DACs better than the DacMagic?

[Ralf11]

Let me try and modify your stmt:

 

Silver cables always eem the warmest to me. I suspect it's something in the metallurgy, maybe the grain structure."

 

- how's that?

 

BTW, nothing against warm sound - it's one of those things that sounds good, even if not entirely accurate -- just ask ARC

[ctsooner]

What? Folks need to get gear into the house and audition. If you can't do that, then go listen at the store and see what you like to listen to. I'm talking about your statement of a 1% difference or even the 1/10th incremental increase or whatever that was that you said. I have never once in my life purchased a piece of gear that wasn't an upgrade regardless of cost. Sometimes I've even stepped down in price and felt I got a better piece. I"m not talking about paying more for something that doesn't sound as good. I never said, nor would it, that spending more gives you better sound. That's not always the case at all. Right now, audio is at a crossroads. There is a lot of expensive gear that is designed to fit into your space or called personal audio and rarely does it sound better than similarly priced, well designed audio gear. I own a Linn Kiko system for my bedroom. It was priced right (accommodation price) and it fits my bedroom where I stream Tidal and the TV. It looks great, is easy to use for the wife and sounds fine.

 

Staying on YOUR topic of only a 1% increase in sound quality. How can you make that statement to folks? Not trying to be a prick, but That just made no sense at all.

 

What happens if they get another DAC and they think it sounds worse?

[ctsooner]

Ralf, however you want to words things is fine with me. The hand made silver cables I've had in and out of my system have sounded the best. Many of the mass produced silver plated wires aren't always the most neutral and I don't love.

Just like anything else implementation is most important.

 

Let me try and modify your stmt:

 

Silver cables always eem the warmest to me. I suspect it's something in the metallurgy, maybe the grain structure."

 

- how's that?

 

BTW, nothing against warm sound - it's one of those things that sounds good, even if not entirely accurate -- just ask ARC

[plissken]

 

Staying on YOUR topic of only a 1% increase in sound quality. How can you make that statement to folks? Not trying to be a prick, but That just made no sense at all.

 

It's based on the personal observation of when I've had people blinded to what DAC is which the differences seemed to dissipate.

 

I would rather just speak about differences. I'm speaking to the OP directly because he may get another, more costly DAC, that may implement the same silicon in the round about same manner with roughly equivalent power supply quality and analog sections.

 

Where the difference in price may be due to name cache, better packaging, aesthetics, etc...

[ctsooner]

Well, he's opened it up and asked about a Codex. Promise you the difference is much much greater than you think. Also, I am very familiar with the DAC he's talking about as my dealer has it with his lower end systems. I can promise you that the Music Hall 25.3 DAC that I sold for around 450 or so a few months back is much more than 1% better. That dealer I'm talking about sells both and the MH is twice the price or so, but sounds worlds better. That's nearly everyone in his store who hears them side by side (it's how he sells the MH). Maybe if you have DAC's under 500 or poorly implemented DACS that cost more, will your statement stand, but please don't say that so many of these newer, well implemented DACS don't sound better.

 

BTW, Ayre has their own proprietary filters with the brand new ESS 9038Pro chip that others can't use. It's all in the implementation. Just because someone uses the same DAC and similar power supplies etc.. doesn't mean they sound the same. There are too many variables that go into implementing and building things. Filters, shielding, quality of the caps, resistors, wire, boards etc... are they direct wired (probably not at your price ranges) or are they on a board and if so, what type of board and what the the traces made of? Again, it's too simple to make the statement 'I would rather just speak about differences. I'm speaking to the OP directly because he may get another, more costly DAC, that may implement the same silicon in the round about same manner with roughly equivalent power supply quality and analog sections.

 

Where the difference in price may be due to name cache, better packaging, aesthetics, etc...'

Just isn't fair to say. Similarity doesn't mean the same and in audio, it's not even close.

 

It's based on the personal experience of when I've had people blinded to what DAC is which the differences seemed to dissipate.

 

I would rather just speak about differences. I'm speaking to the OP directly because he may get another, more costly DAC, that may implement the same silicon in the round about same manner with roughly equivalent power supply quality and analog sections.

 

Where the difference in price may be due to name cache, better packaging, aesthetics, etc...

[plissken]

Well, he's opened it up and asked about a Codex. Promise you the difference is much much greater than you think. Also, I am very familiar with the DAC he's talking about as my dealer has it with his lower end systems. I can promise you that the Music Hall 25.3 DAC that I sold for around 450 or so a few months back is much more than 1% better. That dealer I'm talking about sells both and the MH is twice the price or so, but sounds worlds better. That's nearly everyone in his store who hears them side by side (it's how he sells the MH). Maybe if you have DAC's under 500 or poorly implemented DACS that cost more, will your statement stand, but please don't say that so many of these newer, well implemented DACS don't sound better.

