Looking for DAC to use with vintage system

I searched around at one point for reviews of it in people's systems but couldn't find any.
I've read a few places where it gets hot when charging too so that might not be good to leave plugged in all the time.
If the Mojo is as good as the reviews with headphones say when connected into a system I'd think Chord could have a giant killer if they made a version of it with RCA plugs and no battery and no headphone amp for around $400-$450.
I guess that might take sales away from their Qutest but the price difference is so huge I couldn't imagine it doing too much to sales of the Qutest.
 
Last edited:
Whenever I read of a headphone user talking about the soundstage they're getting from a pair of headphones I must surmise we do not hear the same things. IME (50+ years) no headphones I've ever heard produce any sort of a soundstage (binaural recordings excepted). I have to acknowledge that either we live in different universes or we have completely different definitions as to what a soundstage is.

For me a soundstage is the aural impression of musicians performing on a stage "over there" where my speakers used to be. Headphones are incapable of doing that. Consequently I treat all gear/DAC reviews that mention soundstage based on headphone listening with a very large grain of salt.
 
The Mojo has a line Output mode that you put it in.

I searched around at one point for reviews of it in people's systems but couldn't find any.
I've read a few places where it gets hot when charging too so that might not be good to leave plugged in all the time.
If the Mojo is as good as the reviews with headphones say when connected into a system I'd think Chord could have a giant killer if they made a version of it with RCA plugs and no battery and no headphone amp for around $400-$450.
I guess that might take sales away from their Qutest but the price difference is so huge I couldn't imagine it doing too much to sales of the Qutest.
 
I guess I could setup an AC Infinity cooling fan on it but this part of a review worried me for leaving it plugged in to power while using it the way I'd have it connected. My current DAC I just leave powered up all the time which is pretty handy; one less button to press when listening to music.

"Note that the unit heats up a fair bit during use and charging, and gets worryingly hot if doing both simultaneously. Chord has addressed this issue directly (in multiple instances, too) and says this is to be expected – and anyway, the Mojo has a protection circuit that will shut down the unit if it overheats."
http://audiofi.net/2016/04/chord-mojo-dacheadamp-a-game-changer/
 
As a retiree on a fixed income and still married to the same person for decades a Chord DAC is out of the question unless I won the lottery - oh wait, I never buy any! Finding the right person to live with was my true luck.
 
Hey there, found this thread while searching for input on using Tidal lossless as I just yesterday pulled the trigger on a DAC for my tube based vintage system. I found a Bryston BDA-1 on Craigslist for $550 and I gotta day I’m pretty amazed at how great it sounds. I was using the usb input on a Marantz 6006 CD player which was meh so I was expecting an improvement but this thing- we’re listening now- is pretty sick sounding...and I’m only streaming Spotify through a chromecast!
Hope this helps
 
Run Spotify through IPhone or iPad to an Arcam DAC to my Pioneer SX1250, to some Polk Tower speakers. Totally Amazing
 
Last edited:
I'm streaming Tidal and my own FLAC files from an imac through usb to a Fisher 800c and a Sansui 9090db. Started out with a Topping D10 which sounded and performed excellent for the money, but ended up exchanging for Topping D50. I wanted an optical input to run my cd player to and experiment with the additional sample rates. Also, my Fisher's volume knob has a much more even signal when turned past the 1/4 mark (something to consider on old stereo with slightly worn volume controls). I had balance issues at lower volumes. The digital volume control on the D50 allows me to adjust for the sweet spot with no signal degradation.

I don't care what the tech nazi measurement nerds say, in my setup, a short usb (pangea se 0.5m) and longer RCA interconnects (mogami 2534 6ft) was preferable to long usb (wireworld ultraviolet 2m) and short interconnects (wireworld solstice 0.5m) and no doubt both variations sounded better than generic cables. Whether by cable design, noise interference, break-in, synergy, DAC placement or any other variable, I can't say... Also, the audioquest jitterbug made a noticeable improvement. My speakers are spendor bc-2.
 
