Denafrips R2R DAC (plays 512 DSD) reviewed as giant killer

[giordy60]

On 8/20/2018 at 8:40 AM, alvin1118 said:

 

 

DENAFRIPS DAC decodes DSD in its native format.

all the denafrips also the ares? 

[alvin1118]

3 hours ago, giordy60 said:

all the denafrips also the ares? 

 

Bingo. Yes, all DENAFRIPS DAC does native DSD decoding, including the Ares  

[giordy60]

performing dsd encoding in native mode means that:
natively reads and transfers the output stages?
the signal is not manipulated?
of the filters used (not selectable) how do they work?
like CPLD runs the DSD?
I refer to the ares

in the manual we read:

 

Depending on the sampling rate of the input signal, the Ares automatically converts it to the most suitable sampling rate of the R‐2R DAC for decoding. Although the R‐2R DAC can decode almost all the sampling rate of the audio signals, but in fact, the actual R‐2R architecture and circuitry design, decided the best sampling rate to sound best that it shall decode. The use of up‐sampling processing converts all digital audio input signal to the predefined sampling rate, so to ensure all kind of audio format can be decoded with the best sound performance.

 

what is the most appropriate frequency?

it's only one ?

the manual says :

 

The Ares is equipped with 20Bit R-2R DAC to decode PCM data stream and 32 steps FIR analogue filters hardware decoder to decode DSD data stream. These designs guaranteed the PCM format can be perfectly decoded, at the same time, the DSD format can be perfectly decoded as well. It is rare in the currently market that a R-2R DAC can hardware decode both PCM and DSD formats.

 

does this mean that the R2R network also decodes the dsd?

 

thank you

(I apologize for writing not perfect)

[barrows]

3 minutes ago, giordy60 said:

does this mean that the R2R network also decodes the dsd?

No, there is a separate circuit (the "32 step FIR analogue filters") Which handles DSD conversion to analog.

[Reggy]

On 7/16/2018 at 2:11 PM, barrows said:

Lampi uses a different DSD converter approach.  I am asking for potential customers, personally I am in the process of building a DSC-2.6 from a PCB/module developed by Pavel Pogoda.  Just thinking that Denafrips has a nice approach with the rest of their build quality (power supplies, output stage), and simple DSD only version would allow those (who may not be DIY capable) to have a very high quality discrete DSD DAC for a very affordable price.

Holo audio does offer something like this as well...

Just because a DAC is discrete doesn't necessarily mean it is going to yield a more accurate or true sound with that kind of "discrete" design approach concerning conversion natively, on the other hand a DAC offering both native DSD and native PCM, well that's very beneficial considering  the majority use PCM still for a good number of reasons over DSD. Why limit DSD to such a small audience in the audio market?

 

Anyway I would have thought to consider the Ares to be discrete already as in its discrete resistor ladder design approach.

[barrows]

1 hour ago, Reggy said:

Just because a DAC is discrete doesn't necessarily mean it is going to yield a more accurate or true sound with that kind of "discrete" design approach concerning conversion natively, on the other hand a DAC offering both native DSD and native PCM, well that's very beneficial considering  the majority use PCM still for a good number of reasons over DSD. Why limit DSD to such a small audience in the audio market?

I am not sure what you are saying here?  All I am saying is that there are many folks interested in the sound of discrete conversion DSD DACs, such as Denafrips, Holo, PS audio, etc.  If you are interested I would suggest listening to some of these as they have some very good qualities.

With DSD we have an advantage that the actual D/A conversion process is fairly simple, so it can be done well with a handful of carefully chosen discrete components.  If you keep oversampling/filtering and other DSP out of the DAC box, you have an advantage of less processing (and its associated noise) mixed in the same chassis as the masterclock and analog circuitry.

 

The beauty of this set up is with Ethernet distributed computer audio we can oversample all files to DSD 4, or even 8 in some cases, and then send the DSD 4 data stream to the renderer/DAC in the audio system.  This way the DAC can be built just to perfectly handle DSD 4 (and up will be OK) and can be quite simple.

 

What makes this approach viable now is that there are plenty of software players which do a decent job with oversampling to DSD, with HQPlayer, Audirvana Plus, Daphile, and ROON all capable of good PCM-DSD conversions.

[Reggy]

8 minutes ago, barrows said:

I am not sure what you are saying here?  All I am saying is that there are many folks interested in the sound of discrete conversion DSD DACs, such as Denafrips, Holo, PS audio, etc.  If you are interested I would suggest listening to some of these as they have some very good qualities.

With DSD we have an advantage that the actual D/A conversion process is fairly simple, so it can be done well with a handful of carefully chosen discrete components.  If you keep oversampling/filtering and other DSP out of the DAC box, you have an advantage of less processing (and its associated noise) mixed in the same chassis as the masterclock and analog circuitry.

 

The beauty of this set up is with Ethernet distributed computer audio we can oversample all files to DSD 4, or even 8 in some cases, and then send the DSD 4 data stream to the renderer/DAC in the audio system.  This way the DAC can be built just to perfectly handle DSD 4 (and up will be OK) and can be quite simple.

 

What makes this approach viable now is that there are plenty of software players which do a decent job with oversampling to DSD, with HQPlayer, Audirvana Plus, Daphile, and ROON all capable of good PCM-DSD conversions.

 

I own the Ares, paired with Genelecs balanced connections to a balanced passive preamp; I am no connoisseur with the other DACs but compared to delta sigmas I do believe these R2R DACs have sort of mystique musical quality presentation to them and I very much enjoying the one I have now.

 

I have tried HQ Player and hear absolutely no difference between PCM and DSD except the fact that my Razer fan is spinning like hell so that obviously takes out the possibility for my ears preferring DSD is there was any difference.

 

What I thought was you were in the market of building a DAC which doesn't support PCM only DSD so I was wondering what benefit that would in designing one oppose to some of the R2R DACs that support both native DSD and PCM.

 

 

[barrows]

50 minutes ago, Reggy said:

What I thought was you were in the market of building a DAC which doesn't support PCM only DSD so I was wondering what benefit that would in designing one oppose to some of the R2R DACs that support both native DSD and PCM.

 

I was thinking that yes, there would be a reason to produce a DSD only DAC, as it could be much simpler while still offering the best sound quality.  To do both DSD and PCM via discrete methods requires Denafrips to run two completely different converters, and then to be able to switch between them, additionally, they have proprietary oversampling happening onboard (probably in a fairly high power full chip).  A DSD only DAC could just contain the DSD converter section and no oversampling, just a single input (owner's choice of I2S or USB, to support DSD4/8).  There would not be  huge market, but one could offer tremendous value with this approach.  The fact that there are are few good software oversampling options makes this approach viable.

[giordy60]

12 hours ago, Reggy said:

have tried HQ Player and hear absolutely no difference between PCM and DSD

.....you wondered why?....

....is not your dac resampling everything to a single resolution?....

if so, it is difficult to perceive differences .....

 

11 hours ago, barrows said:

Denafrips to run two completely different converters, and then to be able to switch between them, additionally, they have proprietary oversampling happening onboard (probably in a fairly high power full chip).

one of the unclear things is precisely this ....

the ares has its oversampling, we know that brings everything to 768khz with a series of filters that you can not select .......

and I suppose (at least that Alvin tells us otherwise) that the signal dsd that accepts input does the same thing .... that is all at 768khz.

.....of course I may be wrong ?

[barrows]

1 hour ago, giordy60 said:

and I suppose (at least that Alvin tells us otherwise) that the signal dsd that accepts input does the same thing .... that is all at 768khz.

No, Alvin mentioned that the Ares decodes native DSD, 768 kHz would not be native DSD.  Like other Denafrips DACs the Ares has both an R2R ladder for PCM conversion and a separate, discrete, DSD conversion stage (likely a discrete FIR filter similar to Jussi's DSC design).  Now since Denafrips does not tell all one does not know if their oversampler also oversamples DSD, but because this DSC style conversion for works better with DSD 4 and DSD 8, it is likely that the Denafrips oversamples DSD to at least DSD 4.

[luisma]

33 minutes ago, barrows said:

No, Alvin mentioned that the Ares decodes native DSD, 768 kHz would not be native DSD.  Like other Denafrips DACs the Ares has both an R2R ladder for PCM conversion and a separate, discrete, DSD conversion stage (likely a discrete FIR filter similar to Jussi's DSC design).  Now since Denafrips does not tell all one does not know if their oversampler also oversamples DSD, but because this DSC style conversion for works better with DSD 4 and DSD 8, it is likely that the Denafrips oversamples DSD to at least DSD 4.

