Help A newbie in dispair!! I need your input...

[elcorso]

Actually, there are some Macs that will drive optical to 192k, but yeah- 96k is the norm.

 

Honestly though- I have serious reservations about most DACs that claim 192k abilities. At 192k they sound far worse than they do at 96k. I would think that would not be the case in 2013 but, it is what it is. Driving down prices while increasing capabilities is a good think, but it does have some undesirable effects sometimes. Poor quality at 192k is apparently one of the downsides.

 

Buyer beware!

 

Hi Paul,

 

I believe this is very DAC dependent. I guess you need double the bit rate capabilities from a DAC to get and improvement from 192k versus 96k. Then for 192k you need a DAC with 382k capabilities. From USB of course and never by toslink optical.

 

Of course, the source music file is also important, something from eClassical or so, when you can be sure is not tricky up sampled from a lesser bit rate recording, so common on this days...

 

My humble opinion only,

 

Roch

[Jud]

For those who doubt the superiority of high resolution PCM, download some free music files originally recorded in DXD (24 bit 352.8kHz) from the 2L test bench and convert them to lower sampling rates for yourself and listen to what you prefer to listen to.

 

Bolded a bit that tends to get overlooked by many folks. Until we get acoustically perfect conversion, part of the answer (though certainly not a complete one) to the question of what sounds better will likely be "How many conversions did it go through?" So depending on recording, software and DAC, a 192kHz recording played back at 192kHz through an NOS DAC might sound better than the same recording upsampled in software to 384kHz and played through the same DAC.

[Paul R]

Could you list those dacs you are saying have worse performance at 192 than 96 and which ones are included in your buyer beware blanket statement.

 

Oh my, I was going to reply to this discussion challenge with a normal reasonable answer, but I see there is already a nasty reply in here from another member. Some people are like rattlesnakes, just crawling out from under their rocks to try and sink in a fang.... (*sigh*)

 

Anyways, ignoring that, remember we are talking about the low end of Dacs here, using a N50 as the reference point. And given this is simply my opinion formed from listening. I pretty much had to buy these to be able to listen to them enough to form an opinion.

 

Sounds better at 96 than at 192 (USB or Coax, as appropriate)

N50

Peachtree DAC-ITx

Meridian Explorer

Audiolab MDac

Oppo 105

 

There are others of course, that sound better to me at 192k than at 96k, like the Little Teac Theresa mentioned. And I agree with what Roch pointed out.

 

I own (or bought then resold) all those Dacs above. I consider that fact to be the virtual equivalent of snake boots in this discussion. Those whose fangs are dripping with venom can bite themselves, as I am relatively sure they have not put their money where their fangs are... ]8)

 

So David- are you saying that buyers should not take care when purchasing DACs if they are looking to playback 192k PCM material? (grin) Or do you have a list of DACs in this range you think sound better at 192k than at 96k ( always assuming the material is better of course?)

 

By the way, all those DACs sound very good indeed at 96k or below, especially the Peachtree which is one of my all time favorites, and I will keep till it completely dies.

 

P.S.-the N50 can act as a player, like the Oppo, and that introduces even more issues. I know you are a DNLA master, but I have not yet gotten even the Oppo to playback without issues over DNLA. That is probably more my fault than the Oppo, but still....

[goldsdad]

Paul, thanks for reversing your claimed "most" DACs to a list of just 5 out of many many dozens.

 

So ironic that you refer to others as a creature with forked tongue.

 

Regards from a rattler.

[Jud]

Regards from a rattler.

 

Is that another way of saying "Fangs a lot"?

[Cebolla]

P.S.-the N50 can act as a player, like the Oppo, and that introduces even more issues. I know you are a DNLA master, but I have not yet gotten even the Oppo to playback without issues over DNLA. That is probably more my fault than the Oppo, but still....

Paul, other than the anomally where gapless is supported when playback is commanded from the N-50 player itself (so using its own app, remote & buttons on the box), but not from a UPnP/DLNA control point (currently only achievable with some high end players), what are its other 'player' issues?

[goldsdad]

Is that another way of saying "Fangs a lot"?

 

 

 

 

[Clipart - Cartoon Rattlesnake]

 

[realhifi]

Oh my, I was going to reply to this discussion challenge with a normal reasonable answer, but I see there is already a nasty reply in here from another member. Some people are like rattlesnakes, just crawling out from under their rocks to try and sink in a fang.... (*sigh*)

 

Anyways, ignoring that, remember we are talking about the low end of Dacs here, using a N50 as the reference point. And given this is simply my opinion formed from listening. I pretty much had to buy these to be able to listen to them enough to form an opinion.

