What does everyone want in a DAC?

WC · « **on:** 14 Jul 2011, 12:45 am »

In another thread Seth asked what I wanted in a DAC. It sounds like Virtue is working on a DAC card that will be expansible to multiple types of DACS. What does everybody want to see in a DAC?

Here is my suggestion:

Digital inputs - 1 USB (24-96k min), 2 digital S/PDIF min (24-192k)
Analog inputs - 2 min, with one being a HT bypass
Analog outputs - 1 unbalanced variable volume at a minimum, an additional fixed or variable volume unbalanced would be a plus
Tube buffer
Volume control so the DAC can be used as a preamp.

dboulet · « **Reply #1 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 01:18 am »

1 USB to input digital data
1 pair of RCAs to output beautiful music

That's it.

eclein · « **Reply #2 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 01:45 am »

Quote from: WC on 14 Jul 2011, 12:45 am

In another thread Seth asked what I wanted in a DAC. It sounds like Virtue is working on a DAC card that will be expansible to multiple types of DACS. What does everybody want to see in a DAC?

Here is my suggestion:

Digital inputs - 1 USB (24-96k min), 2 digital S/PDIF min (24-192k)--COOL<<<<<
Analog inputs - 2 min, with one being a HT bypass--COOL<<<<<
Analog outputs - 1 unbalanced variable volume at a minimum, an additional fixed or variable volume unbalanced would be a plus
Tube buffer
Volume control so the DAC can be used as a preamp.--COOL with remote volume control AWESOME<<<<<

almonduck · « **Reply #3 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 01:55 am »

Also, how about a jumper so the volume pot can be taken out if needed.

StereoNut · « **Reply #4 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 02:44 am »

How about a "D100C" board?

A "D100C" board would allow you put $1 bills in one side of the DAC and it would then "spit out" $100.00's from the other side!?!

Sorry, I'm just in a (obviously) stupid, silly mood!

Rclark · « **Reply #5 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 03:20 am »

Giant slaying sound quality.

wilsynet · « **Reply #6 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 03:55 am »

Asynchronous USB 24/96 input
SPDIF input, 1 coaxial and 1 optical
RCA output
Apodizing filter (configurable)

There are so many DACs out there these days, at some pretty terrific price points too. Wondering what the product differentiation would be for Virtue.

Requests for HT bypass, analog inputs, volume control, etc. are basically asking for a preamp with a built-in DAC. But I think that's a preamp, not a DAC. Perhaps Virtue should build a digitally smart preamp, but I really do think that's something different.

dvenardos · « **Reply #7 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 05:13 am »

Quote from: wilsynet link=topic=96486.msg965496#msg965496

Requests for HT bypass, analog inputs, volume control, etc. are basically asking for a preamp with a built-in DAC. But I think that's a preamp, not a DAC. Perhaps Virtue should build a digitally smart preamp, but I really do think that's something different.

It really is a preamp with built in DAC which makes it unique.

Rclark · « **Reply #8 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 06:18 am »

Hell while we're making it into a preamp give us dual subwoofer outputs and tone controls.

Great guys, we were on the verge of getting a DAC, now we won't see the thing for three years.

bretth · « **Reply #9 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 07:31 am »

I use a USB->spdif transport because the USB implementation on most DAC's are pretty average, so it would be nice to see async in a dedicated DAC. Being able to switch out the tube stage would be good as well.

JohnR · « **Reply #10 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 11:18 am »

Following on from the last comment by Rclark, I'd sort of have to ask whether a DAC wouldn't be best implemented as a ... DAC.

Digital in, analog out, that's what the letters stand for.

The problem with units that merge functions is that (and this is just my take on this) people get confused about what they are exactly. Everyone already has a DAC. So A Virtue DAC can just be swapped in and out to any system and compared. Adding more to it might sound appealing to some but at some point it really just confuses the issue. You end up having to reconfigure your system because you have that one unit; in the end it is (in my experience from maybe a decade ago) somewhat futile.

A digital preamp would be a different product.

As far as as a DAC goes, I'd want 24/96 in for USB and S/PDIF, with no caveats on the USB performance, and no need to add additional gizmos to get the best performance that the unit can provide.

brother love · « **Reply #11 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 11:34 am »

Quote from: JohnR on 14 Jul 2011, 11:18 am

... As far as as a DAC goes, I'd want 24/96 in for USB and S/PDIF, with no caveats on the USB performance, and no need to add additional gizmos to get the best performance that the unit can provide.

