Why all the love for the TDA1541?


Seems every so often I see this particular chip regarded as the best ever made. I myself have heard it implemented several times over the years and while it is better than some of the budget dacs of just a few years ago, I cannot understand why it's still a popular choice. I understand audio is very subjective but just what does this DAC provide that today's chips can't in your opinion?
blownsi
There are in general, 2 different schools of design when it comes to DACs.

The TDA1541 is from the former - more old skool design of DACs where 16 bits of data are interpreted DIRECTLY as 16 bits. These are sometimes known as R2R or ladder DACs - where each bit represents a rung on the ladder.

There's a fairly unique sound that comes from such an implementation.

The TDA1541 also implements non-oversampling (NOS) which means 16/44 gets translated to 16/44 (as opposed to 16/176.4 etc)

Others include the BB PCM1704 and on a different scale, MSB has a custom built R2R DAC on their new range that is not built from off the shelf chips.

The second school of design DACs are called sigma delta DACs which convert 16 bits (or 24 or 32) into a much higher bitrate single (or multi bit usually 5?) stream. Sigma delta DACs are much cheaper to implement and there are some quarters that don't like how they sound. Most modern DACs are sigma delta in design including the Sabre32, and even the new BurrBrown like the PCM1794/1796 etc. A variation of the sigma delta designs are custom built DACs like those from Chord, PS Audio Direct Stream, dCS, Playback Designs and Meitner Audio for instance which use discrete designs rather than off the shelf DAC chips.

Sigma Delta DACs usually measure better in some respects because they shift the noise into higher bands which aren't usually audible. They usually lack a certain "bite" when playing 16/44 material - something quite apparent when playing back the same 16/44 material on say a TDA1541. Whether that is an artefact of the NOS 16/44 R2R conversion process is debatable :) but it does have its charm.

I have an Ayon quad PCM1704K based DAC (and CDP) as well as Meitner and Playback Designs DSD DACs and I like them all. I am a bit more partial to the DSD DACs in this case but I am not a fan of the Sabre32 stuff so it IMHO doesn't pay to generalise.

I have heard a TDA1541 based DAC before and it is IMHO very very good with the CDs I fed it with.
I use to have several machines with the 1541 wonder...the best been the Marantz CD 7 which had the double crown version....now I have EMM Labs and I feel that it is better (not talking about the SACD which is why I switched to it)
Thanks for the detailed response Doogiehowser. I must fall into the Sigma Delta group of fans as I own both a standalone NOS DAC (Shek D2) and a Magnavox CDB460 and find both to be fatiguing to my ears. To be quite honest I find any of today's "budget" DACs (DacMagic, Dac-it, Dragonfly, etc) to be superior.