Is digital more faff than analogue?

[Craig M.]

So it's OK for the designer of your equipment to add complication to your system where no problem needed to have existed?

But it's not OK for enthusiasts to add complication to their systems where a problem may or may not have existed?

For example upgrading the power supply of a DAC, may or may not be worthwhile depending on the analogue section of the DAC and the existing power supply.

You are critising people for making their systems more complicated when you have a system that is already over-complicated to begin with.

The expression about greenhouses and throwing stones comes to mind.

There are many valid reasons why an active crossover is a better choice than a passive one, but that is irrelevant in a thread about digital audio. I know you don’t agree but I couldn’t care less.

Adding extraneous fluff to an already competent dac is not in the same ballpark. So I’ll stick with my previous response to you.

 

[chebby]

Adding extraneous fluff to an already competent dac is not in the same ballpark.

I don’t like the image of an extra ‘aneous’ let alone it’s fluff!

 

[Electro]

Why does nobody mention the type or quality of the analog output stage of any digital player, dac or streamer ?

It probably has far more influence on the sound quality than any type of digital converter or chip used and is often overlooked and neglected in favor of the latest wizz bang chip set.

I have put on my crash helmet in anticipation of the $hit storm with bricks added this opinion may cause . *shok* *biggrin*

Edit.

The day I sold my turntable and all the power supplies and phono stages, cartriges, was a real liberation for me, no more faffing about to try and make it sound as good as digital .

I think because many are using digital out to another dac

Quite possibly, but the other dac must have an analog output stage that is critical if the dac is to sound any good.

My point was that the most important part of any type of digital player or dac is the analog output stage , this is rarely mentioned but has a huge effect on the sound quality of the digital player or dac.

 

[andyjm]

My point was that the most important part of any type of digital player or dac is the analog output stage , this is rarely mentioned but has a huge effect on the sound quality of the digital player or dac.

Its not so much the analog output stage itself (which a first year engineering student could design) as the design and topology of the analog reconstruction filter(s) between the D2A chip and the output stage. These are absolutely critical, and work hand in hand with the design choices made for the D2A process itself (delta sigma, oversampled, noise shaping etc etc).

I there was anything that could make DACs sound different, it is the design of these filters and their interplay with the D2A design. The rest of the analog stages are just basic line drivers.

 

[MajorFubar]

My point was that the most important part of any type of digital player or dac is the analog output stage , this is rarely mentioned but has a huge effect on the sound quality of the digital player or dac.

Most people on here neither know nor care about what's in the box at that kind of granular level, the 'DAC' to them is everything in the box which converts the bits and bytes into amplifiable audio, output stage included. They rarely mean the actual chip, unless folks are specifically discussing the merits of a particular DAC chip such as the classic TDA1541 or a modern Sabre ES9018.

 

[muljao]

My point was that the most important part of any type of digital player or dac is the analog output stage , this is rarely mentioned but has a huge effect on the sound quality of the digital player or dac.

Most people on here neither know nor care about what's in the box at that kind of granular level, the 'DAC' to them is everything in the box which converts the bits and bytes into amplifiable audio, output stage included. They rarely mean the actual chip, unless folks are specifically discussing the merits of a particular DAC chip such as the classic TDA1541 or a modern Sabre ES9018.

I think this is very true

I'd also say that it was mentioned earlier how complicated the inners of a certain setup was but it was contained in a nice box- this probably matters to very few either. If I buy a good component and it sounds good, does its job good, I couldn't care less if it has 97 op amps and fairy dust inside. It gets difficult and complex if you need to add bits and pieces, but that complex process is often what enthusiast hifi people enjoy

 

[MajorFubar]

I think this is very true

I'd also say that it was mentioned earlier how complicated the inners of a certain setup was but it was contained in a nice box- this probably matters to very few either. If I buy a good component and it sounds good, does its job good, I couldn't care less if it has 97 op amps and fairy dust inside. It gets difficult and complex if you need to add bits and pieces, but that complex process is often what enthusiast hifi people enjoy

That and the fact that it's not as though you can buy the two things separately, although esoteric DACs often have adjustable this-n-thats, such as different filters, to keep the tweaking brigade happy.

 

[MajorFubar]

Back on topic of digital faff vs vinyl, one limitation with records is you can faff all you want to but you can't defeat it's physical limitations.

For example have you ever noticed that when someone's demostrating how wonderful their turntable sounds, they never choose the last song of an LP? Or if they do, it's maybe of something really simple like a jazz quartet? That's because the SQ of 33rpm records sucks at the end, especially with loud or complex material.

This can be minimized by using the highest quality microline stylii and ensuring your geometry is spot on to within God knows what nth of a degree. But you can't ever defeat the fact that less plastic passes under the groove for each revolution: in other words, the linear velocity plumets. By the time the stylus is about 5" from the centre of a 12" record, about half as much plastic is passing under it for each revolution than at the outer edge (I'm sure someone will do the maths), so the audio information is being compressed into half the space, a bit like a 16rpm record at its outer edge.

