|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
98.217.204.116
I am returning Peachtree Dacitx.Its high frequency sounds harsh to me. I made careful comparison multiple times with the Audioengine D1 which I have been using for about two years. Of course, I also took account of the difference in the output levels: that Peachtree is about 0.3 dB quieter than my Audioengine.
With Dacitx, I often I felt like shutting down the music due to high frequency. This was consistent from various ways of comparison. A/B and B/A with very short time in between, with long time in between, A/B/A and B/A/B, . . . .The dac was connected to Mac mini with optical cable.
The listening test result is opposite to my expectation. My strong prejudice was the following. A computer is not a low jitter source. Hence, a dac with better jitter rejection (e.g. one with new technology such as Sabre HyperstreamTM architecture and Time Domain Jitter Eliminator) should sound smoother and more fatigue free in my system.
Anyway, my conclusion is that Dacitx is not of my taste. Of course, assuming that I did not have a defective one.
Now this is the question.
Can I generalize this experience as follows?
A dac with Sabre D/A chip will not be of my taste.I am asking this to save time in my future auditions. For this Dacitx, I spent very much time, especially because I was trying to get a listening test result that is consistent with the prejudice described above.
Edits: 11/08/14Follow Ups:
of what goes into making a good DAC.
The Sabre chip can be crap or great or anywhere in between depending on the context within which it is implemented.
I would really continue your research before getting rid of your DAC.
For example, - have you tried using something other than your Audioengine?: personally, - I've never liked anything that I've heard by them.
Have you tried using an USB to SPDIF converter?
Have you tried a different Toslink cable?
IMO, there's a ton more at play here than any given digital to analog converter....
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
I was not able to compare. I have compared the Schiit to my Scott Nixon NOS DAC and both are very good in my set up. My system does not like bright sources so one of these might be worth considering.
The Schiit Bifrost Uber is the first "inexpensive" DAC I can live with 'til the end of time.
Hello Mr. Krieger,i see from your computer system that you use a ESI Juli@ card with the
Schiit Audio Bifrost w Uber Upgrade.
I have two kind question:
1) Have you tried also the Bifrost usb connection ?
2) How good are the direct analog outs from the ESI Juli@ card ? it looks well built indeed
Thanks a lot.
Kind regards,
bg
Edits: 11/15/14 11/15/14 11/15/14
If I did not want to play with Hi Rez
Big J
"... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal salvation is a contradiction in terms."
some will say you need some (more) hours of break in. It looks like one gets power from a wall wart the other from a USB cable. This can play a big role on HF. The last thing I saw is the D1 outputs 2V @10 ohms which is better than the DACITx's 1.9V @200 ohms. This comes into play with the overall sound not just HF and what it is plugged into plays a role(an active linestage w/gain or a passive etc.) I'm also w/Todd on Async.
ET
Does it sound as if a narrow band of high-frequency noise sets in after a period of time? Ultimately dominating the music?
If so, this is consistent with what I've heard with DACs that use asynchronous sample-rate conversion. (Not to be confused with asynchronous USB.) The effect would be worse with higher jitter at the input, because ASRC transforms jitter into noise artifacts.
I've read that the Sabre DAC can be utilized with or without ASRC, depending on the DAC product. But DAC manufacturers have been mum in regard to how the chip is used in their products.
The problem is usually at specific moments while high frequency is loud (forte as opposed to piano). I am not trained to explain this feeling in standard audiophile language, but my face suddenly changes to unhappy look and my eyes stare at the speaker: the enjoyment of music stops. Of course, there are moments of energetic expression in music, but it sounds as if there is something excessive and unnatural.This difference between the two DACs happened consistently at various volume settings (including quiet listening at night) in my audio system.
I did some sine wave measurement using Pierre Verrany CD and TrueRTA software. I did not find anything wrong from the Peachtree Dacitx I returned or my old Audioengine D1. Peachtree Dacitx had a little more harmonic distortion and IMD with 0dBFS test signals (I had been expecting this because I had read the review of Dacit on Stereophile), but I do not think that is the direct cause of the problem.
As I understand, Sabre dac's ASRC is different from the real time ASRC in other brand's interface chips. In Sabre dac, conventional non-ASRC oversampling is done first, and ASRC is done at a later stage.
Edits: 11/08/14 11/08/14 11/08/14 11/08/14
The sort of subjective reaction you describe has long been common when listening to digital playback. While there is that impending sense that something unpleasant is about to occur on loud peaks, such playback is usually also accompanied by a general lack of enjoyment even during relatively soft portions of music over longer term listening. Taken together, these express the dissappointment that many audiophiles have had, and many still have, with digital since the format was commercially introduced decades ago.The good news is that I've found this unpleasantness and general lack of musical enjoyment not to be endemic to digital audio as a technology, or even to a given D/A chip technology. Instead, it seems to be much more a function of the implementation details of the DAC unit as a system. A DAC unit not only contains a D/A chip(s), but digital reconstruction filters, speed sensitive analog circuits, analog filters, voltage regulators, noise sensitive clock management, and more. I suspect that the reason so many DAC units seem to produce the same less than fully satisfying sound quality has mostly to do with their having very similar implementations. With digital playback, more so than with analog, the implementation details alone seem to make or break the sound - more often, breaking it.
