Should I upgrade my DAC? Looking for advice

[markot]

Hi everyone

I play music from my PC (FLAC files) and I'm pretty happy with the sound, but I think I could get even better sound out of my system by upgrading my DAC since it is by far the cheapest component of my setup.
What do you think? What would you suggest?

My current setup:
Yamaha A-S500 amplifier
Monitor Audio MR2 speakers
Monitor Audio MRW-10 subwoofer
Behringer UCA202 DAC

 

[cheeseboy]

a good quick test if you haven't done it already would be try going from the audio out on your computer (so removing the dac entirely for a moment) and see if the sound gets any better or worse for you.

I'ts not meant as final solution, but should give you an idea about how your system is treating the source and if a more expensive dac will help. (hope that makes sense as to the why)

Another option is to just make sure you purchase something with a good returns policy, or a trial policy, so that way you don't lose out if you can't hear much improvement.

 

[davedotco]

The reason the Dac is cheap is primarily because it is so simple. No power supply, basic casework and pretty much all the functionality is on the Dac chip. The only thing they add is the headphone amp and that is the poorest part of the design.

Your system seems nicely balanced, save the money towards a much better 'digital' amplifier.

 

[Native_bon]

The reason the Dac is cheap is primarily because it is so simple. No power supply, basic casework and pretty much all the functionality is on the Dac chip. The only thing they add is the headphone amp and that is the poorest part of the design.

Your system seems nicely balanced, save the money towards a much better 'digital' amplifier.

Agree

 

[unsleepable]

I play music from my PC (FLAC files) and I'm pretty happy with the sound, but I think I could get even better sound out of my system by upgrading my DAC since it is by far the cheapest component of my setup.
What do you think? What would you suggest?

I think the suggestion of going for a digital amp is a good one—it would also depends on which one.

But if you like the sound signature of your amp, and have no reason to change it, you may still get better sound by upgrading the DAC in your setup. I think that DAC chipsets are often—not always—over-rated. But the output stage, and other aspects such as re-clocking and noise isolation can make a noticeable difference to the sound.

Whether it will make a difference to you also depends on what you look for in sound, and on your computer—less powerful and busier computers are more prone to jitter; and the power supply in the computer also matters. In my opinion, it's at least worth a listen.

 

[David Palmar]

I'd trial a new DAC before replacing your amp. The s500 is an exceptionally good amp for its price. Australian HIFI give it a wonderfully in-depth review including some great measurements. I don't personally think its the weakest link in your chain. Check out the review and measurements below.

Yamaha S500 review

"I believe the word is ‘sleeper’. OK, that sounds a bit cryptic. What I mean is that every so often—and not so often, to tell the truth—comes an audio component that’s so good, yet so understated, that it flies under the radar of those who should know better. Yamaha’s A-S500 integrated amplifier is just one of those components."

Good luck with your quest for audio nirvana!

 

[davedotco]

I play music from my PC (FLAC files) and I'm pretty happy with the sound, but I think I could get even better sound out of my system by upgrading my DAC since it is by far the cheapest component of my setup.What do you think? What would you suggest?

I think the suggestion of going for a digital amp is a good one—it would also depends on which one.

But if you like the sound signature of your amp, and have no reason to change it, you may still get better sound by upgrading the DAC in your setup. I think that DAC chipsets are often—not always—over-rated. But the output stage, and other aspects such as re-clocking and noise isolation can make a noticeable difference to the sound.

Whether it will make a difference to you also depends on what you look for in sound, and on your computer—less powerful and busier computers are more prone to jitter; and the power supply in the computer also matters. In my opinion, it's at least worth a listen.

All quite correct.

Just to add that, despight it's ridiculously low price the Behringer auditions particularly well, I have carried out a few comparisons, as has 'steve' above and it really is very good.

Maybe my i7 Macbook Pro (and whatever steve is using) has a nice quiet, stable ouput, I can't say, but I have used this dac as 'fixit' solutions for a couple of friends and the results have always been first rate.

