DAC comparisons

[robertzombie]

Some interesting posts flying around in this thread. OP: what's your budget?

I'm currently using a Raspberry Pi 3 w/ RuneAudio and HiFi Berry Digi+ board feeding my Rega DAC-R via coaxial cable (whew!). The sound quality is excellent with my lossless collection of CD rips. Any device that renders a digital stream to a single DAC will "sound" the same as any other rendering device as long as all the devices are set up correctly. You can play the same rip simultaneously on a laptop, Pi, and CD player and flick through the DAC's inputs and the sound is measureably the same. You can verify that with RightMark Audio Analyzer. To ensure Rune is delivering a bit perfect stream you just need to disable its software volume control in settings. As for iPhone supporting Rune, you access Rune's media library through any web browser, no question of OS compatibility here.

If I didn't need the extra inputs the Rega DAC provides then I would wholeheartedly recommend the O-DAC, which is available in the EU through HeadnFi as posted earlier. I like the "XL" version. The Musical Fidelity V90 is also a commendable budget option, it is audibly transparent (moreso than the Rega DAC-R) and has a good number of inputs.

 

[audipheonix]

Modi 2 Uber can be a alternative, dont known how it compares with dacmagic 100. It has all the connections. Some one who has tested both can confirm how it sounds.

 

[thewinelake.]

Hard to say what the budget is, actually. I think "around £100" as I'm of the school of thought that thinks you generally get something OK at that level, and then you're on a law of diminishing returns (and any excess money would better be spent on other elements of the chain or on the music itself!).

I've seen DacMagic 100's go for sub £100 on eBay, so that's doable, but the Arcam kit is a bit toppy.

Not sure if you've seen my other thread, but I've decided to go with a Raumfeld streamer for now. Suspect the DAC element not as good as DACMagic, but that could be added later.

Also, I would be streaming from DSD or lossless rips of CD's for listening to stuff I care about. Then for just browsing new stuff, Spotify premium or Tidal would be OK.

Modi would have been another viable option - suspect (for no particular reason!) it's about as good as DACMagic (and cheaper), although being able to compare the two would be tricky. I could borrow a DACMagic easy enough from my friends at Richer Sounds, but doubt Modi is so accessible over here.

 

[robertzombie]

Schiit has an EU distributor now so their kit is easily available.

 

[thewinelake.]

That's good, but until they're in the shops, it makes evaluation a bit troublesome. I just don't like getting brand new sealed packages to try out when I know there's a greater than 50% chance that I'll be returning. Compare that to borrowing some demo kit where one feels that it's no skin off anyone's nose to try it out.

 

[davedotco]

That's good, but until they're in the shops, it makes evaluation a bit troublesome. I just don't like getting brand new sealed packages to try out when I know there's a greater than 50% chance that I'll be returning. Compare that to borrowing some demo kit where one feels that it's no skin off anyone's nose to try it out.

As far as I am aware the Connector 2 does not handle DSD files, though it is fine with regular hi-res 24/96 and 24/192 should you feel the need.

I do not know whether the digital output is variable or not. To my mind the functionality of the Connector 2 is a big part of it's appeal, but then I use it straight into active speakers so a fixed output would be a real pain in the rse.

The Teufel business model is built around direct sales and home trial, they are happy with this

 

[ifor]

... Raspberry Pis running on RuneAudio. The first is coupled with a HiFiBerry Digi which feeds an Arcam rDAC. The second is coupled with IQaudIO's Pi-DAC+ and Pi-AMP+ connected to B&W ceiling speakers in the kitchen. The latter is excellent for a kitchen system, but for ultimate sound quality the HiFiBerry Digi c/w the DAC and amp of your choice is the way to go.

i have used MPoD and MPaD on the iPhone and iPhone respectively, but in the main I just use the Rune web UI saved to the homescreen of iPhone or iPad.

Bryston's latest streamer contains a R Pi + HiFiBerry Digi+.

 

[thewinelake.]

I didn't realise that DSD was much different from "regular" 24/192.

One review I read did say that the Connector 2 struggled with pulling 24/192 from a server - even over a wired LAN. We shall see....

 

[davedotco]

I didn't realise that DSD was much different from "regular" 24/192.

One review I read did say that the Connector 2 struggled with pulling 24/192 from a server - even over a wired LAN. We shall see....

DSD is completely different to 'normal' PCM, it requires a special dac.

Streaming 24/192 from a regular NAS will require your network to be fully optimised, the Connector 2 has been tested on 24/192 so it will work if you get everything right.

That said, we are talking about a budget component here, it's nearest competitor, the Sonos Connect, is virtually twice the price and does not handle data streams higher than CD standard.

I have no idea why you feel the need for such resolution, but if it is what you want, you should be setting your sights somewhat higher than the Connector 2.

 

[thewinelake.]

