Integrated with DAC on board... why the hate?

[insider9]

As per subject

Why is having a phono stage considered an important feature of integrated amps but having a built in DAC so frowned upon?

 

[stereoman]

I have nothing against.

 

[MajorFubar]

Not sure i've witnessed the hate, but most people already have a D->A solution, either built into their preferred player or via their preferred external DAC, so they might be of the opinion the DAC in an amp is superfluous. When most people buy a turntable it doesn't come with a phono stage, so having at least a half decent phono stage built into their amp gives them a convenient one-box solution.

 

[DocG]

As per subject

Why is having a phono stage considered an important feature of integrated amps but having a built in DAC so frowned upon?

Yes, same thought here.

My ideal set-up would consist of a streamer-dac-pre-power and a pair of speakers or a streamer-dac-pre and active speakers. And if I would separate something out, it would be the streamer, cos that’s where the quickest changes come up. From the DAC downstream, there’s no revolutions to be expected IMO.

 

[insider9]

But I've seen many threads were inbuilt dacs are dismissed but it hardly ever happens with phono stages were they are usually raved about. Strange if you consider probably more people use DAC than turntables.

I fully admit I have been on the bandwagon of all separate but looking at it from technical point of view isn't having DAC built in a better solution?

 

[chebby]

Some people can make themselves angry about other people using integrated amplifiers instead of separate pre/power amps. Some people get angry that the split pre/power guys aren’t also using separate PSUs with their pre-amps. “Are they totally deaf or what?”

Separate CD transports and DACs and clocks (and another PSU or three).

I counted 18 boxes in one Naim system (pictured on another forum) and that was considered to be “not trying hard enough” by the chap who’d bought his own dedicated mains mast/transformer!

 

[chebby]

Snobbery.

#### ‘em.

 

[gasolin]

you can't upgrade, get better sound from a built in dac, you can do that with a phono stage if you buy a better cartridge

Nothing in a cdplayer or pc will improve sound from a dac as much as it will buying a better cartridge without changing phono stage

 

[hybridauth_Facebook_100004211376004]

Not if you fancy trying a low level output cartridge ....you most definitely will need to be purchasing another phono stage.

 

[insider9]

I don't subscribe to this. It's saying that digital is digital and any digital source will sound the same. Often it's not the case. Digital can and often does go wrong.

So with that in mind yes you could upgrade the source although difference would not be as pronounces as a different cart.

And like Mark already mentioned what if you have a MM stage and want to get a MC cart. No different to DAC upgrade analogy.

 

[MajorFubar]

I fully admit I have been on the bandwagon of all separate but looking at it from technical point of view isn't having DAC built in a better solution?

Having a built-in DAC is restrictive from the perspective of compulsive box swappers, because it hogties their ability to tweak anything between the source and the amp. Digital enthusiasts have less opportunities to satisfy their upgraditis / box swapping needs, in comparison to turntable enthusiasts who have a thousand and one things to tinker with even if you discount the obvious one of upgrading the cartridge.

 

[insider9]

I am a notorious box swapper but that point was from technical point of view. Would having a DAC built in be a better solution? DAC straight to preamp stage or in some case power. No noise introduced, no analogue cables to worry about. Better power supply than in many stand alone units.

The question of features such as sampling rates and DSD is similar to MM/MC debate, so putting that aside.

 

[MajorFubar]

I am a notorious box swapper but that point was from technical point of view. Would having a DAC built in be a better solution? DAC straight to preamp stage or in some case power. No noise introduced, no analogue cables to worry about. Better power supply than in many stand alone units.

The kind of people like Chebby mentioned would think otherwise, because it restricts their ability to **** about with external power supplies and try a million different interconnects between the DAC and amp. Maybe also there is a perception that in-amp DACs are a bit cheap and substandard. Most turntable purchasers probably have a viewpoint that an amp's standard phono stage is usually at least good enough to withstand a few turntable and cartridge upgrades before becoming the weakest link.

 

[insider9]

It's one of those things that go unchallenged. Buy an integrated with phono stage not one person will say you should really upgrade that. Usual comment is "xxx make decent phono stages".

