What DAC technology was most advanced in CD & SACD players

[beerandmusic]

Does anyone know what some of the most expensive SACD or CD players were and what DAC technology they incorporated?

I am sure there were some very expensive decks back in the day and most likely related to the internal DAC?

I don't think external DACS were that popular for the most sophisticated audiophiles before computer audio....i am assuming most audiophiles had a highend player plugged into their preamp?

[Panelhead]

  The Playback Designs Memory players seemed to be excellent. I thought a Marantz SA-7 was close to SOTA until I heard a PM-5 or something close in the same system. 

  Swapped back and forth with the same disc. The Memory player was much better. I had meat in this shootout and was more than a little hurt. It was a 10,000.00 player kicking a 7,000.00 player.

[PeterSt]

15 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

I don't think external DACS were that popular for the most sophisticated audiophiles before computer audio.

 

Of course they were. But maybe it is hard to recall other stuff than Audio Note, unless it was that whole world of niche NOS DACs (which later became Audio Note's best feature just the same).

 

Good stand alone players I don't recall. OK, Teac VRDS 10, maybe. But from there I exactly skipped that and bought a transport only (Teac P10 IIRC) with a separate DAC (I recall Stax).

 

SACD could not exist in a separate DAC, so that's an other matter all together (but I never owned a single SACD).

 

15 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

Does anyone know what some of the most expensive SACD or CD players were

 

Ask GUTB.

[PeterSt]

1 hour ago, Panelhead said:

The Playback Designs Memory players seemed to be excellent.

 

Not wanting to go against your gist (because you are correct) but this was already many years after (so to speak). But to be literal: the memory player was the sheer example of how XXHighEnd had to be developed (this was 2005/2006). And I still claim that XXHighEnd is the only player which genuinely (throughout) operates like that. Of course people may now claim that all is played "from memory" but this is really something different, like the hardware memory player (I mean : single box without external PC) was really something different.

 

Disclaimer: I am not so sure that was Playback Designs. I just don't recall that one as the first memory player.

[PeterSt]

Here: https://positive-feedback.com/Issue28/novaphysics_memoryplayer.htm

Time frame fits (see 2006 at the bottom).

 

Glancing over that article, I'd say it is an interesting read. At least for me it was all about that.

[PeterSt]

From that article:

 

We have also seen some very sophisticated CD transports appear on the scene over the years, with the Esoteric VRDS transport mechanism leading the pack.

 

Haha

 

[PeterSt]

15 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

But maybe it is hard to recall other stuff than Audio Note

 

MSB. And probably many more. Man, that was last century !

[Ralf11]

18 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

From that article:

 

We have also seen some very sophisticated CD transports appear on the scene over the years, with the Esoteric VRDS transport mechanism leading the pack.

 

Haha

 

 

when you don't understand how digital signals work, you are apt to dump dollars into many sandboxes

[mav52]

CAry 306 Pro SACD/CD https://www.stereophile.com/hirezplayers/1108cary/index.html

[Hugo9000]

Denon received approval for transmission of undecoded DSD streams via its proprietary Denon Link (3rd Gen).  This effectively made their units SACD transports, but you had to have one of their receivers also equipped with Denon Link.

 

Regarding separate transports and DACs before computer audio, the closest to "mainstream" that I know of was from Madrigal.  When they introduced their Proceed line, it consisted of an all-in-one CD player, and a separate transport and DAC.  This was in 1990.  I know other companies did it earlier, but I personally never saw any at dealers or "in the wild" other than the Madrigal Proceed units.  I really wanted either the CD player or the transport/DAC combo at the time!  As you can see, they didn't merely rebadge a mainstream unit or plop it intact into another case unlike certain other "high end" companies have been known to do! lol

 

[Miska]

dCS has been doing pretty expensive stuff for quite a while, and the DACs are similar discrete designs with their current ones which are evolution from the older ones.

 

EMM Labs / Meitner are also quite expensive are and are AFAIK discrete designs. Same goes for Playback Designs. And for both, newer hardware are evolution of the technology they've been using for quite a while.

 

Esoteric/TEAC has been using COTS DAC chips AFAIK, so nothing extraordinary there.

