Best dac for my cd transport ?

[Standing in the rain]

Do all modern dacs sound the same when converting 16 /44.1. Or are there some better than others.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Most sound the same but there are exceptions, and some DACs, even if capable of transparent performance, have filter settings that can give audible differences.

Give a budget and I’m sure members here can suggest a few options.

 

[Standing in the rain]

Well I don't mind paying up to a £1000. But is there a point when I only want to use it for CD quality

 

[JJB70]

Any competently designed DAC should be audibly transparent at CD quality. However not all are competently designed and some seem to deliberately introduce a coloured sound signature. I honestly find most on-board DACs to be fine.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Well I don't mind paying up to a £1000. But is there a point when I only want to use it for CD quality

Actually, there are plenty of options for a tenth of that price that would do the job transparently.

I would look at:

• Schiit Modi 2
• Topping D30
• SMSL Sanskrit 10th

Measurements of all these can be found here. All have levels of noise and distortion well below any demonstrated human ability to hear same.

There are definitely other options in a similar price range too that will perform as well - those three are just off the top of my head.

 

[Calexico]

I think it's better if dac work synchronously at multiple of frequency of 44.1khz (to my knowledge only ess dacs are asynchronous but can be configured synchronous)
Oversampling is more precise at multiple of frequency because it s easier to calculate.
Then we can assume they will sound better.
Choosing a dac with filter choice can be good because filter make the major differences between dacs particularly at 44.1 khz. You will have the possibility to peak your preferd one. Having possibility to change some opa on output can be good if you want to try (some here don't think it gives any difference and others like me thinks it can make good upgrade).
If you choose tube output it will sound different. Less good measuring but some find it more enjoyable to listen (like me).
Discret output is said to be bad here. It should give a flavor to the sound and some enjoy this flavor despite less transparency from measurement tests point of view (i never tried).
To my listening tests spdif was better than optical for interface but maybe now it doesn't make any difference.

 

[Bliman]

Maybe the new Okto Research Stereo dac.

 

[VintageFlanker]

Maybe the new Okto Research Stereo dac.

Sure, this will have terrific performance... Still, it is neither released or even available for preorder.

 

[Calexico]

The topic was asking wether all modern dac sound the same at 44.1 khz not only giving advice for a dac only based on best measurements.

 

[orangejello]

I am having an issue with 44.1 using the Marantz HD-Dac1. I though it was just the optical input and convinced myself initially that the the COAX input helped. But the sound is still bad. To harsh to listen too with certain kinds of music/recordings. I am running it straight into a NAD M22 which I know is not the problem.

The Marantz USB input using Spotify at 320kHz upsampled to 192/24 sound extremely good though. I played the same music from a CD and from Spotify - some Bartok string quartets. It is pretty unlistenable using the CD through the Marantz. The Spotify version is fine - go figure. I also have a very nice Cayin SACD player that this music sounds great through. But it is mechanically noisy - which is why I am trying to find a DAC that sounds as good.

Fortunately a friend is going to let me borrow his RME ADI-2 DAC this weekend in order to try and get a handle on where the problem lies.

So in my sample size of one, using the Marantz, I do not find that the USB input from Spotify is at all like the CD input. The CD is unlistenable for certain types of music - primarily sparse modern / avant garde chamber music with close-miked strings. Those of you who listen to this kind of stuff know that it can be inherently acerbic, harsh sounding electronics put it over the top in terms of listenablity. Another example that I was listening to with my girlfriend (who had no problem hearing the difference) was Joni Mitchell, Hejira - "Amelia". The pedal steel guitar on that song is not identifiable as such on the CD through the Marantz. Granted that the use of the pedal steel is pretty exotic in this recording. But it is obviously a pedal steel on the vinyl, or played through the Cayin. Didn't try Spotify.

If the RME sounds as bad as the Marantz, then the Cayin and Spotify are coloring the sound because the RME should be very neutral as is the NAD M22. We will see. Would love to see some measurements on the Marantz. That might shed some light on this.