 

BTW, Ayre has their own proprietary filters with the brand new ESS 9038Pro chip that others can't use. It's all in the implementation. Just because someone uses the same DAC and similar power supplies etc.. doesn't mean they sound the same. There are too many variables that go into implementing and building things. Filters, shielding, quality of the caps, resistors, wire, boards etc... are they direct wired (probably not at your price ranges) or are they on a board and if so, what type of board and what the the traces made of? Again, it's too simple to make the statement 'I would rather just speak about differences. I'm speaking to the OP directly because he may get another, more costly DAC, that may implement the same silicon in the round about same manner with roughly equivalent power supply quality and analog sections.

 

Where the difference in price may be due to name cache, better packaging, aesthetics, etc...'

Just isn't fair to say. Similarity doesn't mean the same and in audio, it's not even close.

 

My point is there are only so many ways to engineer a filter, an analog section, a power supply, and shielding. There isn't some mysterious building of super human EE's vs mere mortal EE's.

 

You can get a lot competent engineering for less than a $1000. My experience starts curtailing the chasing of DAC's around the $500 price point.

 

I would like to compare the DC-1 to either Ayre or CODEX or Music Hall.

[ctsooner]

That's great for you. We all have our budgets and reasons, but please don't make statements about components you've never heard and may never hear. You are very wrong in saying that there are only so many ways to build and implement components. I can promise you that Dueland caps sound much better than the off the shelf caps that the products under 1k have to use to stay at the price points they are at. That's just reality. We all have different experiences and most who have heard higher end gear or own it can promise you that there are marked differences or we wouldn't purchase higher end gear. Can you buy good gear for 1k each? Of course you can. Very good gear as a matter of fact.

 

If you want to hear a Codex or Music Hall or anything else, by all means please go for it.

Ayre makes Codex btw, they aren't separate companies. They also helped design the Pono player for only 300 or so I believe.

 

My point is there are only so many ways to engineer a filter, an analog section, a power supply, and shielding. There isn't some mysterious building of super human EE's vs mere mortal EE's.

 

You can get a lot competent engineering for less than a $1000. My experience starts curtailing the chasing of DAC's around the $500 price point.

 

I would like to compare the DC-1 to either Ayre or CODEX or Music Hall.

[plissken]

That's great for you. We all have our budgets and reasons, but please don't make statements about components you've never heard and may never hear. You are very wrong in saying that there are only so many ways to build and implement components. I can promise you that Dueland caps sound much better than the off the shelf caps that the products under 1k have to use to stay at the price points they are at. That's just reality. We all have different experiences and most who have heard higher end gear or own it can promise you that there are marked differences or we wouldn't purchase higher end gear. Can you buy good gear for 1k each? Of course you can. Very good gear as a matter of fact.

 

If you want to hear a Codex or Music Hall or anything else, by all means please go for it.

Ayre makes Codex btw, they aren't separate companies. They also helped design the Pono player for only 300 or so I believe.

 

My budget was $3000 for a DAC. I picked up the Bel Canto 2.7 on recommendation. In my setup, and it's no slouch as I'm sure many others, there just wasn't any appreciable difference.

 

The interesting thing about the TEAC is that they have implemented 4 different filter modes so its neat that someone can play with the various, overall flavors, of filtering including NOS.

 

Speaking about all this filtering and if going there I just implemented a Lake Processing LM26 for a H.O.W. for their line arrays. You can shape it how ever needed with that piece. The UI was killer.

[esldude]

Just look at these graphs for IMD. One from DACmagic and one from Codex.

 

 

[plissken]

Just look at these graphs for IMD. One from DACmagic and one from Codex.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]30434[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]30435[/ATTACH]

 

That's an example of the Codex not filtering out the infra-sonic from what I can determine.

 

And the linear filter used by the DAC Magic.

[Ralf11]

Those ac graphs look bad (Codex?) but how does it sound?

 

I'd like to ask please don't make statements about components you've never heard in a blind comparison test, but we might get no replies then.

[plissken]

Those ac graphs look bad (Codex?) but how does it sound?

 

 

They are inter-modulation graphs and showing the filtering being applied to get rid of ultrasonics.

 

Ayre may be trading off pre/post ringing abatement but having more harmonics passing through.

[17629v2]

Actually with a really fine resolving system you probably can hear the Ayre Codex as different. Because it has one of those "audiophile" filters. - 3db at 20 khz starting an early, but shallow roll off. It will have much more aliasing than the Dac Magic. It also features an audiophile zero feedback output. Though probably low enough in level not to be heard, it has more IMD at high levels than the DAC Magic. If you like it fine, the DAC Magic in some respects is more accurate at reproducing the signal.