I think it was already confirmed like you said that when not using NOS the dac will upsample to 384 or dsdx4 

[giordy60]

1 hour ago, barrows said:

No, Alvin mentioned that the Ares decodes native DSD, 768 kHz would not be native DSD.  Like other Denafrips DACs the Ares has both an R2R ladder for PCM conversion and a separate, discrete, DSD conversion stage (likely a discrete FIR filter similar to Jussi's DSC design).  Now since Denafrips does not tell all one does not know if their oversampler also oversamples DSD, but because this DSC style conversion for works better with DSD 4 and DSD 8, it is likely that the Denafrips oversamples DSD to at least DSD 4.

Interesting .......
I would like to know the opinion of Miska (since he has developed the DSC1) .....
( if he has had an ares in his hands ) 
or in denafrips would explain better what the little jewel of the house

?

[Reggy]

3 hours ago, giordy60 said:

.....you wondered why?....

....is not your dac resampling everything to a single resolution?....

if so, it is difficult to perceive differences .....

 

one of the unclear things is precisely this ....

the ares has its oversampling, we know that brings everything to 768khz with a series of filters that you can not select .......

and I suppose (at least that Alvin tells us otherwise) that the signal dsd that accepts input does the same thing .... that is all at 768khz.

.....of course I may be wrong ?

It upsamples everything to DSD 256 or 384 KHz, doing on the fly conversion (on the PC side) of my choice I could make out whether it was being fed native DSD 1X (input format DSD 64), DSD 2X ( (input format DSD 128), or DSD 4X (input format DSD 256)). Sure it lit up the lights and initially it felt cool that I could utilize the side of the design, but in the end it made no justice hearing the fans spin. 

 

I don't know how you guys get to enjoy it with on the fly conversion but for me its a gimmick that suppose to sound better but in the end it makes no real world difference except for added CPU usage and fan noise. There's been plenty of papers on the PCM Vs. DSD. , in the end most people would justify that PCM sounds more immediate while DSD is more rounded in sound or soft. 

 

If it were me I would say focus on the conversion process or design better chips to be able to avoid having to resort to DSD. I think the R2R DACs are starting to sprawl and do it right.

 

I wish the DSD was forgotten, its a time waster in life.

[Triplefun]

Schitt used to make the Loki dedicated DSD DAC. The Schitt Loki is now a 'tone control'. Schitt withdrew the Loki in 2016 (?) claiming a lack of native DSD material. I preferred the sabre delta sigma DSD sound to the Loki.

[barrows]

2 hours ago, Reggy said:

I don't know how you guys get to enjoy it with on the fly conversion but for me its a gimmick that suppose to sound better but in the end it makes no real world difference except for added CPU usage and fan noise. There's been plenty of papers on the PCM Vs. DSD. , in the end most people would justify that PCM sounds more immediate while DSD is more rounded in sound or soft.

I disagree, but it all depends on the DAC set up as well.  My computer running the oversampling is way off in my workroom isolated via Ethernet, where it does no harm to the audio system, and my DAC uses an ESS 9038 chip, which I feel sounds best when fed DSD 128 or higher.  This DAC is specially tuned to sound best with DSD 256, so that is how I run it.

How it sounds DSD vs. PCM is dependent on the oversampling, and there are a lot of choices here: suffice it to say, there are a number of different programs which allow for good conversions PCM-DSD on the fly.

Every DAC has a "sweet spot" of sample rate and type, but even better is if one can set up a DAC specifically just for one (high) sample rate one can optimize the set up even more.

[coach65]

I'm curious, when you guys listen to music do you listen to the sound or the performance? 

[Ralf11]

I listen to performers make sounds to create music 

[barrows]

13 hours ago, coach65 said:

I'm curious, when you guys listen to music do you listen to the sound or the performance? 

I have two hats, one is when I am working and that hat has me listening to the system and how it sounds.

 

Of course that is work, and I prefer listening to music.  My goal in music listening is to get to that place where I hear music, and the system is forgotten.

[firedog]

22 hours ago, Triplefun said:

Schitt used to make the Loki dedicated DSD DAC. The Schitt Loki is now a 'tone control'. Schitt withdrew the Loki in 2016 (?) claiming a lack of native DSD material. I preferred the sabre delta sigma DSD sound to the Loki.

Actually, Schiit said they withdrew the Loki b/c it didn't sell and they couldn't make money on it. They struggled to sell the small inventory they produced. So they saw no reason to keep making it once what they had made was gone. If it had sold decently, I'm sure they'd have kept making it.  