 

From my own current hardware, my 5.1 channel Sony SACD player pickup head has died by itself without use in the storage over the years. So that player is not operational anymore. It has Sony's own big custom DSD processor chip and custom Burr-Brown DAC chips. Now I still have a stereo Pioneer SACD player that works fine and IIRC uses Wolfson DAC chips (that have Direct DSD mode too), or maybe TI/BB, not 100% sure. I also had some other CD/SACD players but those have been long gone, like Marantz CD-60 which had the typical all-Philips design of the time; Philips CDM4 pickup block, SAA7220 4x digital filter and pair of TDA1541A DAC chips, followed by analog reconstruction filters built around Signetics (Philips) NE5532 opamps.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

6 hours ago, Hugo9000 said:

Denon received approval for transmission of undecoded DSD streams via its proprietary Denon Link (3rd Gen). 

As did Accuphase, iirc.

[Miska]

Ahh, and I still have two of my own old DAC designs from early 90's operational:

1) One with Yamaha YM3623 S/PDIF receiver, BB DF1700 8x digital filter and BB PCM1700 DAC chip, followed by analog reconstruction filter built around AD833 + OPA627 op amps.

2) Another with Crystal (now called Cirrus Logic) CS8412 S/PDIF receiver + CS4328 DAC chip ("the" 1-bit 64x fs delta-sigma DAC chip)

 

I used these with S/PDIF output from the Marantz CD-60.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

5 minutes ago, Miska said:

One with Yamaha YM3623 S/PDIF receiver, BB DF1700 8x digital filter and BB PCM1700 DAC chip, followed by analog reconstruction filter built around AD833 + OPA627 op amps.

I built one like that but with BB PCM63 DAC chips.  Not terrible.

[Miska]

1 hour ago, Kal Rubinson said:

I built one like that but with BB PCM63 DAC chips.  Not terrible.

 

I have one of such too still, but it is not operational anymore. I've taken out the S/PDIF receiver and digital filter chips for something else. I've been every now and then tempted to connect XMOS USB interface straight to the PCM63P DAC chips (to the DF1700 pin holes) and use HQPlayer as digital filter for it. I've shortly tried once with wire hassle, but needs to be done properly to have decent jitter performance.

 

[Hugo9000]

1 hour ago, Kal Rubinson said:

As did Accuphase, iirc.

Yes, Accuphase as well, although I'm not sure what the timeline was on theirs, as Accuphase equipment was/is outside my price range! 

 

I know that Denon Link goes back to 2005 at least, as the dealer tried to persuade me to purchase the higher-priced Denon player and receiver that featured that.  I stuck to my guns and bought the DVD-2910 (pre-Blu-ray "universal" player) with multi-channel analogue outputs and AVR-2805 that still serve me well to this day. 

[Kal Rubinson]

13 minutes ago, Hugo9000 said:

Yes, Accuphase as well, although I'm not sure what the timeline was on theirs, as Accuphase equipment was/is outside my price range! 

 

I know that Denon Link goes back to 2005 at least, as the dealer tried to persuade me to purchase the higher-priced Denon player and receiver that featured that.

I believe that Accuphase's use preceded Denon's but, due to their niche market, was not as well known.  In fact, I recall asking Accuphase how they can get away with sending DSD to their DACs when it was presumed impossible and their response was the result of Sony's approval of their proprietary link, as was the case with Denon.

[One and a half]

1 hour ago, Kal Rubinson said:

As did Accuphase, iirc.

A long time ago now! The 1st separate DAC to read in SACD format was the DC-101 introduced in July 2000. This input was a coded type that could only be read by Accuphase products, it was, and still is their HS-Link, an encrypted LVDS system using RJ45 connectors. The predecessor DAC DC-91 released in December 1992 was capable of accepting 48 kHz PCM samples via S/PDIF, but no HS link capability. Further reading is from their product museum page here. The brochures in classic Japanese audio style, have technical explanations worth reading about. In the days pre-internet, their brochures were the only way to 'sell' product.

