Dac

[joel2762]

Just wondering how do I compare DAC's? What is good? Bad? etc. Thanks!

[recoveryone]

Burr Brown Dac's seams to be the Standarded

[mtrycraft]

Just wondering how do I compare DAC's? What is good? Bad? etc. Thanks!

Waste of time. Stick with what is in the CD or receiver/processor.

[woodman]

Just wondering how do I compare DAC's? What is good? Bad? etc. Thanks!

What is B-A-D, BAD is that they're touted as providing a "night and day" or "HUGE" improvement in performance, which is clearly a false and misleading promise if there ever was one. The very most that any DAC (no matter how expensive or "well regarded") can provide is a small, subtle, tiny, minuscule performance improvement that is hardly "worth" the cost if one is truly honest with oneself, and not willing to put his ABEs to work - conjuring up that HUGE improvement that some people claim to hear.

What I'm telling you essentially is ... FUGGITABOUDIT! Do as Mtry suggests and just use the DAC that your CD player or DVD player or A/V receiver came equipped with ... anything more is generally a waste of your hard-earned.

Hope this helps you -

[joel2762]

Thanks for the help. I have my Sony DVD-NS415 DVD player connected to my Sony STR-DE585 Reciever Via RCA Coaxial Cable. Sounds great, and I can't notice a difference between either type of connection or DAC. Thanks again

[rwcmacc]

I hate to disagree with everyone, but I ran a Marantz CC-47 cd player thru a Theta DS pro Progeny DAC and it WAS like night and day, the soundstage opened up as did the upper and lower end. After this test we used a CAL Sigma DAC with even more dramatic results.

[woodman]

I hate to disagree with everyone, but I ran a Marantz CC-47 cd player thru a Theta DS pro Progeny DAC and it WAS like night and day, the soundstage opened up as did the upper and lower end. After this test we used a CAL Sigma DAC with even more dramatic results.

I hate to have to tell you this, but ... if you indeed heard a "night & day difference", then it was your own imagination that conjured it up, and NOT the performance of the DAC itself. As I stated in my earlier post, such dramatic improvements in performance are quite simply a physical impossibility! Sorry 'bout that, but what I'm telling you is da troot.

[xsparky]

I hate to have to tell you this, but ... if you indeed heard a "night & day difference", then it was your own imagination that conjured it up, and NOT the performance of the DAC itself. As I stated in my earlier post, such dramatic improvements in performance are quite simply a physical impossibility! Sorry 'bout that, but what I'm telling you is da troot.

Woodman....I do not know the caliber of your system,butI have been auditioning various Dac's.I have been considering the Musical Fidelity A21,or the Kora Hermes II,both are tube based (16 bit to 24 bit 192 upsampling) Dac's for redbook cd.And they do sound considerablly better than the Dac's in my Denon 5900 or Anthem Avm20.For you to come out with statements as you have posted meerly shows that you have not heard what a great Dac can do!!!! To bad.

[Skyblazer]

I'm from the camp that says external DAC's usually sound better than the DAC's in your CD player or receiver. usually, not always. I'm very happy with my CAL Alpha DAC. it blew away the DAC's in my Marantz CC4300 or the Marantz receiver I have.

There are people who don't think an external DAC will make a difference. I used to be one of them. I put off buying a DAC for the better of two years. Now, I can't imagine ever having a 2 ch. system without one.

[robin_v]

Waste of time. Stick with what is in the CD or receiver/processor.

This is my contention as well. Why would I need to use a digital output from my CD, run it through a DAC and then connect it to my pre amp? (probably using the same connecter that I would have used to connect the CD player directly.)

The more I read about it, the more I'm convinced that this is simply techique for the sake of technique. If I could get an extra 5 kHz of headroom out of my CD by connecting this, I might be more interested but, as far as I am able to see, one only gets the same frequency range as the on-board DAC. It sounds a bit like reinventing the wheel.

Any thoughts?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I think that too much emphasis is apparent in the yeasayers comments, and too quick a move to discount is apparent by the naysayers.

As a user of an external DAC, I can tell you there is a noticeable, subtle improvement in audio quality over my DVD players internal DAC's. It is certainly not night and day(and no audio improvement is except DVD-A and SACD over CD) but definately noticeable.

It has been proven and tested that the DAC conversion on many DVD and CD players have have rejection problems in the filters, and electromechanical problems which can slightly degrade the signal as it passes through these parts. It seems logical that you can hear subtle improvements in the signal if the DAC's were further isolated, and didn't have these built in problems.

I think that the yeasayers need to use more realistic language when describe any audible improvements they hear, and the naysayers shouldn't be so quick to discount EVERYTHING as market hype. You guys tend to do this whether its warranted, or not.

[hifitommy]

[Waste of time. Stick with what is in the CD or receiver/processor.

__________________
mtrycrafts ]

uuuuuuh.........WRONG! detectable differences with worthwhile audio performance qualities are present with very good DACs such as the CAL sigma mentioned elsewhere.

woodman :

i will agree that >"night and day" or "HUGE" improvement in performance< is mostly an exaggeration but noticeable and desirable improvements are most assuredly achievable with some of these products.

some integrated players have inherently good DACs built in such as my sony ns500v which sounds better than any cdp that i have owned and that included an external DACinTHEbox from audio alchemy which sounded pretty good for cheeeep.

one that i didnt own was the sigma which was just excellent, couldnt afford it at the time and a friend bought it on first listen. in his system, the immediate improvement on imaging was apparent from WAY off axis of the speakers.

with lower end equipment, these differences are less noticeable and arent worth seeking. when the resolution window is opened, things change much for the better and differences are more easily identified, just as when better lenses are used with a camera.

[happy ears]

Have to agree with what you say Terrence. Never have heard these so called night and day differences but I have heard differences. Why the large range I could not say as I am not there listening with them.

For those that do not want to hear a difference because they do not want to or are unwilling to pay the difference I understand. Also understand that they may not hear a difference and this is alright as well. For those that keep hearing these night and day differences I can only assume that they hear a difference but not as large as was stated. Maybe it's my flawed golden ears I say this because naysayers tell me that I must have golden ears, will have this checked the next time I am the doctor. Just concerned he will tell me that there is no gold, but after cleaning my ears that he will keep the gold. Flawed as well because I never hear these night and day differences.

Enjoy the music as life is to short