I feel you would have to move forward quite a long way before the dac becomes the weak link in that setup.

As for a digital amplifier, I was thinking D3020.

 

[markot]

Thanks for all the info.

So basically I wouldn't gain much if anything if I upgraded my DAC? Well that's good to hear since I won't be spending money on a new DAC. And also makes me wonder what's the point of let's say 300€ DACs, specifically TEAC UD-H01 which I've been considering to buy? I mean it costs 10x more than Behringer, so I would think it must produce better sound. If improvement is close to non audible difference, then I will probably save money towards a turntable instead. Really kinda wanna try vinyl too.

 

[davedotco]

Thanks for all the info.

So basically I wouldn't gain much if anything if I upgraded my DAC? Well that's good to hear since I won't be spending money on a new DAC. And also makes me wonder what's the point of let's say 300€ DACs, specifically TEAC UD-H01 which I've been considering to buy? I mean it costs 10x more than Behringer, so I would think it must produce better sound. If improvement is close to non audible difference, then I will probably save money towards a turntable instead. Really kinda wanna try vinyl too.

The UD-H01 is actually a very nice bit of kit, but despite all the BS regarding it's state of the art 32 bit chips and whatever else it has, it will not audition as significantly better than what you have.

Look at the casework, connectors, onboard power supply etc, etc, that is what you are paying for and that costs.

It would be even better if it had level control on its line outputs so it could be used as a dac/pre-amp but it doesn't, it misses the mark.

 

[testpilot4321]

I am now totally converted to flac rips and HD downloads to the point where I sold my CD player and built a dedicated music server. I have tried a fair few combinations of DAC's, cables and even media players before settling on my current set up.

Although I have not auditioned the Behringer DAC you mentioned I do agree that many of the cheaper DAC's still do an admirable job, however I do also believe that it can be worth spending the extra, my first serious DAC upgrade was the HRT Music Streamer II, seriously there was no going back after running that for a week. I then upgraded again to the HRT Music Streamer II+ and although there was not the same level of improvement it was still enough for me to keep it. I have a feeling I will own this particular DAC until the day it or me dies!

 

[unsleepable]

The UD-H01 is actually a very nice bit of kit, but despite all the BS regarding it's state of the art 32 bit chips and whatever else it has, it will not audition as significantly better than what you have.

Look at the casework, connectors, onboard power supply etc, etc, that is what you are paying for and that costs.

It would be even better if it had level control on its line outputs so it could be used as a dac/pre-amp but it doesn't, it misses the mark.

The UD-H01 is actually not half bad. It doesn't provide variable output RCA connections because it's thought out as a headphone amplifier rather than as a preamp. It wouldn't be my choice either, but I wouldn't doubt for a second that it'd be an upgrade over the Behringer. It doesn't miss any mark, you are just judging it out of context.

You keep on claiming that the Behringer is all anyone needs as a DAC. Still, all the DACs you mentioned here that you have listened to are, technologically speaking, very similar to one another—often outdated and of the cheapest variety. Saying that the Behringer can hold its own, and saying that it'd be difficult or much more expensive to get better sound, are two very different things in my opinion. Well, a jack out of my computer straight into an integrated doesn't sound bad at all either, and clarity is decent at half volume—but it would still not occur to me to state that that's enough to get top-notch sound when using the computer as a source.

DAC chipsets themselves have not changed so much for some time—but the technology employed to connect them to computer audio sources, for example, has. I'd suggest you do yourself—and the people you advice to here—a favour, and listen to more advanced digital stuff before making so absolute recommendations. I believe you'll find that things have changed a lot since the times when you used to work in hi-fi.

 

[davedotco]

The UD-H01 is actually a very nice bit of kit, but despite all the BS regarding it's state of the art 32 bit chips and whatever else it has, it will not audition as significantly better than what you have.

Look at the casework, connectors, onboard power supply etc, etc, that is what you are paying for and that costs.

It would be even better if it had level control on its line outputs so it could be used as a dac/pre-amp but it doesn't, it misses the mark.