 

The current method of D to A conversion, relies on mutliple DACs receiving time delayed signals. The outputs are to smaller I to V, which are then summed. The idea is that utlising smaller and larger quantities of I to V converters produces a lot less THD and improves S/N. Full version explanation.

[tmtomh]

On 12/18/2018 at 7:20 AM, beerandmusic said:

Does anyone know what some of the most expensive SACD or CD players were and what DAC technology they incorporated?

I am sure there were some very expensive decks back in the day and most likely related to the internal DAC?

I don't think external DACS were that popular for the most sophisticated audiophiles before computer audio....i am assuming most audiophiles had a highend player plugged into their preamp?

 

Actually, the DAC wasn't the main cost driver in most cases, especially for very expensive, high-end equipment. The real expense was in the analogue section and power supply, and to a degree in the disc transport mechanism and chassis materials.

 

I'm not saying the DAC was not part of the cost - but my understanding is that it was a surprisingly small part of it. If you look at CD players from, say, the mid to late '80s, you'll see some insanely expensive audiophile machines that used the same Philips DACs that were in bog-standard consumer units costing just a few hundred dollars.

[Allan F]

On 12/18/2018 at 4:20 AM, beerandmusic said:

I don't think external DACS were that popular for the most sophisticated audiophiles before computer audio....i am assuming most audiophiles had a highend player plugged into their preamp?

 

 Not necessarily so. Separate CD/SACD transports combined with stand alone DACs were quite popular in the high end back in the day. Mark Levinson produced both, as did Theta Digital.

[Miska]

6 hours ago, Allan F said:

 Not necessarily so. Separate CD/SACD transports combined with stand alone DACs were quite popular in the high end back in the day. Mark Levinson produced both, as did Theta Digital.

 

Yes, I remember many many DACs from 90's. At that time pretty much all CD spinners had either optical or coaxial S/PDIF output and many had both like the Marantz CD-60 for example. And external DAC was popular way to improve sound without changing the physical drive.

 

Audio Alchemy was one of the first I remember. QED made less expensive DACs based on Philips Bitstream (1-bit) chips. And of course Wadia was another popular one.

 

DACs have had huge second coming with computer audio and streaming services.

 

Audio Alchemy Digital Decoding Engine (aka DDE), seems to be based on Philips Bitstream chipset:

 

Audio Alchemy Dac In The Box (same receiver chip I used, but Yamaha YM3434 8x digital filter and Analog Devices AD1860 DAC chips):

 

 

P.S. Looking at the datasheet, that Yamaha digital filter seems to be better than what can be found inside many modern DAC chips. Just like the old Burr-Brown DF170x too:

http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/df1704.pdf

Beats, IMO, for example ESS ES9038.

[Miska]

6 hours ago, tmtomh said:

Actually, the DAC wasn't the main cost driver in most cases, especially for very expensive, high-end equipment. The real expense was in the analogue section and power supply, and to a degree in the disc transport mechanism and chassis materials.

 

Usually those end up costing more, but of course overall performance depends on all components...

 

6 hours ago, tmtomh said:

I'm not saying the DAC was not part of the cost - but my understanding is that it was a surprisingly small part of it. If you look at CD players from, say, the mid to late '80s, you'll see some insanely expensive audiophile machines that used the same Philips DACs that were in bog-standard consumer units costing just a few hundred dollars.

 

That hasn't changed since at all...

 

[audiventory]

As far as I know, most advanced DAC technology for PCM is "sigma-delta based DAC".

 

DSD DAC have no PCM issues and, in general, DSD DAC is simpler, than PCM one.

Simpler devices have lesser internal element number, and have potential possibilities to achieve better sound quality.

 

Read details:

1. https://samplerateconverter.com/educational/r2r-ladder-dac-vs-sigma-delta
    
2. https://samplerateconverter.com/educational/nos-dac

[Allan F]

1 hour ago, audiventory said:

DSD DAC have no PCM issues and, in general, DSD DAC is simpler, than PCM one.

 

SACD/DSD pioneer Andreas Koch of Playback Designs has pointed out at many seminars that a DSD bit stream is a lot closer to analog than PCM.

[lucretius]

In the mid 80's, I had a cheap Pioneer CD player that sounded pretty good.