+1. Agree w/ your post 100% JohnR.

KISS - Keep it simple Seth.

Don_S · « **Reply #12 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 02:52 pm »

A DAC has to have balanced in and balanced out or I won't even consider it. That's my system and I'm sticking to it.

secretriches · « **Reply #13 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 04:03 pm »

Most of us have highly tweaked systems including preamps, tube buffer passive pres, optocoupler volume controls, etc and in my opinion, a DAC with a volume control can only degrade the music quality. Don't do it! Build this as a DAC only (no preamp) or you'll be selling to a market not as interested in sound quality.

There are plenty of other DAC manufacturers (maybe too many) that have middle of the road DACs for this market. Build this DAC as high a quality as you can and strip the unnecessary options to keep the cost competitive. USB implemented to the highest quality would be the goal. Other input options secondary. Unbalanced would be best since a balanced DAC would increase the complexity of the circuit and hence the cost of parts.

Make this a high quality USB DAC without tons of gizmos and you'll potentially have a success. Of course, this is all dependent upon your ultimate price. Lowest price for highest quality will sell. Several models might be a way to go but again adds complexity for you. Make the first DAC your best cleanest sound and beat the other competitors on price rather than features (i.e. Antelope, Metric Halo, Young DAC, etc.)

antonio · « **Reply #14 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 06:50 pm »

hallo.
i would like to have on virtur dac a display that says the bit rate and sample rate of signal input.
and a buffered input, of course.

please, could someone explain to me what is the difference from a balance and unbalanced output?
i'll connect dac to may sensation 901. which kind of dac output i'll need?

antonio (dac fever is increasing!!!!)

WC · « **Reply #15 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 07:12 pm »

Antonio,

Unbalanced connections use RCA jacks and Balanced connections usually use XLR connectors. Your Sensation uses unbalanced connections.

HiFlight · « **Reply #16 on:** 14 Jul 2011, 09:55 pm »

Basic DAC with highest quality SQ. USB, Coax, 2 Optical inputs min. Dual analog outs (switchable)

24v input to be able to share Dodd battery power supply. Small footprint would be nice for desktop use.

Quality sells!

All the other bells and whistles can be found elsewhere in the myriad of complex and overpriced DACs that are currently available.

antonio · « **Reply #17 on:** 15 Jul 2011, 05:17 am »

Quote from: WC on 14 Jul 2011, 07:12 pm

Antonio,

Unbalanced connections use RCA jacks and Balanced connections usually use XLR connectors. Your Sensation uses unbalanced connections.

ok, thanks.
when would be used an unbalaced connection?
antonio

virtue · « **Reply #18 on:** 15 Jul 2011, 04:21 pm »

Thanks for the terrific feedback.

The first version will be simple and fantastic sounding, as most of you describe.

Since we're in the digital realm, volume control is costless sonically.

However, more features take more space externally so you'll definitely see small and simple before you'll see large and complex.

I've been doing a lot of travelling for work and checking in with Aaron every few days. He seems to be doing nicely and I have told him that RMAF anvil will fall from the sky on his head, if this thing isn't done, done, done by then. He's a good man and I know he can do it!

jb26 · « **Reply #19 on:** 27 Dec 2011, 02:33 am »

I'd like to see it in the Melissa platform so that it'll look great with my M901.

Or at least, aesthetically compatible with the Melissa.

Agreed with the above about keeping it to a DAC only.

1 USB, 1 Coax, 1 Digitial in.
1 RCA out
No volume control - that's what the amp/s are for

All implementation of the inputs need to be fully implemented so there's no need for another box. This is especially true for the USB - I have to run an USB/SPDIF between my computer & DAC because the USB is non-asyncronous (my bad, wrong purchase). I can use the USB input, but I know there's a better sound option. Give me one box for inputs!

It would also be interesting to implement some future proofing in the inputs. There are other inputs out there - and new ones coming such as apple thunderbolt (which may or may not be good for audio in future). It would be interesting to have a fourth input area that is empty for now, but that Virtue could sell a slot-in input option in future. The functional-comparison is a desktop computer that has a number of slots that you can mix & match components in - and which sit empty when not yet used.