Are DACs mostly snake oil?

[jid]

Well maybe snake oil is not the most precise term maybe it should be "extreme diminishing returns on investment" but all other things aside (connectivity options etc..) do expensive DACs make any audible difference? I mean you can go from tens of dollars in like a FiiO product to thousands from "audiophile grade" companies but aside from looking Hifi (pretty) and offering sample rates and bit depths that are near impossible to find for source material in music, do these do anything special?

I ask because I've been wanting to reconfigure my set up and none of the components would have a DAC, meanwhile my sources would all be digital so I started looking for external DACs only to be horrified at the range in prices along with lots of claims of improvement, however something about it set off my spidey senses.. is it all just bullsh*t? Or do I need to poney up for this piece of gear in my signal chain?

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

It depends. In a DAC is implemented correctly like practically in a vast majority of modern consumer A/V electronics, then you don't need external DAC.

That said, I used words "consumer A/V electronics" - more often than not, a PC or PC like the device is used to be a source of audio and often includes a DAC. The chip itself could be perfectly adequate or even better, BUT the audio path shielding from VERY (RFI) noisy pc components (like mid to high-end video cards) are often VERY lacking. So going with external DAC (which doesn't need to cost arm nor leg) is a legitimate call.
However, if the source and entire path consist of dedicated consumer electronics (of any price point), typically you should only worry about your speakers, room, quality of audio recording, an amp, and then, only then, the electronics like DAC. (in that order)

 

[MrBoat]

It makes you wonder how the first CD players managed so well, when still fresh against analog sources. Many, if not most of us collected a single CD version of our record collection at a time still having to listen to the vinyl as well. What did they use for DACs way back then?

All I remember is hearing near flawless renditions of our favorites. I was able to afford a generic CD player (multitech) and it played very well for over a decade.

With all the music/video sources available these days, audio quality is grounds for competitive edges, if there are superior means available. That said, I would bet just about any multimedia themed PC or device to have capable DACs well before 2018.

I swear most of these PC DAC issues stem from kids working from bare bones academic/office based machines or the deal of the week at some box store. I used to read up on motherboards in certain brands or bargains when computer/MB shopping, and 9 out of 10 times it was where the savings were. In the more media/game themed machines, there was usually some emphasis in the specs on the audio quality on board. This PC mentioned noise shielding and a higher quality audio experience.

 

[jid]

Thanks.. that is kind of what I suspected. I currently mostly play Spotify (320 ogg vorbis) through Chromecast by way of Toslink to a miniDSP DDRC-24 which acts as a DAC, preamp, crossover for speakers/sub and DRC (diracLive) all in one, the speakers are Focal 706 and are powered by a Cambridge Audio Topaz AM10 integrated stereo receiver, sub is a Sunfire SDS10.

I'm largely very happy with the sound but I do want to ditch the Topaz because I realize now that the "British Sound" is not just a gimmick in name, they actually feck with the response which the DRC then had to equalize back flat which is just F'ing stupid, the volume setting reverts every time I shut it off too and I need to turn it up to what I used for the EQ at every restart.. never buying "British Sound" again . The DDRC-24 is fantastic, but it lacks a few things, a volume knob so I have to always use the remote for instance.. It also looks like ass, being an adult I do kind of want things to look nice in my place so I want to ditch this as well in favour of the ddrc-88a which looks more acceptable but does not have a DAC.

To do all the changes requires that DAC and I'm not sure what to buy

 

[Leemix]

A separate dac before digital room correction wouldnt give anything since the signal would be digitized again. And room correction fully in the digital domain is probably better with what you have now compared to the swap for looks.

Edit: why not use the Azure volume control if you dont have a line level passthrough on it?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[jid]

I'm aware but I'm kind of a superficial c*nt so looks matter to me and since I don't believe I'll hear any ill effects of the double conversion I am not too concerned about it. I just wanted to check with others about the significance of the DAC to SQ which I'm assuming is not really a key factor.. However I found myself doubting that belief when I started to look for DACs and reading reviews, even though I know many "pro" reviewers are afflicted with delusional levels of audiophilia.

