DAC timbre and tonality - It's not what it seems

[Equaliser]

I put it to you that you have no detailed knowledge of the workings of these DACs and for some reason you want to make this thread about the TDA1541. It is not.

 

True I'm no engineer of knowing these DAC's inside out but I know enough to make a statement about them, what I've seen/read/heard/auditioned and discussions I've had with very knowledgeable folks on various boards that do design DAC's for fun and commercial and have the authority to criticise big name designs if they feel they should. 

 

I also don't care about the TDA1541 and prefer the AD1853 over it for various subjective reasons. 

 

I do admit I kind of derailed the point of the thread but could not help knowing what the point of this thread is when you answered your own question as soon as you made the thread. 

 

Quote from Tasso:

<snip>

 

Clearly then there is an issue with mastering  of each format as well as sonic differences between the  analog transducers  used ( tape heads  to ADC for CD creation vs cartridge for Vinyl ). 

 

 

If there is a difference of the same recording but played back on two different source then you can only narrow it to different things, the digital DAC setup or the vinyl setup or even the mastering of the recording. It's simple really you made the judgement call yourself in the first post that it may have a different sound signature, not just that their is too many variables at play. DAC's are much more complicated then a mere vinyl/turntable setup. The processing in the DAC's isn't just ABC, there is bit conversion, passband through digital filters, digital output processing and the receiver, clock rate if used, power filtering, discrete or analog output stage and all that stuff. 

Edited June 28, 2015 by DefQon

[TP1]

The processing in the DAC's isn't just ABC, there is bit conversion, passband through digital filters, digital output and receiver, clock rate, power filtering, discrete or analog output stage and all that stuff.

No argument from me on that. Some do it better than others and accuracy is the quality I am interested in exploring. But listening comparisons can't be conclusive without a reference point.

[Addicted to music]

If you want to hear what a well designed ES9018 equipped DAC is truly capable of, check out Accuphase DC-901, DP-720, DC-37 and Gryphon Kalliope.

I'm really done with the ESS9018, no thanks, I'm after something that comes close to the performance of a Dcs Vivaldi 4 stack,

[TP1]

I'm really done with the ESS9018, no thanks, I'm after something that comes close to the performance of a Dcs Vivaldi 4 stack,

I'm not trying to sell you anything. You will enjoy the DCs Vivaldi 4 stack when you get it.

[Equaliser]

No argument from me on that. Some do it better than others and accuracy is the quality I am interested in exploring. But listening comparisons can't be conclusive without a reference point.

Mostly about the implementation at the end of the day. if you're striving for accuracy that you want to explore then you're going to do a lot of trial and testing, lots of gear, measurements here and there and a group of folks to do some subjective and blind test listening to discern any valuable and variable differences. Oh and don't forget the recording is very important and room correction and treatment/positioning for the gear.

 

But what is the reference point? 20hz/20khz? A Benchmark DAC1? Which is one of the best objectively measuring DAC available but sounds completely the opposite. A reference point is going to be one you're going to make with yourself as it's your gear and something you're trying to achieve, you start with a baseline or a benchmark model/result, as you go along and move up the chain you compare new stuff to it, simple x and y comparisons.

 

I did something similar with my headphone setup(s) over a year ago, it turned out to be a waste of money, time and effort because accuracy is near impossible to achieve unless recording studios around the world start paying attention to the recording and start offering the very best mastering in the source during the recording process. If this were to happen I bet you that vinyl vs digital debates will cease to exist and the only valid differences we can hear then is due to our gear and not source.

 

I'm really done with the ESS9018, no thanks, I'm after something that comes close to the performance of a Dcs Vivaldi 4 stack,

 

Since I have heard a dcs vivaldi stack no off the shelf chip is going to give you the sound of a dcs stack or a msb stack. For it to be beat or comparable in someway you need to compare it with the MSB IV series, what differentiates these high 5 figure DAC's from other manufacturers is that these guys design the DAC chip in-house and program it themselves - some serious proprietary designed stuff and these guys know there DAC's more then anybody else out there. I know Wadia did something similar with the old X64.4 and possibly the X thirty something DAC's (actually I think Wadia did it with the 521 dac as well) , Tube Technology did it with there Fullcrum tube DAC (and a very very very good DAC too) and few others that have gone extinct have done proprietary programmed DAC stuff as well. 

