2. digital
  3. 1398132150

Absolute top tier DAC for standard res Redbook CD

Hi All.

Putting together a reference level system.
My Source is predominantly standard 16/44 played from a MacMini using iTunes and Amarra. Some of my music is purchased from iTunes and the rest is ripped from standard CD's.
For my tastes in music, my high def catalogues are still limited; so Redbook 16/44 will be my primary source for quite some time.

I'm not spending DCS or MSB money. But $15-20k retail is not out of the question.

Upsampling vs non-upsampling?
USB input vs SPDIF?

All opinions welcome.

And I know I need to hear them, but getting these ultra $$$ DAC's into your house for an audition ain't easy.

Looking for musical, emotional, engaging, accurate , with great dimension. Not looking for analytical and sterile.
mattnshilp
charles1dad's avatar
charles1dad
10,250 posts
 
Jeff,
The primary claim concerning R2R superiority is that it is more "analogue " like in its sonic character. You and I have heard a fair number of R2R DACs and haven’t found this to be the general consistent result although individually some succeed more than others.

What I found interesting is the Bricasti SE was more dynamically potent than the TotalDac but also  "more" analogue like and more organic. This went against the so called conventional  wisdom expectation. George and his 8 fellow listeners heard a different outcome.

This isn’t surprising given the undeniable subjective nature of audio, listening sessions and all the accompanying variables associated. Ironically this is what contributes to the joy and fascination of what is the High End audio experience we’re all enthusiastically immersed in.
Charles
gdhal's avatar
gdhal
1,641 posts
 
@shadorne 

Thank you. I mean that sincerely because you do in fact present an abundance of technical data in support of delta-sigma. In my case, I suppose I'm fortunate to have components with both technologies, and have carefully listened to both. While I may not have a 30K divinci dac - which uses delta sigma - I'd have to imagine it sounds spectacular to say the least. All I can indicate with certainty, however, is that to my ears, I prefer the sound presentation of my multibit DAC to that of my delta-sigma. Not only because it sounds more analog, but because it sounds more "real" and authentic. And I get what Al is saying - that those qualities are a result of the implementation and not the technology. So be it. Anyway, who knows what tomorrow's technology will be. Enjoy the music while we can.
almarg's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
almarg
9,670 posts
 
The writeup by Peter Mitchell which Shadorne provided (thanks!) is excellent. But to be precise, the architecture it describes for a "conventional" DAC, in which "the resistors are supposed to be scaled in exact 2:1 ratios," is not R2R. In an R2R ladder only two unique resistor values are required, rather than a different resistor value for each of the 16 (or however many) bits in each sample.  R2R architecture is explained pretty well in the Wikipedia writeup on "Resistor Ladders."

However Mr. Mitchell's basic points about the issues inherent in the "conventional" architecture he describes are nevertheless applicable to R2R as well, as can be seen in the Wikipedia writeup.

Regards,
-- Al
 
audioengr
3,282 posts
 

Okay, time for me to weigh in again....

I also manufactured an R2R DAC in the past, using the laser-trimmed PCM1704 binned for performance. It was a very sweet sounding DAC, and not because of the tubes (I used Siemens CCA NOS tubes, very fast). The detail rendering however was never as good as modern Delta-Sigma chips. Here is what the PCM1702 datasheet says about R2R and Delta-Sigma:

"However, even the best of these (R2R’s) suffer from potential low level
nonlinearity due to errors in the major carry bipolar
zero transition. Current systems have turned to oversampling
data converters, such as the popular delta-sigma architectures,
to correct the linearity problems. This is done, however,
at the expense of signal-to-noise performance, and the
noise shaping techniques utilized by these converters creates
a considerable amount of out-of-band noise. If the outputs
are not properly filtered, dynamic performance of the overall
system will be adversely effected."

So, both techniques can have good S/N (Delta-Sigmas have improved a LOT since the 90’s), but the issue with Delta-Sigma is the filtering. The issue with R2R is this non-linearity. This is what I had said all along. Eliminate the bad digital filtering and you have something really fine with Delta-Sigma. This is what my ears tell me.

As for comparing the Bricasti to the TotalDAC: I think the devil is in the details. Can you even make it apples-to-apples? Even if both were driven S/PDIF, does Bricasti resample and the TotalDAC not? If one is using Ethernet and the other USB, it’s apples to oranges. If even one USB, S/PDIF or Ethernet cable is different in the two systems, all bets are off.

The only valid comparisons would be maybe Ethernet to Ethernet and USB to USB using the same playback software from the same computer or server and the same cables. And we have not even talked about the system of preamp, amps and speakers yet.

The point is that no one can make any credible claims about one DAC over another if the device is not tested in the same system, preferably at the same time with the same music. Particularly if both DACs are very good quality. This is exactly why Matt’s experiments are so important, even more important than professional reviews. Even reviewers systems change over time. If reviewers did more shootouts like Matt has done, we would learn a lot more.


Steve N.

Empirical Audio

jwm
918 posts
 
In my system I used the same ethernet cables to both dac's playing the same songs using the same computer. No changes were made except for two different dac's.
More to discover