The reason I can not use the integrated AMP for volume is because the DDRC-24 handles the crossover between speakers and subwoofer and so it feeds low frequencies directly to the powered sub and higher frequencies to the integrated which powers the speakers only. The result is pretty damn good and very tweakable but not the most practical when turning the system on.. plus the ddrc-24 looks like arse, people think it is my modem lol

 

[Leemix]

Aah, then i guess you will go for a pure amplifier then if you swap the azure.
A DAC by itself is difficult to compare sice the result is so dependant on the preamplifier/volume control. My PS Audio stellar gain cell dac/pre plays rings around my Marantz av8805. It does sound a little better when used as a dac into the marantz, but the difference as dac vs marantz own dac is very small and not there if i dont use pure non dsp/bass management mode

 

[PENG]

I'm largely very happy with the sound but I do want to ditch the Topaz because I realize now that the "British Sound" is not just a gimmick in name, they actually feck with the response which the DRC then had to equalize back flat which is just F'ing stupid, the volume setting reverts every time I shut it off too and I need to turn it up to what I used for the EQ at every restart.. never buying "British Sound" again .

I think there may be something wrong with your Topaz. My Cambridge Audio preamp does not do any "British sound" at all. In fact, my REW graphs show it produces practically identical response as my other preamps (Marantz prepro, Denon AVR) and integrated amp (NAD) do.

As for external DACs, I have 8 if I include the two that I gave away. I think in a blind test, no one can tell them apart if volume matched as I have compared them many times, even with headphones. I find the ones that could play the higher resolution tracks such as 192/24, 352/24, and DSD128 or higher do sound more transparent in general. It is not because of the formats and resolutions but mostly to do with the original master recording/mastering quality. So yes I have no regret to have spend too much on external DAC except I definitely don't need to have so many, that's just being crazy..

 

[Forsooth]

...As for external DACs, I have 8 if I include the two that I gave away. I think in a blind test, no one can tell them apart if volume matched as I have compared them many times, even with headphones. I find the ones that could play the higher resolution tracks such as 192/24, 352/24, and DSD128 or higher do sound more transparent in general. It is not because of the formats and resolutions but mostly to do with the original master recording/mastering quality. So yes I have no regret to have spend too much on external DAC except I definitely don't need to have so many, that's just being crazy..

Pretty interesting..."Pay no attention to that DAC behind the curtain."

 

[Johnny2Bad]

A decent DAC does not have to be expensive, there are a few that sell for under $100 (eg: Topping DX7 from China) that are quite competent. Circuit layout is critical (they are essentially high frequency devices, even more so now with DSD capability), and as the operating frequencies rise, things like PCB trace configuration become more critical, power supply can be an issue as with anything, and these issues affect linearity (ability to correctly resolve the smallest details).

Not everyone truly cares about DAC quality, it does depend on your listening habits somewhat. A good DAC should be one you can sit down and listen to for many continuous hours and still be engaged with the music at the last minute as you were in the first. But many people don't listen that way; if your typical use is more like background music or brief listening sessions of, say, an hour or two, it may not be that important to you.

Most reviewers are far more critical with regard to accuracy than casual listeners. By that I mean they expect the DAC to perfectly reproduce the work without error, from the loudest to the quietest elements in the work. If all you want is to play music, it may not matter to you that the cough in the audience during a song is a bit too loud or too quiet, or that you can't tell if it's a Stienway or a Yamaha concert grand piano the artist is playing (linearity errors). But these are the things reviewers focus upon.

The digital-to-analog conversion process is still not ideal; it's errors are measurable, and to many, even amongst the most competent examples, audible. DACs are clearly not "snake oil", but not everyone demands perfection when "good enough" is good enough.

 

[Johnny2Bad]

What is "linearity error"?

In order to make this easily understandable, some liberties are taken, so don't take this as being exactly how things really work. If you grasp the concept, that's all we're trying to achieve.

Let's take a test tone, 1 Khz.

It's a 16bit/44.1 KHz file, and we have two DACs, one with a 16-bit chip and one with a 24-bit chip.
Now, a DAC is supposed to produce a 2V output signal, some are a bit higher than that.

