2. digital
  3. 194438-268

Why most $3000 and lower DAC’s sound almost identical

I have a theory as to why all modern DACs essentially sound so similar these days, making it difficult to differentiate between them. IMO modern Delta Sigma chips have homogenized DACs into close to the same sound, making it very easy to take any DAC under $3000 and find it will sound good as another.

What I have discovered is that ladder R2R DACs and fully discrete DSD DAC’s are creating a better soundstage and less digital “glare”. An observation supported by countless others - nothing new. Anything with a Delta Sigma chip-based DAC that does oversampling will have less soundstage and more glare.

Nothing new so far - most of you will likely agree that that the above is a common consensus but here is the new bit, so read on if you are curious…

The dissatisfaction with this sound has led to a band-aid solution where Delta Sigma DAC manufacturers now offer a plethora of filters from sharp to smooth, linear phase to minimum phase. All of this is hand waving nonsense that offers a band aid to what is an absolutely fundamental design issue.

FUNDAMENTAL DESIGN ISSUE:

All oversampling with Delta Sigma offers superb measured spec at very low cost - it’s the logical choice for anyone using Precision test equipment to design a DAC. Typical chip filters use about 60 taps in their filters. They also ALL use Parks-McLellan filter designs (which has best “spec” and the short tap length is required for low-latency and easy processing). The result is a filter that has equiripple through the entire pass band. Mathematically it is a fact that an equiripple in the frequency domain equates to two echoes in the time domain - a pre-echo and post-echo. The “digital glare” heard is because of these echoes, likely the pre-echo is most audible. Our ears brain are processing the echos because unlike noise they are a complete reflection of the entire audio signal - low in level but lasting long enough to be detected by our acuity to locate the source of a sound. It is the same reason our speakers sound and image much better when moved out into the room and away from any close proximity to reflective surfaces. Despite these echoes being 60 db down from the primary signal, my listening sessions have convinced me of their audibility, particularly the echoes caused by the first 2x upsampling for 44.1 Redbook data (less so for higher resolution files).

CONCLUSION

Those who are trying MQA and various filters with typical Delta Sigma DAC’s are using band aids. A growing number of critical listeners have discovered that ladder R2R sounds better than typical DS DACs or, alternatively, that high precision conversion to DSD256 on a computer fed to a true one-bit discrete Delta Sigma converter (no chip) sounds equally great too. 
 

Basically any conversion that eliminates oversampling/upsampling done on a chip is going to have less digital glare and better soundstage because of this absolutely fundamental design flaw in ALL Delta Sigma DAC chips.


 

shadorne
ghdprentice
8,131 posts
 

@macg19 

You bring up an important point about kind of sound. 

There are many different kinds of sound created by vendors. You may think of them on a continuum from details forward - holographic - sound spectacular to musical - focused on exact reproduction of natural musical sound. Of course many vendors sit in different positions on this continuum. 

So for instance companies like dCs, Nagra, Burmeister, Roland and Wilson sit on the former side and Conrad Johnson, Audio Research, Cary, Sonus Faber sit on the later. Pass actually has an offering on both sides with X series amps on the detailed side and XA on the musical side. 

To me sound spectaculars are fun to listen to... but not the sound I want to own and listen to daily. I want musical, where my system gets out of the way and completely involves me in the music instead of compelling me to listen to the system. 

You can mix pieces and end up with hybrid systems. But, it is best to know what you are looking for and shop among the products intent on providing the sound you are looking for, otherwise it can be a real struggle. 

mahgister's avatar
mahgister
13,806 posts
 

A technology can evolve by itself electronicacally  this evolution may be independent of audible positive evaluation...

 

 My low cost old NOS Dac TDA 1543 SPS is so good i failed to upgrade it with a Douk Q11, a low cost dac... ( my French Nos SPS dac suddenly stopped working but   happily  i repaired it after ordering the Douk)

 

The technology of the Douk is more sophisticated though than the minimalistic French battery dac...

 

But in term of S.Q. on all acoustics factors the TDA 1543  win on all front in a so evident manner i was shocked...

 My system is low cost but very good, i cannot pay 600 bucks for a new dac in a system which value  300 bucks...

I lost 150 bucks on this Douk Q11, listening everyone raving about his good sound...

Reviewers, most of them, if honest  had no idea what is a good sound (acoustically ) or they sold at all cost what any company ask them to sold...

 

I know how a good dac must  sound through a controlled room with an optimized system...

 

 I had another chinese dac (Hidizs) which sound very well this one for my main headphone system with the TOP K340 very picky headphone which need a very clean dac not a warmer one as the SPS NOS TDA 1543...

 

I will test My K3340 soon again with  my repaired SPS French NOS dac versus the Hidizs dac i like a lot...

 

i heard an immediate difference in my system with all the dacs i bought ...

If someone dont hear a difference his system is acoustically problematic...

Or there is not much difference when we  compare two high end dac, near transparency perfection  on a high end system in a dedicated acoustic room.,.The difference here will be minimal...

 

But the differences between my SPS TDA 1543 and the Douk Q11 is the difference between night and day...

I know the  American Geshelli would be better but it will cost me more than my system price +tariffs...

 

 

 

oddiofyl's avatar
oddiofyl
4,204 posts
 

I've had the Lab 12 for three years.  It's a great sounding DAC.   

https://pt.audio/2023/03/12/lab12-dac1-review/

It's been on their best of digital the last few years.  

 

 

oldrooney's avatar
oldrooney
237 posts
 

@oddiofyl Thanks for the link, interesting review. 
Regarding the topic of this thread, I only own one stand-alone DAC, the venerable Yggdrasil in it’s latest incarnation (although I upgraded from the Garage Sale version) under the $3,000 USD, but, as I understand it, an R2R design which employs an AKM chip. Schiit calls it a ‘Multibit’ design, whatever that means, and it’s definitely not a Delta-Sigma according to the designers. It sounds clear and neutral in my opinion, and the sound stage has definitely improved over the original design. I also have an ESS Chip set in my Oppo 105 Darbee, dual Burr-Brown in my McIntosh 550 SACD player, and a 1741 in an old VCR/DVD player. But I think my latest acquisition, an Auralic Altair has them all beat. I listened to Miles Davis ‘Kind of Blue’ on vinyl today through the Altair’s phono stage, and was utterly transported. Of course, the signal path, in this case, did not pass through the DAC. I’m going to have to hook up my Madrigal PT-1 CD transport and report back. :-)

agisthos
523 posts
 

Its not just the Sigma Delta DAC chip. Most cheaper DAC's under 3k use the same 3-4 op-amps for the output stage, and the same 3-4 onboard power regulators.

So this contributes to them all sounding the same as well.

More to discover