[Miska]

From today's point of view, Loki DAC is also a bit limited with only DSD64 support. This is likely mainly due to limitation of the USB interface Schiit uses (Cmedia) across the product range which is limited to max 192 kHz PCM, which in turn limits DoP to DSD64.

 

For the price at the time when it was introduced it was a fine DSD DAC. From today's point of view, it is just outdated.

 

[Miska]

On 8/26/2018 at 8:09 PM, Reggy said:

I don't know how you guys get to enjoy it with on the fly conversion but for me its a gimmick that suppose to sound better but in the end it makes no real world difference except for added CPU usage and fan noise. There's been plenty of papers on the PCM Vs. DSD. , in the end most people would justify that PCM sounds more immediate while DSD is more rounded in sound or soft. 

 

I use either fanless machines, or machines that have quiet enough fans that I cannot hear them even at full CPU load. I hate hearing fan noise, regardless if it is music playback or processing a video with video editor. Or of course you can just have the machine with noisy fans located somewhere else in the house.

 

On 8/26/2018 at 8:09 PM, Reggy said:

If it were me I would say focus on the conversion process or design better chips to be able to avoid having to resort to DSD. I think the R2R DACs are starting to sprawl and do it right.

 

Better chips would make the chips more expensive, while chips are designed to a certain price point. And likely have other design requirements such as no cooling solution needed. Also the very close proximity of sensitive analog parts on the same die impose limits on how much DSP processing power can be put on the die.

 

R2R DACs have their own inherent restrictions and so far I haven't seen a device that would have overcome these. This is why delta-sigma (including DSD) DACs have taken over. And with R2R you also need to use good digital filters and high as possible conversion rate to minimize the conversion errors.

 

Anyway, DACs like Denafrips and Holo Audio are best for comparing PCM (R2R) vs SDM (DSD) DACs, because there you have two native DACs everything else being the same. Of course these are still subject to particular implementation of the actual conversion.

[Miska]

On 8/26/2018 at 6:19 PM, giordy60 said:

Interesting .......
I would like to know the opinion of Miska (since he has developed the DSC1) .....
( if he has had an ares in his hands ) 
or in denafrips would explain better what the little jewel of the house

?

 

I'm very interested on Denafrips DACs (and all other discrete implementations). They look very much similar to Holo Audio DACs. I'm pondering between Ares and Pontus...

 

[Reggy]

5 hours ago, Miska said:

 

I'm very interested on Denafrips DACs (and all other discrete implementations). They look very much similar to Holo Audio DACs. I'm pondering between Ares and Pontus...

 

I do have the Ares and I am enjoying the musical delivery and presentation very much on my Genelec's. What would the purpose of you considering buying one of these DACs? A side grade, something different to listen to? Would you be using headphones, speakers, studio monitors?

[Miska]

52 minutes ago, Reggy said:

I do have the Ares and I am enjoying the musical delivery and presentation very much on my Genelec's. What would the purpose of you considering buying one of these DACs? A side grade, something different to listen to? Would you be using headphones, speakers, studio monitors?

 

I don't yet have a discrete DAC in my living room system, and Ares would fit on the small shelf there. I would like to have a discrete DAC in all of my systems. Currently I have Holo Audio Spring DAC L2 and T+A DAC8 DSD in the listening room and Holo Audio Cyan DSD on my office desk headphone system. Of course I have big bunch of other DACs too, but I like to have a discrete choice available in all systems.

 

But other than that, I'd like to measure/test it with HQPlayer just like all the other DACs too. Every additional DAC improves QA coverage...

 

[Reggy]

Well, I'm not really sure what purpose it would serve for you. Musically it is very pleasing to listen to, it has a nice articulate cool tone with speakers but measurement wise and technically I don't think it matches up to the performance of the Holo Spring, you even have the Holo Audio Cyan which I myself would be curious about in the future, the latest one? so I'm sure that would make a better bet for conveying the technicals. The measurements have all been thoroughly done at SBAF by AtomicBomb so I think were all covered there, you should see the work he puts in for that.

 

It has a nice cool natural sound of all the instruments playing music with ease like I said, however the microdynamics could certainly be bested using my imagination. It's the musical presentation which grasps people of how natural it sounds with modern day recordings. I would not use it for listening strictly to classical and jazz though.

 

I bought it to listen to music not the equipment and something under $1000, if you want the best of both worlds at least for testing and enjoying the technicalities than I suggest getting the latest gen Yggy as I believe the board was updated and that is something to get curious about.