Are DAC's overpriced?

Chord Dave.  I rest my case for that expensive DACs make a difference.

I’m so relieved that the Rams will not have to face the Bears. Now, as to:

No, an increase in dynamic range only results in a lower noise floor. To suggest it has any other benefit (effecting the sound “across the board”) shows that you do not know what dynamic range is on a fundamental level. We are not talking microdynamics here.

So when there is a lowering of the noise floor and the sound improves (microdynamics included), it’s all incidental?

(congrats ont the Chord Dave)

All the best,
Nonoise

@nonoise  
 
An increase in bit-depth only lowers the noise floor, that’s it.

If that’s it, then what are the benefits of doing so if not to improve the sound quality of the music?

From what I understand, noise floor is the threshold from which lower signals can not be resolved. Those signals are music that can’t be differentiated from the noise.

Ridding the noise that clouds musical signals, harmonics and spatial clues doesn’t benefit anything like the music you can now hear?

I think the problem is you only "see" things mathematically, without art or it’s contributions that the math can only approximate. Music can be measured linearly but when it’s actually played, it’s a different animal. You really should get to know these animals. They’re beautiful.

I’ve always believed that 16bit recordings are all one needs, when done correctly. Take Tony Manasian’s work that I’ve mentioned in other threads. His work rivals any high rez junk out there, and betters most.

I know we all have to deal with high noise floors in our rooms which limits dynamic range so we really only have so much to play with. But any way one can reduce the noise floor betters the sound, or so everything I’ve read says, except you.

Call me dense, but I’m used to it. 😄

All the best,
Nonoise

 @nonoise

16Bit has its noise floor limit at -96dB (it still can have audio embedded lower than that level). Almost all music is mastered to 0dBFS (clipping) is 105dBC, this your room must have a noise floor lower than 9dBC, even the most optimistic values for orchestral/classical recordings aren’t mastered higher than 120dBC, in which the room noise floor would have to be lower than 24dBC.

My living room is open-concept, so a bit noises than normal, but it’s noise floor is about 46dBC. In terms of speaker wattage, a difference of 22dB (46-24) is the same as a speaker being fed 1W vs 160W, it’s a staggering abount or difference, I don’t know any residential rooms that quiet.

Also keep in mind those mastering values are for only that genre of content (and not even the whole genre, only a portion) and most people don’t listen at reference levels (like for movies I’m usually -8dB or -12dB below reference). It also isn’t taking into account that no meaningful data is that low, especially when music >70dB louder is being played, masking it

So no, you won’t hear any benefit going from 16Bit to 24Bit. 
 
Oh, and also remember I didn’t even talk about noise-shaped dither, which can make a 16Bit signal have a noise floor of like 105dB-120dB. So again, 16Bit is enough, and further showing that things like jitter have been a non-issue for many years, even Apple’s USB-C dongle DAC has a Jitter-Test of better than -110dB. Now, not saying no modern DACs are immmune,  but any competent one (even the $9 Apple dongle) has no audible issues with jitter.

The OP must be so pleased; reading your irrelevant arguments.
And so off topic, considering his original question.

My listening changed once I started using DACs.

Now use a Beresford SEG, with Beresford Dorado power supply.
Very smooth, quiet, (cheap), with a low noise floor.

Yes, I feel a bit guilty responding as a certain someone wouldn't stop interjecting after being asked not to and to start his own thread. I would have been happy with that but I got a bit fed up as well. I shouldn't have and I won't any longer.

All the best,
Nonoise

@jerrybj 
 
The thread is about overpriced DACs, so when you look at the performance of say an SMSL SU-8, then yes, something like a Chord Dave, Vivaldi, etc. are overpriced from a pure performance standpoint. 

There seems to be a strong odor of ASR Forum emanating from this corner of Audiogon. Or is that eau de Hydrogenaudio?

When my trusty warhorse and high moded  Pioneer PS65 (stable platter) died, I went into a deep search mode as my budget was/is limited. after days of searching and reading, I settled on a Marantz HD CD 1.(MSRP $650) In addition to being a player it has toslink AND coax out.

My dac/pre is Audio Alchemy, which even has inputs for a streamer. My intent was/is to use it as a transport, so I never listened to the player circuit.

I had been using it all long with toslink but something in my system was not as it should be. I started a hunt to replace my AA DPA-1 amp with AA monos, then PS Audio 700 monos, or Nord Ice/N Core

FORTUNATELY, before I pulled the trigger, I got to hear my system via a prototype coax (not at liberty to say whose)  but the cable was TRANSFORMATIVE

SO, IMHO, MAKE SURE WHATEVER YOU REPLACE IT WITH HAS COAX

HTH

mzkmxcv289 posts01-06-2019 6:38pm@geoffkait

In terms of music mastering (like the DR Database may score one song a 6 and one song a 12). This is the comparison of RMS vs peak levels (or some variant).

In terms of digital audio as a format, it’s the amount of bits. CD is 16Bit, so, if undithered, it has ~96dB of dynamic range (20*log10(2^16)). Meaning from the loudest sound possible all the way down to the lowest noise possible (due to the noise floor), it is a difference of ~96dB.

>>>>The dynamic range is independent of noise. It’s the ratio of two levels of loudness. Loudless level to softest level. Noise has nothing to do with it. Signal to Noise ratio provides the relation (ratio) of signal level to noise level. Dynamic range compression has nothing to do with noise.

Just a little point here - I had a 2900 and it was a well-built unit with a smooth, non-offensive sound.  I hope you find a nice dac you are happy with, but don't automatically assume you will prefer it to what you have.  That's why you really have to try and see for yourself.  Personally, I prefer 1-box units for their simplicity and not having to deal with digital cables, reclockers, whatever.  But I'm a simple guy.  :)

@elizabeth 

Believe we have. Just don't necessarily need a 7k dac for that  :-)

@geoffkait  
 
Again no, it has multiple definitions. 
 
A CD has 96dB of dynamic range available, it does not have a 96dB SNR, that’s a measurement of gear (amplifiers, DACs, etc.).

I’m afraid I must disagree. 😬

FORTUNATELY, before I pulled the trigger, I got to hear my system via a prototype coax (not at liberty to say whose) but the cable was TRANSFORMATIVE

This is simply jitter reduction, and probably not much of it. If you think that is good, try a really good silver BNC terminated coax cable with a Synchro-Mesh reclocker.  7psec of jitter directly measured. You eyes will pop out of your head.

I used to mod AA DAC's and resamplers BTW.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

chayro... "Just a little point here - I had a 2900 and it was a well-built unit with a smooth, non-offensive sound. I hope you find a nice dac you are happy with, but don't automatically assume you will prefer it to what you have. That's why you really have to try and see for yourself. Personally, I prefer 1-box units for their simplicity and not having to deal with digital cables, reclockers, whatever. But I'm a simple guy. :)"

I received a "Box O Goodies" today from my mentor In the industry and I will say this... I don't need a DAC with the 2900... not with my simple two channel system! I changed the speaker wires and that made a very nice, much more open sounding rig. I'm not going Tidal or buying a new computer to listen to something I don't own! 

http://i802.photobucket.com/albums/yy302/thegainster/49667060_235612500648601_5983303984981475328_n....

Possibly yes if it's built around a Sabre chip. Possibly no if it's R2R or FPGA.

What are “the” chips to look for?

I think the question about audio products being over-prices are pretty meaningless unless you explain your thinking in more detail. If you don't think you can hear any difference at all between a $100 dac and a $10 000 dac you can just buy the cheap one and be happy. Many people listen to cheap bluetooth speakers and are happy.

If you mean that a specific piece of gear is overrpices you could elaborate a bit more why you think so. I think that TotalDACs and dCS dacs are expensive but I did like them when I heard them at an audio show. At the same time I don't have the financial means to buy any of them so I don't really care. I hope that some of the technologies inside ripple down to cheaper dacs sooner or later.

If I had a stereo bought for about $10 000 I would probably be looking for dacs around $2000 up to $3000. If I had a stereo bought for +$100 000 and had the money to buy new things to it (I wish) I would also look at the expensive dacs but try to listen and compare them to some $3000 dacs.

If you just want something and don't think dacs matter you could by a Chord Mojo or a iFi Micro Black Label and use that for a few months. Then you can try to find something better and try to compare it with your current dac. Those are easy to carry around if you want to bring them to a store and compare there (some stores will let you do that).

@captbeaver 
 
ESS Saber chips (9018 and newer 9038 are very popular) 
 
AKM chips (4458 is probably the most popular chip out there, they have higher end ones like the 4490 and such). 
 
There’s a few other brands, but nowadays these two make up the majority, and for good reason.

Looking for a DAC based on the chip is fraught with problems.  SQ is  more affected by the implementation than the chipset.

I did a shootout of several chips a few years ago and I didn't like the switched-capacitor sound of the AKM chips.  The only chip I ever disliked.  I would avoid those.

Steve N.

Burr-Brown PCM1704U-J and PCM1704U-K are vintage R2R chips that people seem to prefer to the currently ubiquitous ESS Sabre chips.

The Burr-Browns were something like $20 each at one time.

I learned that many of these so-called vintage chips only support 16/44.1 Redbook rates. Not saying they’re bad, just saying they were designed for CD players as opposed to support the current hi-rez content at higher rates such as 24/96 or 24/192. Lots of folks prefer them over the ESS chips more targeted for hi-rez playback.Your ears/brain is the best judge.

@audioengr

The Oppo 203 uses AKM 4458’s , should people avoid that? As you said, implementation is everything, which is why the Benchmark DAC3 using the ESS 9018 still outclasses cheeped products using the better 9038 (of course this is measurement wise, they audibly won’t be too different).

Under $500, buy a schiit bifost multibit.
Under 2 k, buy a Chord  2qute or Qutest.
It will make a difference, how much is up to ur ears......it is relative.
Good luck.

Not that you need to spend a fortune to achieve this. On the contrary, if you are smart and selective and take advice from the RIGHT people, you can get there on a budget. I think for an entire system, the threshold is probably $20K-$30K. Anything below that will tend to be mid-fi with 2-D presentation between the speakers IME.

Biggest load of nonsense.

i am still using a NAD D1050 which is now 5 years old. you can get these for about $450 and they sound terrific. the NAD will not playback MQA or DSD, but it will playback 24/192 and 16/44.1 on good Classical recordings can be spell binding. most POP recordings can not compete with a good Classical recording. but their are exceptions. have not heard anything much better in the last 5 years. if NAD had thought they could have produced something better in the intervening years considering their huge R&D budget i am sure they would have by now.  the golden age of digital is over.

Insert shameless plug for HiFiBerry (a Pi-based high res DAC) here: [       ]

I am a believer in high-end DAC's.  I was convinced to throw down some serious cash on an MSB Analog DAC with fancy power supply and volume control (as equipped, $12K+, new), which replaced my preamp as well (Plinius 12P).  I think that it was a good improvement over my already good DAC/streamer Naim NDX.  But as everything in audio, how big an improvement is dependent on so many factors, such as speakers, room, amplification, power, cabling, etc.  Highly revealing speakers will show more differences than rolled off "warm" ones, etc.  That's the irony of audio, I suppose.  The more expensive your components are, the more expensive they need to be to sound good.  So are DAC's overpriced?  It depends on your system. a $90K DAC in a $20K system . .. probably not a great match.  Then there is the unique language of reviewers:
"noticeably more presence" = 5% better
"makes you feel right there" = 5% better
"a big difference over my reference" = 10% better
"Blows away my reference ___" = 10-15% better
"to my ears, the most amazing ___ since the invention of the transistor" = 15% better.

A little off-topic, but just once I'd like to read an Absolute Sound or Stereophile review that instead of gushing superlatives says "this piece of equipment costs $20K and sounds no better than a $3000 one.  Buy it if you want, and it sounds good, but its just not worth the money."

