Who has compared a cheap DAC with an expensive one? How much difference do expensive DACs make?

[iamthegruffalo]

Heard them many many years ago but not recently, Im sure they would be just right for me but the problem is cost, wife hates me spending on the equipment.

Change wife option to be invoked there!

 

[theadmans]

I now run a Beresford Bushmaster Mk2 which cost £200.

I power the Bushmaster from a 20000 mah external battery I bought from Amazon for £70.

So this setup cost me £270.

I have compared this Bushmaster with battery power against the Audiolab M-Dac which more than double the price.

........the Bushmaster on battery power wipes the floor with the more expensive M-Dac.

 

[eengineer]

For those who can actually hear a difference between dacs.

First, I admire your hearing capabillities.

What should I listence for to be able to detect the audible

qualities of a dac?

In stead of discussing lets help and learn from each others

ears.

 

[jcbrum]

I guess you're right. but in case of different digital filters there isn't any single perfect one. some do some things better, others do other things better. going by your logic this leaves me with conclusion that all digitally reproduced music must be nothing more but distorted version of the original no matter which DAC you use to reproduce it.

Perhaps, but your conclusion goes against received understanding.

A well produced 24/96 digital recording is generally accepted as being the best there is, these days.

I think such technology does out-perform analogue methods, which suffer worse problems, by comparison.

JC

 

[jcbrum]

Yes, if you define distortion as any deviation but increased gain is a desriable distortion by that definition. Many will consider distortion as unwanted frquency domain artefacts that can be harmonically related or IM-based. I tend to think of frequency response variables as just that. The other type of distortion I dislike is amplitude distortion heard on far too many pop recordings caused by gain compression set too high leading to volume modulation.

Increased gain is not a distortion, it's just louder.

I agree that audio compression, and level pumping, are distortions, but you should use better recordings to avoid that. It has little to do with the replay equipment. Which is what we are discussing.

JC

 

[tone]

I must say that i had an alternative right under my nose.

Duh.

I connected my hard disk with all my music on my Panasonic DMP 220 blue-ray which has a pretty good DAC of its own.

it is definitely much better sounding than my laptop.

How much better connecting a better DAC to the Panasonic's optical digital out will sound I do not know.

I might try it however.

 

[slice]

The 1st DAC I heard at home was an early Bereford - it better my Rotel CDP by a pretty small margin. Before I bought my M-DAC, I used the DAC in my Panasonic plasma - it demonstrated that even basic DACs can sound quite acceptable. A friend brought round an R-PAC that had a noticeable mid-bass lift & far less detail. The same friend bought the Audiolab but sold it back to 7O's for £1k5's worth of NAD M-51 which is a good step up from mine when plugged into my system.

how much better DACs can be, I can't say but I guess better. Some state that DACs sound almost identical - I don't agree.

I had the bushmaster and liked the sound, thought it was an improvement. However the source choice went wrong under warranty ; in fairness it was repaired free of charge. More recently I began to resent the extra faff of of dealing with an extra box, turning it on, pressing the selector up to 4 times to change source etc (yes, I know this isn't exactly a listening issue). Last week the source choice system started to misfire again, and I found myself resorting to using an old cd player excluding the dac, and enjoying the simplicity of it. I think I'm reaching the view that an amplifier should be the one stop shop for source selection, and will just choose my next amplifier from those that have built in dacs.

 

[busb]

The 1st DAC I heard at home was an early Bereford - it better my Rotel CDP by a pretty small margin. Before I bought my M-DAC, I used the DAC in my Panasonic plasma - it demonstrated that even basic DACs can sound quite acceptable. A friend brought round an R-PAC that had a noticeable mid-bass lift & far less detail. The same friend bought the Audiolab but sold it back to 7O's for £1k5's worth of NAD M-51 which is a good step up from mine when plugged into my system.

how much better DACs can be, I can't say but I guess better. Some state that DACs sound almost identical - I don't agree.

I had the bushmaster and liked the sound, thought it was an improvement. However the source choice went wrong under warranty ; in fairness it was repaired free of charge. More recently I began to resent the extra faff of of dealing with an extra box, turning it on, pressing the selector up to 4 times to change source etc (yes, I know this isn't exactly a listening issue). Last week the source choice system started to misfire again, and I found myself resorting to using an old cd player excluding the dac, and enjoying the simplicity of it. I think I'm reaching the view that an amplifier should be the one stop shop for source selection, and will just choose my next amplifier from those that have built in dacs.

I can't understand why Stan doesn't design a remote-controlled Bereford DAC! I bought the M-DAC for its SQ AND functionality. I use all but one input so scrolling through the inputs from my remote control is no inconvenience. I don't have any analogue inputs so my M-DAC effectively acts as a preamp with the analogue outs feeding my power amp directly without any attenuators in the line. The DAC's digital gain used as a volume control that works beautifully.