Er, I'm not really setting my sights anywhere much - someone else made the point that the connector couldn't do DSD. I'm just curious about the difference.

I doubt that much of the music I would listen to is even available in DSD or High Res. Reckon CD quality just fine.

However, I would be interested to see if I can hear the difference.

 

[davedotco]

Er, I'm not really setting my sights anywhere much - someone else made the point that the connector couldn't do DSD. I'm just curious about the difference.

I doubt that much of the music I would listen to is even available in DSD or High Res. Reckon CD quality just fine.

However, I would be interested to see if I can hear the difference.

is a 'different' standard for recording digital audio that is not some sort of flavour of pcm, it is actually the recording technique used to record proper SACD disks and is now available as downloads.

There are so many versions of popular recordings available that it is actually quite hard to compare different formats, very often a CD and a digital download may be made from masters that differ in production, a difference that is far more audible than the change in format or even resolution.

There are apps that allow you to take your favourite hi-res download and convert it to CD standard and compare the two, ie hi-res vs CD from exactly the same source. That is the ultimate comparison.

 

[thewinelake.]

Thanks for that!

Have you done it yourself? Any opinions?

 

[thewinelake.]

I understand that Abrahamsen are sold out of their DACs but have a new range coming out later this year. Should be worth paying attention to.

 

[chebby]

I understand that Abrahamsen are sold out of their DACs ...

Can't they just make more?

 

[davedotco]

Thanks for that!

Have you done it yourself? Any opinions?

But not tried it myself. At the time the software (Foobar?) being used was PC only and I use Apple. It was demonstrated to me by a friend in a hi-fi store in west London.

The comparison I heard was a hi-res 24/96 jazz recording from Linn Records. The software was used to 'downsample' this file to CD standard then compare the two files in a level matched ABX test.

In this case I could hear no difference whatsoever so my choices were pure guesswork. This was on a decent mid priced (£3-4k) setup and also HD650 headphones. None of my usual 'tricks' for identifying reduced bit rate files worked, ambience decay was identical and I had no problem following background instruments when the track became busy.

All in all I was convinced there was no meaninful difference, if in fact any at all. You know what they say about a demonstration being worth more than a thousand words. If you are reasonably compedent on a computer, I urge you to Google for the correct procedure and give it a go.

One final point, the SQ of the Linn recording was first rate, better than virtually all 'commercial' CD releases, it is easy to see why someone might be taken in by this. The important thing to realise is that the quality comes from Linns diligence in production, not the fact that it is 'hi-res'.

 

[robertzombie]

^^ Agreed.

BTW RuneAudio can render DSD to a compatible DAC.

 

[Al ears]

Thanks for that!

Have you done it yourself? Any opinions?

But not tried it myself. At the time the software (Foobar?) being used was PC only and I use Apple. It was demonstrated to me by a friend in a hi-fi store in west London.

The comparison I heard was a hi-res 24/96 jazz recording from Linn Records. The software was used to 'downsample' this file to CD standard then compare the two files in a level matched ABX test.

In this case I could hear no difference whatsoever so my choices were pure guesswork. This was on a decent mid priced (£3-4k) setup and also HD650 headphones. None of my usual 'tricks' for identifying reduced bit rate files worked, ambience decay was identical and I had no problem following background instruments when the track became busy.

All in all I was convinced there was no meaninful difference, if in fact any at all. You know what they say about a demonstration being worth more than a thousand words. If you are reasonably compedent on a computer, I urge you to Google for the correct procedure and give it a go.

One final point, the SQ of the Linn recording was first rate, better than virtually all 'commercial' CD releases, it is easy to see why someone might be taken in by this. The important thing to realise is that the quality comes from Linns diligence in production, not the fact that it is 'hi-res'.

Agreed. Never had a bad recording from Linn.

I could never fathom out why anyone would want to add more software interpolation in actually downsampling a high res file to compare it with anything. Chalk and cheese surely? If you are happy listening to recordings at CD quality then why shell out for a DAC that supports DSD. You might buy one of these if you acknowledge thst there is an aural difference between these and a 'normal' CDP.

 

[thewinelake.]

I presume it's just a case of academic interest - it would be for me...

i.e. if one wants to hear the difference that it makes - which may influence your future purchasing plans, etc.

 

[davedotco]

The test I described is in order to answer a simple question.

Does a hi-res master sound better than the same master at CD standard?

Using the method described earlier, the only difference is the resolution, so it gives an oportunity for real comparisons to be made.

The really sad thing that I have found is that the extra resolution has no discernable effect on sound quality, those superbly mastered Linn hi-res recordings sound just as good at CD standard (downsampled from 24/96) as they do at 24/96. That means to me is that all CD standard recordings could be this good, if the music business could be bothered, but sadly they can't.

 

[Al ears]

The test I described is in order to answer a simple question.

Does a hi-res master sound better than the same master at CD standard?

