Looking for High quality DAC units

[sunnysal]

this is a cool comparison of features of some under $1,000 DACs.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Av47ZDpoaXOydFFIaUh0QS0ybGZTOUNJaDEtQlhWV%203c#gid=0

peachtree, PS audio, cambridge and MSB all make great DACs but I personally I have my eyes on the following;

http://www.lampizator.eu/newdac/lampizator/Lampizator_DAC.html

http://schiit.com/cart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=0&products_id=11

http://bursonaudio.com/Burson_DA160.html

as I mentioned there are a variety of good chips out there, almost a flavor of the month kind of thing. the implementation of the DAC chip and the output stage really determine a DACs sound performance.

like almost any other audio component, extensive listening tests in your system, with your music will decide which is right for you. not the selection via specs, chip type, etc.

warm regards,

tony

[DANGERDAN]

Definitely many to choose from, thats why its good to get ideas, a lot of these are not as widespread as others and difficult to find.

Thanks.

[DANGERDAN]

Can anyone tell me if the Dacmagic plus has a passive preamp or not ?, it states its a digital volume control so is it classed pre amp at all due to actives usually are potentiometers with pre amplification stage and passive just being a analog variable resistor (pot). So .....

[mark1101]

I have been extremely satisfied with my BenchMark Media Systems DAC-1 USB. It has been bulletproof and I have excercised all the different types of inputs and they all sound consistent and excellent. The USB from my PC music server works excellent. I recommend checking this unit out. It is around $1100.00.

[Vick's Pit]

Take a listen to the Rega Dac. Nice sounding unit. Probably my favorite in my setup.

[moray james]

Keep your eyes peeled for a Museatex Melior or Idat44 send it to John Wright at Museatex and he will upgrade it for you very fine DAC. These were designed by Ed Mitner of EMM Labs. Best regards Moray James.

[DANGERDAN]

Iv got my decision down to three dacs, all of which are available to me as most others are not.

DACmagic plus

Rotel RDD-06

Audiolab M-DAC

The dacmagic seems to be the least of my favorite due to its layout of trying to upsample (forcefully) and i just don't agree with their agenda, that and having filters available to the user seems to me they are trying to manipulate the signal more than actually trying to reproduce something more linear.

The real decision is between the Rotel and audiolab, both are beautiful and support many specs that i favour in a unit like this, the Rotel for example hosting the special and highly regarded God of all DACS which is the wolfson 8741 but doesn't have a headphone support/amp. The Audiolab however does and has another chip i see favoured by people in the audiophile scene, its a little more pricey but that's because of the headphone/preamp stage added to the circuitry.

So out of the two really as i am not too keen on the DACmagic i have a big decision to make and a bit more research to do as well.

[sunnysal]

both the peachtree Dac.it and audiolab Mdac use sabre chips (though the peachtree uses the higher end sabre chip), you are right that the same chips appears in some of the highest priced DACs in the world. I like the "play factor" of the audiolab unit allowing you to choose filters, etc. and it seems to use fairly high quality components for the price, I don´t see much about it´s output section and since it acts as a preamp it would be nice to know about how it generates and manages its analog output. I also cannot see much listed about the power supplies. I have always liked the rotel "sound" so if their DAC keeps those same family values it should be a smooth, warm sounding unit. tough choices, becuase there are a LOT of options out there. I suspect you cannot go wrong with any of the ones you listed. one last note many people classify the sound of the sabre chips as analytical while the wolfson might be considered smoother. YMMV, etc. given the flexibility of the audiolab to tailor the sound in your system I might think it owuld be your safest choice of the group. let us know how this progresses. warm regards, Tony

p.s. just to complicate things more add the rega dac to the list, really good output stage implementation there.

[pzannucci]

i just don't agree with their agenda, that and having filters available to the user seems to me they are trying to manipulate the signal more than actually trying to reproduce something more linear.

When you look at the way most dacs work, the pre-ringing (which most of them have a significant amount of) is where many filter makers are trying to act.

The DacMagic allows you to change the filter type (including minimum / linear phase) and one of the filters alows you to remove a fair amount of the pre-ringing. Several digital components are using features such as apodization (Meridian for one). There is some sense behind doing this and as with speakers, you have to decide which really sounds right since none of the digitial recreation is considered to sound right.

How many people use loudness or bass and treble controls or even more heavy handed, audyssey?

[DANGERDAN]

i just don't agree with their agenda, that and having filters available to the user seems to me they are trying to manipulate the signal more than actually trying to reproduce something more linear.

When you look at the way most dacs work, the pre-ringing (which most of them have a significant amount of) is where many filter makers are trying to act.

The DacMagic allows you to change the filter type (including minimum / linear phase) and one of the filters alows you to remove a fair amount of the pre-ringing. Several digital components are using features such as apodization (Meridian for one). There is some sense behind doing this and as with speakers, you have to decide which really sounds right since none of the digitial recreation is considered to sound right.

How many people use loudness or bass and treble controls or even more heavy handed, audyssey?

Yea i understand and i even use EQ's to balance out incorrections but i still believe you shouldn't have to, Id like to think if you had the equipment that was linear enough EQ's or filters would become obsolete. Also it strays me from playing with the dam thing all the time as well.

