Expensive DAC waste of money?

[raghupb]

Hmmm ....
Just watched Matrix on TV yesterday (yet again; have lost count of how many times)

A lot of quotes in the movie are very applicable to many of us on this forum.
The one I felt most appropriate, is by Morpheus
"This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes."

Red pill/Blue pill/Red pill/Blue pill/Red pill/Blue pill/Red pill/Blue pill .....
Give me Saridon please, if you don't mind

Cheers,
Raghu

 

[shibashis]

I saw this thread early morning and I slipped away quietly, did not wish to stir the hornet's nest, knowing fully well that it will be stirred and it will come to blows, I can always come back and watch the aftermath, I was not wrong, I have a black heart!

Well he did not find any difference, the point is and everyone will agree with me at least on this point, that is I do not listen to music through his ears.

Equipments are measured through carefully achieved empirical data, listening one wishes if only was so objective. It is not, nor will it ever be, all one can ever do is trust his/her own ears.

I can only say that I did find quite a bit of difference between a $500 and $1500 DAC when all other possible variables were kept fixed.

Having said all that, the video does make sense to a great degree. For example a $46000 DAC?

 

[music4mhell]

I watched the video last night.
I have subscribed to his channel, i have seen most of his videos.

Let's come to the topic,
He is comparing Emotiva XDA 2 DAC(they call it as a reference DAC) with Schiit Bifrost(Multibit). One is at price $399 and another at $599, so not much difference.
It's like asking some1, do you feel any difference while sitting in Mercedes C class and BMW 300 series.
IMHO you won't find more than 5/10% difference between these two DACs as they are in same league.

Some1 can easily, company Schitt Modi, Bifrost, and Gungnir and find the difference. Yggdrasil is quite expensive thou

Now coming to another part, if a DAC simply convert the music from Digital(0s,1s) into Analogue, then all dacs should sound same.
But people don't research the complexity behind DAC technology, like timing, data loss, upscaling/downscaling etc. No1 can add anything to music through DAC.
DAC is just trying to convert all possible sound which was recorded in the studio. Giving an analogy in TV resolutions,
Some DAC can convert till 720P and upscale to 1080P.
Some will convert till 1080P.
Some wil convert till 1080P and upscale to 4k.
And some will convert till 4K.
It all depends how the DAC process the data and how it fills the missing information and how it reproduces the originality of the sound, starting from normal music to the breath of the singer.

 

[square_wave]

The actual value of dac ( or any source equipment ) changes considerably depending upon the system it is put into. For example, if you have a 15,000 $ music system, the value a 2000 $ dac over a 500 $ one becomes very apparent that it will be fool hardy to ignore it.. At this point, the difference is not really a 1500 $ one. The price is 1500 $ but the value will be much higher.

If you assemble a less resolving system, this will not be the case...

But keep in mind that audio is a tricky world. There are knowledgably audiophiles who know how to get extremely resolving and revealing gear at low price points so dont be surprised to see a 2000 $ dac along with 4000 $ gear. They just choose to travel a different path. Price is not the actual factor here, resolving gear is.

The methodology used in that video has faults aplenty. This has been discussed and argued over a zillion times on the web so do not want to go into it again.
A better way to gain insight into 2 dacs costing 500 $ and 2000 $ would be to take it to someone who owns a properly setup resolving music system and listen to a one full song yourself in a level matched scenario. Do this a few times and you will know the value.


Please keep an open mind about all this.

 

[keith_correa]

I'll be back. I've run out of popcorn.

 

[regeHA]

And which component is supposed to change the signal in the chain?

All pre, power, IC and speaker must (not should) sound same because -
1. Pre only attenuate signal amplitude, must not add or remove anything.
2. Power should only amplify the amplitude of the signal, must not add or remove anything.
3. Interconnects should only transfer the signal, must not add or remove anything.
4. Speaker should only transfer electrical signal to the exact signal that has been fed to the microphone in studio .... not to say, must not add or remove anything.


So, all the speaker, amp, pre and of course, by all virtue, a DAC must sound exactly same!
From JBL Control 1 to B&W 802 D3
From Topping t20 to Symphonic Line
et al

But the thing is not like that, BTW.

Your points only lend credence to his argument.

1. Equipment is not doing the job correctly and hence missing the mark.
2. Equipment is adding something and hence also missing the mark.
3. Equipment is doing the job correctly and so everything sounds the same.

Let me ask you a rhetorical question. If every manufacturer claims to produce "live" music (as in recorded in the studio) and yet everything sounds different then who do we believe? Unless we were at the studio when the music was made and have excellent recollection there is no way we can say any given equipment is faithfully reproducing music.

The only alternative is to choose equipment based on your preferences and budget (for most of us that's only budget). In this scenario, all arguments and reviews are a moot point especially with claims to being the best and/or reproducing music accurately. There is no way every manufacturer can faithfully reproduce music accurately and yet sound different.

PS: There exist equipment which exhibit features consistent and inherent with "sounding the same". I have been listening to Harbeth speakers extensively, and the one surprising and amazing detail with this speaker is that it sounds pretty much the same no matter what else is changed. It sounds pretty much the same with change in the source, placement, amplifiers, etc. Of course, I can make out some differences, most of the time minute, but nothing dramatic or what we would call a "game changer" with regards to its sound signature. The only other time I had a similar experience was with a pair of QUADs.

Anyways to get back to the rhetorical question, most of the time we are choosing equipment based on sound signature we like, as otherwise in a real world everything must sound the same.

 

[koushik]

I am pretty sure that everyone else have got my point except you, regeHA, and that's because you don't want to understand what I said. If you revisit my post, the very first line was -
"And which component is supposed to change the signal in the chain?"

You chose not to answer that because that would have end your conversation and argument.

Care to answer that?

 

[koushik]

Anyways to get back to the rhetorical question, most of the time we are choosing equipment based on sound signature we like, as otherwise in a real world everything must sound the same.

Believe me, we are in real world and nothing sounds same. You are talking about ideal world - Utopia.
And if everything must sound that same, what is the fuss about the DAC over here?

 

[koushik]

PS: There exist equipment which exhibit features consistent and inherent with "sounding the same". I have been listening to Harbeth speakers extensively, and the one surprising and amazing detail with this speaker is that it sounds pretty much the same no matter what else is changed. It sounds pretty much the same with change in the source, placement, amplifiers, etc. Of course, I can make out some differences, most of the time minute, but nothing dramatic or what we would call a "game changer" with regards to its sound signature. The only other time I had a similar experience was with a pair of QUADs.

I don't know which Harbeth you use but this is insult to that otherwise great brand. Quad is wonderful little thing in my system and every single change in my system gets properly reflected by Quad. A minor change in the system and I can pick the difference. So, please don't insult legend like Quad by saying all these.
A mirror should reflect the surrounding exactly the way it is. If the light changes from white to green and the mirror still shows the white light, it is time to break the hacking mirror and get a better one.

 

[saikatbiswas82]

I'll be back. I've run out of popcorn.

Same here [emoji3]

 

[prem]

Keith, pl find out which popcorn machine is being used to make the popcorn. Taste could change depending on the machine used

 

[keith_correa]

Keith, pl find out which popcorn machine is being used to make the popcorn. Taste could change depending on the machine used

Like with most things, I DIY popcorn the "ghetto" way, in a small wok, so I have full control!

 

[raghupb]

There is only one way to get music to sound the way it was originally recorded.
Despite numerous and detailed experimentation, successful results have eluded me ....

Until then, I will use electronics in my living room to recreate and render music.

Cheers,
Raghu

 

[afj]

i think this thread has moved away from being specific to a dac towards an entire setup.

whenever i quantify how good a system is, i always do it on how close it comes to recreating how it would sound live. for that you need to listen to live music. if you dont, it will be very hard to understand whats good and whats not. the easiest way to start is to listen to the vocals. since thats what we're used to listening most. the acoustic guitar would be second for me. piano, horns etc. isolate each instrument and compare it to how it would sound if you were listening to it live. that will give you a very good indication. where i feel most systems fail to reproduce accurately is the tightness and forwardness of a drum kit. esp the mid frequencies. am not sure if its done purposely to decrease listening fatigue, but thats where i find it most lacking. another method i use if for sound stage. close your eyes and if you can imagine that the band is playing in front of you, then its a good setup. if you cant, then it can do with improvement

also what happens in a lot of systems, with dacs being one of the bigger culprits is that apart from not reproducing sounds correctly, a lot of sound is dropped. on a better setup, you will suddenly hear new sounds in a song that you've previously listened to more than a hundred times.

another issue is 'noise'. theres a lot of unwanted hissing in the background. mainly due to the electronic / electric circuitry going on (thats one of the reason why pre and power amps are seperate, and also why internal dacs / sound cards are not preferred in a computer / htpc). these noises go down as systems get better. after a certain level of decrease, my ears arent good enough to pick up these minute noises, but they exist and some discerning listeners do pick it up. the best way to check if these noises exist it to put on all the components in your setup without playing anything increase the volume up to high. if theres a hiss coming out of your speakers, then it means it will be there when youre playing music as well.

