You got to be ?& · Kidding me


To be as short as possible, I just came across many articles on the web regarding a trend amongst DAC designers to disregard all the Industry has learnt and done in 30 years and go back to the basics.

I am on the market for a new DAC, so I was researching many options such as Weiss, Berkley Alpha, Bryston, etc...

And then I came across an article regarding a DAC GURU from Eastern Europe that on his point of view a 1980´s TDA1541A D/A chip and using no Up-sampling is far more musical approach than any up-to-date Burr Brown, Crysta or Wolfson DAC with 24 Bit 96 or 192 Khz technology.

But it seems that he is not alone, there are many DAC designers using this scheme as well. SO I HAVE TO ASK, "ARE YOU SERIOUS??!!!"
kapa11
If the last 30 years of DAC design has been focusing on "transparency" "inner detail" "lifting veils" and/or "resolution", it's quite possible that the 80's chip is better.
Audio Note also uses this approach. I have heard a couple of their DAC's, an entry level one, and an upper middle end one and they sounded excellent, very natural. There is definitely something to this. I think what a lot of people may not understand is that back in the early days of digital playback there was much more than the DAC chip sets themselves and the lack of over sampling that were the main culprits for making those early players sound horrible. With the improvements in other areas of digital design some modern designers have discovered that there are more important factors for determining sound quality in digital [playback then DAC chips and over/up sampling.
Remember that the big electronics companies took their designers off CD in the early 90s. They no longer design chips specifically for CD, but adopt chips designed for other purposes. Many of them fall into the "measures good, sounds blah" category. There are many who agree with this designer, I do myself to a large degree. HIFICRITIC had discussed this is some detail. They have found a decline in general CD performance since the early 90s. The best of the newer designs are fantastic, but cost a fortune; and several of them use older chips. I have a high quality DAC from the early 90s and a more modern one and neither upsample. If tube lovers can maintain that old ones sound better than current ones why would it be surprising that older chips , many of which were relatively expensive to make, sound better in quality audio applications than mass produced ones designed for MP3 players?
Yes, they are serious, but others in the opposing camps are equally serious. Each believes what they believe as to what constitutes a better DAC (or amp, or speaker, or pick your item.)

The catch is your personal preference should not be subject to a popularity vote or some one else's preference. You'll need to listen for yourself to decide. Alternatively, you can turn your choice over to whichever party's argument makes the most sense to you. Just keep in mind there will be plenty of others who think otherwise.