What matters in a DAC

tuga

. . .
Wammer
Aug 17, 2007
14,341
7,000
173
Oxen's ford, UK
AKA
Ricardo
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Following @TheFlash's suggestion, here's a topic about DACs.

Whenever the subject arises I like to quote Ayre's late Charles Hansen (see below). Yet his post from Computer Audiophile is rather specific and I think that it would be interesting to broaden the scope a bit. My knowledge is limited but hopefuly more knowledgeable people will chime in and correct me when needed.

Here's Hansen's ranking, by sonic importance, of a DAC's most significant elements:

The thing that I see over and over and over (...) is an irrational belief in the importance of the DAC chip itself. Just about everything affect the sound of an audio product, but when it comes to DACs, I would rank (in order or sonic importance the general categories as follows:
 
1) The analog circuitry - 99.9% of all DACs are designed by digital engineers who don't know enough about analog. They just follow the app note. The specs on the op-amps are fabulous and digital engineers are inherently seduced by the beauty of the math story. There are minor differences in the sound quality between various op-amps, but it's kind of like the difference between a Duncan-Heinz cake mix and a Betty Crocker cake mix. 99.8% of the op-amps are used a current-to-voltage converters with the inverting input operating as a virtual ground. This is probably the worst way to use an op-amp as the input signal will cause the internal circuitry to go into slewing-limited distortion. http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/anablog/4311648/Op-amp-myths-ndash-by-Barrie-Gilbert
 
With discrete circuitry, the only limit is your imagination. You are free to adjust the topology of the circuit, the brands of the parts, the active devices, the bias current in each stage - anything you can think of. Think of this as going to a world-class patisserie in Paris and seeing all the different things that can be made.
 
2) The power supplies - 99.9% of all DACs use "3-pin" power supply regulators, which are pretty much op-amps connected to a series pass transistor. Everything in #1 applies here.
 
3) The master clock - jitter is a single number assigned to measure the phase noise of an oscillator over a fixed bandwidth. It is far more i important to know the spectral distribution of the timing variations and how they correlate to audible problems. 99.9% of all DACs use a strip-cut AT crystal in a Pierce gate oscillator circuit. It's pretty good for the money but the results will depend heavily on the implementation, particularly in the PCB layout and the power supplies (#2).
 
It's hard to rank the rest of these so I will give them a tie score.
 
4) The digital filter - 99.9% of all DACs use the digital filter built into the DAC chip. About a dozen companies know how to make a custom digital filter based on either FPGAs or DSP chips.
 
4) PCB layout - grounding and shielding, impedance-controlled traces, return currents, and return current paths are all critical. For a complex digital PCB, 8 layers is the minimum for good results.
 
4) The DAC chip - almost everything these days is delta sigma with a built-in digital filter. Differences between different chips is one of the less important aspects of D/A converter designs. Both ESS and AKM have some special tricks to reduce out-of-band noise, which can be helpful, but not dramatic.
 
4) Passive parts - the quality of these can make a large difference in overall performance, especially for analog. Not many digital engineers sit around listening to different brands of resistors to see what sounds best.
 
These are just a few of the things that make differences in the way that a DAC will sound.


 

tuga

. . .
Wammer
Aug 17, 2007
14,341
7,000
173
Oxen's ford, UK
AKA
Ricardo
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Going back a little, a digital audio signal can be either PCM (Pulse Code Modulation) or DSD (Direct Stream Digital).
This is important since most D/A (Digital-to-Analogue) chips are sigma-delta nowadays and require that PCM be modulated in the last step prior to conversion, unlike DSD which is already sigma-delta modulated.
.
One way to describe a DAC is to draw a parallel with a vinyl record player:
The digital audio signal is similar to the grooves where the analogue audio signal is “engraved” in. This signal can also be engraved in a disk, stored magnetically in a HDD or in solid state storage.
The input interface is the digital version of a phono cartridge stylus and cantilever. Like the latter it is responsible for receiving the signal and dealing with transmission “impurities”.
The master clock is, like the turntable, required to keep perfect timing. Poor digital timing results in jitter or drop-outs, poorly kept timing (or rotation stability) produces wow and flutter.
Finally we have the D/A chip which is where the conversion happens, akin to a cartridge converting motion into electrical voltage.
And just as vinyl needs RIAA de-emphasis used to attenuate high-frequency noise, digital also requires filtering to adequately reconstruct the audio signal. Not using a reconstruction filter will result in the infamous “stair-stepped” waveforms:

4715dafig01.jpg


47 Laboratory 4715, waveform of 1kHz sinewave at 0dBFS. (source)

.
One of the teething problems of early digital was that filtering produced audible artifacts. This was sorted by oversampling the signal prior to filtering.
Benchmark’s John Siau talks about that and other issues in a piece called The Unique Evils Of Digital Audio And How To Defeat Them.

 
  • Like
Reactions: uzzy and wobbler123

newlash09

Iam deaf at the ears, but way more dumb in between
Wammer
Aug 10, 2018
3,377
3,331
183
45
India
AKA
Y.Manohar / mike
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Following @TheFlash's suggestion, here's a topic about DACs.

Whenever the subject arises I like to quote Ayre's late Charles Hansen (see below). Yet his post from Computer Audiophile is rather specific and I think that it would be interesting to broaden the scope a bit. My knowledge is limited but hopefuly more knowledgeable people will chime in and correct me when needed.

Here's Hansen's ranking, by sonic importance, of a DAC's most significant elements:

The thing that I see over and over and over (...) is an irrational belief in the importance of the DAC chip itself. Just about everything affect the sound of an audio product, but when it comes to DACs, I would rank (in order or sonic importance the general categories as follows:
 
1) The analog circuitry - 99.9% of all DACs are designed by digital engineers who don't know enough about analog. They just follow the app note. The specs on the op-amps are fabulous and digital engineers are inherently seduced by the beauty of the math story. There are minor differences in the sound quality between various op-amps, but it's kind of like the difference between a Duncan-Heinz cake mix and a Betty Crocker cake mix. 99.8% of the op-amps are used a current-to-voltage converters with the inverting input operating as a virtual ground. This is probably the worst way to use an op-amp as the input signal will cause the internal circuitry to go into slewing-limited distortion. http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/anablog/4311648/Op-amp-myths-ndash-by-Barrie-Gilbert
 
With discrete circuitry, the only limit is your imagination. You are free to adjust the topology of the circuit, the brands of the parts, the active devices, the bias current in each stage - anything you can think of. Think of this as going to a world-class patisserie in Paris and seeing all the different things that can be made.
 
2) The power supplies - 99.9% of all DACs use "3-pin" power supply regulators, which are pretty much op-amps connected to a series pass transistor. Everything in #1 applies here.
 
3) The master clock - jitter is a single number assigned to measure the phase noise of an oscillator over a fixed bandwidth. It is far more i important to know the spectral distribution of the timing variations and how they correlate to audible problems. 99.9% of all DACs use a strip-cut AT crystal in a Pierce gate oscillator circuit. It's pretty good for the money but the results will depend heavily on the implementation, particularly in the PCB layout and the power supplies (#2).
 
It's hard to rank the rest of these so I will give them a tie score.
 
4) The digital filter - 99.9% of all DACs use the digital filter built into the DAC chip. About a dozen companies know how to make a custom digital filter based on either FPGAs or DSP chips.
 
4) PCB layout - grounding and shielding, impedance-controlled traces, return currents, and return current paths are all critical. For a complex digital PCB, 8 layers is the minimum for good results.
 
4) The DAC chip - almost everything these days is delta sigma with a built-in digital filter. Differences between different chips is one of the less important aspects of D/A converter designs. Both ESS and AKM have some special tricks to reduce out-of-band noise, which can be helpful, but not dramatic.
 
4) Passive parts - the quality of these can make a large difference in overall performance, especially for analog. Not many digital engineers sit around listening to different brands of resistors to see what sounds best.
 
These are just a few of the things that make differences in the way that a DAC will sound.
And just before someone comes around reminding that all well designed and competent dac's should sound the same, and Mr.amir's measurements should be the guiding light when purchasing the next dac. Audio note 2.1x signature measure the worst...But boy dont they sound lovely :D

 

BettisDad

Wammer
Wammer
Oct 23, 2019
329
264
83
Wigan
AKA
Phil
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
And just before someone comes around reminding that all well designed and competent dac's should sound the same, and Mr.amir's measurements should be the guiding light when purchasing the next dac. Audio note 2.1x signature measure the worst...But boy dont they sound lovely :D
I can certainly vouch for that. 

 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: robin and newlash09

DomT

Food and coffee and rock n roll
Wammer Plus
Jul 23, 2019
10,323
9,588
198
Village near Nottingham.
AKA
Dom
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I am interested in seeing what I can learn from this thread.  I think that most people would say my Benchmark, Auralic and Luxman are competently made and yet sound so very different. Am happy with all of them. An I loved the sound of the Audio Note 2.1 DAC that I had on home demo.  In combo with my old Leben CS300SX it sounded glorious but would undoubtedly have measured terribly. Fortunately my wife has stopped measuring me and luckily I am still highly rated for making salads and anything with spice in it!