The SQ can suffer terribly from this point on, proportional of course to the loudness of the cut and the complexity of the music/waveforms. Seems like every other complaint from new-to-vinyl enthusiasts is about this issue, the so-called 'inner groove distortion', and truth is no amount of perfect geometry or the best cartridges in the world can completely overcome this, unfortunately. That's why some re-issues of classic single LPs (e.g. Brother In Arms) are issued as 45rpm double albums.

 

[insider9]

Looking at recent posts about streamers, dac and the likes I'm seriously not that sure what to think anymore. It was perhaps cheeky to suggest digital is more faff than analogue but is it?

Ok, you can buy an all in one and not touch it e.g. Linn. But you could have a dealer setup a turntable for you too and you wouldn't touch it till cart change.

But will your streamer be easy to upgrade via external DAC should you wish and would it play a different format? Similar to vinyl say its all setup for LP stereo playback and you want to play a mono single...

Yes, there is no physical wear with digital. But you need to backup your library to prevent data loss. Then you have things that although not directly connected to hifi that often impact on your experience. WiFi, storage, software, updates.

Now, your mate comes over with music on his phone and you have a problem. No, I don't do Bluetooth. DLNA? Can't do it here cause WiFi is dropping out. Can't plug a phone into DAC don't have a cable. Maybe we could download the file onto laptop? Good idea but wait Windows is restarting as it just decides to update itself. Finally let's play it... Oh wait but it's MQA/DSD or 24/192 my player/DAC won't play it, may need to download a codec. Oh FFS just play it it's on Spotify... Sorry only got Tidal..... *shok*

With vinyl you had a record you put it on the platter and that was it. This simplicity is probably why the standard keeps going.

So is digital more faff than analogue?

 

[Electro]

Looking at recent posts about streamers, dac and the likes I'm seriously not that sure what to think anymore. It was perhaps cheeky to suggest digital is more faff than analogue but is it?

Ok, you can buy an all in one and not touch it e.g. Linn. But you could have a dealer setup a turntable for you too and you wouldn't touch it till cart change.

But will your streamer be easy to upgrade via external DAC should you wish and would it play a different format? Similar to vinyl say its all setup for LP stereo playback and you want to play a mono single...

Yes, there is no physical wear with digital. But you need to backup your library to prevent data loss. Then you have things that although not directly connected to hifi that often impact on your experience. WiFi, storage, software, updates.

Now, your mate comes over with music on his phone and you have a problem. No, I don't do Bluetooth. DLNA? Can't do it here cause WiFi is dropping out. Can't plug a phone into DAC don't have a cable. Maybe we could download the file onto laptop? Good idea but wait Windows is restarting as it just decides to update itself. Finally let's play it... Oh wait but it's MQA/DSD or 24/192 my player/DAC won't play it, may need to download a codec. Oh FFS just play it it's on Spotify... Sorry only got Tidal..... *shok*

With vinyl you had a record you put it on the platter and that was it. This simplicity is probably why the standard keeps going.

So is digital more faff than analogue?

Nah just put a Cd on the platter, place the spider clamp on top of the disc, close the cover, press play and enjoy *i-m_so_happy* .

What could be more simple than that ? *music2*

 

[insider9]

What could be more simple than that ? *music2*

 

Alexa... play my audiophile playlist

 

[bigfish786]

The only place I listen to digital is in the car via the usb stick (Ford Sync), which involves ripping CDs, copying onto usb stick. That’s it.

Home is for physical formats.

I don’t find either digital or analogue a pain.

 

[MajorFubar]

The only place I listen to digital is in the car via the usb stick (Ford Sync), which involves ripping CDs, copying onto usb stick. That’s it.

Home is for physical formats.

I don’t find either digital or analogue a pain.

CD is still digital. I don't think he just meant streaming or downloading.

 

[insider9]

The only place I listen to digital is in the car via the usb stick (Ford Sync), which involves ripping CDs, copying onto usb stick. That’s it. 

Home is for physical formats. 

I don’t find either digital or analogue a pain. 

CD is still digital. I don't think he just meant streaming or downloading.

CD players have been moded for a long time too. People upgrading power supplies, putting tube outputs, doing all kinds of things that make a difference. Just as much as they did with turntables.

 

[ellisdj]

who was it who said no pain no gain?
They were definitely referring to digital audio quality when they made it up

 

[Gray]

I've only done what's necessary to get a Rpi3 working as a streamer.

After going round in circles, trying to reflash a new OS on an SD card with no luck, someone on a forum recommended a program - which actually worked by the way.

The following is the genuine warning that came up before I downloaded it. I was a bit fed up at the time, but this did amuse me:

'This program is Beta, and has no warranty. It may eat your files,
call you names, or explode in a massive shower of code. The authors take
no responsibility for these possible events'.

