I keep hearing this... and I cannot agree

[scott1019]

In line with Scott1019's original comments in this thread, I am lucky enough to currently have a Philips DAC960 in my system (on loan from a good friend.) This one has the Philips TDA1541A chip with a production date of December, 1987.
As far as the way it sounds - let me just say that I had the Metrum Hex in my system for a good while before the DAC960, and I would prefer the DAC960 over the Hex any day.
I really didn't know much about the hype surrounding the 1541 chip until I plugged this thing in and started googling it.

So, I would have to agree with the OP - it seems like the more things change, the more they stay the same when it comes to DACS. Is less more? I don't know - I only know what I hear.

This is perhaps the neatest piece of gear I've seen in a LONG time, it's now on my radar! Thanks for sharing.

 

[scott1019]

I am on my 10th DAC in the past 24 years, and each has been a significant improvement over the last. So, my experience differs. So I disagree with some of you who have posted.

Rich, I have listened to and had just about as many, and I too have the best sounding DAC I've had in my system... and it doesn't have a 2016 build date. This revelation turned everything on it's head for me, as I was in agreement with at statement that technology has progressed... but admittedly it has mod work done to it back in 2007.. so I am assuming that has as much to do with it as anything.

 

[scott1019]

Granted, there's been some real significant improvements over time, but there's a point where the differences don't necessarily outweigh your satisfaction level. I'm right happy with 96/24, and the Tenor USB chipset on the Maverick DAC is more than adequate to provide a right realistic and jitter free playback. :thmbsp:

Biggest improvement I've made since getting the DAC is upgrading to Windows 8. Next best thing to bit perfect playback and in most cases, no drivers required unless you're using legacy equipment.

And ya ... S/PDIF can be a bit of a crapshoot. There's the standard, and the way it's implemented in your system. Mine flat out sucks compared to what I get from USB. :thumbsdn:

Oh. One other MAJOR improvement. Onboard USB can get saturated with all sorts of noise and garbage from competing devices on the buss. I was getting some weirdness on mine (courtesy of a Gyration wireless keyboard and mouse), so I installed an add on card that creates it's own USB channel and pulls power directly from the power supply. Only devices hooked to that are my DAC and ADC, and no problems since. Big step up for only $20 ...

Thanks for that suggestion. Those are the issues I've been having with USB..

And in case you were interested, I've ran the i2s interface, DenonLink, and i.link, and HDMi to great success as signal transmission. I wish that the technology would steer clear of USB myself and use one of these which does not introduce these anomalies through the bus.

 

[sKiZo]

Ida know ... USB came of age with the advent of 2.0 and 3.0 ... it's certainly got the speed to do what needs doin' more times than not.

And getting away from specific drivers (and horror of horrors - crap like ASIO for US) has helped a lot. Window's WASAPI is very strong and flexible, can usually use WindOhs! built in audio handling exclusively, and reduces the number of bitrate changes to the minimum for cleaner throughput, as well as allow lower buffer settings.

S/PDIF on the other hand, seems to be hostage to the manufacturers of the motherboards. Some implementations work great, but it's not like you'll find "we screwed up ... our S/PDIF is shite" in the brochures, or "we'll have to get back to you ... we're only on chapter two of the SDK". I've had abysmal luck with it here.

Another tip ... use the shortest USB cable you can on your system. I've also seen a popular mod for DACs that have their own power supply is to snip the power leads in the USB cable. Supposed to limit noise as well.

PS ... what ever happened to asynchronous USB? Flash in the pan now that the standard allows faster speed by default? That was the talk of the town for a bit, and then seemed to disappear?

