DAC around INR 100k

[square_wave]

Well, it's a series of PCs (but then, I suppose the Mac mini is a [Mac] PC too). However, there are some delicious designs there, and I really do, one day, fancy a fanless, silent design. Make-mine-Linux and, if I was looking for a PC to sit in a hifi rack, this could be nice, and, buy/build it or not, I'd read all this guy's stuff instead of taking just a quick look. Actually, the silent PC at the back of my mind is something like this. But I'll need those monobloc amps to match it.

When we are dealing with audio, depending on what one is planning to do ( USB out, Analogue out, Digital out, elaborate studio grade setups with master clocks etc ) , the approach needs to be different. Ranjeet is looking to do USB- out. For what I have experienced, different PCs sound very different when you do the USB thingy. The C-A-P-S build sounds very good when you do USB. That is the only reason why I recommended it. I am sure it is just a matter of taking care of some small things .
However, I do not know how the other pcs sound. MAC minis also sound quite nice.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Oddly (I guess it is the most popular option) I've never yet used USB for sound. I really only took a very quick look --- but these machines are using standard Intel motherboards. Perhaps the builder has found them to have a better USB sound. Obviously this is a comparison I've never done at all. The packaging is damned good, though. I may be in two minds about whether any particular item makes a difference or not, but thought is good and one day soon I'll read through his design thoughts properly.

Best thing about this is it is an open project, with full details published, and the selling is on the basis of if your really can't be bothered to DIY, here it is. So I think one could take any of those "recipes," either as-is or adapted according to personal experience/preference, and have a box which looks and works good on a PC rack.

I'm absolutely out of date on hardware (by as much as decade in some ways) but the appearance of ever-smaller mother-board form factors, and systems all the way down to the size of a Raspberry Pi, really opens up possibilities. For starters, I'm hoping that when my Squeezebox dies, I'm going to be able to do a DIY replacement --- but may that be a long time away

We digress, probably too far from the thread subject into that that of PC audio generally!

 

[square_wave]

The C-A-P-S build is an open project. It is discussed in detail on the computer audiophile forum. This is one of the most cost effective projects out there for very high quality music servers. Many folks have built this and found it to be significant improvement when they are using USB over the regular PC or MAC. Of course you pay a little bit more when you want it ready made.

From what I gather, the design gives a lot of importance to the USB implementation / components / power supplies / filters etc Frankly I dont know how all this affects something as basic as the USB protocol. But then again we will all end up in the same old 0s and 1s fruitless discussion. From what I have experienced with some really high end USB based implementations, the PC or Server and the Software Player / setup make a significant difference in the final sound. Recently we compared the between Jplay and a very popular software in two different homes. The difference was dramatic. Jplay is awesome ! A blind test is required only if we struggle to tell the difference. People like me are not really interested in the HOW CAN THIS BE ? question. What really matters is the pudding. Otherwise we will all be missing out on a lot of good things by trying to figure out how and why when we can enjoy what is readily audible.

 

[reignofchaos]

. Recently we compared the between Jplay and a very popular software in two different homes. The difference was dramatic. Jplay is awesome ! A blind test is required only if we struggle to tell the difference. People like me are not really interested in the HOW CAN THIS BE ? question. What really matters is the pudding. Otherwise we will all be missing out on a lot of good things by trying to figure out how and why when we can enjoy what is readily audible.

Was foobar setup properly when testing with wasapi? Was replaygain turned off? It is on by default. I tried jplay on my system which is reasonably revealing now and I couldn't find an iota of difference over foobar with wasapi. It was the same with xxhighend and cplay. As far as I'm concerned, jplay is a pure scam.

I too heard what it seemed like a massive difference initially. However on further listening, I figured the only difference was that jplay sounded louder. Later on, what I found was that replaygain in foobar was automatically clipping bits of the audio which jplay didn't. After I disabled replaygain, there was absolutely no difference.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

the design gives a lot of importance to the USB implementation

I don't know, but I'd think that, at the PC end, this is all the same: just USB protocol, as you say (giving or taking according to operating system and drivers). At the DAC end, then this implementation is vital, and would appear to be the reason why some DACs, with choice of input, sound much better with SPDIF than USB.

ranjeetrain, did you glance at the Apogee link I gave when you mentioned the Mac Mini?

<Cross-posted>

Your comments on comparative software listening are very interesting. I've often quoted the Foobar FAQs, where the developers say that their software doesn't sound better, or different, from any other software that, at least, does the basics properly. I'd have to admit that, back in those Windays, I first used it because I thought it did. In those days, my theory was that it did not waste processing power on unnecessary graphics. These days, by comparison, we have super-computers on our desks, but I still prefer, at least in principle, to avoid graphic-intensive audio-player displays.

I take the point from what you say that we can be right about what we hear, but wrong about the reasons. Particularly, your example points to that golden rule of audio: louder, unless already too loud, always sounds better --- and "louder" can be by a tiny margin that we don't even recognise as louder, but we do recognise as a fuller, maybe-more-detailed sound.