Just a side note - I finally came around to the notion that if distortion figures are very low so as to be virtually inaudible then we should expect neutrality. This inspired me to try the NAD M22. I have been using Class A amps that have very low distortion. I have to say that the NAD M22 is very close in sound to the two Class A amps I have - but with far more power and far more efficiency. I would never have given class D a chance if I hadn't started thinking about the things that I have read on this forum.

 

[Calexico]

I am having an issue with 44.1 using the Marantz HD-Dac1. I though it was just the optical input and convinced myself initially that the the COAX input helped. But the sound is still bad. To harsh to listen too with certain kinds of music/recordings. I am running it straight into a NAD M22 which I know is not the problem.

The Marantz USB input using Spotify at 320kHz upsampled to 192/24 sound extremely good though. I played the same music from a CD and from Spotify - some Bartok string quartets. It is pretty unlistenable using the CD through the Marantz. The Spotify version is fine - go figure. I also have a very nice Cayin SACD player that this music sounds great through. But it is mechanically noisy - which is why I am trying to find a DAC that sounds as good.

Fortunately a friend is going to let me borrow his RME ADI-2 DAC this weekend in order to try and get a handle on where the problem lies.

So in my sample size of one, using the Marantz, I do not find that the USB input from Spotify is at all like the CD input. The CD is unlistenable for certain types of music - primarily sparse modern / avant garde chamber music with close-miked strings. Those of you who listen to this kind of stuff know that it can be inherently acerbic, harsh sounding electronics put it over the top in terms of listenablity. Another example that I was listening to with my girlfriend (who had no problem hearing the difference) was Joni Mitchell, Hejira - "Amelia". The pedal steel guitar on that song is not identifiable as such on the CD through the Marantz. Granted that the use of the pedal steel is pretty exotic in this recording. But it is obviously a pedal steel on the vinyl, or played through the Cayin. Didn't try Spotify.

If the RME sounds as bad as the Marantz, then the Cayin and Spotify are coloring the sound because the RME should be very neutral as is the NAD M22. We will see. Would love to see some measurements on the Marantz. That might shed some light on this.

Just a side note - I finally came around to the notion that if distortion figures are very low so as to be virtually inaudible then we should expect neutrality. This inspired me to try the NAD M22. I have been using Class A amps that have very low distortion. I have to say that the NAD M22 is very close in sound to the two Class A amps I have - but with far more power and far more efficiency. I would never have given class D a chance if I hadn't started thinking about the things that I have read on this forum.

What is the cd source connected to the dac? Did you try to connect the cayin sacd Source with spdif to compare ? Your cd source is less noisy than the cayin?? Maybe you should buy a passive input switcher instead of having only the dac connected you could connect analog outputs of your cd player to the amp also.

 

[orangejello]

I tried a Samsung Blu-ray and a Technics DVD player. I thought that COAX on the DVD player sounded better and went with that until I realized that if there was any difference it was not enough to make CDs through the Marantz sound enjoyable. Given that I think that transports should not make a difference with a good DAC, I did not try the Cayin as a transport.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I tried a Samsung Blu-ray and a Technics DVD player. I thought that COAX on the DVD player sounded better and went with that until I realized that if there was any difference it was not enough to make CDs through the Marantz sound enjoyable. Given that I think that transports should not make a difference with a good DAC, I did not try the Cayin as a transport.

Have you tried ripping some of the CDs and playing the ripped files over USB to see if that sounds better than direct off the CD? Maybe there is some problem with the SPDIF input.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I think it's better if dac work synchronously at multiple of frequency of 44.1khz (to my knowledge only ess dacs are asynchronous but can be configured synchronous)
Oversampling is more precise at multiple of frequency because it s easier to calculate.
Then we can assume they will sound better.
Choosing a dac with filter choice can be good because filter make the major differences between dacs particularly at 44.1 khz. You will have the possibility to peak your preferd one. Having possibility to change some opa on output can be good if you want to try (some here don't think it gives any difference and others like me thinks it can make good upgrade).
If you choose tube output it will sound different. Less good measuring but some find it more enjoyable to listen (like me).
Discret output is said to be bad here. It should give a flavor to the sound and some enjoy this flavor despite less transparency from measurement tests point of view (i never tried).
To my listening tests spdif was better than optical for interface but maybe now it doesn't make any difference.

