Should I upgrade my DAC? Looking for advice

[Vladimir]

Does the Naim DAC-V1 have an anti-jitter circuit? It's something all proper DACs and soundcards have and therefore jitter is considered a nonissue. Even the petite Arcam-rPAC has one.

 

[davedotco]

I used to use Airfoil with my Mk2, 1st generation AEX for practical reasons. Using the toslink out with from my old (white Macbook/Snow leopard) was clearly superior, at the time I thought this was an Airplay issue and commented on this. I was advised otherwise, Airfoil was the issue and a new Laptop with Mavericks and system level Airplay confirmed that.

For connectivity reasons, I used the the tiny Fiio D3 between the AEX and my active speakers. This worked fine but did not offer any increase in performance over the AEX's onboard dac. Some friends asked about the Fiio as a simple low cost dac, but in reality they needed a dac with usb capability, this brought me to the UCA202. This was used in several of their setups and worked extremely well each time, realistically these were simple, budget installations barely mid-fi.

I have carried out a few tests in my own setup and the UCA202 auditions remarkably well for such a cheap device, maybe my Macbook has very clean audio, I don't know, but the 'graininess' I associate with jitter or high noise levels was never apparent, Alac files from my own ripped CDs sounded pretty much as expected.

I would not use the UCA202 other than as a low cost solution, but it performs better than you might expect, there are several 'proper' asyncronous dacs on the £100-200 range and these are clearly a technically superior solution, I rather like the Odac for example, but using my laptop, differences are not readily discernable.

As for consistency, I found the Dacmagic, in all it's versions to sound different with every different application and connection, very obviously so, so far I have not found this an issue with other, more up to date designs, but then I don't get as much hands on experience as used to be the case. I would love to spend more time with the D3020 (or even the D7050) as I think these are pivotal products but I have no contacts that can help with this.

 

[unsleepable]

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.

I think I understood you well the first time. You believe that jitter is an issue that only occurs with 15 year old computers. I actually find somehow amusing that you would agree that older computers would have this problem, but not that newer ones also could.

Computers are nowadays definitely more powerful, and this makes them less prone to jitter—I agree with that. But apart from that, nothing else has changed that would prevent a more modern computer from generating a jittery signal when processes are competing for resources. A computer in itself is just not the best of devices to perform, deterministically, certain periodic tasks in precise moments, with the sort of precision that hi-fi requires—unless it's completely stripped out of all running processes, or it's supported by another device like a soundcard or a DAC.

As an experiment, if you have any programming skills, just create a program that every second does something. Then, note when the task is actually executed with more precision than one second. No programmer would of course be surprised to find out that the execution does not happen exactly every second—there is always a small error. If the program is written in a low-level language and runs in a privileged state, the error can be drastically reduced and be negligible for most purposes—but the error cannot be entirely removed. The problem is that there is no much control over how little or how large the error will be, as it depends on conditions external to the program.

But anyways, if you believe that there has been any change in computers or operating systems that would prevent jitter nowadays, please let us know what it is.

 

[unsleepable]

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

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

I really hope that wasn't it.

 

[unsleepable]

Does the Naim DAC-V1 have an anti-jitter circuit? It's something all proper DACs and soundcards have and therefore jitter is considered a nonissue. Even the petite Arcam-rPAC has one.

Yes, the "anti-jitter circuit" is pretty much the re-clocking mechanism. The Naim DAC-V1 re-clocks audio on all ports, as does the irDac and most other half-decent, new DACs.

As for soundcards, I am quite sure that the Intel HD Audio thing that there is in the motherboard of my computer does not re-clock anything, but I take it for granted that any sufficiently advanced soundcard will do it—same as DACs.

So I couldn't agree more: "It's something all proper DACs and soundcards have and therefore jitter is considered a nonissue." Except that the Behringer UCA202, that has been recommended in this forum several times, doesn't have it.

 

[unsleepable]

I have carried out a few tests in my own setup and the UCA202 auditions remarkably well for such a cheap device, maybe my Macbook has very clean audio, I don't know, but the 'graininess' I associate with jitter or high noise levels was never apparent, Alac files from my own ripped CDs sounded pretty much as expected.

I would not use the UCA202 other than as a low cost solution, but it performs better than you might expect, there are several 'proper' asyncronous dacs on the £100-200 range and these are clearly a technically superior solution, I rather like the Odac for example, but using my laptop, differences are not readily discernable.

I don't doubt for a second that the Behringer UCA202 sounds good to you, and may be enough for your particular use. And by all means, I respect that. I also think that you might have different views if you listened to more DACs, modern ones, and compare yours to others—but again, if you are happy, you are happy. This discussion anyways is not becayse you are using the Behringer DAC.

My point is that this a hi-fi forum, and I take it for granted that the people that come here are looking for better than average sound. So when someone comes here asking whether €300 would buy an upgrade to the Behringer as a DAC, I would have expected better responses, or at least better-qualified ones, than what this particular OP got.