 

[RH67]

I started with a rudimentary PC audio rig about 7-8 years ago at first using a Creative Labs external USB DAC, which allowed me to hook my computer up to my stereo as it had both SPDIF and RCA outputs. I still have this somewhere if I look hard enough, but the gains were very minimal in comparison to just running a 3.5MM-RCA cable from the headphone jack. I then ran the SPDIF out with a repeater to my stereo rig and my Sony EP9ES "DAC". It was about 20' away from my computer along with a VGA cable ran to my projector so I could watch movies that I cue'd up on my computer. This was before the days of Netflix and digital streaming and I played a lot of DVD's on my computer at the time mostly because my projector accepted VGA and made this simpler for me. I later went to an Acoustic Alchemy DDE for it's i2s interface, and the sound improved, then went to a server based system with a Escient Fireball and a 400-disk DVD player, and finally to a Popcorn Hour.

Over time I realized that saving DVD's to a hard-drive for playback was just too time consuming and not worth the effort for the limited number I had and mainly the sheer cost of DVD's dropping so drastically (and the cost of the Hard-drives at the time), but I continued with archiving my CDs onto my hard drive, and at the same time upgraded my monitor, the video card, my PC's power supply to an excellent and hardly recognized or acknowledged Audiotrak Prodigy HD2. I upgraded to the latest op-amps on the output side (do not recall exact model #), which made a LOT of difference. My monitoring speakers then were JBL L36's.. and I got a Behringer A/D/A connected via USB (model # alludes me too) to allow me to connect my turntable to my PC to rip my vinyl for archival. (Again I'm speaking of what I was up to over 7 years ago!) And not much has significantly changed in terms of sonics, at least in my experience.

I've been at this for awhile now, and USB, while convenient, has always caused me fits to a certain extent. The moment I went to the TeraLink to decouple my PC from my DAC, is when everything changed for me. I experienced similar results with a Dlink wireless receiver (model # escapes me currently), as well as the Squeezebox Duet. There were no more drop outs, none of the noise that always seemed to bleed through was there, and the resultant sound reminded me of what I was hearing on my dedicated CDP. I won't cover all the CDPs I've heard or went through as that's not what this thread is all about.

I have, however, been trying out and testing MANY new DAC's with USB and Hi-rez capability, and the DAC I was using for awhile with my MacMini, the dBlabs Tranquility totally turned ALL these ideas of higher resolution in it's head, it's a 16/44.1 NOS DAC... I've since graduated and tried many others, old and new, especially now that I have the Teralink. Have had some friends bring over their DACs to test/compare etc. And I feel I'm getting lost in the "endless sea of DACs".. wading through them has been really telling of the market share that is happening. 7-8 years ago there were maybe 20-30 "go to's" to consider. Now there are literally hundreds.

I will put it simply, every time I have had the chance to test a DAC that has both USB and Toslink/Coaxial inputs, the Toslink/Coaxial has won out when connected to my PC or Mac Mini or whatever the case may be with the Teralink in between. Yes, this does limit me to 24/96, but I simply have not felt the need, or have the need for anything higher resolution than this.

I agree that it's great for the mastering process to use these higher resolutions and DSD, but I simply cannot agree that it translates to better sound on the playback side, unless it's already captured on the source material. I would have zero concerns about sound quality for a track mastered in this way and "down-sampled" to 24/96. I know this term by itself makes most people cringe, but there is nothing at all wrong with dropping off bits when the files are as large as DSD files. And while we're discussing, DSD is a transmission protocol, not a "source file", but it's being labeled as such. Again, more confusion abounds and it's making my head spin.

No, I really don't know where the future is heading with all of this, and just trying to gain some stable footing when selecting which DAC to try next, if any.

If you all knew what DAC I am going to be using shortly, you would question my evaluation process, but will easily compare to anything and everything available and it's about 15 years old. This very statement may lend itself to down-playing my credibility, but it's why I posted the statement I keep hearing over and over when talking to people about DACs.

"DAC technology is changing so rapidly that it's too hard to keep up, and it's pointless to own the latest and greatest when something new is already in the works"

The perception is seemingly that the latest and greatest always trumps anything else that came before it.

