2. digital
  3. 1243538647

NOS DAC or CDP?

Recently I had to get rid of two of my CDPs (Jolida JD-100 and NAD C542) for finacial reasons. In doing so, I've had to go back to using my old Onkyo DX-C540 changer. Now it's not a bad sounding player for what it is, which is a Mid-FI changer circa late 90s. But both the NAD and Jolida certainly bested it in all areas of performance, and yes, I'm missing that level of performance. In any case am thinking down the road of either getting another CDP (possibly another NAD or used Jolida) or maybe going the NOS DAC route. I'm thinking of going the NOS DAC route as the Onkyo DOES have a optical output, and I think that it might make a decent transport, and give me changer capabilities. In addition, from what I've been reading the NOS DAC would probably give me the warm, musical presentation that I enjoyed with both the NAD and Jolida players. Also it appears that many of the NOS DACs fall within the "price point" that I would like to keep (less than $500). BTW, I consider myself more a "music lover" than an "audiophile", and going the DAC route would certainly be something new for me. Anyway, appreciate thoughs and suggestions from the community on which road they might go down and why they so. Thanks.
cleaneduphippy
clio09
3,375 posts
 
I still am a big fan of NOS DACs even though I'm not using one right now. I don't agree with everything Muralman said about OS DACs, because again a lot is based on design. In my case my transport is slaved to my OS DAC so jitter is not really an issue.

I do agree that NOS DACs have a very organic or natural sound to them. Closest thing to analog IMO, but again if the design is done right. Audio Note and 47 Labs make some very nice NOS DACs, but they are out of the OPs budget.
shadorne's avatar
shadorne
7,491 posts
 
From what I have heard, OS DACs do need jitter control, because the digital filter introduces phase instabilities.

Jitter comes from the digital interface connection between transport and your DAC. It is a universal problem that affects all DAC's, DSP's etc. It is unavoidable. Some DAC's use techniques to decouple the clock signal coming across on the digital interface => this can completely remove interface jitter in a good implementation such as the DAC1. (Of course the clock in the DAC itself will have some jitter itself - there is no "perfect" clock - however this internal jitter should be orders of magnitude less than what you get from any digital interface)

Phase issues occur when using brick wall filters in non-OS DAC's. The idea of an OS type DAC is to avoid the use of steep brick wall filters and the phase errors they inherently bring into the audible range.

Some people will prefer a more jittery sound - it will give more harshness and edge to the music and can help make laid back equipment sound more dynamic, exciting and revealing. (Remember that modern CD's are mostly hyper compressed to give a harsh edgy sound and some people prefer this - jitter is similar in the way it can affect the HF)
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,477 posts
 
Cleaneduphippy - I'm sorry for sounding condescending. It is fuzzy issue with transport being adequate or not since it is difficult to spend over $5k for the transport or even get the loaner to listen at home. In addition differences might become more obvious only when other system elements improve in future.

Optical has much (about twice) higher jitter than coaxial and since you don't have coaxial output I thought it might be better to get jitter rejecting DAC.

Clio09 suggestion to buy Monarchy DIP is excellent one. It will solve your problem of optical only output since suppression on optical of Monarchy DIP is much higher than on coaxial and ends up with even lower jitter. Read this: http://www.monarchyaudio.com/DIP4.htm

Muralman1 - jitter produces sidebands at very low levels, (around -80dB with average transport) that are still quite audible since not related to root frequency. In music it is just noise in the background. Jitter is formed in D/A conversion and filtering has nothing to do with it. It is possible that you have good transport to start with. It would be very interesting to try this Monarchy DIP on high resolution system like yours. On my system switch from good CDP to Benchmark gave me incredible clarity and transparency. It also revealed deficiencies of my system like harsh sounding tweeters or thin sounding speaker cable.
muralman1
1,527 posts
 
Shadorne, I fail to see what jitter sounds like. My sound is supremely cohesive, detailed to the minutest signal, and wonderfully analog. OS DACs sound terrible, and I don't care which one. I can demonstrated the difference here, and have, numerous times.

Anyone can put their ear to my ribbons, and hear pure music out of a black background.

By the way, change out those milk toast diodes out of your transport and DAC for some super Shotkeys and bring the live band in. AN folks don't want you to hear great things out of their lower DACs.
clio09
3,375 posts
 
I can respect Muralman's opinions because I also felt that way at one time, but again there are benefits to OS designs IMO as well. Here is some interesting reading I have come across over the years (yes, perhaps embellished with some marketing language but I'm going to assume we're wise enough to read between the lines):

Lessloss Slaving (read through a few pages)

Lessloss Jitter (follow the steps under the diagram)

47 Labs NOS

Digital Diversions

All of this really just supports the fact that there is more than one way to do digital right.
More to discover