External DAC - needed or not...

[scene]

OK, this maybe a dumb question, but if I've got storage for my media - in this case a PC with an optical out - and an AMP with an optical in and some pretty good Wolfson DACs - in this case an ARCAM AVR250 - do I need an external DAC between them? Or, I suppose, how expensive a DAC would I need to buy to make it worthwhile?

 

[idc]

It sound like you have a good DAC in the Arcam. Unless someone on the forum has compared the Arcam with any external DAC, then all you can hope for is a good guess as to a comparison.

Have you tried a comparison of CD and music file yourself? An optical cable is not much to start and get you going. Letting yourself hear the difference and posting back about it will help with further posts.

 

[scene]

Thanks for that IDC - yes, I should just rip a CD onto the PC and play it over an optical cable, then compare it to the same CD played from my DV88 / DV79 (boy - do I sound like an Arcam fan or what?)

I will try to do this and post back the results...

 

[pete321]

I use a PC with SPDIF out to a Cambridge Audio DacMagic. Initially this was linked via analogue interconnects to an Arcam AVR600, the DacMagic produced a similar detailed and open result to the DAC in the AVR600 if I connected digitally direct to the AVR600. I would say that the DacMagic just edged it. However, when I had opamps and capacitors upgraded in the DacMagic, it produced a far superior result than the AVR600.

In view of this, I would suspect you would notice a significant improvement in using a DacMagic over the internal decoding of the AVR250. In addition, when funds allow you can further upgrade the internal components of the DacMagic to get even better results.

The advice I was given indicated that the opamps in the decoding change will change the sound quality to a greater degree than the actual DAC itself.

 

[scene]

pete321:
I use a PC with SPDIF out to a Cambridge Audio DacMagic. Initially this was linked via analogue interconnects to an Arcam AVR600, the DacMagic produced a similar detailed and open result to the DAC in the AVR600 if I connected digitally direct to the AVR600. I would say that the DacMagic just edged it. However, when I had opamps and capacitors upgraded in the DacMagic, it produced a far superior result than the AVR600.

Thanks - that's really useful to know.

In view of this, I would suspect you would notice a significant improvement in using a DacMagic over the internal decoding of the AVR250. In addition, when funds allow you can further upgrade the internal components of the DacMagic to get even better results.

I was toying with the idea of the Beresford Caiman. Now I'll have to look add the DacMagic to my wish list and look at it...

Excuse me for asking, SPDIF = optical or coax?

 

[Anonymous]

Pete321

I just posted the text below on another thread and then found your response on this one. Looks like you know your DACs and I probably know the answer after reading your post but your view would be much appreciated. What I didn't mention is that most of my music is 320kbps in mp3 format and send digitally to the Nakamichi AV10 and then onto a new set of B&W 803s.

Hello Gents I am completely new and this is my first post and in fact the first thread I have read.

You all seem to know what you are talking about so could anybody give me a steer on DACs.

I have a NAS set up (via router) to my home PC and have installed an alledgedly audiophile grade soundcard, the ASUS Xonar D2X

http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=ZBWhAEnH6nDOB00E&templete=2

The home network is a next step but my immediate aim is to get good sound from my existing system.

The
soundcard has greatly improved the sound quality but I was wondering if
I inserted a Cambridge Audio DAC magic (or others) inbetween the PC and
my old school Nakamichi AV10 I would get a noticable improvement in
sound.

I have pasted the specification below but its all greek to me...........

ASUS Spec:

Audio Processor:
ASUS AV200 High-Definition Sound Processor (Max. 192KHz/24bit)
24-bit D-A Converter of Digital Sources:
TI Burr-Brown PCM1796 *4 (123dB SNR, Max. 192kHz/24bit)
24-bit A-D Converter for Analog Inputs:
Cirrus-Logic CS5381* 1 (120dB SNR, Max. 192kHz/24bit)

DAC Magic Spec

D/A Convertersual Wolfson WM8740 24bit DACs

Digital filter: Texas Instruments TMS 320VC5501 DSP upsampling to 24bit 192kHz

Analogue filter: 2-Pole Dual Differential Bessel Double Virtual Earth Balanced

 

[idc]

Hi rob. Hopefully you will get an answer, but I posted a soundcard, DAC comparison thread a while back and got no responses. The same is the case on other forums I have read. There are no on;ine reviews or group test that I can find either. I know that my Fubar DAC is vastly better than the sound cards that came with my Dell and Sony laptops.

It seems to me that soundcards work for gamers and occasional PC and headphone music listeners, since a soundcard does more than just D to A conversion. A dedicated DAC, which removes the D to A process out of the noisy environment in a PC is the 'audiophile' way to go.

 

[pete321]

scene:I was toying with the idea of the Beresford Caiman. Now I'll have to look add the DacMagic to my wish list and look at it...

Excuse me for asking, SPDIF = optical or coax?

I can only speak for the DacMagic, but I think either that or the Beresford would are good DAC's for the money. It was the DacMagic for me as I wanted to mount it vertically and it was in my mind to have the opamps upgraded to Burson's and I don't think they'll fit in the Beresford. Speak to Brent at AudioUpgrades for the potential to upgrade the Caimen, he's very helpful. I think his view is that people get too hung up on the actual DAC module, when other components such as opamps, capacitors and power supply can often make more of a difference.

Initially I used optical as that was what my onboard soundcard provided, however having bought an Asus soundcard which had a coax SPDIF, I switched to that as I've always believed there to be less margin for error with this method of digital connection.

 

[Anonymous]

If your external DAC has no USB connection, then a co-ax or optical digital output from your PC will yield good results providing :

1) The audio being produced by your software player can send music directly to the soundcard and bypass the OS mixer

2) The Spdif on the soundcard can vary the output sample rate to match the audio.

1) is essential if you are still using Windows XP as the 16bit Kmixer is very crude by audio standards and should always be bypassed for serious audio uses. Vista and Windows 7 use a much improved 32bit float mixer but it is an unnecessary step and should always be avoided if possible especially if you playing back lossless files. There are only a few players that offer this facility, with Foobar tending to be the most popular with a suitable Kernel streaming (XP) or WASAPI (Vista/W7) output plugin which will bypass the mixer. I personally use Media Player Home Cinema with ReClock in XP, but this is only because I need remote access to my networked HTPC and wrote a web based application to control the software remotely via it's web server port that can generate playlist files (more info can be found here: http://www.hi-fi-insight.com/network-media-player.html). For most people's need Foobar should fit the bill if sound quality is the most important factor.

2) Some soundcards fix their SPDIF output at 16bit/48khz to comply with the AC97 standard. For audio purposes, the user needs the option to change this to match the sample rate of the audio being outputted. In Vista, this is easy to find out by looking at the Digital SPDIF connector in the Control Panel > Sounds and looking at what rates you can manually set it at.

 

[Alec]

I used the Beresford with XP and did not bypass K Mixer. I still got good results. Coul they have been better? Maybe, but they were good.