I have the new LampizatOr Level 4 DAC, 8/5/15 and everything thing else being equal in your system this DAC will change your mind as to adding SQ. It`s the presentation of whats available on the source material that separates DAC`s, you cannot add what is not there but bringing out the music and presenting the music in a realistic manner is the key. Chips play a part in what you hear but what is more important is the foundation that supports and is built around that chip.

Like you i was questioning computer audio, as having been able to use many DAC`s in my system, most in the 2k and under range and while most sounded good to really good that wow factor was still missing nothing to say that that SQ had improved a notch or two or three just really good sound for computer audio.

I will shorten the journey here but the new LampizatOr Level 4 has changed everything i had ever thought about computer audio. The Level 4 has delivered what i thought and was hoping for from computer audio and much more. I was in the industry for decades and had access to master tapes and first vinyl pressings and the SQ that i`m hearing from the Level 4 brings me back to those master tape listening sessions.

Don`t give up do some more exploring and you might be pleasantly surprised.

 

[sKiZo]

ASIO was a way to get away from drivers that caused issues - it wasn't the best but it showed which way to go. ASIO is still the best for Windows 10, depending on the implementation done by the DAC designer.

My comment was concerning ASIO4All. Ever try to uninstall the package? Nothing short of a digital stake through it's black heart will stop it from coming back to life when you least expect it. Usually just about the time you get everything working perfect without it, there it is ... snickering in the background, f'upping the whole shebang. Takes some serious registry hacks to kill it entirely. It IS pure evil!

 

[scott1019]

Ida know ... USB came of age with the advent of 2.0 and 3.0 ... it's certainly got the speed to do what needs doin' more times than not.

And getting away from specific drivers (and horror of horrors - crap like ASIO for US) has helped a lot. Window's WASAPI is very strong and flexible, can usually use WindOhs! built in audio handling exclusively, and reduces the number of bitrate changes to the minimum for cleaner throughput, as well as allow lower buffer settings.

S/PDIF on the other hand, seems to be hostage to the manufacturers of the motherboards. Some implementations work great, but it's not like you'll find "we screwed up ... our S/PDIF is shite" in the brochures, or "we'll have to get back to you ... we're only on chapter two of the SDK". I've had abysmal luck with it here.

Another tip ... use the shortest USB cable you can on your system. I've also seen a popular mod for DACs that have their own power supply is to snip the power leads in the USB cable. Supposed to limit noise as well.

PS ... what ever happened to asynchronous USB? Flash in the pan now that the standard allows faster speed by default? That was the talk of the town for a bit, and then seemed to disappear?

Very good information here and for the most part I am in agreement, although my Windows experience has been limited to 7.. and the only SPDIF that has come out of my actual PC has been from one sound card and my MacMini... the USB is admittedly, better, especially when using a particular port, than the SPDIF out.

 

[scott1019]

I have the new LampizatOr Level 4 DAC, 8/5/15 and everything thing else being equal in your system this DAC will change your mind as to adding SQ. It`s the presentation of whats available on the source material that separates DAC`s, you cannot add what is not there but bringing out the music and presenting the music in a realistic manner is the key. Chips play a part in what you hear but what is more important is the foundation that supports and is built around that chip.

Like you i was questioning computer audio, as having been able to use many DAC`s in my system, most in the 2k and under range and while most sounded good to really good that wow factor was still missing nothing to say that that SQ had improved a notch or two or three just really good sound for computer audio.

I will shorten the journey here but the new LampizatOr Level 4 has changed everything i had ever thought about computer audio. The Level 4 has delivered what i thought and was hoping for from computer audio and much more. I was in the industry for decades and had access to master tapes and first vinyl pressings and the SQ that i`m hearing from the Level 4 brings me back to those master tape listening sessions.

Don`t give up do some more exploring and you might be pleasantly surprised.

