Late Boomer
Super Member
Not sure how DAC is relevant to soundstage.
Why are CDs the current hot topic?
- Thread starter H2oman7.62mm
- Start date
-
- Tags
- cds
Natasha Bell
The Adcom Girl
Ohhh, extremely. I can hear clear differences in the soundstage from one DAC to another. Think of it this way, the DAC controls the signal that goes to the preamp. The DAC also configures that signal in terms of response, intensity, duration, dynamics, etc. In this way, it gives the preamp the impetus to do its magic to shape that input to a signal for the amp. This is also why, for example, you hear clear differences between cheap and more expensive phono cartridges. The DAC is in many ways to the CD player what the phono cartridge is to the turntable.
Gigantic
A big, big love
if the goal of most DACs is "neutral presentation of timbre" and most would agree that is the case, we find that the differences between devices lie in soundstage and imaging. Certainly, that's been my experience.
H2oman7.62mm
Super Member
I literally knew nothing about DACs until about 2 years ago when I added a simple Schiit MODI+ to my old SL-PD8 changer via toslink cable, it made my CDs sound so much better and that was good enough for me. The thing about more expensive DACs is that I don't doubt they could sound better, but I don't need all of the extra features because I don't use headphones and I don't stream - I just play my CDs.
I would like to know if there is a basic featureless DAC available that would blow what I am currently using out of the water.
I would like to know if there is a basic featureless DAC available that would blow what I am currently using out of the water.
Last edited:
H2oman7.62mm
Super Member
Natasha Bell
The Adcom Girl
When I saw this, I instantly recognized it for the only thing it could be: One of a certain group of AK members (note the period clothing congruent with the period hifi-gear) attempting to play a CD. Then I realized, it was a scene from a film depicting a secret agent, that is obviously also an AK member. How astute of the writers and producers of this documentary concerning time dilation, cutting edge science, and experimental technologies.
Last edited:
RunOutGroove
Addicted Member
Before I got the Chord Qutest that I'm now using in a trade, I was considering a Denfrips. The two of them supposedly have quite different sound signatures and though I'm certainly not looking to change my DAC, it would be interesting to hear these side by side. I could imagine that even if they sound different from each other than I might like the sound of both. Some of waht makes one or the other more ideal probably has a lot to do with what you have in the rest of your system. I bet that thing sounds good!
Well said. The whole soundstage thing is, at least by my estimation, one of the biggest factors that makes investing in a decent DAC worthwhile. I have my system set up so that my CD player is both routed through the DAC and on a different input on my amp it goes direct. This means I can easily A/B test the sound of through the DAC or direct and when I do I hear a big difference. One of the things that's the most striking is a much deeper, wider 3D presentation with the DAC as compared to straight out of the CD player...Ohhh, extremely. I can hear clear differences in the soundstage from one DAC to another. Think of it this way, the DAC controls the signal that goes to the preamp. The DAC also configures that signal in terms of response, intensity, duration, dynamics, etc. In this way, it gives the preamp the impetus to do its magic to shape that input to a signal for the amp. This is also why, for example, you hear clear differences between cheap and more expensive phono cartridges. The DAC is in many ways to the CD player what the phono cartridge is to the turntable.
Last edited:
Late Boomer
Super Member
Soundstage is defined during mastering and adjusted during listening by speakers' placement and DSP settings. DACs that faithfully convert digits to electricity should make no difference.
Triggered
Active Member
I would love if you'd share some pics!
RunOutGroove
Addicted Member
And yet they do, which is why people buy them. Trust me, there's a difference between DACs as far as that goes, I've heard it.
It's easy to believe that what comes out of any digital device into an amp is going to be all pretty much the same, given the same source material. What comes out of that digital device that goes into the amp is a analog signal though. The digital device, whether it's a CD player, DAC, streamer, whatever has to covert the digital information to an analog signal and that process can be done very differently depending on the device. You could test this very simply in plugging in a laptop directly into an amp vs plugging the digital output of it into even a really inexpensive DAC and I guarantee that most anyone who has an ear for audio. and likely even lots of folks who don't would be able to hear a clear difference. This is a kind of extreme comparison, using the software based DAC in a computer vs a hardware based dedicated unit, but it would illustrate that there are indeed differences and that all of those zeros and ones that are part of the digital information the music is made up with are subject to interpretation when they are converted to analog...
