What do you want from a DAC sound wise ?

[joessportster]

Of course you want it to convert digital to analog (I know theres at least 1 of you that would say that).........................Onward

 

Personally I expect NO digital glare, etch, or harshness.  I want to forget I am listening to Digital, be taken back to remembrances of vinyl playback.  I have had DACs the give me glimpses into that but I always loose connection with the music after some time.  I was always able to stay connected with the music when my source was full on analog, I would loose track of time and spend hours listening.  With decent digital I can listen for extended periods, but I dont really loose track of time and rarely does a song or track end to soon. (You know a great song comes on and you are like damn its over already).  I have a new to me DAC on the way It has all the hype associated with it, most analog DAC ever etc...etc...etc...  It also of course has its detractors That design is BS etc...etc...etc...

 

 I will refrain from giving its name till I get a chance to hear it . Hopefully this coming week. at which time I will happily share my impressions here.......................What say you ?

[Charles T]

It's been a few weeks since you posted this thread. So... How's the "new to you" DAC?

 

For me, I want a DAC that portrays voices as natural and connected as possible. Some DAC's get this wrong and the body, chest and harmonics of a singer's voice sounds detached. Almost like sitting way too close to a large 3-way speaker, so close that all three drivers don't have enough space and time to come together as one. 

 

Another attribute I look for in a DAC is one that "shows" the acoustics of the recording venue, whether it be a recording studio, a music hall, a cathedral, a stadium, whatever. I've heard some DAC's that almost completely eliminate this entire aspect of the recording. Makes for a very lifeless, boring and sometimes fatiguing experience. Being able to hear the acoustic space of the recording is actually part of the recording. It's part of the music and it's part of the experience, which is part of what makes a good recording. It makes you feel more "there" rather than listening to a stereo in an anechoic chamber or something. To be able to hear the faint rumble of the HAVC system or traffic outside, or reverberations off of the walls is what makes a great recording to me. It transports you to that location.

 

A good DAC should have a liquid, or organic sound to it. Bass shouldn't be dry, midrange shouldn't be analytical, treble should most certainly not be etchy or sharp. It should have good sound staging and imaging. It should have deep, detailed, impactful bass, a full and natural midrange, and airy and refined treble. 

 

One DAC that stands out to me that I have owned is the original Schiit Bifrost. I had one of the first ones, and throughout the time of ownership, I had upgraded the USB board and analog board to the latest and greatest at the time. It was a great sounding DAC and I should have never sold it, but it got replaced by an Oppo 105D which sounded decent enough, but also had balanced outputs which I really needed in that system at the time due to the noisy apartment environment. 

 

I now have ( just received it a couple weeks ago) a brand new Schiit Bifrost 2 "Multibit" DAC. It's everything the original was and a LOT more. I've tried a few different common DAC's in my system somewhat recently, including a Teac, Wyred 4 Sound, and one of those new little SMSL blue DAC's. I also listed to the small Mytek and Benchmark units at the 2020 Florida Audio Expo a few weeks back, though through headphones, either directly out of the DAC's or via external headphone amps with a number of different headphones. One pair costing upwards of $10k. 

 

Out of the lot, the W4S DAC sounded the best. Then I purchased the Bifrost 2 and was surprised at how good it sounded. For me in my system, it actually out-performed all of them by a fair gap except for the W4S. These two were very close in overall tonality, sound stage and imaging. Where I think the Bifrost wins out is capturing that "space" and acoustics of the recording venue and a bit more refined top end. Plus it helps that it's considerably less expensive. 

 

All of these DAC's that were tried out in my system were fed from my Bluesound Note 2 via coax. I want to eventually upgrade the streamer to something that utilizes USB to get the full benefits of this DAC. But as it stands, I have zero complaints or regrets. I'm keeping this Bifrost 2. 

[Schu]

I think the phrase 'most analog sounding' is hyperbolic, at best... and at worst, misleading.

 

I expect MORE from a DAC.

 

I feel the term 'digital' is often used as a negative connotation when really it's other things like jitter that create granularity and edginess that can be overly resolving and fatiguing. 

 

Similarly, a more analog r2r DACs built on resistors, while very smooth, have their own draw backs...

 

It really does come down to personal preference and where your priorities lie... for me, I want highly resolved image with no audible granularity on the decay portion of specific sound signatures... namely ringing sounds or high frequency pings. I also want highly focused Low frequency with no bloom and I want to hear and feel extremely fast transients.

 

A good DAC should be able to maintain identifiable musical patterns and great separation of instruments in complex musical movements where sounds are piled on top of each other and a really great DAC should be able to place individual musical phrases and individual instruments in a spacial alignment that creates an awesome sense of dimension. I've heard a great many highly resolved and nice sounding systems that just really come off sounding flat and two dimensional. 

 

A great DAC needs to be able to really dig into a piece of music and pull out textures and sounds that otherwise had gone un-noticed and hidden. Something as insignificant as the breath of a note on a guitar,  a ulterly smooth decay of a loud high pitched marimba note as it trails off or the immediate and startling sound of an explosion or crash can really make or break a set up for me... it's more than just smoothness or resolution.

[Schu]

I also wanted to add, that the current generation of DACs offered by many manufacturers are really really good, and the distance between true high end and the mid teir makers that can use the same off the shelf chipsets are closer than ever. I've seen more than a couple high end companies have now begun to add processing and filter sets to try and differentiate themselves and give the listener and 'added' sonic benefit... but it's still processing and filters. Whatever floats your boat or blows your skirt up just enjoy it. I've want to give chords M scaler a try, but I keep coming back to the fact that it's a processor and adds things to the musical performance.

[Charles T]

25 minutes ago, Schu said:

I also wanted to add, that the current generation of DACs offered by many manufacturers are really really good, and the distance between true high end and the mid teir makers that can use the same off the shelf chipsets are closer than ever. I've seen more than a couple high end companies have now begun to add processing and filter sets to try and differentiate themselves and give the listener and 'added' sonic benefit... but it's still processing and filters. Whatever floats your boat or blows your skirt up just enjoy it. I've want to give chords M scaler a try, but I keep coming back to the fact that it's a processor and adds things to the musical performance.

 

Very true. Most companies use the same chipset, then like you say, they add in their own filters and processing to make their DAC different than the next. The PA Audio Stellar Gain Cell DAC that I had implemented 3 different filters (normal, fast, slow) or something to that effect. I honestly couldn't hear a difference between any of them. Even when using several different loudspeakers, I never heard a difference between those filters. Neither did my brothers or my girlfriend. I just left it on filter #1 and that was that.

 

A couple of things that really attracted me to the new Schiit Bifrost 2 DAC is that it uses a totally different type of chipset, and the only feature added to it is a Phase switch. At least with the phase switch, you can clearly hear a difference, though I don't use it much. But the few times I did, it made an improvement. 

[joessportster]

I have a couple dacs in the house currently an early lampizator tubed and an Altman Attraction Dac. I am leaning twords the Altman, Though it may ruffle SCHU feathers I think it sounds more analog.  

If a dac sounds harsh or fatiguing I dont pick out a part of the DACs topology to blame. IMHO its simply a poor DAC period.  I have had dacs ranging from 100.00 to 8000.00 several various chips, topologies, tubed and not and frankly the new 8K dac was barely discernable from an older wavelength cosecant. That was an eye opener for me.  I prefer NOS Dacs

[veloceleste]

.