 

newlash09

Iam deaf at the ears, but way more dumb in between
Wammer
Aug 10, 2018
3,377
3,331
183
45
India
AKA
Y.Manohar / mike
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I am interested in seeing what I can learn from this thread.  I think that most people would say my Benchmark, Auralic and Luxman are competently made and yet sound so very different. Am happy with all of them. An I loved the sound of the Audio Note 2.1 DAC that I had on home demo.  In combo with my old Leben CS300SX it sounded glorious but would undoubtedly have measured terribly. Fortunately my wife has stopped measuring me and luckily I am still highly rated for making salads and anything with spice in it!
In my own dumb opinion...I couldn't hear a lot of differences between dac's. Most SS dac's still sound the same to me. 

Especially my esoteric is brutal in its honesty, and way too much details...But zero musicality. May be fit for a mixing studio, where they want to hear the singer taking a breath or whatever. But definitely not for a home listening environment where we are in the pursuit of enjoying music, and not into the business of dissecting it.

That is where my AMR tubed dac came in. Gloriously musical, albeit slightly coloured and not of the same resolution and detail as the esoteric. But that never bothered me, as I could be engrossed into music for hours at an end.

 

Ron Hilditch

Well-Known Wammer
Wammer
Aug 11, 2017
2,166
883
0
Suffolk
AKA
Ron Hilditch
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I am interested in seeing what I can learn from this thread.  I think that most people would say my Benchmark, Auralic and Luxman are competently made and yet sound so very different. Am happy with all of them. An I loved the sound of the Audio Note 2.1 DAC that I had on home demo.  In combo with my old Leben CS300SX it sounded glorious but would undoubtedly have measured terribly. Fortunately my wife has stopped measuring me and luckily I am still highly rated for making salads and anything with spice in it!
Reading the HiFi News year book, if measurements are your thing, it's quite puzzling when it comes to DACs.  Their cheaper recommended ones have very low jitter figures.  While the expensive ones usually have much higher jitter figures.  For example the IFI Zen DAC - 13 spec/15psec.  While the Balanced Audio Tech. REX 3 DAC the figures are 280 psec/155 psec.  The IFI DAC IS £129, the Balanced Audio DAC is £19,995.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: newlash09

DomT

Food and coffee and rock n roll
Wammer Plus
Jul 23, 2019
10,323
9,588
198
Village near Nottingham.
AKA
Dom
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
In my own dumb opinion...I couldn't hear a lot of differences between dac's. Most SS dac's still sound the same to me. 

Especially my esoteric is brutal in its honesty, and way too much details...But zero musicality. May be fit for a mixing studio, where they want to hear the singer taking a breath or whatever. But definitely not for a home listening environment where we are in the pursuit of enjoying music, and not into the business of dissecting it.

That is where my AMR tubed dac came in. Gloriously musical, albeit slightly coloured and not of the same resolution and detail as the esoteric. But that never bothered me, as I could be engrossed into music for hours at an end.
My Auralic is the most revealing but yet has some musicality and the Luxman sounds like it's got a valve in it and its diffuse in direct comparison (as well as to the Benchmark). Even the Auralic and Benchmark have quite different traits.  The Benchmark does deep bass whilst the Auralic does lighter but faster bass.  I do not claim to have exceptional hearing but the differences always seem to reveal themselves.  The Benchmark and Auralic are closer together than the Luxman.  The Benchmark is closer to the Luxman than Auralic Altair or Aries..

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: newlash09

DomT

Food and coffee and rock n roll
Wammer Plus
Jul 23, 2019
10,323
9,588
198
Village near Nottingham.
AKA
Dom
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Reading the HiFi News year book, if measurements are your thing, it's quite puzzling when it comes to DACs.  Their cheaper recommended ones have very low jitter figures.  While the expensive ones usually have much higher jitter figures.  For example the IFI Zen DAC - 13 spec/15psec.  While the Balanced Audio Tech. REX 3 DAC the figures are 280 psec/155 psec.  The IFI DAC IS £129, the Balanced Audio DAC is £19,995.  
Measurements are not my thing at all.  Whenever I have tried to make some sense of them they still don't tell me anything. 

 
  • Upvote
Reactions: Ron Hilditch

newlash09

Iam deaf at the ears, but way more dumb in between
Wammer
Aug 10, 2018
3,377
3,331
183
45
India
AKA
Y.Manohar / mike
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
My Auralic is the most revealing but yet has some musicality and the Luxman sounds like it's got a valve in it and its defuse in direct comparison (as well as to the Benchmark). Even the Auralic and Benchmark have quite different traits.  The Benchmark does deep bass whilst the Auralic does lighter but faster bass.  I do not claim to have exceptional hearing but the differences always seem to reveal themselves.  The Benchmark and Auralic are closer together than the Luxman.  The Benchmark is closer to the Luxman than Auralic Altair or Aries..
Iam glad that you can hear those differences sir :)

But having spent a lifetime in high noise big machine environments...I doubt my hearing is what it is supposed to be. So I still really struggle between SS dac's. Though ive never had the good fortune of hearing the 3 dacs just mentioned. But for my tastes in music, I find tubes suite me the most. Probably not as resolving as their SS counter parts, in the budget iam usually trying out kit. But way more musical to my ears.

That said,  my AMR tubed dac has sadly died recently. And I've been reading up on  the audio note 2.1x signature. So can you please share your impressions of the same sir. Thanks in advance.

 

DomT

Food and coffee and rock n roll
Wammer Plus
Jul 23, 2019
10,323
9,588
198
Village near Nottingham.
AKA
Dom
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Iam glad that you can hear those differences sir :)

But having spent a lifetime in high noise big machine environments...I doubt my hearing is what it is supposed to be. So I still really struggle between SS dac's. Though ive never had the good fortune of hearing the 3 dacs just mentioned. But for my tastes in music, I find tubes suite me the most. Probably not as resolving as their SS counter parts, in the budget iam usually trying out kit. But way more musical to my ears.

That said,  my AMR tubed dac has sadly died recently. And I've been reading up on  the audio note 2.1x signature. So can you please share your impressions of the same sir. Thanks in advance.
The Audio Note 2.1 is the only tube DAC that I have had on demo at home.  I have heard several AN DACs at shows and they have always won best of show for me whether it's been a modest unit or a high end unit.  It always just sounds right - to me.  It's been about four years since I did the last demo and so I can't remember any more than that.  But one thing I will say is that if I do decide to get a better DAC than what I currently have then the Audio Note 2.1 would be at the top of my list no question.

 
  • Like
Reactions: robin and newlash09

Monitor Gold Ten

Basking in the warm glow of Electron Tubes.
Wammer
Aug 6, 2012
8,911
2,291
193
Catfield
AKA
Stu
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
In my case it's just too complex to understand and I prefer to use my ears as I do when making music.
I would tend to agree with you; I guess it is the classic "Do what works for you" situation! 

I light a candle, sit back bathed in the soft light and feel as the I can touch the singer. At Music Evening, friends have felt the same way. 

There is no way of measuring that. 👍👍👍😎😎😎

 
  • Like
Reactions: joolz

newlash09

Iam deaf at the ears, but way more dumb in between
Wammer
Aug 10, 2018
3,377
3,331
183
45
India
AKA
Y.Manohar / mike
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
The Audio Note 2.1 is the only tube DAC that I have had on demo at home.  I have heard several AN DACs at shows and they have always won best of show for me whether it's been a modest unit or a high end unit.  It always just sounds right - to me.  It's been about four years since I did the last demo and so I can't remember any more than that.  But one thing I will say is that if I do decide to get a better DAC than what I currently have then the Audio Note 2.1 would be at the top of my list no question.
Wow...gald to hear that sir...Thanks for sharing :)

I've some how got this active triamping ghost on my back which I have to do once atleast, and if I don't like it. Then I will be down sizing immensely, and the audio note dac is high up on my priority list. 

For now I will be using mini dsp SHD as dac cum preamp. Will see how it goes :D

 
  • Like
Reactions: robin

tuga

. . .
Wammer
Aug 17, 2007
14,341
7,000
173
Oxen's ford, UK
AKA
Ricardo
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Reading the HiFi News year book, if measurements are your thing, it's quite puzzling when it comes to DACs.  Their cheaper recommended ones have very low jitter figures.  While the expensive ones usually have much higher jitter figures.  For example the IFI Zen DAC - 13 spec/15psec.  While the Balanced Audio Tech. REX 3 DAC the figures are 280 psec/155 psec.  The IFI DAC IS £129, the Balanced Audio DAC is £19,995.  
iFi makes high fidelity equipment that is slightly voiced.

BAT makes slight fidelity equipment that is highly voiced.

SImples.

I'm sure that the BAT will sound a lot different from most other DACs. A load of mon£y for a pile of :td:

 
  • Haha
Reactions: joolz

Forum statistics

Threads
113,444
Messages
2,451,263
Members
70,783
Latest member
reg66

Latest Articles

Wammers Online

No members online now.