joessportster Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 Testing out a new Dac / Amp the dac is the ESS Saber 9018 The amp is an Audio GD SS amp designed to work with the Dac So I am hearing more Sibilance and harshness Definately more digital sounding, (I will be isolating the Dac and pairing it with my Se84 and see if the tubes mellow out the grain and leave the added detail I was just wondering if any here have tried different dacs and found that they "while better detailed also add the sense of digital sound and grain, and if it was inherent to the dac or it was tamed by a different amp Joe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schu Posted May 20, 2014 Share Posted May 20, 2014 Probably a little , of both to be honest. Have you tried the tubes yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joessportster Posted May 20, 2014 Author Share Posted May 20, 2014 Paired with the tube amp some of the harshness seems to have been resolved while keeping some of the detail, This may be my new dac. Need more time though The difference between dacs is not as subtle as I thought it may be, I think that the difference is basically that my 2 dacs use different chips this one is the saber 9018 the other is the AKM4399 I would be willing to bet various dacs using the same chips will sound very much alike, and more definitive differences are heard between the various chips. A lot of threads I have read state that price grouping would dictate sound IE... most Dacs in this or that range sound very much alike todays little experiment seems to debunk that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1101 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Have you tried all the different inputs and outputs on the DAC? Do they all sound the same? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joessportster Posted May 21, 2014 Author Share Posted May 21, 2014 I have not. It was my understanding that sound signature would be very much the same, However I plan to play around some more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryC Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) Are they well broken in? Edited May 21, 2014 by LarryC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul79 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) I would have to say the digital source is likely to blame. Like maybe the DAC and amp are more transparent, revealing the flaws in the transport, server, or computer that you are using. What are you using to get the music to the DAC? Edited May 21, 2014 by paul79 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1101 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Siblance is an analog byproduct, that more than likely is on the original recording. Siblance does not even exist in the digital world (the transport). Only pops, cracks, drop outs, screechs, and other digital distotions not related to analog signals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1101 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Sibilance is a manner of articulation of fricative and affricate consonants, made by directing a stream of air with the tongue towards the sharp edge of the teeth, which are held close together; a consonant that uses sibilance may be called a sibilant. Examples of sibilants are the consonants at the beginning of the English words sip, zip, ship, chip, and Jeep, and the second consonant in vision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joessportster Posted May 21, 2014 Author Share Posted May 21, 2014 I would have to say the digital source is likely to blame. Like maybe the DAC and amp are more transparent, revealing the flaws in the transport, server, or computer that you are using. What are you using to get the music to the DAC? The source is the exact same to each of the Dacs, cables etc... are the same............. . I am not saying the dac or amp are creating the sound they are reproducing what is fed them, and the fact that I hear more sibilance from one or the other has to be the ability of either to reproduce that part of the source signal At any rate switching amps resolved the harsh, grainy edge I was hearing so I am comfortable blaming the SS amps design. The SE84 has smoothed out the edges while leaving the detail intact Larry yes both units have a few hundred hours break in on them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joessportster Posted May 21, 2014 Author Share Posted May 21, 2014 Sibilance is a manner of articulation of fricative and affricate consonants, made by directing a stream of air with the tongue towards the sharp edge of the teeth, which are held close together; a consonant that uses sibilance may be called a sibilant. Examples of sibilants are the consonants at the beginning of the English words sip, zip, ship, chip, and Jeep, and the second consonant in vision. I am not much into the terminology and from my reading the sibilance I hear is associated with S, T, Z etc.... some systems will produce a sound I equate to sibilance. I am more aware of it on a digital source than an analog source..................It is not created by the digital source. It is recorded onto the digital source and when that digital source is played through a resolving system it can be reproduced and is generally considered a bad thing............If I listen to a piece of gear that sounds sibilant I will stray away from it as I find it harsh I strive to find a balance between resolve and listenable too much resolve can be fatiguing, and too little = loss of detail..................I want to be able to listen for hours without fatigue yet have tons of detail (I know cake and eat it) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark1101 Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 I agree, finding the balance is the game. It sounds like the new equipment might be more resolving showing up anomalies more than what you were listening to. I asked if all the I/O sounded the same because some DACs don't use all their best circuitry on all the inputs and