I run a Peachtree DAC iT, which is their older model.  Picked it up about 5 years ago and paid full-ticket of about $500.  Sounds awesome and you can find them on EBay for about $125 or so.  The newer iTx model does 192 khz whereas my older beast only does 96 khz.  But since I only use it for playing back Redbook grade files, it's fine for me.

you got that right 

OK, I'll try to provide a little less rant-ish reply ;_) (although i stand by what i said).
If your question is really "what should I do about my digital?" - that's a very different question.  let me first emphasize truths that have been stated here in different places that I support:
1. A DAC is only as good as the jitter of the signal it is sent.  Jitter directly impacts the analog output by determining the points in PAM on a horizontal axis. SPDIF is NOT a pure digital signal when only bit recovery matters.
2. Anyone's ability to resolve and appreciate DAC differences is therefore depending on the transport signal.
3. Similarly it is dependent on the rest of the system (duh, but often overlooked when someone ways "i didin't hear a difference" (through some god-awful or simply inexpensive system)
4. SPDIF is synchronous, with the source as the master clock. USB is asynchronous withe the DAC as the only clock.  Therefore USB frees DACs from the tyranny of jitter (but picks up USB noise). I don't mean jitter doesn't matter, just that the jitter is now under the DAC's control.
5. The law of diminishing marginal gains lives. This is why "are they overpriced" is such a fraught question. To some yes, To others no. They cost what they cost.
6. Pay little attention to the chip used.  Worry about jitter, power supply design, digital (pre/up filtering), analog driver and post-filter - you know, the analog stuff :-)
Two new thoughts:
Digital - like all formats is more compromised by the recording process than decent playback. Listen to a regular old 44/16 recording "ella and louis" on a good system - not crazy good, but pretty darn good. 60 year old analog recording, competent transfer to digital, glorious.  We don't necessarily need high-res, we need competent, pure sound obsessed, recording and mastering engineers.  Note: if you are a 50 year old rock and roller with hearing loss, you may demand treble boost.  Bzzzt.

I have some very old but good DACs that stand up to upper-middle competition of today's very well, with my compromised transport (yea, my bad). I plan to switch to a ROON server and move away from SPDIF as much as possible to fix this ( and use a very good low jitter USB--> SPDIF for the legacy stuff, maybe my own frankenbox, maybe the new Schiit - Mike's smart).  I do have a frankenbox today - tandem PLLs that helps. Some.
Have fun. Sorry if i was a crank earlier. My point is that there are facts we can use - and a bunch of opinions, with no assumptions listed, are like signals with floating grounds.  Yikes!

G

I look at it this way:

I only listen to my stereo about 5 hours a week (about 280 hours a year). Let's say I buy a $2k DAC and keep it for 5 years.  That's about $1.50/hour.  I can easily cover that cost if I buy my wine by the case instead of individual bottles.  The more expensive your wine, the more money you will have saved to buy an even more expensive DAC.  So if you have a glass or two of wine while your listening, you can buy the DAC of your dreams without denting the household budget!

I remember when affordable DACs like Audio Alchemy and Theta Chrome were popular, the average blue collar guy like myself could afford one.   I had several early DACs and most were pretty good...at least better than the average decent CD player at the time.  There were always killer dacs like dcs and MSB among others but then DACs fell out of fashion....

My first DAC was an Audio Alchemy 1.1 , shortly after that I bought a like new California Audio Labs Alpha for half price.  It was a great DAC but like a fool I sold it.   I've had a few others si ce and my current DAC is a NAD M51 which still sou ds pretty damn good.   

I was blown away at the quality of MQA streams through my Bluesound Vault 2i, it's hard to say what sounds better, the M51 decoding the 24/96 stream or the player unfolding MQA but for most MQA I've listened to sounded better than it's redbook version....  not that I'm in the market for a new DAC but one thing is for sure, I'm not replacing the NAD until DACs with dsd and MQA are mainstream and somewhat within reach. 

The average blue collar guy can buy a Schiit Modi for $99.  I did.
Interesting you brought up MSB. I have a Full Nelson Gold. Also added a magic tandem PLL in it, and over the past few weeks built God's own (with apologies to God) external power supply - which made a big difference. That thing is still competitive.
G

I used to think DACs made little difference until I tried the Chord DAVE. Whether it's overpriced... well, that comes down to your own financial situation as ultimately value is subjective and cost is relative.

mrkoven-
Can you provide more context on your system, room, listening method, expectations, and findings?
I'll note that discussing the DAVE int he context of budget DACs is kinda silly.... but its nice that you can try such things. I like the qutest a lot.

G

Man, the reply’s here are all over the place. After 40 years of the high end and also working for dealers and hearing everything out there, it doesn’t take long for me to decide to buy when I hear something great without the several thousand dollar price tag. 
My advice in your case is for to you to buy a really good value used stand alone CD player like Rega Apollo and start there.
If you want to play computer audio files, then you will need a DAC. Chord Hugo 2 and Ayre Codex are excellent value and sound and both available used this week on AudioGon for less than $2K. So far,  I have not heard a below $1000 retail DAC that I would buy.
I also find that tube output stages sound a lot more like live music than anything else. Wavelength DACS are wonderful in their musicality and soundstage. 
If you are buying retail through a local dealer, they should allow you to try at home before you buy, or pay for it and return it in a week if not wanted.

Oh, also don’t forget the wire and the power supply. They make a big difference. I use Audience cable, and it isn’t cheap, but their new budget cable Ohno is unbelievably good for the money. Battery power or upgraded switching power supplies for computer audio can make a big difference. 

I am really appreciative of the experiences shared here so I will hopefully throw out a DAC question that someone has a reference from which to share. I am considering inserting a PS Audio DSD in between my Oppo 205 and Hegel H300 to stream MQA Tidal through Roon. Worth it? Nordost Frey loom and Dynaudio 260’s. Thanks for any opinions.

If all your playing is Red Book CD's than look at some of the top of the line DAC's from the early 90's. They used R2R chips. Today a lot of the super expensive DAC's are going back to R2R topology but they have to do it the hard way because there are no more R2R chips made. Instead of precision laser trimmed resistor banks (Inside of the DAC Chip) now they have to use carefully matched SMD resistors and solder them to a circuit board.
Even one of the owners of Schitt lamented that these chips are no longer available and claims that the Burr Brown PCM63P DAC chip was the best ever made.Why? Because they sound so dam good!I have a Parasound D/AC1000 that uses the BB PMC63P chips, it has three analog PS, one for the digital section and two for the analog audio section. It sounds very musical and they can be purchased cheap. New in 1990 they cost 1000.00, not exactly chump change. 100.00 to 200.00 is what they sell for on Ebay.
So today the high end DAC's are moving back to the older technology to get better sound. The DS style DAC's just don't compete.

BillWojo

+1 Elizabeth 

There are some good sounding low cost DACs and some not so good expensive ones. But the best ones seem to be fairly expensive. As with most stuff. 

R2Rs are back on the market from Analog Devices. Schiit is using them in almost all their DACs as an upgrade.
Now, i'll debate that they are hands down better. I had a new schiit BiFrost MultiBit (R2), a MSB Gold Full Nelson, and a Theta DSPro Gen 2 - and we listened side by side, back and forth.  Frankly, different but very, very close.  People worry too much about chips and not enough about execution-  everything from digital filtering to power supplies to jitter reduction etc etc

I should add that all three, on good sounding CDs, were quite excellent. On bad material, well, GIGO.  The MSB was probably the most dynamic. The Schiit and the Theta had a strong family resemblance, a more laid-back presentation, and therefore maybe friendlier to poor material, with the Theta having a bit more heft than the Schiit. Then again it was $4000+ when it was new, and the Schiit is $599, and power supply and analog stage design have changed little in the interim.
I expect that a better source with truly low jitter could have changed the outcome - and made a bigger difference than choosing any of the DACs over each other.  I would like to ( and will) compare the same CD through the Schiit played over USB (asynchronous, DAC clocking) and a run-of-the-mill transport (synchronous, transport clocking).  I expect that will be enlightening.  The Schiit alas, is not mine so it takes a bit more doing.