DAC Shootout

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 48366 times.

bhobba

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1119
Re: DAC Shootout
« Reply #40 on: 15 Aug 2010, 12:44 am »
upsampling a 44.1/16bit source to 192 won't bring much profit in a (NOS) DAC, because there is still the same information.

Yes it is exactly the same information with up-sampling and there is some technical controversy if up-sampling is not exactly the same as filtered oversampling.  A mathematical analysis shows in the limit as sampling frequency increases they are exactly the same.  But because up-sampling is more sophisticated it converges quicker which is why I prefer it - but that is dependent on the algorithm used.

The thing is however Chord believes, and I tend to agree with them, that it is not the presence of higher frequency information that makes material sampled at a higher frequency sound better, it is the extra timing information you get:
http://www.chordelectronics.co.uk/products_detail.asp?id=33

Both up-sampling and oversampling can help in recovering that information even in lower res recordings.  I have verified, at least to my ears, material up-sampled to 192/24 sounds better but material recorded at 192/24 sounds better again.  I believe this is the reason why.

Thanks
Bill
« Last Edit: 15 Aug 2010, 03:27 am by bhobba »

hybride

Re: DAC Shootout
« Reply #41 on: 15 Aug 2010, 01:00 pm »
Both up-sampling and oversampling can help in recovering that information even in lower res recordings.  I have verified, at least to my ears, material up-sampled to 192/24 sounds better but material recorded at 192/24 sounds better again. I believe this is the reason why.

hmm.. here we get into the dark area of human perception because your experience is the opposite of my personal experience. I personally prefer native unfiltert NOS without any up- or oversampling, because it sound the most like music to my ears. To get the LSB's alive in such a basic approach is damn difficult. Why do i mention this? A commercial DAC shootout is always nice to do, but what can we do and learn from the results? There are so many DAC's on the market and every year there are new kids on the block which should be better sounding. IMO it is also interesting to study and discuss the basic theory's about what influences human sound perception and what is (scientifically) needed to achieve the optimum. On the Aspen forum not a bad idea to talk about musical performance  :thumb: 8)

If you wanna read i tell my personal adventure with DAC's. Until a few years ago i was fixated on technical evolution, thought that the Sabre and Wolfson where the new walhalla of sound reproduction like the companies want us to believe. I can remember a moment that i had a bottom tweaked system based on the Twisted Pair Buffalo. I went to a (poor ;-)) friend who only played with an old simple turntable, an old little tubeamp and speakers. I was kind of shocked how i got involved by this sound with all the tic's and noise. Coming home i turned on my Sabre based system with class D amp and it was like a disappointment. That was a definite turnpoint. I was sure that i went the wrong way. I decided to go for musical performance and only that; starting the music and tap your feet. (Honestly i think al audiophiles want that in the end) The science of being involved with music through a DA proces is hard to understand, alltough, it is for me. It's commonly confessed that it is impossible to retrieve all the information of the analog recording from redbook audio because the sample frequentie is to low. The best that can be done is to get the exact analog value of each sample back. Thats plain DA conversion in the opposite way as the ADC proces. It's an well known fact that such conversion comes the closest to realistic playback of the analog source recording. Thats why a lot of audiophiles prefer NOS DAC's. Problem with NOS DAC's is that they are very sensitive for errors like jitter and noise and that they don't correct errors in the frequency domain. To get the full potential out of plain DA conversion we have to choose the best capable chip and surpress and prevent all errors as much as possible. In theory, with that approach and apart from the fact if that really would sounds the most realistic and musical, we have to create the cleanest NOS DAC circuit. John Brown made it without compromises or 'secrets'. Just with using the laws of electronics and physics. The main reason why he choose the TDA1541 over all other NOS DAC chips candidates is because this is the only chip that has a very clean and stable output current source. Thats what he told me. It can also be driven by a passive I/V. Personally it's the best NOS sound i ever heard. Better then this it can't go with plain nos imo. But it is no guaranty that it will sound optimum in every audiochain. You have to put in clean I2S data (like his SD-player. I use a Squeezebox) And not every amp will match with this DAC approach, buts thats another story. Bottomline is that if this DAC doesn't pleasure the ears, NOS is not the way to go. A DAC shootout is imo not really a like DAC contest, but a commercial product evaluation.   

                         
« Last Edit: 16 Aug 2010, 06:56 am by hybride »

cleestedwood

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 67
Re: DAC Shootout
« Reply #42 on: 19 Sep 2010, 12:19 am »
Did this shootout ever occur?  Is it listed under another thread? Thanks

muralman1

Re: DAC Shootout
« Reply #43 on: 19 Sep 2010, 12:59 am »
I emphatically agree with hybride. I just posted my findings with my experience with the 47 Labs Flatfish transport feeding my Audio Note (With giant upgraded diodes) DAC. There is a completely black background, without a shred of self noise by any of my components.

LET THE POOR MUSIC BREATH. It will thank you for that with unimaginable detail, dynamics, and musicality.

bhobba

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1119
Re: DAC Shootout
« Reply #44 on: 19 Sep 2010, 04:22 am »
Did this shootout ever occur?  Is it listed under another thread? Thanks

It certainly did.  Check out:
http://www.stereo.net.au/forums/showthread.php/26992-DAC-Shootout

Sorry I forgot to update this thread.  Instead of going through the meandering thread above here is the key outcomes from Mike Lenehan and his brother.  First from Mikes brother then Mike himself.

Hi all, my name is Russell, Mike Lenehans brother and I had the job of running the systems during the "Dac Shootout" I changed all the discs , help set up the equipment and set the volumes. I also listened continuously for around 6 hours to all the dacs. A couple of points :
1. A tremendous time was had by all. A great diversity of equipment, an even greater diversity of opinion, and a very humbling view of the characters and personalities that we grow into over time. For me , listening to people was just as important as listening to equipment. Not that I agreed with everyone, mind you ! But I took it in.
2. This was NOT a controlled comparison, A/B , blind or whatever. It was an opportunity to listen to a variety of dacs in one system to gain some listening impressions. We at least tried to control SOME variables, the room , the system, the time. At the end of the day, there were some claims of incompatibility etc. which, of course , may be all valid. I assume that we all know that some components work well in some systems and not in others. But remember that all we did here is try to provide a fixed system and environment . And give the manufacturers an opportunity to display their stuff, of course.
**   Also note that 4 of the dacs were driven by a modified Marantz CD94 mk 11 transport (Phillips CDM1 mechanism). Except Joe Rasmussens Oppo, which was used as an integrated player
3. Volume levels were different for each listening group. I set the average level and then asked " Up or down" ? In no way was this a level matched comparison. I at least tried to play rock tracks at higher level than acoustic tracks, my estimate is 90 db average for acoustic and 95 db for rock. However some listeners informed that they routinely listen a lot lower or a lot higher than on the day.
4. We did not swap equipment quickly. My estimate is an hour each dac played continously and they received thorough warmup prior ( if the manufacturer requested it)
5. Ok, my opinions. ** Note that I always sat at the back and WAY off centre. However, my opinions seemed to gel with some whose ears I trust who did have the sweet spot. Also , I am a confirmed analog man ( Garrard 401/SME 3012.Grace F9E Ruby) so you can see my priorities.
** 5 dacs , 3 with tube output stages ( Monarchy NM24 - Craig Connor mods , Lenehan PDX , Steve Garlands Killer Dac) Vs two solid state/op amp output (Oppo - Joe Rasmussen mods) and Wyred for Sound.
The 3 tube out put dacs were in a different league to the other two, they were at least all "alive" and the music flowed with a transient flexibility that the two solid state dacs could not manage. The ebbs and flows of music in real time was obvious ( at least to me).
Killer Dac - all the glories of the double crown TDA 1541A shone through. Superbly consistent top to bottom, dimensional and texturally vibrant. Not quite as gutsy and dynamic as the Monarchy and better suited to acoustic than rock. My favourite on the day.
Lenehan PDX ( Clay Geisler designer) Unbelievable flow that sounded real. Again superb texture and dimension. Not quite as driving in the bass with exceptional mid bass detailing, but soft in the lower bass. Not quite as top to bottom consistent as the Killer Dac.
Monarchy NM 24. Unmatched realism , but slightly less "delicate and refined" than the other two tube dacs. Easily the most powerful sounding and best on rock, with quite staggering bass dynamics.
Wyred for Sound. An amazing amount of detail, excellent tonal consistency and powerful bass. But it sounded like you were playing a CD and there were electronic artifacts in the form of a mid treble glare that intruded. Grey background. Microdynamically restricted. However its combination of consistent tonality and detail was impressive in a hifi sense and I can actually believe that some listeners might place this as their favourite. Not me, not by a long shot.
Oppo by Joe Rasmussen Just did not work in this system. Grey, dynamically restricted ( both macro and micro) and we kept turning it up trying to get some life happening. No detail. Joe suggested a fundamental incompatibility between the very fast and wideband output stage with the Monarchy tube preamp. Nevertheless it did not work in this system and sounded terrible. ** There will be some F/Us on this using Joes own preamp/poweramp.

Next is Mike's view

1 st . Garland KillerDAC best on the day overall

I found that when the KillerDAC was playing purely acoustic unamplified program, I mean by that naturally recorded vocals and acoustic only intruments like guitar, violin,cello,and percussion of all types the Kdac was unassailable !! When listening to the ConnorNM24 on nylon string guitar I thought to myself this is so dang good ! the instrument is there ,nothing will touch this. Ahh Haa, I was wrong the Kdac actually showed me what a nylon string guitar really sounds like.

Back to the Connor NM24 and although it was still very very good the nylon string guitar sounded just ever so slightly like someone had tightened the strings a semitone and smeared the strings with warm honey. There was a just perceptible piquedness.

Vocal and harmony presentations for the Kdac were nothing short of real ! ones mouth could sometimes become unhinged ! as Steve Garland explains it , The Beauty ! The music has heart !

