Are "vintage" DAC's worthwhile, or is this a tech that does not age well

I am listening to a Dac built in 1995 and it sounds sublime. There's a lot more to Dacs than the latest digital technology.

I have found that at least on the few dacs that I have tried that you can put a very good modern USB to SPDIF converter in front of it and get excellent up to date USB performance.  Also,  I purchased a SMSL M500 Dac and was pleasantly surprised at its performance.  It definitely out performs the other in expensive DACs that I've had in my system. and believe me, I wasn't delusional.  The differences were very audible.  I have now owned 11 different inexpensive DACs,  many were similar, but some varied wildly.  

You did not say how much you were planning to spend. I would not invest in a old dac though 
but a nice R2R dac like a Holo springs May dac,
Denafrips R2R dacs ,even black ice  audio burr brown tube dac ,Topping 9
many options depending on budget to spend ,many prices and different flavors depending on your audio systems sonic signature.

@charles1dad +1.

My current DAC and the one in my friend’s system (Michael Spallone, who modifies the Synergistic Research MPCs here and the other site), both have NOS DACs with older chips and we’re thrilled.
Michael’s system is the most three dimensional and holographic system I’ve ever heard with unbelievable depth.
Oh, and he doesn’t even have a standalone DAC, he has a CD player.

@miglos,
1 High quality good sounding vintage DACs can hold their own against many of the current generation DACs. A lot of the very good older DACs were well engineered and have very good power suppliers and analogue output stages. What they'll often  lack is modern connectivity and flexibility.  If your main listening is Redbook/16/44 you can obtain excellent sound quality. 

2 I can appreciate differences in DACs as easily as I can with different cartridges or other audio components. I reject the "all DACs pretty much sound the same" not by a long shot.
Charles 

Older DACs will still sound as good (or bad) as they were originally, but there have been significant advances in DAC implementations. So I would recommend at least listening to some newer DACs before deciding to go with an older one.

Improvement of technology in amplifier or dac are not synonymous with an automatic improvement in S.Q. in your own room, gear and electrical grid.... And a change on some aspect of sound is NOT an improvement in itself just a change, an improvement is a change on all aspect of sound simultaneously: details but also natural tonal timbre, imaging but also soundstage, listener envelopment but also source width....Any change on only one or 2 aspect is not necessarily an improvement, but only moving the unadressed problems around one upgrade after an another....Most people call a change from warm to more details or the reverse an improvement and it is not an improvement AT ALL just a moving around of unadressed problem....







The real question is with the least money possible how will i make my actual dac sound great? Is it possible? if yes why upgrading at all?

Some vintage dac can probably sound so good in the right "environment" that upgrading them will look like silliness.... It is my case....

But people dont know what is an environment: a mechanical,electrical and acoustical environment.... The words "embeddings" here is replaced by environment for a best understanding....New words are terrifying it seems... 😁😊

a change of a piece of gear is often  only a "change", a moving around of the problem, not an improvement....

To this day, the Audio Note Level 5 Special is a state of the art, sought after DAC. MSRP in 2008 was $80K! It can only be used to play Redbook and SACD only having a SPDIF input. I feel fortunate to own and enjoy a 3 Dimension Audio DAC which was inspired by the AN 5. Like it, a fully tube DAC. It is in my office headphone system with a Theta Compli transport, Bakoon HA-1 and ZMF Verites. I listen to it daily and feel, “Wow, that sounds great”. But when I listen to my TT main system I feel, Wow, I am speechless”
Not to open up that Pandora’s box...
As far as aging digital, for sure 16/44 is not going away and still sounds great!

Older DACs will still sound as good (or bad) as they were originally, but there have been significant advances in DAC implementations. So I would recommend at least listening to some newer DACs before deciding to go with an older one.

Very rare to have a good sounding cheap amp.

Call me i will give to you a list of cheap very good amplifiers....my sansui AU 7700 is unbeattable for the price: 100 bucks and 6th year of working in my room 12 hours each day....

Try to look for a very good and low cost dac? This is HARD, good luck..... 😁




I bought a NOS french dac which use only one old chip TDA 1543 in a minimalistic design... Sold on EBAY by Starting point systems...Christophe Mariac designer...

He is so good i want to buy another one used in case...If someone want to sell one call me.... 😊😁😁😁😁😊

I will bother no much ever for a dac, because in my actual acoustical settings i sense NO limitation at all coming fromt it...

And my audio system for his price is so well embedded that i dont listen to my 7 headphones anymore, i dont like NO other system i listen to more andi dont to want to upgrade or buy another one....

It is not the best system there is at all, but when all music is there filling the room without heavy limitations, we listen music without thinking about a new component....

Then my greatest purchase luck what the luck to buy one of this dac....

A good dac at LOW price is perhaps the harder piece of gear to discover and bought....harder than even buying low price good speakers....

I am born under a good star.....


Then yes, old designed cheap could be more good or than dreamed of because most people has never listened to their own system at his peak working potential at all anyway.... Often the real causes of theor unsatifactions unbeknownst to them, comes from the bad embeddings controls and less than from the gear they already own.... Then instead of adressing the more complicated questions like vibrations controls, electrical noise floor controls or more importantly acoustical controls, they search for an easy solution: an upgrade....And the more evident one : a costly DAC....


I think it is not the vintage chip TDA 1543 which only explain the result i listen to but more the MINIMALISTIC way and  the low noise which is associated also with the internal battery....I connect it to a good power supply also: IPOWER ...

On the digital front, who knows? But the analog conversion and the analog amp do make a difference. Very rare to have a good sounding cheap amp. 

I had a CAL Audio Labs DAC and Pioneer Elite DAC/DVD player from the early 2000s that I was using for years.  When I decided to upgrade to modern DACs in the $500-1000 range a year or two ago, the differences (improvements) were noticeable.  I now use even more expensive DACs, one a modern design and one in production today but based on a vintage R2R chip.  Both exceed the $1000 DACs in sound quality.  Lessons learned: (1) not all DACs sound the same.  (2) vintage DACs, properly implemented, can sound great.  With respect to (2), I suspect we've learned a lot about handling digital signals in the past years, making older implementations more suspect.

MC you're a peach. :-)

LOL, I'll tell you what, I have a Krell 5.1 same time most of the HT preamps were both a HT system and stereo playback..

That HT unit has a DAC and stereo playback that will match a LOT of the newer units..  The gain stage is all class a, they are different..

Like my buddy says (All Krell and Martin Logan) "It's a Krell" he's not kidding.. I got my HT 5.1 from him for 200.00 12 years ago..  They have one of the best remotes EVER made. CnC from aluminum billet. I got to dig that out.. Great 3 speaker playback with sub control on the remote..
The remote sold for 350-500.00 LOL GOOD Buddy..

Regards

Oh, wait a minute, sorry, my mistake. That's turntables. Vintage turntables. Old DACs people throw away. Sorry. Nevermind.

Very “interesting” explanation about vintage DACs. Oh, wait, sorry, about vintage turntables.

You can be sure vintage DACs are good simply by the state of the huge vintage market, all the refurbished vintage DACs, the small cottage industry of artisans making beautiful wood cabinets to show off fine vintage DACs, and by looking at how many decades old DACs sell today for more money used than they cost when they were new back in the day. People just can't get enough of that vintage DAC sound, and they are willing to pay for it. 

Oh, wait a minute, sorry, my mistake. That's turntables. Vintage turntables. Old DACs people throw away. Sorry. Nevermind.

I don’t know how much of that truth, but audophiles say that the old (for example) Sonic Frontiers dac, is so well crafted that creating a similar-sounding dac would cost a lot of money to this day. Is there as much as it is true. Because these three I mentioned dac’s- are well known in the world, legendary. Or I’am not right?

yep, good dacs from way back when will sound as good as good dacs from today

usual concerns about aging internal components, as for any aging electronic gear, should be checked out

then the add’l concern is input signal compatibility, esp. w r t higher res feeds used in more recent times

examples of mine in hand -

1 - 1997 vintage van alstine fet topp dac, with its lovely philips tda1545 r2r nos chip and 12ax7 output stage.... sounds as good as any $1500-2000 dac today - but it will only accept 44.1 khz input due to its crystal semi input chip of the day

2 - 2003 vintage modded musical fidelity trivista 21 dac w bb1792a dsd converter and 5703 mini tube output stage - it accepts all inputs and sounds as good, if not better than the current high dollar dacs out there - in fact better than psa ds, dena term, schiit yggy in terms of imaging timbre and holography

jasonbourne52

In controlled A/B tests nobody can distinguish a $100 DAC from a $1000+ one.

Please tell us about the tests you’ve conducted that led you to this conclusion. I’m also interested in why you confined your efforts to simple A/B tests. For those interested in the most valid scientific blind audio testing, A/B/X is the gold standard.

I have no particular faith or allegiance to blind testing but if you’re going to undertake such work, it makes sense to engage the best protocols.

In general I wouldn’t buy a DAC older than 10 years or so.

Maybe older DCS ring dac or similar if well cared for but only for the right price.

well the DAC in my Emotiva CDP doesn't sound as good as my MHDT DAC

Count me as one who can definitely hear the differences between (at le

ast some) DACs.

Having said that, I’m not suggesting that "new is always better" or that there aren’t vintage products that are competent with red-book CD (16 bit, 44.1 kHz) audio. But count me as one listener to can attest that not all DACs sound the same. When I bought my first stand-along DAC (Audio Alchemy back in the 90s... along with their DTI Pro Jitter Filter and 16->20 bit converter), I brought my stereo to the university where I was attending as I wanted to host an audio "demo" for some folks in the music department. The goal was to demonstrate basic principles of high-fidelity audio to people who "love music" but tended to have very little understanding of music reproduction... so one by one I sat each person in the sweet spot and played a Billy Joel track to demonstrate "imaging" which on its own was a big eye opener for lots of listeners. When I was about to pack everything up someone asked "hey, what does all that stuff do" pointing to my stack of audio alchemy gear. I said "oh, that’s the gear that takes the digital data for the music and converts to analog" and he asked "well what would it sound like without all that, just using the CD player?" So I moved a couple of cables and we played the same track that we had just been listening to via the analog output of my Pioneer CD player. WOW. The sound transformed from the lush, airy, liquid character everyone had just been hearing to flat, lifeless, and harsh. Without any coaching from me this fellow said "Yuck! Yeah, that equipment you have really makes a difference!"

In any case... to the caller at hand... there is good sounding vintage gear if red-book CD is your music library and you don’t need DSD, MQA etc. though with D/A converters, as with all things... personal taste and emotion come in to play (i.e. is detail more important than an organic midrange? Or is imaging more important than dynamics and bass slam)? Whether new or old there is never "one right" sound that everyone would prefer. Let your ears be the judge!

Dear, thank you for such interesting story. Yes I agree with that, your ears have to decide which sounds right.

Count me as one who can definitely hear the differences between (at least some) DACs.

Having said that, I’m not suggesting that "new is always better" or that there aren’t vintage products that are competent with red-book CD (16 bit, 44.1 kHz) audio. But count me as one listener to can attest that not all DACs sound the same. When I bought my first stand-along DAC (Audio Alchemy back in the 90s... along with their DTI Pro Jitter Filter and 16->20 bit converter), I brought my stereo to the university where I was attending as I wanted to host an audio "demo" for some folks in the music department. The goal was to demonstrate basic principles of high-fidelity audio to people who "love music" but tended to have very little understanding of music reproduction... so one by one I sat each person in the sweet spot and played a Billy Joel track to demonstrate "imaging" which on its own was a big eye opener for lots of listeners. When I was about to pack everything up someone asked "hey, what does all that stuff do" pointing to my stack of audio alchemy gear. I said "oh, that’s the gear that takes the digital data for the music and converts to analog" and he asked "well what would it sound like without all that, just using the CD player?" So I moved a couple of cables and we played the same track that we had just been listening to via the analog output of my Pioneer CD player. WOW. The sound transformed from the lush, airy, liquid character everyone had just been hearing to flat, lifeless, and harsh. Without any coaching from me this fellow said "Yuck! Yeah, that equipment you have really makes a difference!"

In any case... to the caller at hand... there is good sounding vintage gear if red-book CD is your music library and you don’t need DSD, MQA etc. though with D/A converters, as with all things... personal taste and emotion come in to play (i.e. is detail more important than an organic midrange? Or is imaging more important than dynamics and bass slam)? Whether new or old there is never "one right" sound that everyone would prefer. Let your ears be the judge!

I would not buy a vintage dac simply because of the service issues.  Some companies just have lousy or hyper-expensive service costs, not to mention the possibility of obsolete parts.  I'm not saying the newer dacs necessarily sound better than the best old ones, but they are certainly a safer bet.  As to the new ones, there are so many dac threads here, I'm not even going to get into which ones you should consider.  

Back in the 80’s the first test done was comparing the Theta DAC (designed by Mike Moffat) against the Sony Discman. Electronics used were by Boulder and speakers were Quad 63’s. After many trials the final scores were no better than 50/50.

Clever marketing psychology drives the market for new DACs. In controlled A/B tests nobody can distinguish a $100 DAC from a $1000+ one. The loudest complaints against this will of course be from those with the most money invested. 

All competently-designed DACs will sound alike. This applies to ones from 20+ years ago to the present. There is NO ever-upward increase in sound quality. The proliferation of ever more expensive DACs is a marketing ploy based upon confirmation bias to get the gullible to spend more!