Same thing happens with built in DAC and a first suggestion is to upgrade a DAC. Hell, people purposely trying to look for units without DAC as if these products were somehow worse. The expectation is it's going to be awful. I hold my hands up that's no different to what I've been subscribed to.

Now, interesting part is that sonic differences from DAC to DAC are usually smaller than from one phono stage to another.

 

[MajorFubar]

To be fair, I've obviously missed all these posts where people slag-off a built-in DAC in preference to an external one, so all my guesses are supposition, but I do agree that changing the DAC is often not the most cost-effective improvement you can make unless everything else in your hifi is beyond reproach for the price.

 

[Electro]

Would it not make sense for the manufacturer to offer a Dac in the box option when buying the amp, that way everbody would be satisfied. *smile*

Why pay extra for something you don't want .

 

[drummerman]

Would it not make sense for the manufacturer to offer a Dac in the box option when buying the amp, that way everbody would be satisfied. *smile*

Why pay extra for something you don't want .

Some do, Creek being one. I find the option available for the 50 and 100 appealing but it will cost and maybe put the amplifier itself out of competition?

The only problem with built in stuff is that if another format comes out you may be stumped (MQA on example). To some that won't matter.

 

[insider9]

Primare did this. Not sure if they still do. Most I22 I've seen second hand didn't have DAC boards in them.

 

[Al ears]

Not if you fancy trying a low level output cartridge ....you most definitely will need to be purchasing another phono stage.

If you are going down that route you are not too worried about the odd pound or two......

 

[Al ears]

Snobbery.

#### ‘em.

Yep! ;-)

 

[Al ears]

But I've seen many threads were inbuilt dacs are dismissed but it hardly ever happens with phono stages were they are usually raved about. Strange if you consider probably more people use DAC than turntables.

I fully admit I have been on the bandwagon of all separate but looking at it from technical point of view isn't having DAC built in a better solution?

In my opinion no. It is a hindrance to upgrading. The phono stages fitted to some amps are deemed perfectly adequate for most turntable users, as are the DACs, however many other pieces of equipment also have integrated dacs. You don't need two and these items of equipment are evolving rapidly so having an external one you can sell on is always a benefit financially.

I use an Oppo 105eu, why would I want an amp with cheap sac built-in?

Personally I wouldn't touch an amp with inbuilt dac, I don't hate them they are just unnecessary for my system, but I can see some benefits for those that simply must minimize box numbers.

 

[insider9]

In my opinion no. It is a hindrance to upgrading. The phono stages fitted to some amps are deemed perfectly adequate for most turntable users, as are the DACs, however many other pieces of equipment also have integrated dacs. You don't need two and these items of equipment are evolving rapidly so having an external one you can sell on is always a benefit financially.

I use an Oppo 105eu, why would I want an amp with cheap sac built-in?

Personally I wouldn't touch an amp with inbuilt dac, I don't hate them they are just unnecessary for my system, but I can see some benefits for those that simply must minimize box numbers.

They may indeed be evolving but is it for the better? Surely at this rate over the last 30 years we'd reach an amazing peak in performance. Yet old Philips CD players still sound amazing today compared to modern DACs.

Doubling up is a point well made. But would you really restrict your choice of an amp because of the inbuilt DAC?

 

[insider9]

Why pay extra for something you don't want .

 

Sure, quite agreed on that point. But that equally applies to phono stages (which I don't want to either own or pay for).

 

[MajorFubar]

Sure, quite agreed on that point. But that equally applies to phono stages (which I don't want to either own or pay for).

...and for about two decades it was common for amps to not come with them either. But most people's digital sources already have a DAC so you're unnecessarily doubling up, whereas most turntables don't come with a phono preamp.

 

[davedotco]

I can recall a couple of occasions where an owner wrote off the amps onboard dac, prefering an external one.

In both cases, in an A/B comparison, the external dac was prefered, usual reasons, better resolution, focus etc, etc.

In both cases, replicating the test showed their to be a significant difference in level between the onboard and external dac, the internal being noticeably quieter, which of course makes it sound less 'good'.

I have also observed similar results using Apple's AEX, many suggesting that the dac is not very good, despite a perfectly decent chipset being used. The fact that the AEX outputs 1 volt whereas most dacs output twice that is rarely mentioned. When differences are very small, as they are between compedent dacs, level is everything.