The UD-H01 is actually not half bad. It doesn't provide variable output RCA connections because it's thought out as a headphone amplifier rather than as a preamp. It wouldn't be my choice either, but I wouldn't doubt for a second that it'd be an upgrade over the Behringer. It doesn't miss any mark, you are just judging it out of context.

You keep on claiming that the Behringer is all anyone needs as a DAC. Still, all the DACs you mentioned here that you have listened to are, technologically speaking, very similar to one another—often outdated and of the cheapest variety. Saying that the Behringer can hold its own, and saying that it'd be difficult or much more expensive to get better sound, are two very different things in my opinion. Well, a jack out of my computer straight into an integrated doesn't sound bad at all either, and clarity is decent at half volume—but it would still not occur to me to state that that's enough to get top-notch sound when using the computer as a source.

DAC chipsets themselves have not changed so much for some time—but the technology employed to connect them to computer audio sources, for example, has. I'd suggest you do yourself—and the people you advice to here—a favour, and listen to more advanced digital stuff before making so absolute recommendations. I believe you'll find that things have changed a lot since the times when you used to work in hi-fi.

I feel that you are taking my views out of context.

I have never claimed that the UCA202 is 'all anyone needs', all my remarks in this thread were in the context of a budget system. Yes you can get a better sound from more sophisticated dacs, but equally you need a better system to make them worthwhile.

For what it is worth, I feel that there are some fine cheap dacs, and some very nice more expensive ones, but the ones in the middle price ranges do not really hit the spot.

You are of course free to believe what you will, but deliberate voicing apart, modern dacs are quite transparent, differences are small and really only of importance in revealing setups.

 

[unsleepable]

I feel that you are taking my views out of context.

I have never claimed that the UCA202 is 'all anyone needs', all my remarks in this thread were in the context of a budget system. Yes you can get a better sound from more sophisticated dacs, but equally you need a better system to make them worthwhile.

For what it is worth, I feel that there are some fine cheap dacs, and some very nice more expensive ones, but the ones in the middle price ranges do not really hit the spot.

You are of course free to believe what you will, but deliberate voicing apart, modern dacs are quite transparent, differences are small and really only of importance in revealing setups.

When you talk in generic terms like that, it's difficult to disagree with you. Although your remarks are so ambiguous that could easily be applied to many products—you could well be talking about fridges there.

The fact remains that what you recommend to play audio from a computer is nothing better than a chip on a cable that won't do the smallest of efforts to resolve the most common problems that are to be faced with computer audio sources. I find this anachronical, and rather poor judgement for a hi-fi forum. It's not only that the whole concept of jitter, for example, seems to have passed you by entirely—you also consistently show that you lack base for judgement in terms of current DACs.

My views are exactly the opposite of yours. A cheap DAC will often not be an upgrade to the one in the computer, and with the most expensive ones you are paying high margins due to little production volumes, a specific voicing, and esoteric features that can be sometimes more easily talked about than heard. It's precisely in the middle range where noticeable improvements can be gained without incurring in very high costs.

 

[BigH]

I feel that you are taking my views out of context.

I have never claimed that the UCA202 is 'all anyone needs', all my remarks in this thread were in the context of a budget system. Yes you can get a better sound from more sophisticated dacs, but equally you need a better system to make them worthwhile.

For what it is worth, I feel that there are some fine cheap dacs, and some very nice more expensive ones, but the ones in the middle price ranges do not really hit the spot.

You are of course free to believe what you will, but deliberate voicing apart, modern dacs are quite transparent, differences are small and really only of importance in revealing setups.

When you talk in generic terms like that, it's difficult to disagree with you. Although your remarks are so ambiguous that could easily be applied to many products—you could well be talking about fridges there.

The fact remains that what you recommend to play audio from a computer is nothing better than a chip on a cable that won't do the smallest of efforts to resolve the most common problems that are to be faced with computer audio sources. I find this anachronical, and rather poor judgement for a hi-fi forum. It's not only that the whole concept of jitter, for example, seems to have passed you by entirely—you also consistently show that you lack base for judgement in terms of current DACs.