 

[venkatcr]

There is only one way to get music to sound the way it was originally recorded.

There is a huge difference between how music originally sounded and how it was originally recorded. The only way you can listen to music without any change is to listen to it without any electronics. I know of a few musicians in India who insist on having no amplification when they are singing. We do this quite often in our club, but that can only be done for a small group.

Believe me, that sound is completely different. Just close you eyes and sit on a roof one day and pay attention to what you are hearing. You will get multiple sounds, coming from multiple directions, and from multiple 3 dimensional depths. We actually hear the best sound system in the world second minute we are awake, but never pay attention to that.

Remember Diwali? The sound effects of small crackers and the depth at which they sound can never be recreated by any sub. The distance between you and the explosion is so measurable in real life. A 2-dimensional speaker system can never recreate that. What manufacturers claim of 3D sound are all illusions using varying amplitude to create the image of distance.

I clearly remember a musical group walking though my street one day. The drums sounded so different from what we spend lakhs of rupees trying to recreate in our homes.

The minute sound is recorded and stored, it has changed. You can never recreate the original sound. Yes, as you said, what we are all fighting over is to bring what we hear as close to what is recorded. But, hey! Who knows what was recorded?

As long we get clear sound, with decent depth, no jitter, no noise, and enough gain, we should be happy. That can be delivered with a $250 DAC connected to a $1000 system as we all a $2500 DAC connected to a $10,000 system. As I said before, the difference between these systems can never be more than 10%, assuming the first system does work well. Anything else you hear has placebo effects. Keep one thing in mind, a 1dB increase in sound would sound better on the same system. That is how human ears work. As I said before, many times companies use this simple logic to fool you.

If you read reviews carefully, beyond a certain price range, reviewers are finding it difficult to justify a higher spend. 'I am not saying x is bad. All I am saying is that Y has more of 'that there''. It a just a play of words to justify a product. If this can happen to experienced reviewers, you and I can be fooled easily.

At the end of the day, fix your budget and get the best system you can for that price. Stop chasing un-attainable systems. If I had 100,000$, I would certainly find better uses for that than trying to get a more resolving system and not enjoy the music and system I already have.

Cheers

 

[venkatcr]

Now coming to another part, if a DAC simply convert the music from Digital(0s,1s) into Analogue, then all dacs should sound same. But people don't research the complexity behind DAC technology, like timing, data loss, upscaling/downscaling etc. No1 can add anything to music through DAC.

It all depends how the DAC process the data and how it fills the missing information and how it reproduces the originality of the sound, starting from normal music to the breath of the singer.

You are contradicting yourself here. Remember, EVERY DAC adds something to the sound by the very effort to trying to fill the missing information. The only difference is where, when, and how.

Cheers

 

[keith_correa]

You are contradicting yourself here. Remember, EVERY DAC adds something to the sound by the very effort to trying to fill the missing information. The only difference is where, when, and how.

Cheers

What "missing" information? How does the DAC know what is missing and by extension what to fill in and how much to fill in?

 

[keith_correa]

As I said before, the difference between these systems can never be more than 10%, assuming the first system does work well. Anything else you hear has placebo effects.

Correct! Even 10% is too high but we really can't put %'s to it. Suffice it to say "subtle". Someone said 50% in this thread and I refuted it but the post was deleted. Maybe because of the way I refuted it. Strongly!

 

[raghupb]

Ah Yes! Unamplified live music. Venkat beat me to it.
Time to dust out that Ouija board for one more try

Cheers,
Raghu

 

[square_wave]

As long we get clear sound, with decent depth, no jitter, no noise, and enough gain, we should be happy. That can be delivered with a $250 DAC connected to a $1000 system as we all a $2500 DAC connected to a $10,000 system. As I said before, the difference between these systems can never be more than 10%, assuming the first system does work well.

I agree with your hypothesis about musical enjoyment vs chasing the unattainable. No arguments there. Many audiophiles at some point realize this and adjusts their musical priorities.

But the statement in quotes above is a rather broad generalization with no technical or intellectual basis. Do not agree at all. What is 10 % ? How did you arrive at it ?