outputs. One or more may sound better than the others. This would be the analog circuits I'm talking about. I don't know about your DAC specifically. My DAC has both anaolg (DAC can be used as a preamp) and digital inputs and 3 sets of anaolog outputs (2 RCA and 1 XLR). What I like to do is make sure I'm getting a high resolve from the source and preamp, becuase this is where I take most of my gain to ensure a high signal to noise ratio. I use relaxed amps in my setup to avoid exactly what this thread is about. This way I am making sure high Res info gets all the way to the amp. In my setup, the amps are what is preventing that over articulated brittle sound. Also.......I am using a tube preamp and a tube buffer on my DAC.....these help too. There's no right or wrong way to do this. Some do it with crossovers, caps, drivers, others use different components like you are working with. Some use tubes. I think you just found a combo that isn't your favorite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muel Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 I used to have a Dacmagic that had the sound of sibilance around 5khz. It was one of the early DACs I tried so I only had a couple of experiences to compare at the time but it was certainly doing something I didn't like in my system. Sometimes, when you improve your resolution you are going to hear things that you don't like. It might be in the recording or you have just revealed another weakness in your system. There are some bargains with DACs (Halide USB DAC for example). Some of the tube DACs (Grant Fidelity, MHDT) aren't as resolving or clear as some of the more expensive DACs but they can be really musical! I don't think you are asking for too much. Let us know the results of your input comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joessportster Posted May 21, 2014 Author Share Posted May 21, 2014 certainly will post any findings (have to wait for bed time, so I can have some quiet time for playing , Irish coffee in one hand headphones on and other hand on the volume knob........FUN NIGHT AHEAD ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryC Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 (edited) Sibilance is a manner of articulation of fricative and affricate consonants, made by directing a stream of air with the tongue towards the sharp edge of the teeth, which are held close together; a consonant that uses sibilance may be called a sibilant. Examples of sibilants are the consonants at the beginning of the English words sip, zip, ship, chip, and Jeep, and the second consonant in vision. I think very complex and massive aggregates of random tones, like we hear from cymbals, triangles, and spoken sibilants ("sheesh!) are very difficult for audio equipment to render accurately and smoothly. That includes phono cartridges, electronics, and speakers. So I'm not at all surprised that DACs might be very challenged, too. I like my Dragonfly DAC (which uses an ESS chip) very much. It has stunning accuracy and musicality on classical instruments and voices when played over Promedia 2.1's IMO. I haven't compared other DAC's, but it looks like this has been a very fast-moving field. The ESS has stayed visible in the fray and widely used. I haven't noticed any problems with sibilance, but I haven't listened to heavy cymbal crashes over it, either. Edited May 21, 2014 by LarryC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ski Bum Posted May 21, 2014 Share Posted May 21, 2014 Irish coffee in one hand headphones on and other hand on the volume knob How much Irish cream until it's no longer a sighted evaluation? I've been subjected to one of those horrible ABX tests on DACs. I won't say they're all the same, but I sure couldn't tell a difference in a blind test. Besides, even if differences do exist between DACs, such differences are dwarfed by what your room is doing, and less even than the tube amp by a considerable amount. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joessportster Posted May 21, 2014 Author Share Posted May 21, 2014 Irish coffee in one hand headphones on and other hand on the volume knob How much Irish cream until it's no longer a sighted evaluation? I've been subjected to one of those horrible ABX tests on DACs. I won't say they're all the same, but I sure couldn't tell a difference in a blind test. Besides, even if differences do exist between DACs, such differences are dwarfed by what your room is doing, and less even than the tube amp by a considerable amount. Yea I am a light weight with alcohol, I limit myself to 1 and only add about 1 ounce of Irish cream to a 6 oz cup of dark roast coffee, I really like the flavor (Thanks again Mark) I don't notice gains so much as I notice what is missing when comparing most gear, However with the Ess 9018 saber, it was immediately evident that I was hearing expanded highs and better detail however it also added a harsh grainy edge, I was at that time listening to the onboard SS amp, Bypassing the amp and running the dac through my SE84 cleared up the harsh edge and tamed sibilance. so the ESS 9018 is now making for a more resolving system, The difference is obvious now the question is are the differences I hear a result of the saber being run Spdif while the Bifrost is being run usb Schiit is pretty adamant that there implementation of async usb renders sound as good as Spdif or optical so I will be testing that theory this evening, plus comparing both dacs using Spdif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joessportster Posted May 22, 2014 Author Share Posted May 22, 2014 Did the back and forth and there is no question about it the ESS 9018 is more resolving, better detail and tighter bass The Bifrost is very very musical, with some smeared lines which allow it to be more forgiving a very little flabby on the bass maybe a little deeper no discernible difference in sound between the Spdif and the usb on bifrost I may be forced to keep both of these I don't know which I like more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.