 

[jai1611]

Was foobar setup properly when testing with wasapi? Was replaygain turned off? It is on by default. I tried jplay on my system which is reasonably revealing now and I couldn't find an iota of difference over foobar with wasapi. It was the same with xxhighend and cplay. As far as I'm concerned, jplay is a pure scam.

I too heard what it seemed like a massive difference initially. However on further listening, I figured the only difference was that jplay sounded louder. Later on, what I found was that replaygain in foobar was automatically clipping bits of the audio which jplay didn't. After I disabled replaygain, there was absolutely no difference.

I've experimented with all three in my system and settled with JPlay. Fairly noticeable difference against both Foobar and JRiver. I was using Foobar for the longest time before this and had it properly configured. At least with my particular interface and dac (Lynx AES16, Lampizator LIII), it makes a major difference. With JPlay, PC playback actually beats my Teac VRDS10 used as a transport.

 

[square_wave]

ROC,

It was at Jais house where I noticed this difference. The other was done at another friends home running green mountain audio EOS hd speakers. The difference was fairly profound at Jais place. I think you should visits Jais place to check this out.

 

[square_wave]

I take the point from what you say that we can be right about what we hear, but wrong about the reasons. Particularly, your example points to that golden rule of audio: louder, unless already too loud, always sounds better --- and "louder" can be by a tiny margin that we don't even recognise as louder, but we do recognise as a fuller, maybe-more-detailed sound.

Agree about the reason !

The difference I have noticed with Jplay is not about loudness. It is hifi sound VS stark reality . With JPlay, that last bit of digital glossiness is gone and the singer / sound start feeling like flesh and blood. Very eerie feeling

 

[captrajesh]

Was foobar setup properly when testing with wasapi? Was replaygain turned off? It is on by default. I tried jplay on my system which is reasonably revealing now and I couldn't find an iota of difference over foobar with wasapi. It was the same with xxhighend and cplay.

I too heard what it seemed like a massive difference initially. However on further listening, I figured the only difference was that jplay sounded louder. Later on, what I found was that replaygain in foobar was automatically clipping bits of the audio which jplay didn't. After I disabled replaygain, there was absolutely no difference.

I've experimented with all three in my system and settled with JPlay. Fairly noticeable difference against both Foobar and JRiver. I was using Foobar for the longest time before this and had it properly configured.

I think you should visits Jais place to check this out.

Very interesting experiences. May be you guys should get together at Jai's place and post your observations.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Now that I have jumped out of the Windows, I can't comment on Foobar any longer, and I never tried JRiver anyway.

I can't escape the subjectivity trap on this sort of testing: I even hear differences between different Ubuntu versions when I upgrade, and setting up a blind test on that, however informal, is impossible --- just too much to do with the eyes closed, and too much time gap.

The difference I have noticed with Jplay is not about loudness. It is hifi sound VS stark reality . With JPlay, that last bit of digital glossiness is gone and the singer / sound start feeling like flesh and blood. Very eerie feeling

Well, OK, I accept your ears ---which are doubtless better than mine anyway. I guess you don't have any reason to think they may be swinging a little touch of DSP on you? If you didn't you wouldn't be using it.

In practice, it is hard to get beyond a certain subjective analysis, because which of us even has the equipment to do this stuff. So my analysis is as subjective as anybody's: but with worse hearing :lol:

 

[reignofchaos]

Well - I'd still be a skeptic until I've heard it myself. Jai I'd love to drop by sometime

Thanks!

 

[ranjeetrain]

Update 25-Jan-2013: DAC around INR 100k

I have decided to up the ante. In my mind I am uping the budget to 2 lacs now.

I have already shortlisted some candidates that have emerged very strong contender at my original 1 lac point. My list is topped by Antelope Zodiac and is followed by M2Tech Young and Ayre QB-9. Ayre will have to be used and it will come well within the budget with some change to spare.

The decision to up the budget was based on curing the upgraditis. In that budget I will be able to accommodate Weiss, Antelope Zodiac Gold, Prism Sound. For most of them I am open to pre-owned, as 2 lac is a bit of stretch for these brand new.

Hopefully something solid will work out within next few weeks.

 

[SatMumbai]

Classe CP-800 could be an option. Excellent DAC paired with very nice pre-amp. I sold my Classe CP-800 for about 2800 Euros which is excellent for two channel only kind of set up. (Though I preferred the SSP-800 sound for reasons I can not put my fingers on)
Metrium Octave - It was highly recommended by Prem and what i read about it makes me want it
Pathos Ethos - I heard it and I love it. Though it is an all-in one unit.
PS Audio Perfect Wave DAC - Quite Nice. It was about 2900 Euro ex-demo (with the Bridge)
I am sure there are many more.
At the expense of sounding repetitive, having lived with some of the above, I would still put my money else where in the value chain as DAC based investment is definitely not VFM and the extra SQ at the additional cost is at best subjective (OK..High end DAC lovers pls don't shoot me down!)

