2. digital
  3. 1392995955

Another DAC bits and Hz question

For redbook CDs only, why use a DAC greater than 16/44.1 for two-channel?

Redbook CDs are my only source of music in a two-channel system. I use the Oppo 980H because of its video capability and the fact that it is a multi functional player (DVDs for my children and CDs for me). I don’t stream music and I don’t have a blu ray player. From a music playback perspective, I think I’m pretty safe in saying that the source material is 16 / 44.1.

Part of the reason I ask this question is because of the comparison of older DACs to newer ones. My hypothesis is that yesterday’s top DACs will perform just as well for me (given my source material at a bit perfect rate) as today’s DACs. While this might not be true for everyone, I think it might be true for me. Years ago I had a Monarchy Audio DAC in my system. Foolishly, I sold it. If I don't need USB and 24/96, I think I'd rather purchase an older DAC if sound quality isn't sacrificed.

Is my hypothesis reasonable? Or do the newer DACs extract the musical data better today regardless of the bits and Hz perhaps due to better re-clocking or algorithms?

I posted this question over on computeraudiophile, but I think it was the wrong location since I don't stream music or use a computer as the source.
pgawan2b
bifwynne
2,206 posts
 
Ok ... so here's my conundrum. The BB DAC used in my redbook CDP is not cutting edge anymore -- per Steve (Audioengr). That may be true, but I cannot validate that view unless I do some serious auditioning.

Notably, the ARC Ref CD-9, which replaces my CD-8 redbook CDP, uses quad DACs in mono configuration, whatever that means. But ... the CD-9, also supports a wide array of other digital media and formats. So I do not know how much of this additional quad/mono DAC firepower is dedicated to just the redbook CD format.

Maybe my point is this. I've been consciously looking to improve the digital side of my rig. A more modern CDP may be the way to go. Dunno??

But here's "non-tweak" that took my current CDP setup to another level. The "non-tweak" is hi-def/hi-rez CDs. I picked up a couple of MoFi "gold" quality CDs to see if the quality of recording and mastering redbook CDs make a difference. IMO and IME, the answer is a unqualified ... yes!!

Out of curiosity, I may check out ARC's latest digital products to see if they can "suck more juice" out of my redbook CDs. I surmise that the answer is a little, but not a lot. Afterall, a garbage CD is still garbage by any other name. Sounds like something Shakespeare might say.

If Steve or our other digital techies can explain in plain English what the quad/mono DAC topology is all about, I'd appreciate the education. Please be kind ... I'm a tech boob. :)

Thanks
audioengr
3,282 posts
 
Quad/mono DACs just means that they are using stereo D/A chips, but only one per channel so it used in a "mono" mode, not stereo.

One way to make your existing CD transport sound even better than a new transport is to add the Synchro-Mesh in-between:

http://www.empiricalaudio.com/products/synchro-mesh

This is the best reclocker on the market.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
jwm
918 posts
 
Steve you should put your synchro-mesh converter in the Offramp 5 as well. People could then use it with their cd transports for reclocking and also use it for higher bit downloads. They wouldn't have to buy both boxes.
audioengr
3,282 posts
 
Jwm - that would be cute, but it would add to the cost, making it more difficult to own an OR5.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
ps68
230 posts
 
The point that Zd542 raises is highly valid. Analog output stage is equally important as the conversion stage itself, and given a true (and tested!) 75ohm input, the DAC output will be as good as anything sold today. Some 80's 16 bit chips are far more musical and energetic than some modern variations exhibiting plenty of detail too, it's all there, just down to the designer not to mess it up with a mediocre output stage.
More to discover