Overdose said:
You made a valid point, but the 'fact' bit is relative to the differences being 'similar'. What one considers an insignificant difference could be described by another as 'night and day' in the subjective world of this hobby, but in any case, the differences when they exist in digital sources is by far and away the smallest out of any other component in the audio chain. So if a couple of DACs are night and day different, where does that leave us with speakers?
If you need to sit down in a quiet room with no distractions and listen very carefully and intently to separate the differences in a pair of components, then I would consider those differences to be largely inconsiquential. If a DAC is transparent, as some clearly are, then that is as good as it gets.
I consider it a higher priority to choose something like a DAC on its function and connectivity and see sound quality or its ability to be relatively transparent, a given
That is fine, and is your experience.
I hate the description of "day and night", which is so cliched and subjective, as to be almost meaningless.
My experience differs somewhat....though the better the source, the better the system has to be in order to make the most of it.
The expensive DACs I've heard were DCS Debussy, Chord QBD 76 and an Audio Note (NOS) 2.1x sig......IMO. They were all different, and all a big step up in SQ over more budget offerings....though I admired the Chord more than I liked the sound of it.
I think that not all DACs are created equal due to things like:
- Quality, type and implementation of the power supply
- How effectively the clocking is handled (asynchronous etc)
- How well the components are isolated from interference
- How they implement up-sampling / over-sampling and filtering
- Whether they are NOS types
I agree, that (unlike vinyl), a digital source can take up less of the system....and a streamer can take less than a CDP