The Modern DAC killed High Resolution Music - has Stereophile proven it?


Hi Everyone,
One thing I've mentioned a lot is that over the past 10 years or so DAC's really closed the delta in how well they play CD (i.e. Redbook) vs. high resolution (96/24 or higher). I've stated for a long time that the delta closed so much that high resolution music no longer seemed to be as important.

Stereophile just released an interesting set of measurements regarding jitter performance of older players vs. today. It's not absolute proof of my thesis, but it certainly is correlated.


https://www.stereophile.com/content/2020-jitter-measurements

One thing, as I commented, you don't have to compare old DACs to the $15,000 Bartok. The Mytek Brooklyn and others in the $2,000 price range also demonstrate this, and in fact has a very similar jitter rejection profile to the Bartok. The point to me is, almost all decent DAC's have jumped leaps and bounds in jitter performance. That's for sure.  Perhaps this explains the disappearing gap in performance as well between Redbook and Hi Rez?

https://www.stereophile.com/content/mytek-hifi-brooklyn-da-processor%C2%96headphone-amplifier-measur... 

erik_squires
Generally I can certainly attest to the fact that I haven’t given high-res music files much of a thought these latest years, other than 2L recordings, but whether that’s attributable to the technological advancements made in jitter reduction with DAC’s as of late, as drawn out by the OP, I can’t say. Mostly I believe high-res files have sounded drab and downright uninspiring (again, except 2L files). The DAC I have used until recently saw the light of day around 2013/14 - does that even count as a more recent level af DAC-development? I guess not.

Nevertheless, my new DAC acquisition isn’t a new item by any stretch of the imagination (though it is upgradable, with some now awaiting), but rather a Danish all out development with incept date around 2012 - bought used, even though the model is still attainable as new. Former Orpheus top model DAC (back in the day priced in Denmark around $45,000) was the measure of performance to aim at during development.

Anyway, we’ve compared this Danish DAC/preamp of mine (priced new around $10k), not upgraded for years, to a very recent DAC/streamer development, the Auralic Altair G1, to see how a mid-priced still "wet painted" (i.e.: 2nd half of 2019) DAC might compare to an older high-end design. Is it representative at all, this shoot-out? Well, it’s one very newly developed, reputable brand DAC vs. an older design (known to few) - it HAS to be representative to some degree.

Long story short: old high-end design wins hands down. I guess that’s what an excellent analogue output stage, power supply, clock(?), and possible even a well thought out digital volume control implementation does - some years on its back be damned. What is jitter reduction and overall DAC chip development in the face of these factors? Not to say they aren’t worthwhile.

I had higher expectations of a new design, much lower priced even (to a new-price item of named alternative), and I truly had my eyes set on this route, also with the advantage of the latest streamer advancements (and in this regard, boy have they come far). And yet, back to old PC-based playback, which in many regards is a pain in the a**, but it’s a price I’m willing to pay with the sonic outcome "old Joe" delivers - at a cheaper used price even.
I refer to one recording that I own as both a Redbook CD and a High Rez download.  It is Andris Nelsons  conducting the Boston Symphony in Shostakovich Symphony #10.  The CD is very fine, up there in SQ with any other CD that I own.  The download is another matter.  I have attended Concerts in this Hall and the download is as close an approximation to being there as it is possible to obtain, at least in my system.  The CD is a very good CD but not for one minute do I have the illusion that At his is the real thing.
  Not only can I tell the difference, but when I demonstrated a passage for comparison to my wife, who could care less about SQ, admitted there was an obvious difference, as have many reviewers.   I can only hope that such high quality recordings continue to be issued.  If you choose not to buy them, that’s your choice, and imo, your loss 
For those who have posted:

“Remember how much money Wadia commanded for their upsampling DACs?.”

I have a PS Audio DirectStream DAC, which upsamples as well.  Maybe that's one of the pieces of the puzzle, why so many 44.1/16 sources sound just as good as hi-res.  I'm guessing that after the stream is "upsampled", when the DAC filters at the back end, any "unintended consequences" are well beyond the hearing range.

Interesting postings, thank you everyone for your input!
I refer to one recording that I own as both a Redbook CD and a High Rez download. It is Andris Nelsons conducting the Boston Symphony in Shostakovich Symphony #10.



Love specific, personal experiences, @mahler123, thank you.

Not only can I tell the difference, but when I demonstrated a passage for comparison to my wife, who could care less about SQ, admitted there was an obvious difference, as have many reviewers.

It is always hard to tell if this is due to technology or the re-mastering process, but do you think that with a 15 year old DAC you’d feel the difference in sound quality between the CD and Hi Rez recording would have been the same??

I believe the mathematicians got CD right but there was a lag in playback quality.  I quickly decided the inflated prices of hi-rez downloads wasn't worth it.  But I'm now going 100% streaming, so hi-res Qobuz was the obvious choice at their current discounted rates because they live or die by sound quality.  Not saying I can tell the difference, or know how much is marketing, but overkill is fine with me in the streaming world.