My views are exactly the opposite of yours. A cheap DAC will often not be an upgrade to the one in the computer, and with the most expensive ones you are paying high margins due to little production volumes, a specific voicing, and esoteric features that can be sometimes more easily talked about than heard. It's precisely in the middle range where noticeable improvements can be gained without incurring in very high costs.

I don't think this forum is of much use for info. on DACs, another forum goes in for testing and comparing such things, it seems under £1,000 that the John Kenny DAC about Euros 500 comes out as the top one, next is probably the Metrum which is about £900. The Benchmark used to be top.

So what are these mid range DACs that are so good?

 

[davedotco]

I feel that you are taking my views out of context.

I have never claimed that the UCA202 is 'all anyone needs', all my remarks in this thread were in the context of a budget system. Yes you can get a better sound from more sophisticated dacs, but equally you need a better system to make them worthwhile.

For what it is worth, I feel that there are some fine cheap dacs, and some very nice more expensive ones, but the ones in the middle price ranges do not really hit the spot.

You are of course free to believe what you will, but deliberate voicing apart, modern dacs are quite transparent, differences are small and really only of importance in revealing setups.

When you talk in generic terms like that, it's difficult to disagree with you. Although your remarks are so ambiguous that could easily be applied to many products—you could well be talking about fridges there.

The fact remains that what you recommend to play audio from a computer is nothing better than a chip on a cable that won't do the smallest of efforts to resolve the most common problems that are to be faced with computer audio sources. I find this anachronical, and rather poor judgement for a hi-fi forum. It's not only that the whole concept of jitter, for example, seems to have passed you by entirely—you also consistently show that you lack base for judgement in terms of current DACs.

My views are exactly the opposite of yours. A cheap DAC will often not be an upgrade to the one in the computer, and with the most expensive ones you are paying high margins due to little production volumes, a specific voicing, and esoteric features that can be sometimes more easily talked about than heard. It's precisely in the middle range where noticeable improvements can be gained without incurring in very high costs.

Again, context, context, context.

I have never 'recommended' the UCA202 for use in anything but budget systems, where the minimal cost is important and yes, I have also pointed out, on several occasions, that it may be sensitive to noise or jitter due to it's simple syncronous design. I have no idea where you get the idea that I think this is 'all you need'.

Again some onboard computer dacs are very decent, the Essence STX for example, and you are right, the UCA202 will not be an upgrade, I don't think I have ever said otherwise.

For more demanding, but still budget applications I often suggest the Odac (an open source design available from several 'assemblers') for about £100, it is this that, for me, sets the standard in cheap dacs and shows up some mid priced ones.

We may be a bit at cross purposes regarding what we consider to be 'expensive' in terms of dacs. For the record, I consider anything above £400-500 to be 'expensive' and for some time my 'reference' dac has been the Benchmark Dac 1.

 

[unsleepable]

Again, context, context, context.

I have never 'recommended' the UCA202 for use in anything but budget systems, where the minimal cost is important and yes, I have also pointed out, on several occasions, that it may be sensitive to noise or jitter due to it's simple syncronous design. I have no idea where you get the idea that I think this is 'all you need'.

Again some onboard computer dacs are very decent, the Essence STX for example, and you are right, the UCA202 will not be an upgrade, I don't think I have ever said otherwise.

For more demanding, but still budget applications I often suggest the Odac (an open source design available from several 'assemblers') for about £100, it is this that, for me, sets the standard in cheap dacs and shows up some mid priced ones.

We may be a bit at cross purposes regarding what we consider to be 'expensive' in terms of dacs. For the record, I consider anything above £400-500 to be 'expensive' and for some time my 'reference' dac has been the Benchmark Dac 1.

Well, just to make my point clear, for me the Behringer falls in the category of "don't bother to buy it unless your sound card doesn't work or doesn't provide a line-level output." I still think that a Yamaha A-S500 plus Monitor Audio speakers may well deserve better—probably many set-ups will benefit from better sources when there is so much room for improvement. It's a pity that this particular OP has been led to think that €300 won't bring any upgrade to their set-up.