Some very moderate caveat’s
1.on fast paced wideband rock material like Joe Cocker Sheffield Steel or Joan Armatrading Square the Circle the Kdac I thought trailed slightly behind the ConnorNM24 in bass control and pace resolution. It was still a virtual Katana on this material but the 24 was just a tad better.
2.Perhaps the noise floor is marginally elevated in the Kdac ! the Connor NM24 may have had a blacker deader canvas to work with.

2nd ConnorNM24 10% behind the Kdac overall

I won’t over extrapolate as it’s mainly covered above. But let me say the things a beast ! I’ve spent time with a full DCS stack and I can tell you the Connor24 smacks it down simple as that. The 24 is a DCS stack with a velvet glove.
If the Kdac is Frank Sinatra the NM24 is Tom Jones !! It’s bass has articulation and snap that is SOTA , pace rythym and timing were no 1 on the day. Although in the end run sounded just a poofteenth caricatured in presentation compared to the Kdac.

LenehanAudio PDX 10% behind Connor NM24

Ok I’ve gotta be brain dead to put my product 3rd ! The PDX came in at 11.30am with the solder still wet , Clay had blown up a DAC chip 3days before and we were gutted . We thought we’d have to pull it.
They’ll never believe us Clay ! everyone will say we nutted out the other DAC’s were better and went back to the drawing board .

Anyway Clay gets the thing running and walks in at 11.30am on the day (30mins before the shootout starts )and says ok it’s going ! we heard one track, which was Joe Cocker Ruby Lee ! and it sounded great , smooth punchy and communicative. So in the mix it ended up !

Basically the PDX sounds very organic detailed and fast . At the start I felt it may topple the ConnorNM24 but the PDX does’nt have the togetherness of the NM24 or the drop dead harmonic texturing of the Kdac.
We are however very happy with the outcome as the shootout PDX was built from junk parts with a pair of incorrect value Duelund VSF capacitors lobbed into it from the other side of the workshop. The IV resistors for instance were 5c metal films.

JLTI Oppo 25% behind LenehanAudio PDX

We just could’nt get this player to work at the level of the other three. It did’nt have a tube back end and I know some thought this could have something to do with it.

Joe did explain that the player does require significant warm up . Later on after the shootout when the player had been on for a few hours we listened again and it had improved significantly , producing significantly improved fluidity and pace but still to my mind retaining a mild patina of grain in the mids and lack of vocal sibilant control.

Joe was sure that this was accurate reproduction and that the player was exposing the true characters of microphone signatures.

Wyred4 Sound DAC2 50% behind JLTI Oppo

This device is a $2000 retail product and sounded it ! Sorry call me biased or whatever but it did’nt belong in this comparison.

Nowhere near the JLTI Oppo in performance , always just on the edge of the resolution verse analytical thing. Bass seemed slightly synthetic and boosted ! mids were lacking real resolution and in it’s place the DigiGods were trying to serve us up sibilance. The top end was clean ! ohh so clean, like listening to music in the fridge ! the brassy sound was absent from the high hats for instance leaving us with only an endless shimmer !! Hmmmm. We’ve heard the Sabre Dac is hard to control.

Here are the voting results for the 5 DAC’s on the day

KillerDAC 4 firsts 1 second

ConnorNM24 2seconds 3 thirds

LenehanAudioPDX 1 first 2seconds 1 third 1 fourth

JLTI Oppo 1 second 1 fourth 3 fifths

Wyred4Sound DAC2 1 first 2 fourths 2 fifths

Since then the Tranquility has arrived and not even optimized by feeding it with the recommended source of a tweaked Mac Mini it was comparable to the NM24 and about the same as the prototype PDX - with the PDX a bit better.  We will be doing a much more detailed comparison between an optimized Tranquility, a PDX from the first production run, and the NM24.  It is hoped both may surpass the NM24 but we will see.  The Tranquility and the PDX will eventually be going on a little tour to Sydney then Perth where they will be checked out against the Killer.  If Hugh is happy sending it down to him for guys in Melbourne to checkout can be arranged as well.

Thanks
Bill


Dracule1

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 718
Re: DAC Shootout
« Reply #45 on: 22 Sep 2010, 04:20 am »
Bill thanks for the update. Is the KDac available for sale?  Website?  I have a Double Crown I've been wanting to use.

bhobba

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1119
Re: DAC Shootout
« Reply #46 on: 22 Sep 2010, 04:49 am »
Bill thanks for the update. Is the KDac available for sale?  Website?  I have a Double Crown I've been wanting to use.

It sure is available for sale.  They have their own website with that information:
http://killerdac.com/forum/index.php?topic=49.0\

The guy to contact is Mario who posts as Kajak12.
http://killerdac.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=6

Thanks
Bill

gaetan8888

Re: DAC Shootout
« Reply #47 on: 22 Oct 2010, 01:10 am »
Hello

Anybody did try any dac using the Burr Brown PCM1794 24bit/192kHz DAC and the SRC4192 Sample rate converter ?

I'm interest about the sound quality of the PCM1794 dac with a SRC4192 because I can have those chip and could made a dac with them.

Thank

Bye

Gaetan