2. digital
  3. 127596-388

Any comments on DAC going direct to power amplifier or to pre-ampliifer?

My local retailer HIGHLY RECOMMENDS the use of a pre-amplifier.  Bricasti believes that going direct to a power amplifier sounds better.  And, I also know that everyone had a "different opinion" about going direct or using a pre-amplifier.  

I am running my Bricast1 M1 SE DAC direct to my Hypex NCore NC400 Bridged Mono Block class D power amplifiers (no pre-amplifier) and like the sound quality very much.   

For me, the sound is more natural and clearer by going direct to a power amplifier. Of course, I think the M1 SE DAC has special “custom" circuits in the analog section to make it sound so good. I returned home and listened to my system.  It sounds terrific and I continue to enjoy and recommend the Bricasti M1 SE DAC.

Please note that we removed the R141 (circuit) from my Hypex NCore NC400 bridged mono blocks, thus lowering amplifier gain by 14 dB, requiring 14 dB higher M1 volume setting for same playback level.  Bricasti says the goal is to have the M1 CLOSE to 0db front panel attenuation.  If you reduce the volume on the M1 SE DAC, you cause more bit reduction meaning you lose sound quality.   We discussed this modification with Hypex and they approved the removal of the R141 circuit.  They suggested we be very careful removing the 4 R141 chips (for my 4 NC400 amplifiers) to avoid board damage.  

I noticed that many of the newer DAC’s (even the new Ayre QX-5 Twenty DAC and many others) have volume controls meaning their DAC/Pre-amplifiers are designed to go direct to a power amplifier (as an option, of course).  

What are your experiences of going direct to a power amplifier or using a pre-amplifier?  Have you compared going direct vs. going to a pre-amplfier and noticed any sound quality differences?  Have you gotten different results from using different DAC's and amplifiers?   Your comments are appreciated.  Thanks.





hgeifman
dragon_vibe
430 posts
 
EQ is something I would not recommend. Even in Studio Room setups I have been involved with Roger Quested. Both in UK, EU and Asia. We never EQ the system. Roger was always against it and advised to stay away from EQ as it will introduce more distortion into the system.

Hans Zimmer personal studio and production rooms were all setup by Roger. Non of them required EQ of any types and we are talking about 5.1 Systems. I hardly think you need to EQ a 2 channel setup as long as you focus some attention to the room it self.

Personally i have built a 24 and 16 channel room both with out a single ounce of EQ in the room. Some say it cant be done but sure it can the problem lies in how people setup the acoustical properties of the room. We did not even need to EQ 4 Large subwoofers. Phase shifts were corrected between the subwoofers and that’s about it.

My advise is to get your self a decent tube pre-amp.

georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 
If you want a better impedance match if you have a problem, this sorts it out without the need of an active preamp (tube or s/s) and their unnecessary amount of gain and colourations.
It’s a discrete impedance matching active buffer incorporated within the interconnects, and has just a little gain, far less than an active preamp would have. RCA to RCA $149aud, that's around $100usd 
https://www.bursonaudio.com/products/cable-plus-a2r/

Cheers George

mmeysarosh
126 posts
 
This particular topic will likely produce some of the most inconsistent responses, with nearly all of them having some validity. The same system with two differing files at the same levels will produce two differing results.

First, if the DAC is using digital attenuation to address amplitude, the ability to attenuate without loss will depend on the bit depth of the file. CD's offer 16 bit of data and LPCM files are often at 24 bit (but then we can also digress into the LSB/MSB factors as well). But lets go with the lowest factors for this example. Using red book standard, a 32-bit volume control can fully attenuate a digital signal without affecting its dynamic range. This being the most common format and the typical file format most music is published in gives it a pretty good starting point. If we move into 24 bit files, this dramatically reduces down to 44db of attenuation before perceptible loss. This can occur during high resolution playback and will be very system dependent on how much impact will occur.

This by no means addresses the interaction between the analog stages of the pairing. It can be measured, but often must be done by ear to determine how well they may interact.

You could even achieve differing results with a speaker change. If one is significantly more sensitive and requires more attenuation, its resulting sound may differ more so than the speaker change as the digital dither could have greater impact at the differing amplitude levels.

So I don't believe any answer provided can established a preferred route. Just a demonstration that differing configuration may have varied results.
sunandmusic
27 posts
 
I prefer the direct connection with my Audio Note DAC 5. It feeds my Plinius SS power amplifier via a passive pre. The line stage in my DAC is basically the Audio Note M6 pre-amplifier line stage and power supply, so no point in doubling up gain. I think it comes down to output impedance (lower the better) and current delivery (not just 2v / 6v) but have enough drive for the next stage (power amp). Keep the interconnects really short, and use an analogue passive / pot or transformer passive.

A key for impedance mismatch is a tipped up balance (no real bass) and reduced dynamics. The rewards for getting it to work is less coloration and lower noise floor (especially if your pre-amp is tubed) and faster slew rates. And more 3D soundstage. If it sounds better with a pre-amp it may be the DAC is too bright already, or the impedance matching is off.
I am not sure it would work so well with an SS DAC and SS power amp though....
georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 
A key for impedance mismatch is a tipped up balance (no real bass)
It’s more to do with the source, if it has an output coupling capacitor being too small (in uF), which yes raise the ouput impedance, when in conjunction with the input impedance of the passive. This forms high pass filter (a low frequency roll off) that can start too early and chop out some of the low bass.
But it’s a simple fix, replace the coupling cap in the source with 2 or 3 x the uF (microfard) and while at it a better quality one.
That's why I prefer sources with direct coupled outputs, no cap to worry about. BEST CAP IS NO CAP.

Cheers George
More to discover