Since the Nad D 3020 was mentioned before—nothing less than as an upgrade to the Yamaha—, I'd also like to point out that in my opinion, the USB implementation of the D 3020 is flawed in the same way as the one in the M51. I find the audio quality to be inconsistent over the digital ports, which is an indication that something is not quite right with the implementation. I see many reasons why the D 3020 could be recommended, but its USB port won't be one of them.

 

[unsleepable]

I don't think this forum is of much use for info. on DACs, another forum goes in for testing and comparing such things, it seems under £1,000 that the John Kenny DAC about Euros 500 comes out as the top one, next is probably the Metrum which is about £900. The Benchmark used to be top.

So what are these mid range DACs that are so good?

I agree that conversations about digital products are not the most fruitful in this forum. I was amazed that no one in the forum said anything when WHF reviewed the DAC2 and didn't give it five stars—at least I don't recall any thread about the subject. Must be the only publication that has dared not to give it top marks.

As for DACs, I very much enjoyed my previous irDac. I think it does everything that can be expected from a line-level DAC, and it does it all very well. It has never disappointed in comparison with much more expensive DACs. Maybe not the cheapest, but a safe bet—and in the second-hand market would be closely at reach with the budget mentioned by the OP. As an aside, it's a pity that Arcam hasn't released a digital preamp or DAC with variable output, as DACs and volume controls are two things that they know how to do well.

Another DAC I heard and liked was the Musical Fidelity V90-DAC—even though other Musical Fidelity gear I have auditioned, and in particular the M1-SDAC, haven't done it for me. It's cheaper than the irDac and maybe an option, although I haven't compared these two side by side.

If I was now in the market for a cheap line-level USB DAC, I would definitely check out the Firestone Custom Cute DAC. It's the only DAC I find interesting of what they have, but it ticks all the boxes of what I would be looking for. I haven't listened to it, so I can't vouch for it—just saying that on paper it looks quite good, and it's cheap, so there are options.

A personal favourite of mine in the sub-€1000 category—although more expensive than the previous ones I mentioned—is the DSPeaker-Anti-Mode 2.0 Dual Core. I didn't care much about the room correction feature, although it works well and it's easy to set up. But it's amazingly transparent as a DAC, even when going the full A/D–D/A cycle. Very nicely neutral and superbly detailed at low volume. It's more a DSP than a DAC, really, as it also offers other features such as cutting out sub-sonic frequencies, and adjusting the tonality of the sound—like tone controls, but more flexible and complete, and done digitally. Regrettably, as a digital preamp I found that it had certain usability issues that made me decide not to keep it. But it really impressed me and I will definitely check any new products they release.

 

[cheeseboy]

. It's not only that the whole concept of jitter, for example, seems to have passed you by entirely

ironic really that the concept of jitter not really being an issue anymore seems to have passed you by (tongue in cheek btw) Just buy an asyncronous dac or a pc that's not 15 years old and it's not really an issue. Please stop flogging a dead horse, it's a red herring. here's some more info with graphs and stuff that people like

http://nwavguy.blogspot.nl/2011/02/jitter-does-it-matter.html

 

[davedotco]

Since the Nad D 3020 was mentioned before—nothing less than as an upgrade to the Yamaha—, I'd also like to point out that in my opinion, the USB implementation of the D 3020 is flawed in the same way as the one in the M51. I find the audio quality to be inconsistent over the digital ports, which is an indication that something is not quite right with the implementation. I see many reasons why the D 3020 could be recommended, but its USB port won't be one of them.

Now this I find interesting. I have tried the D3020 mainly on optical and I am rather impressed. The sound is very different to the norm for amplifiers at this level and the functionality is rather good. I would like to know more about the usb input 'issues' you mention if you have the time.

