chaining two DACs

[listening-in]

Hi everyone, A dumb question perhaps but here it is: Is it bad for the signal to pass through two DACs? It can't be good to add a step in the chain, but is it especially harmful here?

I have been using an Asus Xonar Essence ST soundcard, which uses a Burr-Brown PCM 1792A DAC to convert signals(127dB SNR, Max. 192kHz/24bit). Retails for about US$200. Am wondering how pricey a DAC separate I would need to hear an improvement in the sound. If I upgraded to say a Rega DAC or Arcam rDAC, would I need to remove the soundcard, and run the signal off the motherboard's audio outputs? I have about US$1,000 (800 pounds) available for an upgrade and wonder where it should go, as currently the sound is alright but want punchier, tighter. Maybe its the speaker-amp.

Incidentally, from the soundcard, the signal goes out RCA jacks through Chord Crimson interconnects to a Rega Brio-R then through Chord Carnival Silverscreen speaker wire to Monitor Audio Silver RX1. Thanks!

On a side note, what do people think of the claims made in this science-based article, which holds "there is no point to distributing music in 24-bit/192kHz format. Its playback fidelity is slightly inferior to 16/44.1 or 16/48"24/192 Music Downloads are Very Silly Indeed

[Melvin]

First of all, there is no dumb question. If you purchase a DAC with USB input there is no need to remove your soundcard. You would simply connect the DAC to your computer using USB and select it in your audio preferences. Have fun!

[Musicophile]

Alternatively, you could use one of your digital SPDIF outs to feed an external DAC digitally.

[NOMBEDES]

Hi Listening in. Read the article ("24/192 Music Downloads are Very Silly Indeed) with great interest. As in the case with many aspects of this hobby, you will find that out of 100 people on this site at least 99 will have a different opinion on any topic. Some people will ever disagree with themselves from time to time.

 

The only thing you can do is build a nice system and enjoy the music. I like to play with the file format but, most of the time I can't hear much difference in quality. If you are young and still have most of your "hair cells" (see article supra) you may enjoy the higher-rez, I don't have all my hair cells in my ear or on top of my head so I just enjoy.

[obt_man]

You can certainly improve your sound by getting a new outboard DAC to perform d/a duties instead of your Asus card. If you go with Rega DAC, which is a great addition to your Rega Brio-R, you should probably use your Asus to output digital SPDIF signal into Rega DAC. This DAC does have a very basic USB implementation, so it is not advisable to connect it directly to your PC.

[DigiPete]

. . .

On a side note, what do people think of the claims made in this science-based article, which holds "there is no point to distributing music in 24-bit/192kHz format. Its playback fidelity is slightly inferior to 16/44.1 or 16/48"24/192 Music Downloads are Very Silly Indeed

 

 

The article seem quite one-sided, but then I am not an expert

An important advantage of the wider bandwidth offered by high resolution files, is that they allow for gentler filters and probably more accurate filters.

Gentler filters should give superior sonic results, since they impose less degradation on the time domain waveform of the music signal.

I'm not saying it's one or the other, but rather that it is too complex an area to serve up so simplified.

 

The again, I do hear the artifacts he is talking of on:

 

30_and_33-long.flac

Pido_O_trollbat.waw

 

However, if I adjust volume to normal listening level for Pido_O.waw, then I have to increase volume by 30dB to make out the artifacts of the other files in a dead quiet room.

This is for a very hot signal at full level. So real life the artifacts may be at 60dB below main signal or less.

 

Is that significant, well you tell me!

[Musicophile]

 

On a side note, what do people think of the claims made in this science-based article, which holds "there is no point to distributing music in 24-bit/192kHz format. Its playback fidelity is slightly inferior to 16/44.1 or 16/48"24/192 Music Downloads are Very Silly Indeed

 

Has been debated VERY extensively a gazillion times, including here:

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f6-dac-digital-analog-conversion/24-192-downloads-and-why-they-make-no-sense-10788/

 

In a nutshell: Everybody needs to try for himself if it makes a difference on his system.

[listening-in]

yes, sorry about the double-post. I only saw it after posting my comment. I have done the ABX Comparator with the foobar plug-in. I can score about 80% between 24/96 and 16/44.1 - NOT encouraging.

 

 

Though I read that 30 tests are needed to ensure a reliable result, with lots of ear rest in between.

 

 

I hear the difference between the two examples most easily when listening for singers' inhaling and exhaling at the end of notes and also through brush snares/high hats/ cymbals.

 

 

I need a top-produced album like "The Imagine Project" (vinyl ripped) by Herbie Hancock to hear the difference. I then convert a track down to 16/44.1 and test it against the original in 24/96.

 

 

I also took a hearing test at Upper Frequency Range (High Pitch) Hearing Test, online

and found I could only hear tones starting at 17kHz - can anyone hear the 18-20kHz tones?

 

 

Thanks for your replies!

[elcorso]

I also took a hearing test at Upper Frequency Range (High Pitch) Hearing Test, online

and found I could only hear tones starting at 17kHz - can anyone hear the 18-20kHz tones?

 

 

Thanks for your replies!

 

Test tones are not music, and doesn't mean nothing about your hearing capabilities, this had being discussed ad nauseam here in CA an on another forums.

 

I have several "dog whistle" I can't hear it, but my dog either.

 

High Resolution (after 16/44) is not only for the frequency upper limit, but for dynamics, dynamic contrast, harmonic structure, etc., etc. That (to my ears and on my system) are better preserved on HR= Closer to the music= Closer to life unamplified music listening. For achieving this the recording must be HR also.

 

Regarding "test tones" at which Db output? I f you look at an spectrogram from HR music, at very high frequencies the Db output (in relation with the other medium & low frequencies) are on the low side.

 

There are also a lot of studies related to neuroscience, where they demoed (by looking at brain activity) that human listening are beyond the today statement, but this "hearing capability" are not related to the human ear system only.

 

I can only tell you that I can notice if there is lack on upper frequency on some music, but mostly on non HR. Listenable yes, enjoyable of course, but not the real thing: "Closer to the music".

 

Roch