Fake -- Lack of a reconstruction filter in a typical NOS DAC allows high frequencies (aliased images of the original signal from the stair step) to pass which when they hit things like tube amps and speakers with high distortion, they generate frequency components in the audible range that are a mix of aliased images with frequency shift (IMD), random distortion products, and signal modulated noise. While sounding complex and awful, some people like the way it sounds. The general description is "airy".
No, what you think you hear is "natural". It is not, no more than vinyl sounds "natural", no more the analog tape is "natural". They are not natural, they are colored. You just happen to like that coloration and associate that with natural.
Maybe there will come a time when most "audiophiles" will accept that what they like, and hence what they attribute as "natural" and accurate is anything but, at least if they put vinyl or tape on a pinnacle. It is not the pinnacle of accurate sound reproduction. Digital is. Very few audiophiles have heard the difference between a live microphone, a digital loop and a tape loop, let alone the eventual vinyl cut. And that is completely okay. It does not matter if you prefer the vinyl cut. All that matters is you like what you are listening to. However, describing it as natural is wrong because it is not.
Here, have a read:
http://recordinghacks.com/2013/01/26/analog-tape-vs-digital/
I will excerpt a pass from the article,
"Fake air?" All I hear with my Audio Note Dac is a natural sounding top-end with air and space between instruments.
No, what you think you hear is "natural". It is not, no more than vinyl sounds "natural", no more the analog tape is "natural". They are not natural, they are colored. You just happen to like that coloration and associate that with natural.
Maybe there will come a time when most "audiophiles" will accept that what they like, and hence what they attribute as "natural" and accurate is anything but, at least if they put vinyl or tape on a pinnacle. It is not the pinnacle of accurate sound reproduction. Digital is. Very few audiophiles have heard the difference between a live microphone, a digital loop and a tape loop, let alone the eventual vinyl cut. And that is completely okay. It does not matter if you prefer the vinyl cut. All that matters is you like what you are listening to. However, describing it as natural is wrong because it is not.
Here, have a read:
http://recordinghacks.com/2013/01/26/analog-tape-vs-digital/
I will excerpt a pass from the article,
"It is my belief that much of the pain of switching over to digital recording was due to the tools that engineers had mastered for analog recording. For instance, applying EQ and compression (or no compression) to tape to make up for the color that the tape added didn’t sound so great when recording to digital. Bright FET microphones and harsh transistor preamp tones became rounded off in a pleasing way on tape, and by the 100th mix pass, the high-end was rolled off and the transients smeared so much that the final mix sounded phat, warm and fuzzy. It took experienced engineers a minute (or years) to gather their thoughts, re-examine their tools and learn how to take advantage of the clarity, quiet, and unforgiving purity of digital recording. At that point recordists moved towards super-fast, ultra-clean and high-gain preamps and transparent compression. Low cost digital processors stopped using transformers and tubes, which lowered costs and also lowered THD, while widening frequency bandwidth specs from DC to light. We had finally found it: perfect, clean, sterile audio!