1. Home
  2. digital
  3. 1398132150

Absolute top tier DAC for standard res Redbook CD

Hi All.

Putting together a reference level system.
My Source is predominantly standard 16/44 played from a MacMini using iTunes and Amarra. Some of my music is purchased from iTunes and the rest is ripped from standard CD's.
For my tastes in music, my high def catalogues are still limited; so Redbook 16/44 will be my primary source for quite some time.

I'm not spending DCS or MSB money. But $15-20k retail is not out of the question.

Upsampling vs non-upsampling?
USB input vs SPDIF?

All opinions welcome.

And I know I need to hear them, but getting these ultra $$$ DAC's into your house for an audition ain't easy.

Looking for musical, emotional, engaging, accurate , with great dimension. Not looking for analytical and sterile.
mattnshilp
gdhal's avatar
gdhal
1,641 posts
 
shadorne - Here is a thesis paper explaining why R-2R DACs have lots of harmonic distortion. Looks like the distortion is consistent across all harmonics.....

Hi shadorne. I have no disagreement in what you are stating in your previous post. I would just like to submit as food-for-thought that Jimi Hendrix used fuzz distortion. Not quite the same as the distortion you are speaking of, nevertheless, worth mentioning, IMO.

EDIT:

....that would be *intentionally* used....
audioengr
3,282 posts
 
George frequently to support his point says R2R is "bit perfect" whereas delta sigma is merely a "facsimile". As a listener I don’t hear R2R superiority. As a builder/designer is this claim true and if so is it an audible or meaningful distinction in your experience?

I have compared D/S to R2R with my own DAC designs. The D/S is better, however my R2R was using older chip-based technology. Some of the new clever design tricks with R2R overcome some of the limitations of older chip-based technology. The accuracy of each level is still an issue however, so this causes its own distortion.

When you compare these two technologies, you are comparing two different deficiencies. The question is: given both designs are excellent, which one sounds more live to you?

I have personally had great results with D/S, but if I designed an R2R from scratch, it might be equally good.


Steve N.

Empirical Audio

gdhal's avatar
gdhal
1,641 posts
 
audioengr - ....The question is: given both designs are excellent, which one sounds more live to you?....

Hi Steve. Not meaning or wanting to play on words here, but for clarification purposes, by "live" do you mean "authentic"? Thanks.

shadorne's avatar
shadorne
7,333 posts
 
@gdhal

Even harmonic distortion is pleasing. It is higher order odd harmonics above 7th which are not pleasing and harsh sounding.

It looks like the R-2R DAC has equal amounts of even and odd harmonic distortion. The 2nd harmonic being the most important. Above 7th odd harmonics is where it becomes disagreeable to the ear. If the audio is filtered at higher frequencies (most older NOS designs have gentle roll off from analog output filters) then the lower harmonics will dominate and it could sound subjectively excellent.

This might be the key reason R-2R sound could be preferred for the same reason tubes are highly regarded for their wonderful sound...

A complete lack of harmonic distortion is about as dry and clean sounding as it gets - the latest ESS DS chip has extremely low 2nd and 3rd harmonic distortion (-130dB in the mid range) which is exactly where you get most of the harmonious pleasing warmth in tubes. 
audioengr
3,282 posts
 

Not meaning or wanting to play on words here, but for clarification purposes, by "live" do you mean "authentic"?

By live, I mean when I play a live track, say a jazz performance in a restaurant, can I close my eyes and believe that I’m actually sitting in the restaurant?

Can I turn my back on the speakers and believe that there is a live performance behind me?

Does a good piano track sound like my Yamaha Grand Piano in the other room?

Steve N.

More to discover