The idea that "all DACs sound the same" seems to have taken root in this forum and is constantly pushed by some members. And I don't entirely disagree… up to a certain point. While I've tested well-implemented DACs that I couldn't tell apart, I've also faced noise and jitter issues, and seen how DACs resolve them, and heard DACs that sounded notably different. So in my opinion there is some truth to "all DACs sound the same". But only some, not everything is white and black at all. And anyways, for me that statement only makes sense when talking about well-implemented DACs.

I don't think the Behringer falls in this category—although I don't doubt it's terrific as a regular audio device. I think that the hi-fi sector has learnt in the last years—and this is what we are seeing in the latest DACs released—that to effectively use a computer as an audio source, the audio signal needs to be re-clocked, and noise must be isolated.

 

[davedotco]

I have carried out a few tests in my own setup and the UCA202 auditions remarkably well for such a cheap device, maybe my Macbook has very clean audio, I don't know, but the 'graininess' I associate with jitter or high noise levels was never apparent, Alac files from my own ripped CDs sounded pretty much as expected.

I would not use the UCA202 other than as a low cost solution, but it performs better than you might expect, there are several 'proper' asyncronous dacs on the £100-200 range and these are clearly a technically superior solution, I rather like the Odac for example, but using my laptop, differences are not readily discernable.

I don't doubt for a second that the Behringer UCA202 sounds good to you, and may be enough for your particular use. And by all means, I respect that. I also think that you might have different views if you listened to more DACs, modern ones, and compare yours to others—but again, if you are happy, you are happy. This discussion anyways is not becayse you are using the Behringer DAC.

My point is that this a hi-fi forum, and I take it for granted that the people that come here are looking for better than average sound. So when someone comes here asking whether €300 would buy an upgrade to the Behringer as a DAC, I would have expected better responses, or at least better-qualified ones, than what this particular OP got.

The idea that "all DACs sound the same" seems to have taken root in this forum and is constantly pushed by some members. And I don't entirely disagree… up to a certain point. While I've tested well-implemented DACs that I couldn't tell apart, I've also faced noise and jitter issues, and seen how DACs resolve them, and heard DACs that sounded notably different. So in my opinion there is some truth to "all DACs sound the same". But only some, not everything is white and black at all. And anyways, for me that statement only makes sense when talking about well-implemented DACs.

I don't think the Behringer falls in this category—although I don't doubt it's terrific as a regular audio device. I think that the hi-fi sector has learnt in the last years—and this is what we are seeing in the latest DACs released—that to effectively use a computer as an audio source, the audio signal needs to be re-clocked, and noise must be isolated.

That is all fair comment, though at it's core it addresses a number of things that I have not said.

Everything I have said about the UCA202 has been in the context of a budget system, in this case my proposition is simply that in this case the value for money of a €300 dac would at the least be questionable if not a complete waste.

Better dacs sound better? Of course they do, that is why they are better, but with my Macbook as a source the differences are small, this is the case in the studio too, where the Benchmark Dac 1 is, well. the benchmark.

The only area I really disagree with you on is the magnitude of the differences between decent cheap dacs and better ones. It is my view that those that sound noticeably different have been deliberately 'voiced' to do so, which is perhaps a slightly different discussion.

The other possibility for differences is poor implementation, the reason the UCA202 works is its simplicity, the 'chip on a wire' description being a complement in this case. I am surprised that poorly implemented dacs make it to market these days, the truly dreadful early Dacmagics and Meridian 200 series dacs are, hopefully, long in the past.

 

[unsleepable]

That is all fair comment, though at it's core it addresses a number of things that I have not said.

Everything I have said about the UCA202 has been in the context of a budget system, in this case my proposition is simply that in this case the value for money of a €300 dac would at the least be questionable if not a complete waste.

I don't know what things you are referring to that you didn't say. I think that the paragraph above shows quite well the heart of the matter.

As I've said before, I think you are wrong in your proposition, and it also seems to lacks base for judgement. You are basing it on the fact that the Behringer sounds good to you—without having seriously compared it to much else—, and on your limited experience with modern DACs. Because of this, it surprises the kind of absolute statements you make: "the value for money of a €300 dac would at the least be questionable if not a complete waste."

Of course you are entitled to your own opinions. But given your limited experience in the matter, I think that you should at least better-qualify your statements.

 

[davedotco]

I don't know what things you are referring to that you didn't say. I think that the paragraph above shows quite well the heart of the matter.

As I've said before, I think you are wrong in your proposition, and it also seems to lacks base for judgement. You are basing it on the fact that the Behringer sounds good to you—without having seriously compared it to much else—, and on your limited experience with modern DACs. Because of this, it surprises the kind of absolute statements you make: "the value for money of a €300 dac would at the least be questionable if not a complete waste."

Of course you are entitled to your own opinions. But given your limited experience in the matter, I think that you should at least better-qualify your statements.

To be honest I thought that using the word 'questionable' was reasonable qualification, but perhaps not. I also mentioned on a number of occasions that my views were within the context of a budget system.

As for comparisons, I accept that I do not get 'hands on' with as much equipment as used to be the case, but my experience is that sighted tests are of very little use in any case, but I remain willing to learn. I was hoping to hear more from you on why the Nad usb inputs are so flawed as I have been very impressed with the overall performance of the D3020.

For what it is worth, I have managed some comparisons, the UCA202 with the Odac, Arcam rDac, Arcam irDac and Benchmark Dac 1 usb among others so I am not operating in a total vacuum.

 

[steve_1979]

I've compared to the Behringer UCA202 to the O2 DAC and the differences are very very small (even with Senheiser HD700 headphones and the O2 being used as the headphone amp for comparing both DAC's).

I wasn't able to compare them blind or even do an instantaneous A/B switch so I couldn't be 100% sure but I think I could probably just about tell a difference. But they're so close that I'm not at all confident that there would be any noticable difference had I done a proper instantaneous blind A/B comparison.

 

[unsleepable]

Ok, fair enough. It took you a sweet lots of posts to say that you had also auditioned other stuff, including among others the irDac.

Given your stance, maybe this question is unnecessary, but did you also not think that it was an upgrade?

I thought I had answered about the Nad D 3020, but if there's anything else you'd like to know just ask. I didn't audition it specifically but asked to hear it, just out of curiosity, after finding differences between the digital inputs in the M51. I don't know why that is, and I can only infer that it's due to lack of isolation—or to what seems more likely in retrospective, a noisy implementation of the USB port.

It seems that adding a USB port to a hi-fi DAC is not as simple as it would seem. While there are already USB controllers that will take care of the asynchronous connection and de-jittering the signal—being probably the most popular the XMOS—, it seems that there is still no chip that will take care of noise isolation. It'll likely come… but for now it's up to the vendor/implementator to handle this issue. In my experience, and maybe because I so often listen music at low volume late at night, this makes a noticeable difference—although for me the differences are not only to be found at low volume.

 

[davedotco]

Ok, fair enough. It took you a sweet lots of posts to say that you had also auditioned other stuff, including among others the irDac.

Given your stance, maybe this question is unnecessary, but did you also not think that it was an upgrade?

I thought I had answered about the Nad D 3020, but if there's anything else you'd like to know just ask. I didn't audition it specifically but asked to hear it, just out of curiosity, after finding differences between the digital inputs in the M51. I don't know why that is, and I can only infer that it's due to lack of isolation—or to what seems more likely in retrospective, a noisy implementation of the USB port.

It seems that adding a USB port to a hi-fi DAC is not as simple as it would seem. While there are already USB controllers that will take care of the asynchronous connection and de-jittering the signal—being probably the most popular the XMOS—, it seems that there is still no chip that will take care of noise isolation. It'll likely come… but for now it's up to the vendor/implementator to handle this issue. In my experience, and maybe because I so often listen music at low volume late at night, this makes a noticeable difference—although for me the differences are not only to be found at low volume.

Interesting.

I really don't get to play with anything like the amount of equipment that I used too, but I do 'hang out' with some pro-dealer mates and still have some contacts.

Arcam wise I am quite familier with there product, I helped out a friend of a friend who wanted to add an rDac, in its pretty white case to his Sonos Connect, using spdif the results were that it was louder, adjust the levels and it was no improvement. The Odac is a tremendous device once you sort out it's connectivity, very, very, close to the Benchmark. I thought the irDac rather hi-fi, warm and slightly flatulent, easy to listen to if that is important to you.

I tend to prefer 'clear and explicit', so some of the more 'obvious' hi-fi designs are not to my taste, I understand this so rarely comment on the sound of stand alone dacs. Personally for a plug and play device, the Odac is pretty good.

The D3020 I find interesting, it is one of the few amps that that seems to maintain a very even performance as volume levels are increased, unusual at this sort of price. I have used both Spdif optical and usb inputs but never actually compared them in any meaninfull way so given that you hear a substantial difference I would like to here your thoughts on why this is the case.

Noise issues I can understand, having lived with Meridian 200 series dac many years ago, though these days I find a lot of noise issues can be solved with a systen that has a sensible gain structure, far too many moderm amplifiers have far too much.

 

[unsleepable]

It seems that you and I find each other in the opposite ends of things when it comes to sound. I rather dig the hi-fi type sound—at least for my hi-fi setup. I am not so sure anyways that the irDac has this kind of sound signature, as I think it's rather neutral and detailed—although I see what say about the Benchmark DAC1 being more explicit, although for me that comes out as somewhat thinner.

I haven't heard the ODAC—I suppose that the cleansing of the USB 5V power supply in order to prevent noise didn't sound appealing to me. And since you compare the sound to the Benchmark DAC1, I guess that it would probably not do it for me in terms of sound either. Amazing work of marketing, though.

 

[markot]

Wow I didn't check this thread for a few days and so many interesting replies were posted in this time. Thanks for your effort. So it seems I could improve my sound with a new DAC (not that my system sounds bad, but we all aim at even better, right?).

So, I was browsing through DACs on Amazon today and stumbled upon Aune T1 MK2 Tube USB DAC. Reviews are mostly positive and it's within my budget. What do you guys think about this DAC? Search here on WHF didn't bring anything up.