 

Sounds better at 96 than at 192 (USB or Coax, as appropriate)

N50

Peachtree DAC-ITx

Meridian Explorer

Audiolab MDac

Oppo 105

 

There are others of course, that sound better to me at 192k than at 96k, like the Little Teac Theresa mentioned. And I agree with what Roch pointed out.

 

I own (or bought then resold) all those Dacs above. I consider that fact to be the virtual equivalent of snake boots in this discussion. Those whose fangs are dripping with venom can bite themselves, as I am relatively sure they have not put their money where their fangs are... ]8)

 

So David- are you saying that buyers should not take care when purchasing DACs if they are looking to playback 192k PCM material? (grin) Or do you have a list of DACs in this range you think sound better at 192k than at 96k ( always assuming the material is better of course?)

 

By the way, all those DACs sound very good indeed at 96k or below, especially the Peachtree which is one of my all time favorites, and I will keep till it completely dies.

 

P.S.-the N50 can act as a player, like the Oppo, and that introduces even more issues. I know you are a DNLA master, but I have not yet gotten even the Oppo to playback without issues over DNLA. That is probably more my fault than the Oppo, but still....

 

No fangs out here! Got your drift on the price range you were talking about. Didn't see that qualifier when you were commenting on dacs not playing 192 well.

 

No expert on DNLA here but certainly understand your frustration with the Oppo. I have gotten that to work but have not been impressed with it's performance and find the lowly Marantz units to work better and sound superior AND actually have a decent interface now (finally) to boot.

 

I'll be honest, I have not tried those dacs you mentioned with 192 and in general have found you have to spend a bit in order to play and to really enjoy what 192 has to offer.

I personally think that Dacs below a grand should stay focused on getting the very best out of 16/44 and 24/96 and think of higher resolutions when there is better analog conversion included (ie. usually a bit higher priced) in the dac. That said I really like how the Marantz, Parasound, Pioneer and Meridian dacs all sound when playing back cd quality or 24/96 files. All are good to me.

 

As in so many things today, when you spend more you usually do end up with more.

[Cebolla]

No expert on DNLA here but certainly understand your frustration with the Oppo. I have gotten that to work but have not been impressed with it's performance and find the lowly Marantz units to work better and sound superior AND actually have a decent interface now (finally) to boot.

Interesting obvservtion especially with regards SQ - you're comparing the Oppo 105 with its much touted internal DAC with something like the Marantz NA7004, presumably?

[Paul R]

Yep, knew there were fangs around these parts...

 

By the way, I didn't reverse anything I said, I merely typed in a few off the top of my head that I am sure of. I still firmly contend that most DACs do not sound as good at 192K as they do at RedBook or 96K. That's even more true considering the class of DACs we are talking about here.

 

You have any proof otherwise, or you are you just displaying that fine set of fangs, dripping venom and all?

 

If you want to pay me to go put together an extensive list and test them for you - I'll be glad to do that. But as a very good friend of mine used to say, if it is worth doing, it is worth getting paid for.

 

Harry is also the person who originally thought up that rattlesnake analogy, just to give credit where credit is due. Boy was he ever right.

 

Paul, thanks for reversing your claimed "most" DACs to a list of just 5 out of many many dozens.

 

So ironic that you refer to others as a creature with forked tongue.

 

Regards from a rattler.

[Paul R]

Problems playing gapless playback are really my number one bugaboo, but other issues have shown up, like sample rate limitations or compatibility issues with the DLNA server. Part of that might be my own issues.

 

For streaming Redbook material, Apple is hard to beat, as it "just works." For streaming hi-res about, I really like JRMC, and especially so since I can stream hi-res material to my phone and iPad. DLNA just has not captured my fancy all that much.

 

-Paul

 

 

Paul, other than the anomally where gapless is supported when playback is commanded from the N-50 player itself (so using its own app, remote & buttons on the box), but not from a UPnP/DLNA control point (currently only achievable with some high end players), what are its other 'player' issues?

[goldsdad]

You have any proof otherwise, or you are you just displaying that fine set of fangs, dripping venom and all?

 

I don't need to prove anything; I wasn't the one asserting a claim one way or the other. You were, and so the burden of proof is on you.

[realhifi]

Interesting obvservtion especially with regards SQ - you're comparing the Oppo 105 with its much touted internal DAC with something like the Marantz NA7004, presumably?