But that makes for some complicated math (dividing 2,000 mV by 16). So let's pretend they output 1600mV maximum instead, making each bit 100mV. Not to mention that there are far more than 16 discrete steps in level, but bear with me.

There are no DACs that are truly linear. In other words when asked to reproduce that 1KHz tone at a level equivalent to 2 bits (14bits down from full scale), it is supposed to output 200mV (using our example)

But no 16-bit DAC will do that. Generally linearity errors will begin to show up around the 13th bit down from full scale. So, instead of 200mV maybe it's 250mV or 140mV. And because it's non-linear, the 3-bit level might be only 220mV, or 330mV. The least significant bit is usually way off, plus or minus.

Now, take the same 16-bit file played back with a 24-bit DAC. Measurements reveal that it's linearity errors show up around the 19th or 20th bit down (typically). Which means it can perfectly play back all 16 bits without linearity error.

If we change the file to a 24-bit file, we are back to the same situation as with the 16-bit DAC; linearity error is inevitable.

Even though a 24-bit file is supposed to have more resolution than a 16-bit one, you may find that it doesn't sound that much different than a 16-bit version, because the actual resolution is much closer than at first it seems.

Now for a real-world example.

In the graph example, the response should be a straight line right to the -96dB point for a 16-bit file, and to the left edge of the graph for a 24-bit file. Although the error is a bit extreme (-8dB at -96dB) it does err on the side of "too quiet" and is at least consistent. Some skew wildly above and below ideal. We would say this DAC resolves down to about -68dB, which is equivalent to about 11~12 bits resolution.

 

[sterling shoote]

What it's all about, a more life-like experience, right. So, first, is there a DAC out there today, any DAC, at whatever price, which is seen from some sort of evaluation to deliver a more life-like experience? And, what's a life-like experience when instruments are electronic and voices are reinforced through amplification? I know I don't have an answer. The only thing in fact that I'm actually sure of is my music from iTunes on iPhone sounds a lot better than the same music from my circa 1959 Magnavox AM Transistor Radio, so maybe the place to begin evaluation is what's meaningfully different between my AM Radio and my iPhone. Knowing this would I think give us all a little bit better perspective of the materials, design, and techniques which we all agree have lead to better sound today than in the past. This exercise I believe would also suggest the areas where engineering effort might best be directed for continuing sound quality improvements.

 

[jid]

I think there may be something wrong with your Topaz. My Cambridge Audio preamp does not do any "British sound" at all. In fact, my REW graphs show it produces practically identical response as my other preamps (Marantz prepro, Denon AVR) and integrated amp (NAD) do.

As for external DACs, I have 8 if I include the two that I gave away. I think in a blind test, no one can tell them apart if volume matched as I have compared them many times, even with headphones. I find the ones that could play the higher resolution tracks such as 192/24, 352/24, and DSD128 or higher do sound more transparent in general. It is QUOTE]

I think there may be something wrong with your Topaz. My Cambridge Audio preamp does not do any "British sound" at all. In fact, my REW graphs show it produces practically identical response as my other preamps (Marantz prepro, Denon AVR) and integrated amp (NAD) do.

As for external DACs, I have 8 if I include the two that I gave away. I think in a blind test, no one can tell them apart if volume matched as I have compared them many times, even with headphones. I find the ones that could play the higher resolution tracks such as 192/24, 352/24, and DSD128 or higher do sound more transparent in general. It is not because of the formats and resolutions but mostly to do with the original master recording/mastering quality. So yes I have no regret to have spend too much on external DAC except I definitely don't need to have so many, that's just being crazy..

Interesting.. yeah maybe you are right about my topaz I will know better once I have another measurement from another amp, it could be another piece in my audio signal as well. I don't have the graph handy as I'm at work but I remember looking at it thinking all the ways reviewers described the sound they heard seems to be represented in this graph.. Either way the DRC corrected it and I want to replace it for other reasons too.

However, since you are talking pre amps, those should be line level shouldn't they? If I was going to give sound a flavour I'd do it at the amp or speaker myself. Anyway at this point I'm speculating hard and talking out of my butthole a bit so I will go with your assessment for the time being.

Thanks for the replies, I'm learning lots here

 

[TLS Guy]

What is "linearity error"?

In order to make this easily understandable, some liberties are taken, so don't take this as being exactly how things really work. If you grasp the concept, that's all we're trying to achieve.

Let's take a test tone, 1 Khz.

It's a 16bit/44.1 KHz file, and we have two DACs, one with a 16-bit chip and one with a 24-bit chip.
Now, a DAC is supposed to produce a 2V output signal, some are a bit higher than that.

But that makes for some complicated math (dividing 2,000 mV by 16). So let's pretend they output 1600mV maximum instead, making each bit 100mV. Not to mention that there are far more than 16 discrete steps in level, but bear with me.

There are no DACs that are truly linear. In other words when asked to reproduce that 1KHz tone at a level equivalent to 2 bits (14bits down from full scale), it is supposed to output 200mV (using our example)

But no 16-bit DAC will do that. Generally linearity errors will begin to show up around the 13th bit down from full scale. So, instead of 200mV maybe it's 250mV or 140mV. And because it's non-linear, the 3-bit level might be only 220mV, or 330mV. The least significant bit is usually way off, plus or minus.

Now, take the same 16-bit file played back with a 24-bit DAC. Measurements reveal that it's linearity errors show up around the 19th or 20th bit down (typically). Which means it can perfectly play back all 16 bits without linearity error.

If we change the file to a 24-bit file, we are back to the same situation as with the 16-bit DAC; linearity error is inevitable.

Even though a 24-bit file is supposed to have more resolution than a 16-bit one, you may find that it doesn't sound that much different than a 16-bit version, because the actual resolution is much closer than at first it seems.

Now for a real-world example.

In the graph example, the response should be a straight line right to the -96dB point for a 16-bit file, and to the left edge of the graph for a 24-bit file. Although the error is a bit extreme (-8dB at -96dB) it does err on the side of "too quiet" and is at least consistent. Some skew wildly above and below ideal. We would say this DAC resolves down to about -68dB, which is equivalent to about 11~12 bits resolution.

You have made a really important point here.

This ties in with the reel to reel tape thread stated by 3 db. We have had a long discussion about analog versus digital recording and editing.

The point is that you do have to keep your recording properly placed between bit saturation and the noise floor. You can not be cavalier about it. Actually it is not easy to make a really good recording in either format.

Analog has most of its trouble apart from the noise problem at max modulation, whereas digital has huge problems at the quiet parts of the recording. So a digital recording must be optimally positioned between maximum modulation and the noise floor. An under modulated digital recording sounds lifeless and strange.

Yes, good Dacs and Adcs are crucial. What is even more important is good metering and software. Digital does have an ace in the hole as you can position the modulation afterwards though good software unless you really miss judged the original recording.

So I feel the 2K I spent on my DAC/ADC justified.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

...do expensive DACs make any audible difference?

No, they won't sound any better than the DAC inside a Denon X2000 series or higher model AVR.

 

[Forsooth]

"...do expensive DACs make any audible difference?"

No, they won't sound any better than the DAC inside a Denon X2000 series or higher model AVR.

AcuDefTechGuy, just to be clear, did you mean that an expensive DAC will sound no better than any generic, (but competent) DAC such as found in the majority of mainstream amps/receivers?

I'm learning here, so trying to make sure I'm understanding correctly. Thanks.

 

[PENG]

Interesting.. yeah maybe you are right about my topaz I will know better once I have another measurement from another amp, it could be another piece in my audio signal as well.

I ran REW using the same speakers, just swapped the preamp, avr, integrated, and power amps that the FR graphs would overlap to the point at 1/12 or even 1/24 smoothing it looked like one line. At 1/48 smoothing you can see some slight difference but too minute to make any audible difference.

I don't have the graph handy as I'm at work but I remember looking at it thinking all the ways reviewers described the sound they heard seems to be represented in this graph.. Either way the DRC corrected it and I want to replace it for other reasons too.