There are some incorrect statements in this post. Your whole idea of synchronously working DACs seems out in left field. There actually is not a difference in precise results resampling or oversampling odd versus integer multiples anymore. Hasn't been for some time. Nor is the statement about ESS DACs correct. Nor that most are synchronous, actually you don't seem to know what that means. That is okay, not everyone knows everything, but you are spreading misinformation.

 

[Tks]

The topic was asking wether all modern dac sound the same at 44.1 khz not only giving advice for a dac only based on best measurements.

This question doesn't make sense. That's like saying "I want to know whether all modern cars can have the same gas mileage at the same speed, not only from the advice based on the efficiency specifications of the engine"

Measurements will effect nearly all facets of a sound signal in some way. 44.1 kHz isn't somehow immune from the processing pipeline within the DAC chip. It doesn't make 44.1 kHz some sort special sample rate that isn't effected by the conversion process itself.

So, the literal answer is: No, not technically all the same. Simply because "modern" doesn't mean anything, and "sound the same" varies based on your hearing ability.

 

[Calexico]

There are some incorrect statements in this post. Your whole idea of synchronously working DACs seems out in left field. There actually is not a difference in precise results resampling or oversampling odd versus integer multiples anymore. Hasn't been for some time. Nor is the statement about ESS DACs correct. Nor that most are synchronous, actually you don't seem to know what that means. That is okay, not everyone knows everything, but you are spreading misinformation.

Interpolation made synchronously is more precise because easier to calculate. You can try on foobar and see the difference of cpu consommation vs asynchrone. If there is no difference in a dac that means that not all of the power of DSP is used for the synchrone oversampling. Then it could be more precise with using as much dsp power as the asynchrone one. But i Don't now if it's hearable and if it has been demonstrated to be unhearable.

 

[Calexico]

I tried a Samsung Blu-ray and a Technics DVD player. I thought that COAX on the DVD player sounded better and went with that until I realized that if there was any difference it was not enough to make CDs through the Marantz sound enjoyable. Given that I think that transports should not make a difference with a good DAC, I did not try the Cayin as a transport.

Don't go thurther. Dvd blue ray player are ugly for listening cd via spif. I had the same experience. My sony sacd cheap DVD player sound ugly for cd when connected to my dac. A hifi cd player sound normal then connected to same spdif dac. I suspect that not hifi dvd players do some processing on cd plaback or have very bad spdif output. Be cause there shouldn't be so obvious differences with a normal hifi cd source via spdif.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Interpolation made synchronously is more precise because easier to calculate. You can try on foobar and see the difference of cpu consommation vs asynchrone. I you don't know this i cannot trust you. But i Don't now if it's hearable and if it has been demonstrated to be unhearable.

You can do upsampling to common multiples (7,056,00 hz) at which point downsampling can be an integer process. It would involve interpolation and decimation with polyphase filters. The precision is just fine either way. There is a computational cost, but it isn't much.

As for DACs like ESS or most others you have two base crystal clocks usually. One is 44.1khz and multiples, one is 48khz and multiples. So nothing different either way there. You are at no point in simple playback needing to go from one to the other. There is upsampling, filtering and other stuff going on in nearly all modern delta sigma DACs which gets more involved. But your over-simplified idea is no guide to what works better or worse.

 

[Calexico]

You can do upsampling to common multiples (7,056,00 hz) at which point downsampling can be an integer process. It would involve interpolation and decimation with polyphase filters. The precision is just fine either way. There is a computational cost, but it isn't much.

As for DACs like ESS or most others you have two base crystal clocks usually. One is 44.1khz and multiples, one is 48khz and multiples. So nothing different either way there. You are at no point in simple playback needing to go from one to the other. There is upsampling, filtering and other stuff going on in nearly all modern delta sigma DACs which gets more involved. But your over-simplified idea is no guide to what works better or worse.

The two clocks are in the usb side only. There is a third clock for the ess dac that's why he works asynchronously. This is good for jitter but don't know if this jitter improvement is hearable. For spdif usually you got a dir9001 or ak4118 that locks to the frequency of the input.

 

[Purité Audio]

I would base my purchase on the facilities needed, the RME units are incredibly versatile, volume, headphone amp, tone ,even EQ.
Keith