![]() ![]() |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
46.140.171.83
In Reply to: RE: Most manufacturers don't talk about it but voicing is real..... posted by AbeCollins on February 12, 2024 at 12:10:08
There are loads of chips that are R2R that have WAY more precision than the discrete stuff being pushed by various makers today. The only discrete one that I have heard that really measures up is from the very expensive TotalDAC.
The following R2R chips are very good:
BB PCM 63K (20bit)
BB PCM 1704K (24bit)
AD 1862N (20 bit)
AD 1865N (18 bit)
Philips TD-1541 and the like (double or triple crown, 16 bit)
UltraAnalog D-20400A (20 bit)
Have you owned high end dacs with any of these?
Follow Ups:
Denafrips and some other DAC brands do in fact use individual 'discrete' resistors which are in fact 'unprecisely matched' alluding to the fact that better matching can be achieved on a single substrate (IC)."Have you owned high end dacs with any of these?"
Yes the DAC section in my Cary CDP from a couple decades ago used 8 PCM 1704, 4 per channel. Was it a great sounding DAC? Yes. Was it the best sounding DAC I ever owned? No. My ESS based PS Audio has a very similar 'voicing'.
Edits: 02/15/24
Your comments don't make a lot of sense. I was simply pointing out that what a lot of people think R2R means is discrete resistors and what it used to mean was chips with far higher precision than can be dreamed of with discrete resistors. They were laser trimmed no less to get even more exact values.
It's funny that you say it wasn't the best DAC you ever owned but you don't say the PS Audio was actually better.
BTW. I own a PS Audio DAC...but its from the early 90s and uses the UltraAnalog D20400A 20 bit module and UltraAnalog receiver chip with discrete transistor output. It's not as good as Aries Cerat or Ayon but it is very natural sounding in a more realistic way than anything I have heard with an AKM, ESS or FPGA based DAC.
" I was simply pointing out that what a lot of people think R2R means is discrete resistors....."I was pointing out that I am not one of them and understand the differences.
"It's funny that you say it wasn't the best DAC you ever owned but you don't say the PS Audio was actually better. "
I have never owned a "best DAC". No one has. Many of my DACs were outstanding, a few were duds to my ears including 3 "R2R" types, but I have learned long ago that there is no "best", not even for me.
Interestingly my two FAVORITES [plural] are probably the Cary 306/200 that used 8 BB PCM1704 but I also love my 8 - 9 year old PS Audio NuWave DSD DAC that uses the ESS ES9010K2M SABRE chip. This is the DAC that I have owned the longest and it is "voiced" very much like the Cary. Another one I would put right up there with the PS Audio was my Ayre QB9-DSD DAC, also older ESS based. The main difference between the Ayre and PS Audio is how they are "voiced" with the PS Audio ever so slightly more 'weighty' in the lower mids. I've also had a couple AKM based DACs that were excellent.
My conclusion that I will stick to is that the DAC "chip" matters less today than the rest of the electronics that surround it especially the analog output stage.
Edits: 02/16/24 02/16/24
i have no doubt about the output stage and power supply making a big contribution to the overall sound. However, I think you underplay the significance of the DAC and its architecture.
A friend of mine has the Ayon Stratos DAC, which is virtually identical to my Skylla (same PSU same output stage) except the digital engine where they have gone to an ESS (not sure which model) chip due to lack of availability on the PCM1704. They sound quite similar BUT there is a robustness and realness with the PCM1704 based DAC that puts it ahead of the same DAC with different digital engine.
Counterpoint had a DAC in the 1990s that you could swap between an UltraAnalog D20400A, Analog Devices AD1862N or a CS soemthing or other D/S chip. The rest was essentially the same (at least the analog stage and PSU...obviously some of the digital processing was different). The CS chip based version was universally loathed and there was a bit of a toss up between the two R2R chips...the UA was smoother and more refined and the AD1862 had big ball dynamics and bass punch. Same PSU and same Analog stage...very different sounds.
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: