Movie DACs, Music DACs, or just DACs?

[sploo]

Hi all,

I've recently put together a system with an Arcam AVR300 receiver, and a borrowed Denon A-11 DVD player.

I've noticed that CD playback with the Denon (via analogue) isn't a whole lot different from a line out on a decent personal CD player.

Having auditioned a Cyrus CD6 and Denon DVD-3910 (with the AVR300), and spoken to numerous dealers and Arcam tech support, I've reached the following conclusion:

There's a huge difference between DACs suited for movie use, and DACs suited for music (i.e. a good CD player will play CDs better than a high-end DVD player. Also, it's better to use the DAC on a good CD player than the DAC on a decent AV receiver - e.g. use an analogue, not digital, input).

So:

1. Is this complete BS, or am I roughly on the right lines?
2. If this is right, then could someone explain (in very basic electronics terms) the differences between DAC technologies?
3. Would I benefit from a cheap (<300GBP) external DAC, to decode a digital 2 channel output (CDs) from the Denon DVD player to an analogue input to the Arcam receiver?
4. If the answer to 3 is yes, then could anyone recommend a product (or a DIY job)?

Thanks for any info!

 

[mtrycrafts]

Hi all,

I've recently put together a system with an Arcam AVR300 receiver, and a borrowed Denon A-11 DVD player.

I've noticed that CD playback with the Denon (via analogue) isn't a whole lot different from a line out on a decent personal CD player.

Having auditioned a Cyrus CD6 and Denon DVD-3910 (with the AVR300), and spoken to numerous dealers and Arcam tech support, I've reached the following conclusion:

There's a huge difference between DACs suited for movie use, and DACs suited for music (i.e. a good CD player will play CDs better than a high-end DVD player. Also, it's better to use the DAC on a good CD player than the DAC on a decent AV receiver - e.g. use an analogue, not digital, input).

So:

1. Is this complete BS, or am I roughly on the right lines?
2. If this is right, then could someone explain (in very basic electronics terms) the differences between DAC technologies?
3. Would I benefit from a cheap (<300GBP) external DAC, to decode a digital 2 channel output (CDs) from the Denon DVD player to an analogue input to the Arcam receiver?
4. If the answer to 3 is yes, then could anyone recommend a product (or a DIY job)?

Thanks for any info!

1. Yes, BS
3. Don't waste money on an extrenal DAC

 

[sploo]

Ahhh... the joy of audio... (ask 10 people, get 11 answers )

On another forum I've had a reply to the effect of "yes that's correct, but you probably won't get any benefit with an AV receiver".

Cheers for the reply though.

 

[bumblebee]

audition musical fidelity's X-DAC v3 if you are able. they (mf) claim that this is the best DAC on the planet. if i understand the purpose of a DAC correctly, then the X-DAC can make those cheap dvd players rival those megabuck cd players.

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

DACs vary in quality according to their measured performance, but even the least of them these days are audibly transparent, with any errors being below the threshold of hearing. I have never heard of "movie" or "music" DACs. What is true is that some inexpensive DVD players use the cheapest audio DACs for CD playback. Maybe that's where the "movie" and "music" DAC idea came from. And I would not rely on dealers for technical advice!

Unless you have several digital source components (more than you can physically plug into your receiver or prepro), an outboard DAC makes little sense. If you think a particular player isn't up to snuff, spend the money on a better player!

 

[mtrycrafts]

then the X-DAC can make those cheap dvd players rival those megabuck cd players.

You must be joking, right? I didn't get it the last time someone was joking in the post and I messed up in the response

The dac is accurate or it is not. It will show in the measurements Some could be designed on purpose to be euphonic

 

[mtrycrafts]

Ahhh... the joy of audio... (ask 10 people, get 11 answers )

Yes, multi part questions

 

[b_panther_g]

Hello Sploo,

I admit that I'm stepping out on a limb here, but bare with me.

I do believe that there is a difference in CD playback between some high-end players vs. most high-end DVD players. Why?

Because some high-end CD players up-sample the CD. That is, instead of playing them as 16bit/44kHz, the CD is up-sampled to 24bit/96kHz or some other higher resolution.

It might be a good idea to see if your CD player up-samples the CDs. And also it might be a good idea to check if your Denon does the same.

Well I hope that helps. If not, hey it's free advice...just forget that I wrote anything.

Enjoy.



BTW – for those who don't agree with me...
I fully expect everyone, their grandmother, and even the family dog to start screaming, crying and shouting about how I'm insane, stupid, still think the world is flat, and they hear that I was the 3rd gunman on the grassy knoll. So have fun

 

[mtrycrafts]

BTW – for those who don't agree with me...
I fully expect everyone, their grandmother, and even the family dog to start screaming, crying and shouting about how I'm insane, stupid, still think the world is flat, and they hear that I was the 3rd gunman on the grassy knoll. So have fun

Why would anyone think this???
We can have fun without any of it

Hello Sploo,

I admit that I'm stepping out on a limb here, but bare with me.

Yes, you are

I do believe that there is a difference in CD playback between some high-end players vs. most high-end DVD players. Why?

Because some high-end CD players up-sample the CD. That is, instead of playing them as 16bit/44kHz, the CD is up-sampled to 24bit/96kHz or some other higher resolution.

When a CD is recoded unto that CD at 16/44, it has a fixed database of values. Upsampling cannot fill in missing information. How would it know what is missing in order to correct and add that missing information??? It cannot.

Besides, CD player have been over sampling for 20 year now.

It might be a good idea to see if your CD player up-samples the CDs. And also it might be a good idea to check if your Denon does the same.

Well I hope that helps. If not, hey it's free advice...just forget that I wrote anything.

Enjoy.

 

[bumblebee]

You must be joking, right? I didn't get it the last time someone was joking in the post and I messed up in the response

The dac is accurate or it is not. It will show in the measurements Some could be designed on purpose to be euphonic

nope. im not joking.

 

[mtrycrafts]

nope. im not joking.

Check out Rip's comments on CDP and DAcs very recently since people have a difficult time with my inputs :

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=63514#poststop

May need to do a search on him for the DAC.

Mostly transparent in well designed components. Period, end of story. Just because one is a DVD player doesn't excludes it.

 

[b_panther_g]

Hello Mtrycrafts,

Now I freely admit that I'm not an expert in upsampling - Not by a long shot. But here is how the technology works, as I understand it. (Remember - No experts here)

mtrycrafts wrote...
When a CD is recoded unto that CD at 16/44, it has a fixed database of values. Upsampling cannot fill in missing information. How would it know what is missing in order to correct and add that missing information??? It cannot.

An upsampling system doesn't "know what is missing". It simply fills in a series of “best guess” values. Here's what I mean...

A CD is recorded at 16bit/44.1kHz. Let's say the upsampling system wants to play it at 24bit/96kHz. It looks at 2 consecutive values from the CD recording. Since it needs to fill in the extra bits, it runs a algorithm that “guesses” the missing values. It then plays a combination of the information that was actually recorded and the extra information that it “guessed”.

Upsampling is not about accuracy (i.e. playing whats on the recording bit by bit), It's about creating a more “pleasing sound”. The engineer(s) who wrote the algorithm for the upsampling chip(s) determines what is “more pleasing” or “more analog” or whatever they want to call it.

It's like upsampling video. A DVD is recorded in 480i, but products upsample it to 720p or 1080i. It's not about accuracy. It's about producing something that is subjectively more pleasing.

To shift gears a little...
The only reason I brought it up was because I was trying to explain why Sploo, the original poster, hears a difference. I also noticed that his CD player has 24bit DACs. If his player upsamples, that could account for the difference he hears.

Enjoy.

 

[bumblebee]

Check out Rip's comments on CDP and DAcs very recently since people have a difficult time with my inputs :

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=63514#poststop

May need to do a search on him for the DAC.

Mostly transparent in well designed components. Period, end of story. Just because one is a DVD player doesn't excludes it.

the bottom line is that all digital players will sound the same if the receiver's DAC is used. if all DACs are created equal, this is ok. but if some DACs are indeed better than other DACs, then the better DAC should be used. whether external or w/in a player or receiver.

 

[mtrycrafts]

the bottom line is that all digital players will sound the same if the receiver's DAC is used. if all DACs are created equal, this is ok. but if some DACs are indeed better than other DACs, then the better DAC should be used. whether external or w/in a player or receiver.

And how will you find a DAC that may sound a tiny bit different and better? Will you be doing a DBT comparison? If not, you will be gambling on any outcome
Best to agonize over the speakers and room acoustics

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

Upsampling is not about accuracy (i.e. playing whats on the recording bit by bit), It's about creating a more “pleasing sound”. The engineer(s) who wrote the algorithm for the upsampling chip(s) determines what is “more pleasing” or “more analog” or whatever they want to call it.

It's like upsampling video. A DVD is recorded in 480i, but products upsample it to 720p or 1080i. It's not about accuracy. It's about producing something that is subjectively more pleasing.
Enjoy.

This is a common misconception (exploited and abetted by marketing) of the reason for over(up)sampling. In reality, it has nothing to do with creating a more pleasing sound by filling in the "gaps" of the original sample in a manner analogous to video interpolation, but with avoiding distortion and noise in the highest frequencies due to the limitations of real-world "brickwall" filters, among other things.