 

[arj]

...
At the expense of sounding repetitive, having lived with some of the above, I would still put my money else where in the value chain as DAC based investment is definitely not VFM and the extra SQ at the additional cost is at best subjective (OK..High end DAC lovers pls don't shoot me down!)

I would advice on getting the best possible Source wth a higher weightage than the speaker or Amp ..something I learnt the hard way.

What i mean by Source is Transport+DAC or TT+Phono COmbo and also including the power feeding it+ Cables

This is explained to an Excellent post by Bhagwan here . if your Source is not detailed and accurate enough then the rest of the chain is also compromised..and even if the rest are not at the same level today , any time you do try to do an A/B you will never really see the impact of a superior component .

the DAC especially a USB influences the sound perhaps in the largest fashion..But yes at higher level of quality the cost paid for the differentiall is very Subjective from a VFm point of view .

 

[reignofchaos]

I would advice on gettnig the best possible Source wth a higher weightage than the speaker/Amp..something i learnt the hard way.

Source is Transport+DAC or TT+Phono COmbo + the power feeding it+ Cables

This is explained to an Excellent post by Bhagwan here . if your Source is not detailed and accurate enough then the rest of the chain is also compromised..and even if the rest are not at the same level today , any time you do try to do an A/B you will never really see the impact of a superior component .

Totally agree with you - IMHO the source needs to at par or better than the rest of the chain. Otherwise it is garbage in, garbage out.

 

[longshanks]

I have tried many players including the famed Sonic Studio Amarra in my macbook, for me no player sounds better than Foobar with WASAPI.I did try many other player players in windows including Beatport,Songbird,Jplay and what not and none was better than Foobar and the convenience Foobar provides letting me control it through my Android phone is amazing.And i am guess any player which outputs audio bypassing the operation systems sound mixer and not adding any EQ should sound the same, and if people still hear difference then i guess it must be placebo.


Amarra,Audirvana and Pure music did sound different through my Mac but i did not like the sound, i felt the sound was processed and specially through Amarra it sounded too warm for my taste so i guess these players were not true to the source.

 

[ranjeetrain]

To bring some humor here: It is no good marrying Kareena or Katrina if she has to live inside a veil entire life :lol:

What I am trying to say is - importance of source is definitely there. Garbage in, garbage out is a valid principle. But a very good source put through average amplification and average speakers will not sound great. On the other hand, an average source put through average amplification but great speakers will sound great.

I believe in the speaker theory. If any component benefits the most from more investment in a system, it is the speaker. In brief, law of diminishing returns kicks in much early with respect to a DAC compared to Amp or speakers. A 1 million rupees system that has a 50k transport, 1 lac DAC, 2 lac Amp, 6 lac speaker will sound far better than a system with a 50k transport, 4 lac DAC, 2 lac Amp, 3 lac speaker. That's what I have experienced.

 

[Gerry_the_Merry]

Bhagwan mentioned yesterday that the chain is as strong as its weakest link, which seems intuitively correct. So a 6 lac speaker will probably show up the limitation of the 50k transport much more glaringly and will force you to upgrade. On the other hand, a mismatch by having a 6 lac CDP on a 2 lac amp and 2 lac speaker will reduce everything to a 2 lac per component level, and if you haven't heard better, you will probably be satisfied. I personally believe in having at least one component far above the level of the rest so that when upgraditis hits me, at least I don't have to upgrade that component. Upgrading everything is painful and amounts to rebuilding the system rather than evolving it.

 

[SatMumbai]

Totally agree with you - IMHO the source needs to at par or better than the rest of the chain. Otherwise it is garbage in, garbage out.

I am sure we all had / have very different experiences here. By no means I meant to have a rubbish source.
My point is, the SQ difference of source (DAC+ Transport) after a 1000USD or so price point is at best subjective. By doubling or tripling or X 10 this number, the audible differences can be achieved effectively by diverting the money from Source to speakers or even to the amplifier. Again, this is IMO.
However I would never suggest to get a 20 USD DAC to pair up with a 5000 USD rest of the set up. My current understanding of the market is that beyond 1000 to 1500 USD, the SQ gain benefits from Source upgrade are relatively minimal.

 

[arj]

What I am trying to say is - importance of source is definitely there. Garbage in, garbage out is a valid principle. But a very good source put through average amplification and average speakers will not sound great. On the other hand, an average source put through average amplification but great speakers will sound great.

IF your source is getting you only average content, the speaker can only play that..cannot make it better
But yes if the amp and speaker are both at 50% (just to illustrate) and the source at 80% then the sound will only be 50%..jsut that sound tonality etc are very sensitive ot speaker changes, but sound quality is very very difficult to comment on.