[Don Richard]

Yea i understand and i even use EQ's to balance out incorrections but i still believe you shouldn't have to, Id like to think if you had the equipment that was linear enough EQ's or filters would become obsolete.

But when you put a loudspeaker in a room the room interacts with the speaker, causing its output to be anything but flat. Treatments help but do not completely cure the problem. Floyd Toole in Loudspeakers and Rooms says that EQ is often the preferred way to control a room mode because cutting the offending frequency with an EQ lowers distortion. Recording studios have tons of treatment but still EQ the monitors flat.

[derrickdj1]

But when you put a loudspeaker in a room the room interacts with the speaker, causing its output to be anything but flat.

Not using room EQ or filters almost insures that the sound you hear is not what the sound engineers meant to be heard.

[dtel]

the sound you hear is not what the sound engineers meant to be heard.

I know it's taken out of text, but that alone is the biggest problem, what they want you to hear, or the sound there pushing. There are no standards to volume, loudness, compression, you can only try to make up for so much on your end.

Sorry for being off topic but we can only start where they leave off.

To me anything that improves the sound is fine.

[DANGERDAN]

I tend to disagree, EQ's is more like masking tape in a job where nails are needed. They change the characteristics of the sound but not the formality or structure, by that i mean EQ's can only resolve so much before they add their own distortion to the sound and you reach a limit of configuration. Studios and master recording buildings don't use EQ's on the final output stage of what they are working on, they have individual recordings of which they can manipulate without affecting other instruments. If your dealing with room acoustics that change the sound you would be best off treating the room than using EQ's as the former would have a much larger and more linear outcome than trying to just adjust the signal and if your speaker is the source of bad frequency response then you can only so much try to improve that with a EQ in which if you want overall better response you would upgrade or change your current speakers. Where EQ probably works the best is when the source adds coloration that you don't like but in terms of accuracy i don't think the EQ has that much of a impact on it, so IMO if your ever going to use a EQ its to change the tonal balance but never the accuracy of the frequency response.

Smileys all round :)

[Don Richard]

Studios and master recording buildings don't use EQ's on the final output stage of what they are working on

Wanna bet? Final EQing is nearly always done in the mastering stage, particularly with multitrack and often with acoustic recordings. When mastering for loudness spectral shaping is always used.

if your speaker is the source of bad frequency response then you can only so much try to improve that with a EQ in which if you want overall better response you would upgrade or change your current speakers.

You are clearly not familiar with constant directivity horns which always are EQed, by design. They deliver constant directivity by using a minimum phase roloff of their top end frequency response. When their frequency response is corrected phase errors are also corrected and system coherence is improved.

IMO if your ever going to use a EQ its to change the tonal balance but never the accuracy of the frequency response

Used for both purposes, works well for both uses.

[DANGERDAN]

Iv never heard of studios EQing their sources (at the final stage), maybe the equipment but i would guess it would be to again flatten out the tonal balance distortion set by their equipment.

With regards to horn directivity i believe your talking about a different type of EQ are you not ?, in the actual design of the horn where the CD design has trouble with roll off and also sensitivity so in the crossover they implement a attenuation and eq filter ??. At least i would think they already have a filter in our klipsch so CD EQ would be pointless no ?.

I still hold true that EQ works best with source correction, You cannot completely correct a bad speaker as well as a bad signal and sure it can improve it but its more like masking tape as i said before and you would DEFINITELY get better results with a speaker upgrade.

[LarryC]

I ordered one of these: http://www.amazon.com/AudioQuest-DragonFly-Asynchronous-Digital-Audio-Converter/dp/B00882U782/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1348623994&sr=8-1&keywords=dragonfly+dac

I'm a babe in the woods where this kind of thing is concerned, but a local audio emporium zeroed right onto the Dragonfly, the day after I read a very positive review in the latest Stereophile (cover item, too). The Amazon.com comments are all 5-star positive, too.

I'll let people know how I like it. I started with miserable DVD sound from my Macbook Pro through Klipsch Promedia 2.1's. The store said this was the answer.

[EDIT] This month's Absolute Sound also gave the Dragonfly a cover headline and a very favorable review inside.

Stay tuned --

[tromprof]

On the DAC front I am very pleased with my Maverick Tube Magic D-2 tube DAC. The price is good and the sound outstanding. On the EQ front, bad speakers cannot be EQed into good ones, but some room issues can be corrected and some speaker weaknesses can be compensated for. My Behringer DEQ2496 can do this entirely in the digital realm and to my ears is otherwise transparent (it is also a pretty good DAC as well and considering all it can do is somewhat of a bargain). As far as an EQ destroying the accurate reproduction, I think that far more has been done to the sound at the recording end to screw that up that would be done with a little thoughtful EQing on a good system. All you can ever hope for is close.

[derrickdj1]

None to few of us have perfect rooms, that was the context of using EQ. The use of quality speakers was assumed on this forum.

[DANGERDAN]

ordered a audiolab m-dac which should be here in a few days, from what i have read its a really nice unit. so we shall see how it goes.