Using an SMSL SU-8, $250 at Amazon, with my system listed below. Small footprint, solidly built, volume control and remote, USB/S/PDIF/optical , and excellent sound. Yes, it made a difference over the 10+ year old DAC's in my other digital gear.
 
I have been using a Topping D50 now for months. Not sure HOW they got a Sabre to do what this little box does...but they did. ;)
Very much improved from a 10+ Yr old DAC period...unless you own and Elgar or other insane $10K+ monster.
 
All my dac's are under $200.

Right now I'm using a broken Denon DVD-5000 the dvd drive is broke but the dac still works good on it.

Wow, the DVD-5000 is loaded with good stuff. Dual transformers, fixed and variable analog output. Bet it sound great as a CDP.
 
I bought a D50 for use with my McIntosh C34V Pre-Amp. As I'll be streaming to it from a Macbook Pro. A major part of my decision was the fact that I could adjust the Line Level Signal coming out of the RCA's. It's also a part of my HP rig too. The Topping replaced a Schiit Modi 2 Uber.

HP Set Up: Macbook Pro >3.5mm Mini Toslink >Topping D50 >Schiit Magni 3 >HD 6XX >400i >SE325
Streaming Set Up: Macbook Pro >3.5mm Mini Toslink >Topping D50 >C43V >MC2205
 
Last edited:
I'm streaming Tidal and my own FLAC files from an imac through usb to a Fisher 800c and a Sansui 9090db. Started out with a Topping D10 which sounded and performed excellent for the money, but ended up exchanging for Topping D50. I wanted an optical input to run my cd player to and experiment with the additional sample rates. Also, my Fisher's volume knob has a much more even signal when turned past the 1/4 mark (something to consider on old stereo with slightly worn volume controls). I had balance issues at lower volumes. The digital volume control on the D50 allows me to adjust for the sweet spot with no signal degradation.

I don't care what the tech nazi measurement nerds say, in my setup, a short usb (pangea se 0.5m) and longer RCA interconnects (mogami 2534 6ft) was preferable to long usb (wireworld ultraviolet 2m) and short interconnects (wireworld solstice 0.5m) and no doubt both variations sounded better than generic cables. Whether by cable design, noise interference, break-in, synergy, DAC placement or any other variable, I can't say... Also, the audioquest jitterbug made a noticeable improvement. My speakers are spendor bc-2.
Sorry, as a tech Nazi I have to disagree :).
I use a D50 with an extender cable to a laptop with a short 0.5m cable to a tube preamp and I compared it to the same configuration but with a short USB cable to the D50 followed by a long phono connection and there was essentially no audible difference when I had my wife/daughter do a double blind compare.
You do realize that all USB interfaces go through a standards compliant receiver which includes a retiming clock so that the resultant output jitter is essentially independent of the source until the input data stream falls out of the retiming window? This means that it's really, really, hard to see why a "better" USB makes a difference.
USB also employs two methods to prevent/detect data errors including a CRC(Cyclic Redundancy Code) and a packet sequence identifier, so errors are detected and fixed if possible, and flagged if not possible, so really, how can it be different?
By the way, my vinyl playback system sounds noticeably better than the D50, or any other DAC I've tried on Redbook sources, assuming quality LPs, and this has been validated using independent testing- I.e. not myself.
It can't be a blind or double blind test as it's obvious which source is which.
 
Sorry, as a tech Nazi I have to disagree :).
I use a D50 with an extender cable to a laptop with a short 0.5m cable to a tube preamp and I compared it to the same configuration but with a short USB cable to the D50 followed by a long phono connection and there was essentially no audible difference when I had my wife/daughter do a double blind compare.
You do realize that all USB interfaces go through a standards compliant receiver which includes a retiming clock so that the resultant output jitter is essentially independent of the source until the input data stream falls out of the retiming window? This means that it's really, really, hard to see why a "better" USB makes a difference.
USB also employs two methods to prevent/detect data errors including a CRC(Cyclic Redundancy Code) and a packet sequence identifier, so errors are detected and fixed if possible, and flagged if not possible, so really, how can it be different?
By the way, my vinyl playback system sounds noticeably better than the D50, or any other DAC I've tried on Redbook sources, assuming quality LPs, and this has been validated using independent testing- I.e. not myself.
It can't be a blind or double blind test as it's obvious which source is which.

