WHF review of MF M6 DAC and other DACs

jerry klinger

New member
Jun 26, 2010
37
0
0
Visit site
I read the comprehensive review of the MF M6 DAC and was struck again by the punchline (go & listen to the Naim DAC). This seems to be a bit of a theme when reviewing top DACs, but though the Naim DAC is undoubtedly excellent, there are two or three important points:
1. It doen't have a USB-B input, surely a basic requirement for someone wishing to plug a computer straight in. Of course you could add the V-link (by MF :roll: )
2. Not everyone likes the Naim sound, which isn't always the most genuinely detailed
3. Most people buying a £2k DAC would baulk at paying another four-figure sum for an add-on power supply (as is suggested in the M6 review).
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
13
0
Visit site
It would also be interesting to know how the Arcam FMJ D33 would compare in this elite company...I suspect it would suit my taste better.
 

drummerman

New member
Jan 18, 2008
540
3
0
Visit site
Just read a lab report on a (very inexpensive) Onkyo AV receiver. Its in-built DAC's measure as well as many audiophile products ... .

I only mention this to give some perspective on cost.

regards
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
13
0
Visit site
drummerman said:
Just read a lab report on a (very inexpensive) Onkyo AV receiver. Its in-built DAC's measure as well as many audiophile products ... .

I only mention this to give some perspective on cost.

regards

This may sound like a stupid question, but is there always a strong correlation between measuring well and sounding good...or (taking subjectivity into account) is there more to it than that?
 

drummerman

New member
Jan 18, 2008
540
3
0
Visit site
CnoEvil said:
drummerman said:
Just read a lab report on a (very inexpensive) Onkyo AV receiver. Its in-built DAC's measure as well as many audiophile products ... .

I only mention this to give some perspective on cost.

regards

This may sound like a stupid question, but is there always a strong correlation between measuring well and sounding good...or is there more to it than that?

No although one is purely subjective and only of good use as long as the recipient of the recommendation is fully aware of that.

regards
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
13
0
Visit site
drummerman said:
Not at all a stupid question. Measuring well is objective whilst 'sounding good' is purely subjective.

If measuring well would be all-important, quite a few expensive (or otherwise) products wouldn't cut it and probably never make it into production. I will start a thread on this and give examples.

We are all different and thus, a universally acceptable sound does not exist. However, if I'd pay a lot of money for something, be that speakers, an amplifier or whatever then I would expect good engineering practice and certainly would not accept things such as channel imbalance, poor pair matching, high uneven harmonic distortion, a lot of hum/noise and whatever other little ailments you can think of. Unfortunately there is a lot of that about and it simply isn't necessary, actually its undesirable and poor.

There are other examples of 'engineered' sound. For example, many years ago I used John Shearne amplification which was deliberately made to sound more tubey. It measured not so well but it did so because it tried to ape better valve amplifiers. It was deliberate engineering.

With DAC's, they mostly come on boards which manufacturers buy and apparently, they come with clear instructions on what and what not to do as to make the most of the in-built capability of the DAC. - I said it before, some companies manage to make a perfectly good product worse by applying their own ingredients. Audiolab is one such manufacturer which managed to produce a product which measured in some respect rather poorly. Perhaps that was a bad sample supplied, who knows and there are other far worse 'offenders' but personally I'd rather not have to much signal manipulation in a DAC. Especially as it usually only gets worse further down the line/chain.

My example of the Onkyo receiver was simply to show that it can be done at relatively low cost.

regards

Thank you for your thoughts and insights.

For example, Audio Note and Linn take very different approaches:

AN's NOS Dacs remove all signal manipulation such as over sampling, noise shaping, re-clocking or jitter reduction, as they claim these interfere with the critical time domain requirements of the signal. They have also dispensed with all filtering in the analogue domain, to further retain good wide band phase-frequency and dynamically coherent behavior....closer to the original master tape.

They prefer the Analogue Devices AD 1865 18 Bit converter chip, which they say sounds better than the 20 or 24 Bit versions. Nb. The above info was mooched from the manual of their 2.1x signature Dac that I tried for a while.

