DAC Shootout Starts This Weekend
@verdantaudio I'm curious how you attribute an aspect like soundstage depth to a DAC, in context of the uniqueness of various systems, the rooms these systems are in, the listener positions, and the use / lack of use of room treatment (for the purchasing party)? I'm not challenging...just trying to understand and learn. Thanks. - David.
|
@david_ten am sure scott will answer, but my 2 cents, my own process: - have my system set up ideally in my room (see my system page for pics) - have my standard ’reference’ dac in place, know how music i know well sounds, how the soundstage is presented, in terms of size (width, height, depth) and separation / layering / relative distance of voices/instruments etc - swap in new dac being evaluated, adjust for correct (same) volume level, listen and perceive how the sonic ’image’ is presented differently, if at all (don’t change anything else, even cabling) - btw - having a well selected playlist of familiar music helps alot in this... hope that helps |
@david_ten I have been lucky to have heard dozens of these premium DACs with a variety of speakers in my home and in many friends and customers homes. I am lucky. On a relative basis, certain brands/DACs exhibit certain properties. In any system, I would expect a Rockna DAC to sound wider and flatter than Chord DAC which would be narrower but much deeper. There are many ways to compensate but if everything is held equal, I would expect this relatively to be true. you are right though. A combination of room treatments or different speakers and system components could achieve different results. If depth of soundstage is a concern, MBL or Raidho speakers would have a bigger impact than a Bricasti DAC. But, that necessitates rethinking amplification and a variety of things. And it is true that a Rockna DAC in a system with Raidho speakers would probably sound deeper than a Chord or Bricasti DAC in a system with Magico speakers. but that isn’t the exercise in this case. The only variable proposed was DAC. this does raise an important point and something everyone should be reminded of. The particular results in this thread are from a system that is intentionally held constant to provide relative characteristics. And I think that is the key here, results are relative. When you change a variable (speaker, amp, etc…), you do need to think through the implications.
|
@verdantaudio Your answer is very helpful and furthers my understanding of where you are coming from. Thanks for that! +1 to the extremely pertinent point(s) you shared above....especially this one >>>
|
@jjss49 Thanks for sharing your approach. It's one I have used in the past but am cautious with now. Why the caution? The conundrum(s) posed by optimization... and the resulting false negatives. With an optimized reference system: - if the exchanged component (like a DAC in the above posts) outperforms your "reference" DAC...the approach works. however, - if the exchanged component (like a DAC in the above posts) under-performs your "reference" DAC...the approach may yield a true negative OR a false negative. For example, had you optimized your reference system around that "rejected" DAC...could you be certain of the outcome in that now optimized system with your current reference DAC. Maybe yes, maybe no. |
