs $14.55. Anyone who thinks that the entire sound of a $7000 piece of audio equipment is based on a $3.70 DAC is fishing in the wrong river.

I got the "ranking" idea from Gene when he reviewed the Denon DVD-5910. I realize that we can't really hear any difference in sound. So the ranking is academic at best.

I had no idea about the pricing. If the DACs are so cheap, why doesn't everyone put the PCM-1792 in every component?

So if the PCM-1792 is shipped DSD-ready, why doesn't Denon use it for every SACD/DVD-A player they have?

Yeah, I guess the threshold for THD is 1%, F.R. is 20Hz-20kHz +/-3dB, SNR > 80dB, & Crosstalk of < -30dB.

But let's face it. Who among us want a component with those specs?

 

[WmAx]

People need to get over the hype surrounding DACs. A lot more than the model of DAC chip used in the equipment is relevant, and simply, most equipment today has what would be considered transparent performance, in relation to what the human auditory system can differentiate. Regardless, I suppose the baseless claims of many, testifying about the 'clearly obvious' audible differences will persist, as they have throughout history, even though in most cases, no real differences exist, as has been shown time after time when such claims were put to double-blinded, level-matched and statistically valid comparisons.

-Chris