I have met the Lampizator.. .and we have had discussions of the sort, he is making use of the line drive aspect of tubes on the output stages of his DACs, in a way using ancient technology to alter the way the signal is driven... if you consider the use of tubes in this way "ancient", but he is using methods that could have conceivably been concocted 20 years ago with the DAC chips/components available then, so how, essentially, is that an improvement in technology... he's just going about things in a different way.. the "DAC" I am using and feel very similar about, as you do the Lampizator, is built around 15 year old framework with the best that modern circuits and components can provide, which were derived, however, admittedly, about 7-8 years ago, and the person doing the work to that unit, has since improved methods further as there have been new circuit revisions since then.

What I am speaking of for the purpose of this thread, is the fundamental conversion process from Digital to Analog, not necessarily the resulting stages thereafter... all of which are still be tinkered with... not only in DACs, but pre's, integrated's etc. I don't foresee that ever changing.

 

[scott1019]

ASIO was a way to get away from drivers that caused issues - it wasn't the best but it showed which way to go. ASIO is still the best for Windows 10, depending on the implementation done by the DAC designer.

Hmm, this sounds to me like it could be a game changer for USB-based audio transmission, and could make the use of something like my Mini an after-thought. (Although I must say I am enjoying Amarra and Audirvana as playback software more than I did JRiver, I guess another reason for the switch)... It took me a LONG time to make the switch because I hated ITunes... to which both Amarra and Audirvana use as the GUI and file management. Another major reason for transitioning over to the Mini was because of all the frustration I was experiencing with my XP and 7 based machines with the USB dropouts etc. The Mini, also, allegedly has one port, second from the right looking at it from the back, that is designated as "hi-speed" and has better shielding and a different bus config. I do notice less noise when using this port vs. the others.

PS ... what ever happened to asynchronous USB? Flash in the pan now that the standard allows faster speed by default? That was the talk of the town for a bit, and then seemed to disappear?

Yes, let's not get me started on Async, amazing how that went "out of style"... and I'm wondering what else in the plethora of DACs currently available will be en vogue several years from now..

 

[RH67]

I have met the Lampizator.. .and we have had discussions of the sort, he is making use of the line drive aspect of tubes on the output stages of his DACs, in a way using ancient technology to alter the way the signal is driven... if you consider the use of tubes in this way "ancient", but he is using methods that could have conceivably been concocted 20 years ago with the DAC chips/components available then, so how, essentially, is that an improvement in technology... he's just going about things in a different way.. the "DAC" I am using and feel very similar about, as you do the Lampizator, is built around 15 year old framework with the best that modern circuits and components can provide, which were derived, however, admittedly, about 7-8 years ago, and the person doing the work to that unit, has since improved methods further as there have been new circuit revisions since then.

What I am speaking of for the purpose of this thread, is the fundamental conversion process from Digital to Analog, not necessarily the resulting stages thereafter... all of which are still be tinkered with... not only in DACs, but pre's, integrated's etc. I don't foresee that ever changing.

You have totally lost me so i will stay out of this. Hope you find you answer.

 

[BillWojo]

Sounds like the Lampizator is using the same technology that Bob Carver used in the highly sought after Carver SD/A-490t Vacuum Tube Reference CD player that was built in the late 80's or early 90's. Using a unity gain tube buffer really makes a nice difference in the SQ.
I borrowed a cheap tube buffer from a friend to use with my Pioneer Elite DV-79Avi that has nice BB DACS and has been my reference player. I can't explain the difference in words but I like it so much I picked up a kit to build my own. Jim's Audio on ebay sell's a kit for 32 bucks, you supply the tubes. Look under "Tube Buffer".
One way I can describe it is that I want to listen to my CD's more often and for longer periods of time.

BillWojo

 

[WhiteSE]

My small experience is that I have had Modwright units, Esoteric, and some others, but I always return to my Parasound CDP-2000 Ultra with the following:
Converter Type:
20 bit Burr-Brown PCM 1702, one per channel
Sampling Rate:
352.8 kHz, 8 x 44.1 kHz

 

[RH67]

Sounds like the Lampizator is using the same technology that Bob Carver used in the highly sought after Carver SD/A-490t Vacuum Tube Reference CD player that was built in the late 80's or early 90's. Using a unity gain tube buffer really makes a nice difference in the SQ.
I borrowed a cheap tube buffer from a friend to use with my Pioneer Elite DV-79Avi that has nice BB DACS and has been my reference player. I can't explain the difference in words but I like it so much I picked up a kit to build my own. Jim's Audio on ebay sell's a kit for 32 bucks, you supply the tubes. Look under "Tube Buffer".
One way I can describe it is that I want to listen to my CD's more often and for longer periods of time.