 

So when you're buying the next dCs or MSB and think "is this thing really worth $90000"?, think for a minute and care to understand that everything was designed in-house and within the company. 

 

RE: The Sabre chip, I was done with the ESS Sabre stuff as soon as some of the first and hyped commercial dac's utilising it came out. I love listening to piano pieces, I have a member in the family that use to play and teach piano so I know what a piano sounds like in real life, imo no vinyl or digital setup I've heard has been able to replicate what a piano key sounds like in real life, some setups have been close but like Tasso's OP it very much boils down to the recording, it's always the recording.

 

If one particular recording sounds bloody sublime on your system but the next sounds like dog crap than you know it's the recording. I admit the Sabre chip is a highly detail and resolving but it makes female vocals sound unnatural, a Norah Jones passage would sound like a John Farnham piece through a Sabre based DAC for me at least. Ok but how about we eliminate the discrete output design i.e semi's and opamps and put valves into the equation and bring 2nd/3rd degree harmonic distortion of valves in the output stage, yes we talking about what we love best of tubes; warmth. Yes it mellows it a bit but Sabre house sound is still there, detailed and bright with an unnatural glare over the mid range. The piano sounds like a plastic toy on all the Sabre DAC's I've heard and I've heard plenty. 

 

There was an interesting article written a while ago with why the Sabre stuff is becoming so popular and the reason for it is most people these days want detail. Detail /= music. It's part of the equation. Of course if consumers want so much of something, it's natural for manufacturers and companies to keep feeding and supplying with these things. Easier to make money then risk being different and release something unique and kudos to those that do. These days it's about up-sampling the source and ESS9018. 

Edited June 28, 2015 by DefQon

[henry218]

 

 

If one particular recording sounds bloody sublime on your system but the next sounds like dog crap than you know it's the recording. I admit the Sabre chip is a highly detail and resolving but it makes female vocals sound unnatural, a Norah Jones passage would sound like a John Farnham piece through a Sabre based DAC for me at least. Ok but how about we eliminate the discrete output design i.e semi's and opamps and put valves into the equation and bring 2nd/3rd degree harmonic distortion of valves in the output stage, yes we talking about what we love best of tubes; warmth. Yes it mellows it a bit but Sabre house sound is still there, detailed and bright with an unnatural glare over the mid range. The piano sounds like a plastic toy on all the Sabre DAC's I've heard and I've heard plenty. 

 

 

which speakers that you heard the DAC with? i have tried many DACS and great players, none of them can have that significant differences, the music flows better on the better dac but usually not that drastic tonal changes.

 

in regards to nfb-12, the unit that you bought from atisley was mine , its lacking the ultimate treble, but somehow enjoyable.. (especially since its cheap )

[Equaliser]

which speakers that you heard the DAC with? i have tried many DACS and great players, none of them can have that significant differences, the music flows better on the better dac but usually not that drastic tonal changes.

 

in regards to nfb-12, the unit that you bought from atisley was mine , its lacking the ultimate treble, but somehow enjoyable.. (especially since its cheap )

 

Other then a few Dynaudio monitor's, Harbeth SHL5's, Quad ESL- 57/63,2812's and some diy horn's using all sorts of drivers, my headphones, well at least what I had 2-5 years ago. The difference wasn't absolutely huge as I described it to be on honest but it was enough to put me off and have me "go ok, lets change the DAC or headphone or speaker as this sounds really really bad and non-involving". 

 

I know no treble and hardly any mids. I was thinking something was wrong with my headphones at the time. 

[TP1]

Mostly about the implementation at the end of the day. if you're striving for accuracy that you want to explore then you're going to do a lot of trial and testing, lots of gear, measurements here and there and a group of folks to do some subjective and blind test listening to discern any valuable and variable differences. Oh and don't forget the recording is very important and room correction and treatment/positioning for the gear.

.

I don't think you have got the point. This is not about subjectively comparing DACs to each other because that doesn't prove anything other than people have different tastes. In terms of listening as a means of judgement, it is only valid if being compared to the actual source material. Unless you have done exactly that , I would suggest your observations on DACs are not very useful to others other than declaring your subjective tastes. Going on a half page rant about a particular DAC is a case in point. It's anything but objective.