What I do know is: USB cables are limited, the signal is electric by nature, its easiest to push electrons (even the ones shaped like 1's and 0's) through silver.

Whether silver, copper, aluminum, steel or any other conductor is best suited is subjective I guess, but maybe not based on the science described. Maybe a cleaner signal means less work detecting/preventing errors?

In any case, I don't think I said the change came as a result strictly of the USB cable.

Ultimately, I can see what you're saying, but like I said, I don't care what you say. No offense tech nazi :)

However, I do agree that a proper vinyl rig is pure unscientific soul engaging magic
 
What I do know is: USB cables are limited, the signal is electric by nature, its easiest to push electrons (even the ones shaped like 1's and 0's) through silver.

Whether silver, copper, aluminum, steel or any other conductor is best suited is subjective I guess, but maybe not based on the science described. Maybe a cleaner signal means less work detecting/preventing errors?

In any case, I don't think I said the change came as a result strictly of the USB cable.

Ultimately, I can see what you're saying, but like I said, I don't care what you say. No offense tech nazi :)

However, I do agree that a proper vinyl rig is pure unscientific soul engaging magic

Do you realise that the acceptable maximum length of a non-regenerated USB cable is set by the propagation delay through the cable and the delay through the electronics and that the propagation delay is due to the length of the cable and the properties of the insulator and essentially nothing to do with the resistivity of the conductor? It's a half duplex system so both directions count.
In essence it's limited by the field propagation rate of the cable and the associated velocity factor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velocity_factor
The cable doesn't matter rule is not true with USB 3.0 as better cables i.e. ones with a higher field propagation rate (reduced permittivity insulator), can be used to some benefit, and in that case a maximum length is not specified in the standard.
However, in all cases as long as the "exchange" is completed within the allowable data recovery window it doesn't matter what the conductor material is at all.
Incidentally, electrons do not travel from one end of "the pipe" to the other to transfer the 1s and 0s- it's essentially only the fields that move and its a "collective" property of the electrons that operates here. No electron rushes from one end to the other.
So whatever you believe you hear it's likely nothing to do with the actual USB cabling.
 
What I do know is: USB cables are limited, the signal is electric by nature, its easiest to push electrons (even the ones shaped like 1's and 0's) through silver.

Whether silver, copper, aluminum, steel or any other conductor is best suited is subjective I guess, but maybe not based on the science described. Maybe a cleaner signal means less work detecting/preventing errors?

In any case, I don't think I said the change came as a result strictly of the USB cable.

Ultimately, I can see what you're saying, but like I said, I don't care what you say. No offense tech nazi :)

However, I do agree that a proper vinyl rig is pure unscientific soul engaging magic
electrons have no shape per say.

The 1's and 0's are voltage states, 1 is voltage present, 0 is no voltage.

Think of it as an ultra fast Morse Code key being pressed.
 
I have starting point dac 3 NOS and battery operated. it is a gem and the bass is world class. for someone who doesnt do DSD (which no one should as it is the main source of hep C and aids :D) it is a no brainer. i bought mine for $112 best bang for buck
 
I have starting point dac 3 NOS and battery operated. it is a gem and the bass is world class. for someone who doesnt do DSD (which no one should as it is the main source of hep C and aids :D) it is a no brainer. i bought mine for $112 best bang for buck
For Red book audio NOS DACs seems to be popular, but I don't care for them. I can clearly hear the effect of the alias being folded back into the audio band. Perhaps it's because I use tube amps with relatively wide bandwidth (200kHz) and relatively high non-linearity.
For DSD256 or PCM converted to DSD256 my experience has been that no "reconstruction filter", just a relatively slow roll off supersonic filter (3rd order, starting at c. 30kHz in my case), works very well and is closest to the sound of my vinyl rig. In effect it's what is usually called NOS even though it's actually heavily oversampled.
 
Back
Top Bottom