Using the method described earlier, the only difference is the resolution, so it gives an oportunity for real comparisons to be made.

The really sad thing that I have found is that the extra resolution has no discernable effect on sound quality, those superbly mastered Linn hi-res recordings sound just as good at CD standard (downsampled from 24/96) as they do at 24/96. That means to me is that all CD standard recordings could be this good, if the music business could be bothered, but sadly they can't.

This is true. The CD format could be very good indeed, as well as Linn there are some very reputable labels but these tend to concentrate on specific genres and are maybe not for everyone. I have had some pretty dire recordings on CD in the past which has pushed me to seek the album in different formats normally SACD or digital downloads.

In theory recordings at CD quality should be all you ever need but quite often this is not the case.

 

[BigH]

I agree with Dave the format does not make the difference however sometimes you have to buy the high res to get a better re/mastering, however sometimes this mastering becomes available on the subsequent cd releases for example Bob Dylan post 2010. The high res is not always a better remastering there have been complaints about some even by specialist labels in the USA. Comparing different versions is difficult, even the same recording can vary so much depending on where the cd was pressed, seems everyone is different. Japanese ones are often the best. If you want to buy a cd best to research the different versions, generally the ones in the last 15 years or so have less dynamic range. Linn good record label but very limited choice, think I only own one, Hats - Blue Nile.

 

[Andrewjvt]

The test I described is in order to answer a simple question.

Does a hi-res master sound better than the same master at CD standard?

Using the method described earlier, the only difference is the resolution, so it gives an oportunity for real comparisons to be made.

The really sad thing that I have found is that the extra resolution has no discernable effect on sound quality, those superbly mastered Linn hi-res recordings sound just as good at CD standard (downsampled from 24/96) as they do at 24/96. That means to me is that all CD standard recordings could be this good, if the music business could be bothered, but sadly they can't.

This is true. The CD format could be very good indeed, as well as Linn there are some very reputable labels but these tend to concentrate on specific genres and are maybe not for everyone. I have had some pretty dire recordings on CD in the past which has pushed me to seek the album in different formats normally SACD or digital downloads.

In theory recordings at CD quality should be all you ever need but quite often this is not the case.

I totaly agree with what you and dave has just said but then is it not good to have a dac that can do dsd then?

Seems the quality could be better
Not that a good recording on cd can also sound just as good.

 

[Al ears]

The test I described is in order to answer a simple question.

Does a hi-res master sound better than the same master at CD standard?

Using the method described earlier, the only difference is the resolution, so it gives an oportunity for real comparisons to be made.

The really sad thing that I have found is that the extra resolution has no discernable effect on sound quality, those superbly mastered Linn hi-res recordings sound just as good at CD standard (downsampled from 24/96) as they do at 24/96. That means to me is that all CD standard recordings could be this good, if the music business could be bothered, but sadly they can't.

This is true. The CD format could be very good indeed, as well as Linn there are some very reputable labels but these tend to concentrate on specific genres and are maybe not for everyone. I have had some pretty dire recordings on CD in the past which has pushed me to seek the album in different formats normally SACD or digital downloads.

In theory recordings at CD quality should be all you ever need but quite often this is not the case.

I totaly agree with what you and dave has just said but then is it not good to have a dac that can do dsd then?

Seems the quality could be better Not that a good recording on cd can also sound just as good.

My opinion is you'd get a DSD capable DAC if you ever think you are going to get any files in this format which, according to as Ken Ishwata is 'analogue' or like the idea of 1 bit formats.

CD s are not 'pressed' as such and I don't believe it makes any difference where they are made simply the actual re / master they use in the production varies throughout the world.

For me, seeing the way things are going, buying a DAC that isn't DSD capable could be a mistake.

 

[davedotco]

DSD is the recording format used to record SACDs so it is not new. For DSD downloads to be be viable, the recording needs to be made using DSD, which for commercial recordings is very rare.

You cannot remaster pcm recordings to DSD so there is little prospect of back catalogue material though there may be some scope if top quality analogue masters are available.

Personally I find the reluctance of the music industry to produce the best quality CD possible to be quite damming, the idea of course is to charge the enthusiast extra to get the quality he should have received as standard with the CD release.

 

[Al ears]

DSD is the recording format used to record SACDs so it is not new. For DSD downloads to be be viable, the recording needs to be made using DSD, which for commercial recordings is very rare.

You cannot remaster pcm recordings to DSD so there is little prospect of back catalogue material though there may be some scope if top quality analogue masters are available.

Personally I find the reluctance of the music industry to produce the best quality CD possible to be quite damming, the idea of course is to charge the enthusiast extra to get the quality he should have received as standard with the CD release.

I concur and they are, in some cases, doing just that it would appear. Deliberately keeping CD quality low so you may be tempted to buy it age in a different format. Shocking...

I do buy DSD recordings that actually are and DSD from analogue master tapes, but as you say these are limited.