DAC 5686

rmihai0 · « **on:** 19 Nov 2004, 06:21 pm »

Apparently the digital to analog converter DAC5686 is the best available yet in the market. To your knowledge is there any CD-player or DAC who is using it?

Thank you

_scotty_ · « **Reply #1 on:** 19 Nov 2004, 07:58 pm »

rmihai0, According to the TI product sheet this 16bit DAC is intended for
use in cellular communication systems and cable modem termination systems
and is not intended for high fidelity audio applications.
See link below
http://focus.ti.com/docs/prod/folders/print/dac5686.html

Here are some links to DACs that might be considered among the best currently available
http://focus.ti.com/docs/prod/folders/print/pcm1704.html
http://focus.ti.com/docs/prod/folders/print/df1706.html
http://focus.ti.com/docs/prod/folders/print/pcm1738.html
http://www.asahi-kasei.co.jp/akm/en/product/ak4395/ak4395.html
This last link is to a DAC in the same family of products as the AKM 4395.
http://www.asahi-kasei.co.jp/akm/en/product/ak4385/ak4385.html
It does not spec out as well but it does sound very good and is in use in the
JVC XV-NP10S .About $121 at Best Buy. Scotty

rmihai0 · « **Reply #2 on:** 19 Nov 2004, 09:43 pm »

Dear Scotty,

is true that TI is saying that the DAC5686 is used for telecommunications and alike, but the truth is that is having the best specs for audio, better than the other that you mentioned. As you might be aware, this is not the only product that is intended for an use and is discovered to be very good for something else also.

PhilNYC · « **Reply #3 on:** 19 Nov 2004, 10:19 pm »

The spec says that the DAC5686 has a SNR of 72db...(vs. 120db for the PCM1704). How could it possibly be good for home audio applications?

_scotty_ · « **Reply #4 on:** 19 Nov 2004, 10:36 pm »

PhilNYC, as you are aware specs don't tell the whole story but I also have a problem with it's SNR spec, and it's 16bit accuracy limits it's usefulness to 16bit data or redbook only. rmihai0, what particular specs on the 5686
make it especially well suited to audio applications over the other DACs I listed. Scotty

rmihai0 · « **Reply #5 on:** 19 Nov 2004, 11:14 pm »

Ohho - that is very easy - all the other specs are superior. The "sensitivity" of only 72db is not telling the whole story at all. Actually I am a believer that the best products are not highly sensitive - so gor those who are looking for speakers or electronics highly sensitive - sorry - I have a different opinion. The sensitivity should be the LAST spec that someone should look for. It is like trying to get more quantity in detriment of quality.

PhilNYC · « **Reply #6 on:** 19 Nov 2004, 11:26 pm »

Quote from: rmihai0

Ohho - that is very easy - all the other specs are superior. The "sensitivity" of only 72db is not telling the whole story at all. Actually I am a believer that the best products are not highly sensitive - so gor those who are looking for speakers or electronics highly sensitive - sorry - I have a different opinion. The sensitivity should be the LAST spec that someone should look for. It is like trying to get more quantity in detriment of quality.

SNR = Signal-to-Noise Ratio, not Sensitivity...

rmihai0 · « **Reply #7 on:** 20 Nov 2004, 12:08 am »

Hehehehe - and moresignal what does it mean? Something else than quantity or sensitivity?

PhilNYC · « **Reply #8 on:** 20 Nov 2004, 12:13 am »

It means it has more noise in the signal than just about every TI DAC designed specifically for audio...

rmihai0 · « **Reply #9 on:** 20 Nov 2004, 01:37 am »

The low noise in cd machines it is given by a low jitewr clock - the DAC is not very important at all.

_scotty_ · « **Reply #10 on:** 20 Nov 2004, 03:27 am »

rmihai0, Where did you read that the TI DAC5686 is technically superior
TI products intended specifically for high resolution audio reproduction. Critical information relating to its suitability for this sort of application is missing from all data sheets and
application notes pertaining to this device.
Your assertion that it is superior
in all other areas with the exception of SNR is not substantiated by your statements. You must be specific and go down the line and show exactly with numbers and facts where this device is better than other TI products actually
intended for high resolution audio reproduction or no one can follow the reasoning process you employed to reach your conclusion.
So far your claims are unsubstantiated. Scotty

_scotty_ · « **Reply #11 on:** 20 Nov 2004, 03:28 am »

rmihai0, Where did you read that the TI DAC5686 is technically superior
TI products intended specifically for high resolution audio reproduction. Critical information relating to its suitability for this sort of application is missing from all data sheets and
application notes pertaining to this device.
Your assertion that it is superior
in all other areas with the exception of SNR is not substantiated by your statements. You must be specific and go down the line and show exactly with numbers and facts where this device is better than other TI products actually
intended for high resolution audio reproduction or no one can follow the reasoning process you employed to reach your conclusion.
So far your claims are unsubstantiated. Scotty