 

[insider9]

If it may eat your files,
call you names, or explode in a massive shower of code.

It's not Beta, it's Badass *lol*

 

[MajorFubar]

who was it who said no pain no gain? They were definitely referring to digital audio quality when they made it up

There was also one about the fool and his money being easily parted *biggrin*. But maybe don't take that too personally, because athough I think a lot of your tweaks are wacky and way out there, I do fundamentally respect the effort you commit to the hobby.

 

[Blacksabbath25]

Cassettes used to be a pain when you tried to record stuff and a specially recording from the radio as I used to record the Friday Rock show on a Friday night and try and catch the music with out the DJ interrupting the song I was trying to record and sometimes he used to talk before the track finished . .

You had to keep an eye on the tape or tapes to stop or press play or turn the tape because I had a twin deck so sometimes you had 2 cassette going .

Anyway it didn’t bother me I enjoyed it and it doesn’t bother me putting a cd on or any kind of hifi messing around that’s the hobby

 

[Blacksabbath25]

who was it who said no pain no gain? They were definitely referring to digital audio quality when they made it up

There was also one about the fool and his money being easily parted *biggrin*. But maybe don't take that too personally, because athough I think a lot of your tweaks are wacky and way out there, I do fundamentally respect the effort you commit to the hobby.

Ellisdj might be a little wacky but he must be doing something right because his setup sounds pretty good for someone being a little wacky I reckon .

thats just wanting perfection which is a good thing to want I think to get what you paid for to sound the best it can possibly sound

 

[ellisdj]

hobby or obsession or just the inability to accept mediocre or just the interest and desire to know just how good something can actually sound. bit of all of it for me.

I am the most sane one here I have the best power cables in my system .....

 

[rainsoothe]

Obviously, it's all the faff you want it to be, whatever the format.

Fwiw, "on bits are just bits", I recently auditioned an NDX and a MSB into Naim Nac202 + Nap200. The difference (reflected in price) was not inconsiderable. Won't go into great detail, bigger this, smoother that, but one was enjoyable and wonderful, the other made me go "wtf, Naim?". I even prefer the 172 to the NDX. Point is not that more expensive is better, just that there are differences.

On digital always sounding better than analogue - better is so very subjective when it comes to this hobby/passion/whatever. And, ime, digital being superior is not always true (though it is, most of the time) - and I have Steven Wilson's latest album to back me up. I have a hi-res do of it and the vynil and, much to my surprise (because, as majorfubar said, complex music, like prog, has a hard time sounding good on vynil, especially on the inner grooves), the vynil version sounds much better. And this is on an analogue front end that's cheaper than my digital one. And yes, it's a single album, which they released on 2 45rpm discs. Big difference from 33 ones.

Last but not least, the clarity of the digital has nothing to do with what happens when you go to a concert. Neither does separation for that matter. I don't mean this as in "all stuff together, muddled, is what live music sounds like", but clarity isn't what music reproduction is ALL about. Just been to Steven Wilson's concert at Royal Albert Hall (which I absolutely loved, btw) and even if the sound was great, there was no 3D soundstage (apart from the effects on the surround halo above the auditorium), just huge wall of sound and emotions. So the clarity of digital is not what makes it superior, imo - and nothing is. As I said in the beginning, superior or better is all subjective in the domain, and has little to do with measurements.

Sorry for going off-topic.

 

[lindsayt]

There are many valid reasons why an active crossover is a better choice than a passive one, but that is irrelevant in a thread about digital audio. I know you don’t agree but I couldn’t care less.

Adding extraneous fluff to an already competent dac is not in the same ballpark. So I’ll stick with my previous response to you.

That is where you and I differ fundamentally.

A 4th order op amp based analogue active crossover is the very defintion of "extraneous fluff" as it adds 50 active amplification devices to the signal path. If you're going to go active, why not use different drivers, a first order crossover, discrete transistors instead of op amps?

For reference, some systems get by with 4 active amplification devices in the entire signal path between the source and the speaker drivers.

Changing the power supply for a DAC adds 0 components to the signal path.

I have heard the same phono stage powered by different power supplies. As the supplies were beefed up and then converted to dual mono, the sound quality of the phono stage improved incremetally. If that applies to phono stages I'm happy to accept it can apply to the analogue section of a DAC.

Improving the sound quality of a system is not extraneous fluff.

 

[lindsayt]

"Adding to an already competent dac is not in the same ballpark."

Something else to ponder, Craig M.

Would you consider the Behringer DEQ2496 to be an "already competent DAC" and that anyone modding it is merely adding "extraneous fluff"?

 

[insider9]

hobby or obsession or just the inability to accept mediocre or just the interest and desire to know just how good something can actually sound. bit of all of it for me.

I am the most sane one here I have the best power cables in my system .....

I agree with the first paragraph.

Second one remains to be seen