I used to paid attention to or even believe subjective reviews in the past but after spending thousands and thousands of dollars and a lot of hours playing, comparing etc etc., I now try to ignore them, including what they said about the Topaz (read about it when I was shopping for a small integrated amp). They do create expectation bias among readers/followers. The thing is, once people get pass the line of diminishing return, people could hear what they want to hear, but in fact the differences are mostly in the look, build quality, reliability, and compatibility related issues such as sensitivity, gain structures, output power etc. The so called sound signature that is not even logical if you think about it.

However, since you are talking pre amps, those should be line level shouldn't they?

All done in line level using external DACs, and always volume matched, again using the REW software. By the way, I can understand there are reasons to replace your Topaz, just hope that it isn't because of some reviews.

 

[Irvrobinson]

But no 16-bit DAC will do that. Generally linearity errors will begin to show up around the 13th bit down from full scale. So, instead of 200mV maybe it's 250mV or 140mV. And because it's non-linear, the 3-bit level might be only 220mV, or 330mV. The least significant bit is usually way off, plus or minus.

You've posted this misinformation before, I've pointed it out to you before, and you clearly learn nothing. TI "Precision" 16bit DACs are rated for 16bit performance. This is just one example:

http://www.ti.com/product/DAC80004/datasheet/abstract#SLASE444385

The ASIC industry tells few lies, because their customers actually measure things as part of their own product design processes, and word of untrustworthiness spreads quickly.

You also continue to be incorrect about 24bit DACs, though the state of the art is now 32bit, such as the ESS DACs, and they are essentially perfectly linear within 24bit audio, and with the appropriate output stage op-amp ASICs 21-bit full-path resolution is achievable. I've previously pointed you to the Stereophile review of the Benchmark Media DAC3 as evidence:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/benchmark-dac3-hgc-da-preamplifier-headphone-amplifier-measurements

Please stop positioning yourself as an expert when you clearly do not have a good grasp of the simplest fundamentals.

 

[Swerd]

Thanks for the replies, I'm learning lots here

Your topic is a good one, and I like the way you presented your question. Your "spidey senses" are right. You deserve good responses.

… all other things aside (connectivity options etc..) do expensive DACs make any audible difference?

My answer is no, but I have not purchased an expensive, stand-alone DAC. I have had one CD player from the 1990s (Sony), two DVD players (also Sony), and a BluRay player (Panasonic). In addition, I've had two AVRs (a Denon and a B&K with internal DACs. I can confidently say I've never heard a noticeable difference among them. My Panasonic BR player has both analog and digital outputs which allows me to connect it both ways to my AVR. I can quickly switch between the Panasonic internal DAC and the B&K receiver's DAC while playing the same CD. I cannot hear any audible difference. So, I've never understood why there are so many stand alone DACs for sale. Despite what the magazine reviewers claim, I strongly doubt they offer an audible advantage.

I ask because I've been wanting to reconfigure my set up and none of the components would have a DAC, meanwhile my sources would all be digital so I started looking for external DACs only to be horrified at the range in prices along with lots of claims of improvement, however something about it set off my spidey senses.. is it all just bullsh*t? Or do I need to poney up for this piece of gear in my signal chain?

I currently mostly play Spotify (320 ogg vorbis) through Chromecast by way of Toslink to a miniDSP DDRC-24 which acts as a DAC, preamp, crossover for speakers/sub and DRC (diracLive) all in one, the speakers are Focal 706 and are powered by a Cambridge Audio Topaz AM10 integrated stereo receiver, sub is a Sunfire SDS10.

I have to ask why you've chosen a set up like you have. The most common way to include a DAC in an audio system is to include it into a receiver. This becomes more important because your digital music sources are not on discs. Very few, if any, stereo receivers have DACs, leaving AVRs as the main choice. Furthermore, your system includes a sub woofer. AVRs have the most flexible and useful sub woofer controls. While there are other routes available for using sub woofers, they are limited at best, more often they're awkward. Why have you avoided an AVR when you so clearly need a DAC?

 

[Leemix]

How much or how litte you get out of more expensive dacs greatly depends on the pre amplifier connecting it to a reciever/surround pre usually doesnt give much if anything depending on sound mode.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk