dac chip vs analog stage as to sonic impact

Mrtennis, that is exactly correct. Masking inferior digital design and DACs with tubed analog stage sounds really bad indeed, IMHO.

At the same time, carefully designed digital with an appropriate DAC can do miracles with just a few Op Amps and all solid state output buffer.

Of course, the "real deal" (for me) is superior digital/DAC design combined with fast and transparent tube output stage.

Regards,
Alex

hi alex. it seems to me that the better dacs are not 24/192. i have yet to hear a cd player or a d/a converter with such a chip regardless of mods sound anything but digital and forced.

the old cal aria and the old cal tempest were ideal products.

By current standards the CAL products are very colored in their sound. Not unpleasant sounding, but not particularly accurate to the source material.

Mrtennis - I would agree as I prefer non-os dac designs. Coming from the perspective that I primarily focus on analog (vinyl) as my primary medium, non-os dacs have given me the satisfaction of a sonic signature more synonymous of the analog sound I prefer. The added bonus is I don't have to open my checkbook to achieve this sonic signature.

A DAC is an analog device. What do you think the "A" stands for. It is also a digital device, but the digital part is a go/nogo thing and not likely to affect sound quality. The analog output of a DAC chip is fast and accurate, but generally needs a buffering circuit to provide a low impedance signal for output to other parts of the audio system. I think that the question relates to the quality of this follow-on circuitry. In early CD players this is where manufacturers chose to cut corners, and many early CD players were significantly improved by replacement of this circuitry. This is still common practice by MOD shops, even going so far as to install tube stages. Few, if any, MODs involve new DAC chips.