PS. You were right to be scathing about my sugestion that the D3020 would be an upgrade on the A-S500, performance wise at least, for some reason I read that as the older A-S300, my mistake.....*dash1*

 

[unsleepable]

ironic really that the concept of jitter not really being an issue anymore seems to have passed you by (tongue in cheek btw) Just buy an asyncronous dac or a pc that's not 15 years old and it's not really an issue. Please stop flogging a dead horse, it's a red herring. here's some more info with graphs and stuff that people like

http://nwavguy.blogspot.nl/2011/02/jitter-does-it-matter.html

I agree that jitter is an issue of the past. But not because it doesn't exist anymore as you seem to imply, but because it can be resolved quite effectively and cheaply with current technology—of which the DAC subject of the current discussion is not a representative; hence the discussion.

I've posted before about Airfoil being a very jittery source when using it to play music through an Airport Express. Timing is so off that DACs that try to re-clock the signal on the TOSLINK port will choke on it:

I've been using this to test whether DACs re-clock the signal on all ports. And this happens even though the Airport Express itself also has an internal clock, which it requires to assemble the signal—although I suppose that the implementation is not at the same level of a good re-clocking DAC.

This is an extreme case, granted, but enough to prove my point. Use the Airport Express with Airfoil and you will be hearing the result of jitter. If you try this and can't hear the problem, well, then I guess that's the end of the issue (for you).

 

[cheeseboy]

Use the Airport Express with Airfoil and you will be hearing the result of jitter. If you try this and can't hear the problem, well, then I guess that's the end of the issue (for you).

Interesting (seriously, not sarcastic). looks as though airfoil ain't that great by the looks of things. Unfortunately I don't have access to an AE to test anymore because I would actually like to hear the issue for myself.

 

[unsleepable]

Now this I find interesting. I have tried the D3020 mainly on optical and I am rather impressed. The sound is very different to the norm for amplifiers at this level and the functionality is rather good. I would like to know more about the usb input 'issues' you mention if you have the time.

When comparing the audio over different digital ports, I just expect it to be the same. After all, the inputs are already level-matched, and there is the same DAC (and everything else) after the port controller. So if I find differences in audio quality, any at all and without mattering which port seems to sound better, I take it that they are due to one or the other port not being correctly implemented.

Why this happens I guess depends on each specific case. But with re-clocking the S/PDIF signal becoming a more common feature in modern DACs, and even some DAC chipsets being able to do this themselves—regardless of the audio source—, the problem in recent DACs seems to be more often related to the implementation of the USB port. Likely, noise isolation.

In the case of the M51, people have reported that the audio quality is improved when using a USB-to-SPDIF converter, which puts the USB port at fault. I was very interested in the M51 as a digital preamp, but the sound difference put me off—it just doesn't give confidence that they'd overlook such an important feature.

I don't know if anyone has tested a converter on the D 3020—its price probably doesn't justify buying a separate upgrade; and I guess that having to add a second box kind of thwarts its reduced form factor.

 

[unsleepable]

Interesting (seriously, not sarcastic). looks as though airfoil ain't that great by the looks of things. Unfortunately I don't have access to an AE to test anymore because I would actually like to hear the issue for myself.

My point really is that jitter is a very current issue with computer audio sources. Airfoil simply makes it so bad that my DAC doesn't recover from it when trying to re-clock the signal. Without Airfoil, the DAC will happily do its job without complaining.

 

[cheeseboy]

Interesting (seriously, not sarcastic). looks as though airfoil ain't that great by the looks of things. Unfortunately I don't have access to an AE to test anymore because I would actually like to hear the issue for myself.

My point really is that jitter is a very current issue with computer audio sources. Airfoil simply makes it so bad that my DAC doesn't recover from it when trying to re-clock the signal. Without Airfoil, the DAC will happily do its job without complaining.

Please don't get me wrong, the reason I said I was interested is because my experience is pretty much the opposite from yours in that I've never had jitter problems, so it looks as though there is a way using the ae and airfoil to replicate it so I can see and hear for myself as I've not yet found a guaranteed way to replicate it before.

 

[spiny norman]

Please stop flogging a dead horse, it's a red herring.

By some margin, the most sensible thing you've said for ages.