BillWojo

The Carver was a nice piece that i owned until i bought my Krell. The Krell offered so much more in SQ. The Carver used what they called a soft EQ in their Digital Time Lens adding depth to the soundstage. It was ok for it`s time.

 

[scott1019]

Funny WhiteSE, that the "DAC" I am using is based around that exact DAC chip set, implemented properly of course The Chip "can" make a difference as it limits what can be done to get the "most" out of it.. if that makes any sense. at least IMO.

 

[satkinsn]

I pretty much agree with the OP, though I own a couple of (cheap) USB DACs and they're fine too. A lot of obsessiveness happens around these things, especially when the technology starts to take off. I can't tell the difference from DAC to DAC, with maybe one unimportant exception. Of course, I also don't care about high-res, DSD and the rest of that end of things either. YMM (and probably does) vary.

s.

 

[George W]

Agreed. I have not had the benefit of getting better with every change, but definitely have noticed a pattern going forward, i.e. we are getting better with digital audio. Changing a significant part an audio circuit can surely change the result.

As an old guy with hearing loss I was convinced I would never hear better audio quality then what I had lived with for years. My components were all mId-fi and old. nothing I changed seemed to make a sonic improvement, so I relegated my listening experience to that of background noise.

It changed when I made the first transition to a digital signal path. I bought a 2nd hand USB DAC and this was better. Then I purchased a preamp with a digital input and it was better still. Then I bypassed the USB DAC in favor of a straight optical cable from my computer and the improvement was again significant.

The differences between the USB signal path versus the optical signal path R enough to start me chasing Digital ghosts.

It is a new experience for me, because anything with audio and USB and DAC had been too expensive way back then for me to follow it. The improvements and affordability have been good and awakened my interest to enjoy music at home again.

 

[Gibsonian]

Nice experience there George B. Sounds like significant improvement without significant expense.

 

[redcoates7]

I still like the sound of my old Audio Alchemy gear, but believe that any perceived advantage of the older DACs really comes down to superior circuit design- with a PS3 power supply the DDE v3.0 is hard to beat for under a grand for CD-quality audio

That said, the newest chipsets can sound phenomenal when designed into a carefully engineered product- sure a lot of the focus is on USB, but it SHOULD be! I've never had a single issue since I started using USB on Macs back with my 2007 MacBook Pro.

I still have a couple nice CD players, but I'd rather listen to a decent USB DAC and my Mac running Roon than a CDP any day

Great conversation!

 

[scott1019]

Hey Redcoates, I ran the DDE V3.0 connected via i2s, which was, as you say, pretty amazing.. It has since been beaten, but it was surely an amazing DAC.

USB with a Mac is MUCH easier... but with the ASIO drivers on a Win10 PC, it should be only a preferential decision at this point for us audio geeks.

 

[pete_mac]

PS ... what ever happened to asynchronous USB? Flash in the pan now that the standard allows faster speed by default? That was the talk of the town for a bit, and then seemed to disappear?

Asynchronous USB has nothing to do with data transfer speed, and everything to do with which device provides the "clock" for the data transfer. The vast majority of USB based digital audio devices use asynchronous USB nowadays, rather than the inferior adaptive or synchronous USB. I think because it is now so commonplace, it's not focussed upon as much as it once was.

USB interfaces and chips like the XMOS, audio-gd USB32/VIA Envy and Amanero Combo384 offer insanely good asynchronous USB for very little dollars. Asynchronous USB has never been stronger than it currently is!