The bad news is that this doesn't leave the consumer with much in the way of a reliable list of technical features to look for when shopping. Unfortunatetly, it seems that the proof of a given DAC unit design is only to be found in the listening.
_
Ken Newton
Edits: 11/09/14 11/09/14 11/09/14 11/09/14 11/09/14
Nicely put, Ken.
With this in mind, I can see that such thinking has - at least in part - guided my own thinking about engaging with digital playback and informed my own purchasing decisions. I concluded similar notions to yours and, as a result, recently purchased (new) a digital system that looks quite old on paper - the Lite Audio LT-1 transport and Lite Audio DAC 83 convertor. I also liked the look of the Aqua Audio 1704 dacs but cannot afford those presently.
A lot of thinking has been designed into their execution, with consideration given to the sorts of aspects you describe. That said, there are new designs which fulfil these conceptual frameworks too. In particular, I'm very keen to hear the forthcoming Schiit Yggdrasil DAC for the reasons you describe, more so than I would be to hear another SABRE dac. I think SABRE technology implementation is still very young, even in digital terms.
Big J
"... only a very few individuals understand as yet that personal salvation is a contradiction in terms."
I guess the problem was not ASRC..... The only other thing I could think of is maybe something in the output loading which may have triggered momentary oscillation. But with recent gear, such occurrence is rare.
My DACMagic+ has 3 filter selections, one of which is SURE to please.
Link is to a minimal explanation. The instruction manual is a little better while I read a test with measures which nailed it down further.
As for generalization? I'd be real careful. A poor implimentation of the 'worlds greatest chipset' will still sound like drek. A good implimentation of a good chipset will easily be superior.
Too much is never enough
had one and very much enjoyed it's smooth sound. It worked very well.
I wanted to be able to go into very high rez with my Mac and so I replaced the DacMagic with a Yulong DAC8. The improvement was startling, way better performance plus a great headphone amp built in that you can use or leave out of the circuit.
Yulong DAC8 is about 4 times the original cost of the DacMagic but the improvement is worth it. YMMV.
The DacMagic/Plus sound is very dominated by the Wolfson WM8740 DACs. These DACs do the I-V conversion onboard and there isn't a whole lot in the output stage to make a night and day difference with the basic design. Other products that have current output DAC ICs on board can sound radically different depending on the designers preference. I bought one of each of the DacMagic models for a project and I went to town on the DacMagic, re-capping the power supply, and all critical bypass/decoupling caps etc, replacing the 5532 and OP275 for LME49722, replacing the metal film polypropylene caps for matched polystyrene caps, replaced the output NP caps for Nichicon MUSE ES and the difference hardly justified the effort and expense! Doing similar on a Musical Fidelity X-DACv3 (as well as grafting in a Tentlabs XO clock module) transformed it from sounding "OK" to something outstanding!
Looked at another way, the Cambridge Audio design is actually very good engineering - they have achieved close to the best performance for the price point chosen. More exotic components aren't necessary. To improve the sound they choose to go to a current output DAC AD1955 as in the 851 DAC and CD player for the reasons I outlined.
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
Did you have the DM or the DM+?
The plus (+) does have a reasonable headphone output which is of some use very late at nite. It is 'old school' 1/4" while the output on my P5 is 1/8" or 3.5mm.
What is meant by 'very high rez'? And where do you get such files?
My mac will output 24/192 if I HAD the file.
I just looked up photos of the Yulong and the ONE feature which bugs me is the single optical or coax input. And the 1200$ retail is about 2x the DM+ list.
Too much is never enough
and by HR I mean DSD and DSDx2. The Yulong will do those and the music player I will be adding to the new Mini will output those too. Thus doing an end run around Itunes limited output range.
"Automatic sample rate switching, up to 384 kHz PCM sample rate or 2.8 or 5.6 -MHzDSD" The Yulong can only go to those rez with the USB connect. My McIntosh SACD/CD player will use the optical inputs as it has been doing. Those are the only two Digital inputs and/or devices that I need to accommodate.
Those high rez files are available from downloads all over the net.
Yes, the cost is higher. I feel that the improvement in sound was well worth it but the real selling point was the unlimited ability to play any and all present and future resolutions.
And the Sennheiser's sound magnificent with the headphone amp....
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: