What makes a DAC so expensive?


You can buy a Cambridge Audio AXA25 25 Watt 2-Channel Integrated Stereo Amplifier | 3.5mm Input, USB Input for $225, and most DACs seem more costly. 

I'm wondering what it is that makes a Bifrost 2 almost as expensive as an Aegir and 3x's as expensive as the Cambridge product, above. I would have thought an Aegir would out-expense a Bifrost by a factor of two or three. What are the parts that make the difference? 

I'm wondering if the isolated DAC concept is one that comes with a "luxury" tax affixed. Can anyone explain what I'm getting in a Bifrost 2, or other similar product that justifies the expense...?

Thank you.
listening99
before PS went to manufacturer direct sales, many of their larger dealers sold their gear new for 40% off...no longer the case of course...
Value for money is a minefield.

Perhaps you can price out the components that go into a unit, but then you have to factor in all the other costs, past, present, and future that the manufacturer has to account for.  I've never seen that done convincingly, because buyers forget items or underestimate costs.

Once you've got over that hurdle, a unit that genuinely costs more to produce and market may not sound as good, at least to some (or many) people, as a unit costing less.

So there's no ultimate correlation between performance (sound) and MRP, however nice it would be if there were one.

So you pays your money and takes your choice.
Transparency means that the distortion and noise that exits the analog outputs is so low it’s beyond audibly for humans. If you take a dozen DACs and they all measure below the threshold of hearing then how can one be more transparent than another? I will mention not all DAC manufacturers strive for transparency which is why some have a sound signature. IMO DACs should be transparent if you want to color your music do it with tubes or EQ or tone controls it's much cheaper.
@listening99

i won’t get into the ’accuracy’/measurements debate... it is old hat, no light all heat - i am into this for musical reproduction that pleases me, in my listening space, really don’t care about the rest... there is a place for measurement in hifi, but to me it is limited, the ultimate test is listening pleasure produced, we are not buying digital thermometers here

i think it is also a fools errand to try to ’justify’ the last 10% of performance... some want it and can afford to go for it, others can’t even hear it nor afford the pursuit -- value is about money... end of the day, money in and of itself is over-rated if you have enough to be comfortable ... it is the experiences, enlightenment and joy that money may buy that matter

also, don’t get sucked into used market availability of X as a metric of value... used items can be good but they are available because they have been successful, sold many units, after a while, end users want newer, so they re-sell... used porsche 911’s aren’t lousy sports cars because there are many used ones for sale, just the opposite

yes ps directstream has features, but so does denafrips... my ares ii is fun to play with, with its various nos/os and filter options, very cool piece, lots of dac for what you pay

i am not trying to talk to into a vs b, just pointing out the nuances and manifold issues in the consideration

good luck have fun


I am in the get a transparent DAC camp as @djones51 mentioned.

I got a Benchmark DAC3B which I was going to use as a DAC on my lesser bedroom system. I was going to get a much costlier DAC for my office system. However, when I added the DAC3 to the Benchmark HPA4 preamp in the office system I was of the opinion that changing this sound signature would be foolish and costly on my part. It sounded great and transparent.

My speakers are going to determine the tone of my system.