The battle of the DACs, comparison of sound quality between some DACs

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
D

Deleted member 537459

U101222 said:
I am only hostile to unsubstantiated claims. Which have been made here, like Andrea's obsession with oscillator phase noise, and I haven't seen (or I may have missed) a study on the effect on the sound of the very low levels he speaks about.
Click to expand...

It seems that Andrea's claims are not unsubstantiated.
Four of The Netherlands' most prominent engineers (Bruno Putzeys, Guido Tent, Peter van Willenswaard, and Eelco Grimm) seem to agree with Andrea.
And their study (blind test with 8 listeners) on the effect on the sound confirms this
https://tapeop.com/reviews/gear/75/cc1-master-clock/

I can add my humble opinion as a self-builder, and also a seller of some objects to which he asks. I have been traveling around Italy for years to always try to improve the quality of my system. in the last year that I got to know Andrea's material I did a lot of tests in various contexts with over 20 people involved in the various listening sections. I imagine that the placebo effect can convince someone, but if I continually confirm the excellent quality of Andrea's products. and I state first I met Andrea personally only later so there are no interests of any kind in what I write. I believe that you should write with concrete things in hand, done tests, try to give personal reports. not guesswork about things you haven't heard. but for bias or because someone you respect tells you something and you believe it blindly. it's like wanting to get an opinion on a car by reading a review, or by listening to a friend who has only seen it and maybe not even tried it, but since he can't afford it, it's easier to talk badly about it.
 
D

Deleted member 537459

I don't write much, but honestly the desire to share also passes when there are people who the only goal is to give against without even having a personal judgment, but simply because the "numbers" do not come back to him ...
I think to have an opinion real and concrete you must have tested the product in question. otherwise in most cases it's bar talk, but I didn't feel like I ended up in a bar ... coffee please!
I am available to host anyone to do blind tests and be able to relate and compare. maybe I learn something new.
I can't wait for a certain "Gino" to come along and invent an inexpensive super high noise oscillator that sounds better than any other clock.
Regards
Gavroche
 
D

Deleted member 537459

Oneminde said:
What are you using now or which one (dac) do you personally favour ?
Click to expand...
Tda1541a with @bisesik trasfo output
Now we have opportunity to have dac lite. I prefer it, in all aspect.
yesterday we were 5 friends, we compared 3 dacs, pcm1704 with tube output, tda 1541a with pearce 5/6 oscillator and trasfo outputs and lastly the dac lite.
all agree on the final result. the tda has improved considerably with the introduction of Pearce oscillators. but not enough to do better than the dac lite.
 
diyiggy

diyiggy

Member
Joined 2019
Again... we need something like the tube triode festival but with dacs...after all there are already diy loudspeakers festival around club enthusiasts or parts distributors ?
Economical model: sponsors from official cunsumets dacs brands if they are so sure about their superiority...wait I have two ninjas ringing at the door bell...😁
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
D

Deleted member 537459

Oneminde said:
So that would be this one then ? https://www.thewellaudio.com/twsdac-1541-d/

bisesik is using nanocrystalline cores which have among the best hysteresis behaviour of any core, aka, it loses the memory fast. This is good for transient performance :)
Click to expand...
I mount the @ray
Oneminde said:
So that would be this one then ? https://www.thewellaudio.com/twsdac-1541-d/

bisesik is using nanocrystalline cores which have among the best hysteresis behaviour of any core, aka, it loses the memory fast. This is good for transient performance :)
Click to expand...
I mount the @ryanj pcb, but I also listen the dac you linked.
 
diyiggy

diyiggy

Member
Joined 2019
@Oneminde , ad1862 is not a delta sigma...and imo better than than pcm1704. I am not sure than more bit resolution matters in those chips as far you listen 16 bits reccordings or buy CDs.

I can not affoard it but I am sure I would be happy in listening terms with r2r lite in 16 bits with 5 mhz SC cut Laptech by Andrea. My library being 99% Red Book marble.
 
Last edited:
Ken Newton

Ken Newton

Member
Joined 2003
diyiggy said:
@Oneminde , ad1862 is not a delta sigma...and imo better than than pcm1704. I am not sure than more bit resolution matters in those chips as far you listen 16 bits reccordings or buy CDs
Click to expand...
Yep. It has long been true that audio DAC chips have 'featured' bit resolutions which they don't come anywhere near effectively resolving. So, while the AD1862 'features' 20-bits, and the PCM1704 'features' 24-bits, neither monotonically resolves those bit-depths. I'm not aware (but, I may be mistaken) of any audio D/A units which are better than about 21 ENOB, including the Sigma-Delta units. Of course, the other side of that is that the ear couldn't utilize that dynamic range even if DACs could resolve it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
abraxalito

abraxalito

Member
Joined 2007
Ken Newton said:
Yep. It has long been true that zudio DAC chips have 'featured' bit resolutions which they don't come anywhere near effectively resolving. So, while the AD1862 'features' 20-bits, and the PCM1704 'features' 24-bits, neither monotonically resolves those resolutions.
Click to expand...

Ken how could you not have given even a slight nod to the very DAC to out-resolve every other chip under the sun, the truly, mind-pummelingly incredible PCM1795?
PCM1795.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Ken Newton

Ken Newton

Member
Joined 2003
abraxalito said:
Ken how could you not have given even a slight nod to the very DAC to out-resolve every other chip under the sun, the truly, mind-pummelingly incredible PCM1795?
View attachment 1066885
Click to expand...
Ha!
Yes, and, of course, the datasheet specifications tell a much different tale to those who understand what they're looking at. The DAC bit-depth war always reminded me a bit of the old PC CPU clock speed war that Intel always drove and lead, due to their process technology advantage. Such is the nature of product marketing. Give the customer some simple metric as a proxy by which to compare products. I suppose that the (mis)judging of product performance in that way isn't any worse than when customers simply rely on a product's brand-name as the proxy assess it's quality and performance. This is the issue in marketing to non-expert consumers, which most are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Oneminde

Oneminde

Member
Joined 2014
Okay, looked it up and AD1862 is apparently multibit like the PCM's. Here is a nice list of chips and a form of ranking.

According to SoundBessive:

PCM63 20-bit, one of the best of the world’s Audio
PCM64 18-bit, one of the best, with a parallel input
PCM1702 20-bit, the quality just below the PCM63
PCM1704 20-bit, the same as the PCM1702
PCM1794 – best of PCM1792-PCM1798 (from a series of 24/192)
TDA1541 16-bit is a very good multibit, stereo
TDA1541A 16 bit – “improved” TDA1541 – good multibit
AD1862 20-bit – one of the best of the world’s Audio

http://www.soundbsessive.com/information-about-dac-chips/
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom