Component contributions to “sound stage”

@knownothing A few months before I became a dealer two years back, I was on a search to upgrade my own DAC. I owned a modified PS Audio DirectStream MKI (in which the transformer and LPS mods I performed improved and increased the soundstage) to an exploration of over a dozen other DACs. In each instance, using the same cabling and remainder of system components, each DAC presented the stage a bit differently. Some DACs presented a more forward stage and excelled in depicting width, while others presented further behind the speakers with decent depth and less width. Some DACs excelled at neither, and few excelled in every dimension.

While the DAC chip and conversion process itself should not be responsible for altering the presentation of the soundstage, the rest of the design and engineering of the DAC, including how it manages a low noise floor to the design of its analog stage, can contribute to how the stage is presented. Even the T+A DAC 200, which is one of the most popular units I sell, has a “Wide” setting on its front face. When disabled, I believe it caps frequency response at 20KHz or 50KHz (I am too lazy to look in the manual right now), whereas when enabled, it allows up to 200KHz of information through. While that focuses on the frequency response, and despite the threshold of 50KHz-200KHz to be well beyond the capabilities of human hearing, most (including myself) can actually hear the soundstage widen.

In my experience, noise, whether it be power line noise, EMI, jitter and others are all culprits for poor staging. Any noise alters specific frequency and timing, which will affect reflections in room and different intersections of frequencies, phasing, etc. Our pursuit of happiness in our audio systems are largely around a search for realistic presentation and harmonics of music, countered by the elimination of noise and reflection in most ways possible. I say “most” because some noise with regards to harmonics are preferred, and soundstage width sometimes cannot be truly replicated without the right types of reflections which help to more accurately paint an accurate picture of the space.

Even studios and live recordings are often captured with noise and reflection as part of the equation.

@blisshifi 

Good post.

Why, thank you. :)

@ghdprentice +1

@blisshifi “While the DAC chip and conversion process itself should not be responsible for altering the presentation of the soundstage, the rest of the design and engineering of the DAC, including how it manages a low noise floor to the design of its analog stage, can contribute to how the stage is presented.”

💯

I assemble my own power cables and have banished all switching power supplies from my system as I have tried to optimize everything from digital signal cables to the type of hard drive I use for my file server.  Those actions have incrementally reduced noise, improved timing and added clarity to leading and trailing edges of notes in digital reproduction.  But the Chord DACs I’ve used (currently a Chord Qutest) made the biggest difference in digital presentation of soundstage, with cable and power supply upgrades adding definition to various elements in the sound field.  I can only imagine better DACs would provide even deeper insights into spatial information in recordings.

To suggest as some do that modern DACs are all “audibly perfect” and that modern electronics have no role in how we experience sound stage in our systems “unless they are badly broken” is just not consistent with my experience with my systems.

kn

I would also add that putting a blanket over my television mounted on the wall between my speakers does wonders for the soundstage when listening in two channel.

kn