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
Is my discussion a tactic? At least for me, it's not a "tactic". I was a Chintziphile many years ago. I'm simply discussing the ulterior motive that often accompanies the effort to claim that the differences in performance are not that great. 

The only thing that changed my perspective was the blessing of being asked to review, and consequently handling equipment in a different class than I ever would have considered buying. Apart from that, I likely would still be arguing along the lines of the objectivists in order to defend the wallet - and frustrated with the sound/experience.   :)

It's simply not worth arguing about it. Either open your wallet or not, and get the results you are working (or not working) for. If you don't want to spend money, feed your skepticism. If you want to build a superior audio system, get ready - you have to open your wallet.    :) 



I am not a fan of shutting down others voices. DJones is technically correct. The measurements are what they are. The difficulty in refuting his absolutes is that “transparency and measurements” does not always sound so great or the same. I have 2 transports with similar measurements- one I use daily the other is in a box. Why in a box? Because it doesn’t sound as good as the other. The one I use does have much better components. Does it sound better  due to some yet to be discovered attribute? Don’t know, nor do I spend an inordinate amount of time contemplating. I have plenty of technical background but I also have travelled the world extensively and realize that some things buck current science. I also do not believe that big money is the only path to phenomenal anything. Big dollar components can be trumped by better application and synergy of lesser priced components. What’s wrong with audio being a mixture of science and art and magic? Last point, all of us have varying financial means, and similarly varying definitions of audio nirvana. It isn’t a zero sum game where ones win is another’s loss. 
I am not a fan of shutting down others voices. DJones is technically correct. The measurements are what they are. The difficulty in refuting his absolutes is that “transparency and measurements” does not always sound so great or the same. I have 2 transports with similar measurements- one I use daily the other is in a box. Why in a box? Because it doesn’t sound as good as the other. The one I use does have much better components. Does it sound better due to some yet to be discovered attribute? Don’t know, nor do I spend an inordinate amount of time contemplating. I have plenty of technical background but I also have travelled the world extensively and realize that some things buck current science. I also do not believe that big money is the only path to phenomenal anything. Big dollar components can be trumped by better application and synergy of lesser priced components. What’s wrong with audio being a mixture of science and art and magic? Last point, all of us have varying financial means, and similarly varying definitions of audio nirvana. It isn’t a zero sum game where ones win is another’s loss.
i very much like your post and wise comments....

Thanks....

I will add my own comments about "what buck science" :

Too much tools use dependency, not enough disciplined perception.....Something that, almost 2 centuries ago, Goethe called "delicate empiricism".....
If it results in distortion then it is measurable. If it is above a certain level it will be audible. If it is audible then it's a lousy DAC sell it to an audiophile and move on. DACs that are well engineered DO NOT have sound signatures they are considered audibly transparent
I hate to break it to you, but no audio equipment is 100% transparent.
If it results in distortion then it is measurable. If it is above a certain level it will be audible. If it is audible then it’s a lousy DAC sell it to an audiophile and move on. DACs that are well engineered DO NOT have sound signatures they are considered audibly transparent
I hate to break it to you, but no audio equipment is 100% transparent.
:)

I am an audiophile and i said all that a few post ago without insulting all these people who lives by the book of measures or any book........