Linn argue that the Dac plays a small part in the system of converting the stream of audio into the analogue domain. Unlike a lot of other manufacturers, they disable all the internal processing of the Dac (upsampling/filtering etc )which they believe to be limited, and just use its conversion stage.

Upstream of the Dac, they apply their own more sophisticated processing which is beyond the capability of the humble chip.

44.1 kHz is upsampled to 352.8 kHz

48 kHz Hi-Rez is upsampled to 384 kHz

I believe the Dac they use is the Wolfson WM8741 (except the Sneaky - 8740)

The above info may sound like I know what I'm talking about, but in reality I only have a very cursory understanding of these very different approaches...which probably measure very differently.

So in my very convoluted way, I'm trying to say that unless you have a very in depth understanding of the measurements you're looking at, and what implication it will have on the final sound, it's better not to get hung up on them, and go listen.

IMO Both approaches work really well, if properly implemented, and are put in the right system.
 

drummerman

New member
Jan 18, 2008
540
3
0
Visit site
You caught me out you naughty boy (girl?). Thought I'd deleted the post quickly enough as this whole thing is going into dodgy territory but yes, they all have their own idea of what things should sound like, as do we.

Its an emotional thing, financially too! Not many folks will freely admit that their new £2k DAC is sounding almost the same as their old £200 one (just an example and not always the case I'm sure).

regards
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
13
0
Visit site
drummerman said:
You caught me out you naughty boy (girl?). Thought I'd deleted the post quickly enough as this whole thing is going into dodgy territory but yes, they all have their own idea of what things should sound like, as do we.

Its an emotional thing, financially too! Not many folks will freely admit that their new £2k DAC is sounding almost the same as their old £200 one (just an example and not always the case I'm sure).

regards

You're not having much luck on here. :shifty:

When you want your epic monologue seen, it disappears; but when you try to delete one, some awkward fecker traps it for all eternity! :grin:
 

oldric_naubhoff

New member
Mar 11, 2011
23
0
0
Visit site
CnoEvil said:
For example, Audio Note and Linn take very different approaches:

I only have a very cursory understanding of these very different approaches...which probably measure very differently.

yes they do. Linn measures wery well. AN poorly.
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
13
0
Visit site
oldric_naubhoff said:
CnoEvil said:
For example, Audio Note and Linn take very different approaches:

I only have a very cursory understanding of these very different approaches...which probably measure very differently.

yes they do. Linn measures wery well. AN poorly....

....Yet somehow sounds fantastic in an all AN system....Hifi is a strange and baffling business.
 

oldric_naubhoff

New member
Mar 11, 2011
23
0
0
Visit site
CnoEvil said:
oldric_naubhoff said:
CnoEvil said:
For example, Audio Note and Linn take very different approaches:

I only have a very cursory understanding of these very different approaches...which probably measure very differently.

yes they do. Linn measures wery well. AN poorly.....

....Yet somehow sounds fantastic in an all AN system....Hifi is a strange and baffling business.

and this is the point here. although I believe AN will measure better in one aspect that is hugely ignored by majority of DAC manufacturers and which makes outdated Philips DAC chips still ticking.
 

jerry klinger

New member
Jun 26, 2010
37
0
0
Visit site
Actually, the point - in my original post :rant: - was that WHF always end up mentioning the Naim DAC in this context. I suppose it's a reference for them, but the fact is it's a bit clunky in operation and not the most detailed you can get these days. I believe it came out in 2009.

I'm going to try & get a demo of

MF M6 DAC

Arcam D33

Primare DAC30

in one room!
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
13
0
Visit site
jerry klinger said:
Actually, the point - in my original post :rant: - was that WHF always end up mentioning the Naim DAC in this context. I suppose it's a reference for them, but the fact is it's a bit clunky in operation and not the most detailed you can get these days. I believe it came out in 2009.

I'm going to try & get a demo of

MF M6 DAC

Arcam D33

Primare DAC30

in one room!

Sorry for the diversion, as I'm inclined to get easily distracted.....and I too would be very interested in the outcome.
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts