DAC specs versus sound quality potential
I'll second the responses by the others. I'll add that in situations where some of the specs on a given part may be "superior" to those of a competitive part, it will often be the case that both specs are sufficiently good that the difference is sonically irrelevant. As to why Esoteric chose the Asahi Kasei part instead of an ESS Sabre part, I wouldn't begin to want to speculate. A quick scroll through this 42 page datasheet for the AK part will give you some idea of the complexities that are involved. (ESS doesn't appear to provide detailed datasheets at its website). Also, I would expect that experimental evaluations were likely to have been performed, perhaps using circuit boards provided by AKM, ESS, etc. for evaluation purposes. And non-technical factors may also have been involved, perhaps including things like working relationships among the particular companies, and how much familiarity and experience Esoteric's circuit designers may have with the products of the respective chip manufacturers. Perhaps it is even relevant that AKM is a Japanese company (as is Esoteric), while ESS is headquartered in California and does a lot of their work in Canada. In general a great many things, both technical and non-technical, can factor into the selection of a key part in a design, and I would not want to speculate in any given case. Regards, -- Al |
I have two non-oversampling DACs, mhdt Paradisea and Constantine. I have no idea how they measure, but the sound quality speaks for itself and both compete well with anything at any price that I have heard to date. The Paradisea has a tube output stage and the resulting sound will vary greatly depending on specific tube used, I have found. No doubt there are many implementation details with DACs that matter, but frankly, most newer DACs I hear these days tend to sound quite good overall. That was not so much the case I think just 5-10 years ago. SO maybe DAC designs have matured quite well of late and excellent performance not hard to find? Kind of like how most modern computers are well suited to leverage the internet? OR most digital cameras can take very high quality photos that would have cost a lot more to produce in teh past with older technologies? DACs are pervasive and are used everywhere similarly these days, so that would not surprise me at all if good sounding DACs are commodity items now these days for the most part. Not to say that any two designs will sound exactly the same, so there still is some decision making involved there for discriminating ears I would say. |
Having gone through the 42 page datasheet for the AK chip,thanks to almarg's post above,I have a better understanding of the myriad functions dac chips perform as well as their specs and tolerances. The spec sheet is obviously not comprehensive as it lists functional parameters/characteristics but not manufacturing details and material specifications. I'm not the least qualified to evaluate the chips even provided all relevant data. I remain interested in a comparison of the chips in a way I can understand. For example; which would be like the best Porsche motor and which like a Mercedes Formula 1 engine. |
The differences between dac chips are hard to tell apart given the same topology and specs. But the differences in topology is another story when both are converting the same media. The different topologies are Multibit and Single Bit (Delta Sigma) These two when compared can be quite different if both are implemented well. To me Multibit does PCM (dxd, redbook 16/44 24/96) the best, there are some very expensive ones that can also do DSD as well I have not heard these, doing dsd. Where Delta Sigma does DSD well, it falls short on doing pcm right when compared to Multibit, it’s very smooth and non intrusive and to me a bit boring, it lacks that live dynamic jump factor that well implemented Multibit is capable of and can put out in spades. Cheers George |