 

Ayre Acoustics Codex D/A headphone amplifier Measurements | Stereophile.com

 

Reading through your post, I can't help but notice how much you rely on speculation. Probably this, and probably that... So when you say, "the DAC Magic in some respects is more accurate at reproducing the signal.", I say BS. How can you make a factual statement about the DAC Magic, when comparing it to the Ayre, you're guessing on the Ayre's performance?

 

You know me well enough by now, to know I don't evaluate equipment half ass. The sole purpose of a piece of stereo equipment is to listen to it while playing music. If you fail to do that, there is no evaluation.

[ctsooner]

For the love of all that is right guys please go listen to some music on these components. Most of the most expensive units don't use much filtering at all. Like I've always said they use proprietary filtering that is minimal. I know one designer of a 16k DAC that is ridiculously good sounding that uses no filtering for digital He gets rid of the ringing some other way. Have no idea how but his DAC sounds really good.

 

You guys make me laugh a bit as it's about the music that you will get out of these devices. One graph showing digital filtering doesn't show anything about how it ultimately sounds in a system. I always listen to gear and rarely look at graphs. Years ago they couldn't measure jitter and now see how everyone talks about it.

 

Just go listen and then you can come back and tell everyone how it's decent but you like your DAC better and it's. OT worth the price. I'm sure that's what you would say. That's fine too as you feel that way and you may not be able to hear the difference the way the rest of us who have actually heard these DACs. It's all good.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[plissken]

Reading through your post, I can't help but notice how much you rely on speculation. Probably this, and probably that... So when you say, "the DAC Magic in some respects is more accurate at reproducing the signal.", I say BS. How can you make a factual statement about the DAC Magic, when comparing it to the Ayre, you're guessing on the Ayre's performance?

 

You know me well enough by now, to know I don't evaluate equipment half ass. The sole purpose of a piece of stereo equipment is to listen to it while playing music. If you fail to do that, there is no evaluation.

 

ESLDude is just presenting Data. He spoke about implementation approaches and has shown IMD plots as backing evidence.

 

Speak to the data and provide counterpoint.

[esldude]

They are inter-modulation graphs and showing the filtering being applied to get rid of ultrasonics.

 

Ayre may be trading off pre/post ringing abatement but having more harmonics passing through.

 

That is exactly what they are doing. To get a half cycle of pre and one cycle of post ringing this is the result. Like you mentioned earlier, in a few tests done listeners who don't know what they are listening to tend to favor the old bad ringing filter that is normal or have no preference. Since all the ringing occurs above 20 khz it really shouldn't be surprising that it isn't heard.

[plissken]

For the love of all that is right guys please go listen to some music on these components. Most of the most expensive units don't use much filtering at all. Like I've always said they use proprietary filtering that is minimal. I know one designer of a 16k DAC that is ridiculously good sounding that uses no filtering for digital He gets rid of the ringing some other way. Have no idea how but his DAC sounds really good.

 

You guys make me laugh a bit as it's about the music that you will get out of these devices. One graph showing digital filtering doesn't show anything about how it ultimately sounds in a system. I always listen to gear and rarely look at graphs. Years ago they couldn't measure jitter and now see how everyone talks about it.

 

Just go listen and then you can come back and tell everyone how it's decent but you like your DAC better and it's. OT worth the price. I'm sure that's what you would say. That's fine too as you feel that way and you may not be able to hear the difference the way the rest of us who have actually heard these DACs. It's all good.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

 

I've heard plenty of minimum phase filters while playing around during implementation of products by Lake Processing, BSS Audio, Xilica etc...

 

As a matter of fact I get control over the shaping of the audio that is second to none and why I am a proponent of Pro-Audio gear. Most of it only supports up to 24/96 but even in audiophile circles it's more than enough bit depth. Considering the knee is pushed up to 48Khz that you have to filter for you are pristine at 24Khz especially considering the quality of Mic's and we are doing the ADA live.

[esldude]

Reading through your post, I can't help but notice how much you rely on speculation. Probably this, and probably that... So when you say, "the DAC Magic in some respects is more accurate at reproducing the signal.", I say BS. How can you make a factual statement about the DAC Magic, when comparing it to the Ayre, you're guessing on the Ayre's performance?

 

You know me well enough by now, to know I don't evaluate equipment half ass. The sole purpose of a piece of stereo equipment is to listen to it while playing music. If you fail to do that, there is no evaluation.

 

And you know me well enough to know I don't agree.

 

Listening is not the only evaluative method. In my opinion it isn't even a good method though it may be all most people have.