I will go further and say that while the online reviews have been welcomed by many of us, they have also taken away objectivity to a large extent, because no longer are critical performance parameters measured and reported , but are replaced by colourful language, and list of songs played.

Edited June 28, 2015 by Tasso

[statman]

Tonality, timbre, prat, timing etc. What a pile of ****. I think it just comes down to whether the listener wants to listen to the recording or whether he just wants to listen to how he thinks it should sound. 90% of us want the latter and we think only we know what it should be. A completely neutral system that accurately reproduces the recording will only be as good as the recording, as it should be. If you think there is a dac out there that will play everything as you want it to sound, well you need to learn that it won't ever happen.

I like a nice warm tone sometimes, but I'm very happy that we are getting closer to hearing how good an excellently recorded album DOES sound. You can only get that with a dac that is going to sound dreadful with a dreadful recording.

(This is just another opinion from just another Internet expert , one of thousands , jeez we're breeding like flies)

[Sub Sonic]

Mostly about the implementation at the end of the day.

 

RE: The Sabre chip, I was done with the ESS Sabre stuff as soon as some of the first and hyped commercial dac's utilising it came out.

DefQon,

What are your opinions/thoughts of the Resonessence Labs DACs? I'm led to believe these guys have more background experience with the Sabre chips than most, so just curious.

 

Since I have heard a dcs vivaldi stack no off the shelf chip is going to give you the sound of a dcs stack or a msb stack.

these guys design the DAC chip in-house and program it themselves - some serious proprietary designed stuff and these guys know there DAC's more then anybody else out there. I know Wadia did something similar with the old X64.4 and possibly the X thirty something DAC's (actually I think Wadia did it with the 521 dac as well) , Tube Technology did it with there Fullcrum tube DAC (and a very very very good DAC too) and few others that have gone extinct have done proprietary programmed DAC stuff as well. 

 

So when you're buying the next dCs or MSB and think "is this thing really worth $90000"?, think for a minute and care to understand that everything was designed in-house and within the company.

I was reading another thread where you mention you didn't like a couple of the Chord DACs, don't these guys do the same with their chips? Obviously different engineers work in different ways, but how would you compare some of the Chord gear to the above?

Not trying to put words in your mouth, just a couple of genuine questions.

Regards,

SS

Edited for grammar.

Edited June 28, 2015 by Sub Sonic

[Equaliser]

I`ll be honest and say I`ve never liked any of the Chord stuff. Starting from the Chord 64 to the Qute.

They don`t compare to the dcs and msb stuff imo. It`s not really about engineers every company has its own philosophy and design goals what they want to achieve.

Heard the first Invicta that was released its ok sounding for something that has an array of 9018`s? But preferred the Metrum Hex to it.

Sent from my LG-D855 using Tapatalk

[JDWest]

Tonality, timbre, prat, timing etc. What a pile of ****. I think it just comes down to whether the listener wants to listen to the recording or whether he just wants to listen to how he thinks it should sound. 90% of us want the latter and we think only we know what it should be. A completely neutral system that accurately reproduces the recording will only be as good as the recording, as it should be. If you think there is a dac out there that will play everything as you want it to sound, well you need to learn that it won't ever happen.

I like a nice warm tone sometimes, but I'm very happy that we are getting closer to hearing how good an excellently recorded album DOES sound. You can only get that with a dac that is going to sound dreadful with a dreadful recording.

(This is just another opinion from just another Internet expert , one of thousands , jeez we're breeding like flies)

 

Very much to the point. I'd add that Tasso's methods can make it a bit easier for individuals to determine whether accurate and neutral is what they really want. As you point out,  some, will love it when the recording is good but hate it when the recording is bad; then it's down to which you feel more strongly about.

 

For me, I'm now motivated to replace some of my worst digital recordings with rips of vinyl. That is, I'll continue my personal quest for accuracy and neutrality in my system but try to get better recordings of some of my favourite albums that were poorly recorded on CD.

 

i.e. rather than chasing a digital system that is more friendly to poor recordings, this thread makes me wonder how far I can get by replacing those recordings.