 

Yep. And you should hear the new Marantz NA-11S1. Awesome player.

[davide256]

Problems playing gapless playback are really my number one bugaboo, but other issues have shown up, like sample rate limitations or compatibility issues with the DLNA server. Part of that might be my own issues.

 

For streaming Redbook material, Apple is hard to beat, as it "just works." For streaming hi-res about, I really like JRMC, and especially so since I can stream hi-res material to my phone and iPad. DLNA just has not captured my fancy all that much.

 

-Paul

 

Paul...out of curiosity what DLNA implementations have you tried? My Oppo implementation slaughters the asynch HiFace USB I had for mid range warmth and tonal color... complements the same reasons I have tube instead of solid state gear. Since the thread originator has tube gear I think you are sending him down the path of unhappiness by dismissing DLNA.

[Paul R]

Have a nice life Owen, and don't forget to take your meds.

-Paul

 

 

I don't need to prove anything; I wasn't the one asserting a claim one way or the other. You were, and so the burden of proof is on you.

[Paul R]

XBMC, MediaTomb, TVMobli, and a few others. -Paul

 

 

Paul...out of curiosity what DLNA implementations have you tried? My Oppo implementation slaughters the asynch HiFace USB I had for mid range warmth and tonal color... complements the same reasons I have tube instead of solid state gear. Since the thread originator has tube gear I think you are sending him down the path of unhappiness by dismissing DLNA.

[realhifi]

 

For streaming Redbook material, Apple is hard to beat, as it "just works."

 

I love Apple as much as the next guy but their streaming solutions, although super inexpensive, have a number of limitations. They really need to update their Remote App. It doesn't go into landscape mode and has no support for their new Radio feature.

 

My "go to" inexpensive streaming option for Redbook is the Sonos line now. Excellent useability, aggregates libraries into one, incorporates steaming services such as Mog, Spotify, Pandora, Tune In Radio and does one trick the vaunted Apple can not do; it synchs rooms perfectly with no lag or echo and has excellent control of each zone to boot. The hardware has digital outs so if you want you can improve the sound with your favorite dac and you can even use it as your only source with no preamp if you like, by utilizing it's variable output.

 

Good stuff.

[goldsdad]

Have a nice life Owen, and don't forget to take your meds.

-Paul

 

A typical infantile remark from someone who cannot bear to be seen losing an argument.

 

I think we've both said enough.

[Paul R]

I agree that Sonos is definitely good stuff. It is also pretty much available in a lot of places now. Even in Target!

 

I am not enamoured of their speaker models, but the models that are hooked up to even a modest two channel solution, they are very good indeed.

 

I do not understand their resistance to moving to high res material, and the remote app is pretty basic, but those are very minor quibbles.

 

Good recommendation!

 

-Paul

 

 

I love Apple as much as the next guy but their streaming solutions, although super inexpensive, have a number of limitations. They really need to update their Remote App. It doesn't go into landscape mode and has no support for their new Radio feature.

 

My "go to" inexpensive streaming option for Redbook is the Sonos line now. Excellent useability, aggregates libraries into one, incorporates steaming services such as Mog, Spotify, Pandora, Tune In Radio and does one trick the vaunted Apple can not do; it synchs rooms perfectly with no lag or echo and has excellent control of each zone to boot. The hardware has digital outs so if you want you can improve the sound with your favorite dac and you can even use it as your only source with no preamp if you like, by utilizing it's variable output.

 

Good stuff.

[Cebolla]

I do not understand their resistance to moving to high res material

They've yet to find a way of it not breaking their proprietary in sync playback technology, perhaps?

 

Another thing that's puzzling with Sonos is its lack of digital audio inputs to their system.

[realhifi]

They've yet to find a way of it not breaking their proprietary in sync playback technology, perhaps?

 

Another thing that's puzzling with Sonos is its lack of digital audio inputs to their system.

 

Cost. That and the simple fact that the large majority of their customers are either not interested or simply have no idea that higher resolution music even exists. When you think about it, why would someone think that sound that is as good as a cd, which was touted as "perfect sound forever", is not good enough? MOST folks think that is more than good enough for them.

 

Their soundbar has an optical input which can take a multi channel digital signal (or two channel obviously). Only catch is that people end up using the optical audio out of their television which is lousy and also processes the signal down to a two channel signal which then has to be RE processed into multi channel sound. Not a recipe for great sound. An Apple TV and cable box with an optical splitter straight into the soundbar works great though.