 

What you mislabled speculation was simply looking at the data. The aliasing, IMD distortion, and reduced flat bandwidth of the Ayre is going to be marginally audible. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, some of it will depend upon listeners and other factors. If those were a bit higher, I would be able to say it will be audible. If it were lower I could say it won't be heard. If someone hears it and likes it fine, but higher actual fidelity it is not. I can say that because of facts. Like obviously higher distortion is less accurate at reproducing the waveform of a recording than gear with lower distortion. Plain, and simple, and uncontestable. Whether you like one or other better is a different matter.

 

I have not heard either DAC. Even if I had, I would have the same thoughts you label as speculation.

[semente]

For the love of all that is right guys please go listen to some music on these components. Most of the most expensive units don't use much filtering at all. Like I've always said they use proprietary filtering that is minimal. I know one designer of a 16k DAC that is ridiculously good sounding that uses no filtering for digital He gets rid of the ringing some other way. Have no idea how but his DAC sounds really good.

 

You guys make me laugh a bit as it's about the music that you will get out of these devices. One graph showing digital filtering doesn't show anything about how it ultimately sounds in a system. I always listen to gear and rarely look at graphs. Years ago they couldn't measure jitter and now see how everyone talks about it.

 

Just go listen and then you can come back and tell everyone how it's decent but you like your DAC better and it's. OT worth the price. I'm sure that's what you would say. That's fine too as you feel that way and you may not be able to hear the difference the way the rest of us who have actually heard these DACs. It's all good.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

That's how measurements work: each measurement focuses on a single, specific parameter and you'll need a comprehensive set to characterize performance.

 

R

[17629v2]

ESLDude is just presenting Data. He spoke about implementation approaches and has shown IMD plots as backing evidence.

 

Speak to the data and provide counterpoint.

 

Dumb and dumber. If there is one thing we should realize by now, is that you and esldude can't backup your own arguments. In this case, you don't even have an argument. Go to the Stereophile review that he lists, and you'll see that he got his argument from JA, word for word. Also notice that he didn't post the whole review. Just the measurements. I wonder why.

 

My answer to you is not going to change one bit. If you didn't listen to it, you didn't evaluate it. Only someone on crack would say different. Since you guys are so hung up on magazine reviews, explain this. Why is it that all reviews that have a measurement section, also have a listening evaluation as well? Even they're smart enough to review on specs only. The only thing that you 2 wannabees care about is looking good in some internet chat room. And you're both failing in spectacular fashion.

[17629v2]

"Since all the ringing occurs above 20 khz it really shouldn't be surprising that it isn't heard."

 

It can't be heard because neither one of you listened to it.

[17629v2]

"I have not heard either DAC. Even if I had, I would have the same thoughts you label as speculation."

 

Proof that you're on crack.

[esldude]

Dumb and dumber. If there is one thing we should realize by now, is that you and esldude can't backup your own arguments. In this case, you don't even have an argument. Go to the Stereophile review that he lists, and you'll see that he got his argument from JA, word for word. Also notice that he didn't post the whole review. Just the measurements. I wonder why.

 

My answer to you is not going to change one bit. If you didn't listen to it, you didn't evaluate it. Only someone on crack would say different. Since you guys are so hung up on magazine reviews, explain this. Why is it that all reviews that have a measurement section, also have a listening evaluation as well? Even they're smart enough to review on specs only. The only thing that you 2 wannabees care about is looking good in some internet chat room. And you're both failing in spectacular fashion.

 

Other than reading the measurements section, I didn't read either of the reviews. Stereophile simply has credible measurements of more gear than most publications. I didn't copy JA's argument for I don't know that he made one. JA describes the results in the measurement page. If he had some comments on sound elsewhere I didn't read that part. I didn't post the whole review because it was not pertinent to the data I was using. I believe I linked to the review up thread on one of the two devices. Sorry if plissken and I don't fit your preconceptions of people who don't agree with you.

[esldude]

"Since all the ringing occurs above 20 khz it really shouldn't be surprising that it isn't heard."

 

It can't be heard because neither one of you listened to it.

 

Also couldn't be heard if I had. I don't know whether plissken has listened to either or not.

[Jud]

That is exactly what they are doing. To get a half cycle of pre and one cycle of post ringing this is the result. Like you mentioned earlier, in a few tests done listeners who don't know what they are listening to tend to favor the old bad ringing filter that is normal or have no preference. Since all the ringing occurs above 20 khz it really shouldn't be surprising that it isn't heard.

 

I prefer linear phase filters in my main system, and speculate it may be due to how they interact with my speakers.

 

However I think Miska may prefer minimum phase filters, and I am reasonably sure he doesn't like ringing. While we can't hear the frequencies where the Gibbs phenomenon occurs, Miska says it "smears" transient response to a degree that makes ringing filters inappropriate for music where such transients are important.