This article on oversampling gives a good, non-technical explanation of the hows and whys of oversampling. It is one of a series on digital sound that I highly recommend for inquiring minds.

From the article:

Most people have heard the term "oversampling" applied to digital audio devices. While it's intuitive that sampling and playing back something at a higher rate sounds better than a lower rate—more points in the waveform for increased accuracy—that's not what oversampling means.

 

[bumblebee]

And how will you find a DAC that may sound a tiny bit different and better? Will you be doing a DBT comparison? If not, you will be gambling on any outcome
Best to agonize over the speakers and room acoustics

get better players. surely, a 3510 would perform better than a cheap noname.

also, if you have a 3510 and a 3805, w/c connection would you use? digital or analog?

 

[sploo]

There's some very interesting discussion here.

I've found that I can't detect much (any) real difference between:

1. Reasonable personal CD player -> analogue line out -> AVR300
2. Denon A-11 DVD player -> analogue out -> AVR300
3. Denon A-11 DVD player -> digital out -> AVR300

I can understand the latter two - both are devices primarily intended for movie use, with 'movie' DACs (according to someone at Arcam I spoke to).

I have auditioned - in the same listening session - a Denon 3910 DVD player, a Cyrus CD6, and a Cyrus stereo amp (can't remember the model number, but it was similar in price to the CD6).

For CDs, the Denon 3910 and AVR300 (via analogue) was OK, but nothing inspiring (BTW the 3910 and a Denon AVR3805 was truly awful). The Cyrus CD6 and AVR300 (via analogue) was better. The Cyrus CD6 and Cyrus amp was a massive improvement.

Ignoring the stereo amp, as I was after an AV receiver, I really felt there was quite a difference between the Denon DVD player and the Cyrus CD player.

Why... I don't know. Logic would tell me it's because the cost of the DVD player is spent on video componentry, and the cost of the CD player on audio componentry. However, so many people express the opinion that there's no difference between different types of DAC, that digital audio data is digital audio data (regardless of what transport is reading the CD) etc. etc.

So... given that the Denon 3910 and Cyrus CD6 are reasonably similar in price, and that the Denon has video hardware that the Cyrus doesn't, but (to my ears) the Cyrus sounds way better... what's the difference in the audio hardware (if it's not the DAC, transport etc. etc.)?

 

[mtrycrafts]

Why... I don't know. Logic would tell me it's because the cost of the DVD player is spent on video componentry, and the cost of the CD player on audio componentry. However, so many people express the opinion that there's no difference between different types of DAC, that digital audio data is digital audio data (regardless of what transport is reading the CD) etc. etc.

So... given that the Denon 3910 and Cyrus CD6 are reasonably similar in price, and that the Denon has video hardware that the Cyrus doesn't, but (to my ears) the Cyrus sounds way better... what's the difference in the audio hardware (if it's not the DAC, transport etc. etc.)?

One aspect you didn't consider, a major one at that.
That is the way you did the comparison listening test human psychology and expectations, uncontrollable. If you knew which components you compared at all times, it is unreliable. If the levels were not matched, it is unreliable, etc.

 

[sploo]

I can't deny any of that, though I would note:

1) I didn't know anything about the Cyrus CD player before I heard it (i.e. I didn't have any expectations)

2) After my first listen, I was told the price, which was *cheaper* than the DVD player (i.e. I wasn't thinking "wow this is a really expensive player, so it must be good")

3) I had plenty of time to listen to the different units (and to play with the volume control!)

Obviously, this is not even close to a blind test, but I had no prior expectations, and swapping between the two resulted in a huge difference in sound (to my ears). Can't really say any more than that... just what I heard.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I can't deny any of that, though I would note:

1) I didn't know anything about the Cyrus CD player before I heard it (i.e. I didn't have any expectations)

That may be the case, no doubt, but human nature looks for differences in everything. That is evolutionary, built in and no on/off switch.



2) After my first listen, I was told the price, which was *cheaper* than the DVD player (i.e. I wasn't thinking "wow this is a really expensive player, so it must be good")

Never know how bias works. If we did, we could turn it off at will

3) I had plenty of time to listen to the different units (and to play with the volume control!)

Obviously, this is not even close to a blind test, but I had no prior expectations, and swapping between the two resulted in a huge difference in sound (to my ears). Can't really say any more than that... just what I heard.

Well, all we know for sure is that you perceived something different, not that you heard a difference. Yes, there is a difference between perception and hearing. I perceive people calling me all the time to be told no, they didn't call me
So, because of uncontrolled biase, uncontrolled level differences at comparison, who knows what really happened in reality.