Triggered
Active Member
Three options for answers that I can see:
1. Nostalgia by kids who grew up with them.
2. It is the cheapest way currently available to legally own the media.
3. Some association, in an attempt to deal with the massive overflow of useless CDs that weren't marketable by its membership, came up with the genius idea to hire influencers to tell people that they want them. Because you can honestly tell people how to feel about something if you do it correctly for the intended audience.
1. Nostalgia by kids who grew up with them.
2. It is the cheapest way currently available to legally own the media.
3. Some association, in an attempt to deal with the massive overflow of useless CDs that weren't marketable by its membership, came up with the genius idea to hire influencers to tell people that they want them. Because you can honestly tell people how to feel about something if you do it correctly for the intended audience.
Late Boomer
Super Member
Whenever someone tries to tell you how you should feel by doing something, buying something, singing something, marching together or being alone in front of a big TV, you should know that you are being manipulated. This is an instant red flag.
Triggered
Active Member
Of course. However, the real secret is to manipulate people without them knowing what you're doing. It's more difficult but infinitely more effective.
Natasha Bell
The Adcom Girl
"Should" and "do" are two different things, and many say DAC is DAC; nothing can be further from the truth. The DAC that is onboard in CD players was good for the time the player was manufactured. In the case of my Pioneer PD-59, about 30 years ago. It did the best it could with the technology of the period, as well as limitations brought forth by component price concerns and series production, as the same internal DAC was used in many other Pioneer products. Its conversion of the digital output of the mechanism to an analog signal was processed accordingly providing a given performance.
A modern DAC, with current components, does exactly the same thing, except that its rate of conversion, is considerably higher. Thus it is able to achieve greater specific resolution with less compression. This is what you are hearing as a wider and deeper soundstage. Some modern DACs also utilize serval processing chips per channel. This further improves the processing ability of the device. What you are actually getting is a better reproduction, more faithful reproduction, utilizing more data-points, that earlier generations of DACs could not accomplish due to processing capacity.
If you really want to have a modern DAC shine, utilize it to play 320kb MP3 or FLAC files, rather than CD (whose capabilities were designed around the limited DAC technology of 1980/81). It will greatly expand the soundstage, even more than it does with CDs. This is the very reason early CD players sounded rather harsh. Some manufacturers, Sony specifically comes to mind, didn't really upgrade their internal DACs until the mid-1990s for all but the most expensive models. This is why Sony players from that period sounded more "sterile" and perhaps "clinical".
Last edited:
H2oman7.62mm
Super Member
Interesting.
Have any CDs been produced to take full advantage of modern DAC technology?
Natasha Bell
The Adcom Girl
I am currently using the DAC in my Parasound P6, which is a twin-Sabre... I can't remember the chipset off-hand, but I had looked it up and it was one of their latest, higher-end ones. It is excellent. It totally wipes the floor with my Modi 3+, and is lightyears better than the internal one in my Pioneer PD-59. This being said, I utilize the internal DAC in my Marantz SACD player as I love its warm, if somewhat colored, reproduction. It just sounds so nice.
Natasha Bell
The Adcom Girl
No, not CDs in itself. The original DACs the CDs were paired with in 1982/83 players, were not really up to the task. The designers of the CD, Philips and Sony, however designed the parameters to be maximized by the second generation DACs (mid-late 1980s production) then under development. This is why the CD is a 16bit / 44khz medium. SACDs offer substantially higher resolution (less compression) and higher bit-rates, as do even more exotic formats such as DVD-Audio.
This "resolution" is also why many early CDs, especially those from the early to mid-1980s, have a disclaimer on the inserts in the jewel cases: The high resolution of the digital media will expose the underlying tape hiss of the original analog master tapes. Why was this "hiss" not heard on LPs and cassettes? The resolution of those formats wasn't high enough. It was not until the recordings themselves were all digital, without analog components in the chain, that the hiss disappeared. In addition, the early DACs took fewer data points to create the analog signal. Current DACs (those of the last say 5 years or so especially), it is my understanding that they process the signal between 0hz - 100khz, in real-time with many times more data points, then truncate everything other than generally 20hz-20000hz. The result is a pure, high resolution signal designed to cover the normal range of human hearing. This being said, most of us, myself certainly included, cannot hear to 20khz anymore... my hearing seriously drops off at 16khz.
PM sent.
