Hi.
Everything in a stereo system matters. Everything. The room too. The quicker I came to this conclusion on my own by experimenting in deference to my own biases, the quicker my system performance could be elevated.
There are a few ways to increase depth of sound stage and it does not mean one has to replace gear to accomplish it.
However, the fastest way to diminish it is to have highly reflective vertical surfaces or partitions between the speakers, ala, TVs, screens, wall units. Especially if these items are between the front plane of the speakers and the wall behind them. It/they will act as initial point of reflection partially or fully lessening the front to back distance of the SS and increasing the brittleness or hardness of the sound, depending on its size, and what sort of surface material that vertical plane is comprised. A softer material often helps with tV & screens. Experimentation shows vividly what kind of material you may need.
Diffusion is likely the best tact here. Uneven things with many irregularities.
I used draperies. Lots of pleats. Wall to wall. Several sorts of materials too before I found something I could live with. Reading up on managing room acoustics should help you a lot. Harder stuff equates to harsher tones. Softer fabrics suck up some highs. Etc.
Opening the curtains increases resolution and increases clarity yet the sound on the whole becomes a tad more edgy, though not at all strident, as the on wall 50 H x 110 W (116 diag.) screen is fully exposed.
Fully closing the drapes adds noticeable warmth and undeniable depth as the pleats and intermittent materials I’ve added onto the drapes combine to create diffusion and absorption. Along with a very light touch of reflection.
If no TV is needed during listening, then maybe simple paper egg crates glued onto a sheet of lightweight material cut to fit the TV screen could do something similar in your case. Set it behind the TV afterwards. Again, experimentation is key here. Materials matter!
Your costs here could be insignificant. $10?
There are alternatives to replacing devices. I would suggest trying some different power cables at the source or the amp before running out to buy another DAC or amp.
Certainly there are better devices about which might help, but still, a better PC will help not just your gear but later likewise upgraded gear too, so you’ll be that much farther ahead. Its likely the cheaper path now too.
Yeah. I’ve not always been in the camp of wires are the ticket. But I found out they matter a great deal. Not just every or any upscale PC will add depth. Some time back Elrod signature and Shunyata Python helix did excellent jobs in this area as well as in many, many other respects for the sonics. Better bass, better imaging, more coherent and natural tones. It was a fascinating revelation. You might get a pair of them and still have money left over given your proposed allotment. One for DAC. One for amp. Or not.
Check out the cable Co. ask them for current recs. Rent a couple and see for yourself.
Digital sources aren’t always the best path for obtaining great depth as you have experienced in your outfit.
I’ve listened to friends systems with DAC setups costing well into five digits. Berkely. Wavelength. Bel Canto. Mitner. DCS. Apogee. Lavry. Lynx. M Audio.
Depth was not always a given. The recording did have to be one which could yield that info too. As you are or have experienced so far in your own rig. And why I say first, try PCs. I’ve been there. Done that.
It could be difficult to get DACs & amps in the range of your available funds previously mentioned which will solve the issue of and by themselves Unless… you can find something in either category, DAC or amp, that uses tubes as was already stated. Eg., Quicksilver. . could be a crap shoot as to the outcome.
Apogee house sound had great depth and was very inexpensive. Lavry too had nearly as much. I chose a Bel Canto DAC 3 which had likely the least depth but in all other areas was IMHO the better more resolving unit. Depth came from using tubes in the line stage preamp. Later in the amp as well. Albeit the tube amp in my instance did not appreciably increase what was already evident in the sound stage dimensions. .
Tubes as well can influence depth width or height of the SS. Depending.
ICs can play a noteworthy role, though my EXP says start with PCs. PLCs may help too, but I would look there once I liked what everything else was doing beginning with the main IC ()pre to amp.
With $1500 or so, and a real desire to improve the system performance despite the outcome of what size SS occurs, I’d look into finding a nice tube preamp first. Otherwise or during that hunt play with affecting the acoustics in the room with the focus around the speakers. First reflection points, diffusion. Etc.
Do remember, if it ain’t in the recording, it is impossible to hear it.
Another true concern is attempting to ‘contort’ the SS depth inordinately. Expanding it is one thing, pushing it this way or that too much always changes the impact and degree of believability IMO.
Folks debate SS size a lot. It concerns me very little. Having a life size recreation of the venue is improbable in more than a few cases. A 20 piece band arranged and seated occupys about 33 ft. of width. Nearly as much in depth but only 4ft of height. . symphonic orchestras eat up considerably more in each direction. Few folks have 4000 to 5000 sq. ft. of SS area at and behind their speakers.
Consequently we settle for seating perspectives Instead. Front row. Mid hall. Back of hall. Usually by thirds.
Very good luck I hope you get the answer you need.