General DAC Questions/Tech Thread

[The Monkey]

Well, remember, I also like there to be lots of lights and buttons.

[n_maher]

Well, remember, I also like there to be lots of lights and buttons.

Isn't there some giant box showing up this week? I remember it having a few buttons and lights.

[NekoAudio]

Well, remember, I also like there to be lots of lights and buttons.

Shoot. I knew I should have glued on some extra LEDs and random buttons. I've missed out on a core demographic.

[spritzer]

Apparently understated looks are on their way out in favor of "MOAR LITGHZ!!!" so a revision is clearly in order.

Ohhh and Dinny, don't buy the AudioZone Dac-1. It has only one LED (a tiny 2mm one) and no switches.

[dsavitsk]

What I do know is that I prefer those DACs where the mids give me a better sense of "presence."

This is, to my ear, what NOS dac's based on the AD1865N-K sound like. See if you can borrow somebody's AudioNote to play with -- I think you'll like it.

[Dusty Chalk]

Monkey, maybe you are now in a good position to spend (under) $300 on something different: an eq...

x2 -- if you're really comparing DAC's and looking at them primarily for their frequency response, you owe it to yourself to buy an EQ and make them all sound the same, and then see if there is still a difference. I personally hate Behringer, but it is the default gateway drug entry point.

There are more and less analog-sounding DACs out there, but most audiophile DACs should be analog sounding, it's the consumer-grade stuff that sounds digital to my admittedly less-than-golden ears.

WRT lights and stuff, you definitely want an EQ with a spectrum analyzer built in.

[The Monkey]

The EQ idea is interesting. But I'm not sure I quite understand how I would use it. Are you guys suggesting that I level out the mids on each DAC and compare from there? And if so, I guess hypothetically I would be able to discern whether the perceived clarity and detail were simply due to the tweaked midrange frequency?

[dsavitsk]

It doesn't sound like an EQ issue to me. It sounds like a particular distortion characteristic.

[Torpedo]

It doesn't sound like an EQ issue to me. It sounds like a particular distortion characteristic.

x2. Not sure if distortion, speed or other issue, but I'm prone to think that any of those DACs would measure ruler flat regarding frequency response.

[Dusty Chalk]

x3

The EQ idea is interesting. But I'm not sure I quite understand how I would use it. Are you guys suggesting that I level out the mids on each DAC and compare from there? And if so, I guess hypothetically I would be able to discern whether the perceived clarity and detail were simply due to the tweaked midrange frequency?

Aw hell no -- you'd accentuate the mids on the ones that aren't accentuated, if that's what you think you like.

But that's assuming that they're wrong about it being something else -- which is too big of an assumption for me to put money on. I'd say that they're probably right. Especially about the ruler flat business.

[nikongod]

x2. Not sure if distortion, speed or other issue, but I'm prone to think that any of those DACs would measure ruler flat regarding frequency response.

It is also possible that the MFR deliberately rolled off the highs in the audible ranges. Unless Im mistaken there are digital chips that roll off (or brickwall filter) at ~16k digitally.

From personal experience, rolling off the highs (or at least taming them) with EQ has pretty significant effects on the mid ranges.

I also think that dinny should get an EQ. just because.

[penger]

This is, to my ear, what NOS dac's based on the AD1865N-K sound like. See if you can borrow somebody's AudioNote to play with -- I think you'll like it.

AudiogoN ForSale: Audio Note dac 2.1x balanced

[Torpedo]

Yep, but you're speaking at about 1dB attenuation at 20KHz, 3dB in the worst case, then not more than 1-2dB at 16KHz, which while may have some effect in the midrange perception, I guess it's not the kind of midrange emphasis we're speaking about.

EQ can achieve some things, but not everything. BTW the thing Azazel recommended is craptacular IMHO.

[grawk]

I actually thing the behringer is pretty darn impressive, I think it gets a bad rap because everything else behringer makes is crap.

[Torpedo]

I've "listened" to it in several occasions and I find it far from transparent even in its by-pass mode on digital link. The analogue outputs are pure crap. But it's very affordable...

[Dusty Chalk]

I actually thing the behringer is pretty darn impressive, I think it gets a bad rap because everything else behringer makes is crap.

It's not so much that they make crap as that they steal all their designs.

[grawk]

no, it's that they steal their designs, and then make crap

[darkless]

It's not so much that they make crap as that they steal all their designs.

Is that true? I wonder who they stole the DEQ2496 design from, then. I'd love to have the real deal. The DEQ2496 is a really versatile piece of gear.

[luvdunhill]

everything else behringer makes is crap.

I think their measurement mics are decent.. not compared to a DIY version, but still decent.

[eugenius]

Is that true? I wonder who they stole the DEQ2496 design from, then. I'd love to have the real deal. The DEQ2496 is a really versatile piece of gear.

Maybe they stole from this:

Finalizer 96K

[The Monkey]

It doesn't sound like an EQ issue to me. It sounds like a particular distortion characteristic.

What exactly does that mean? I am not well versed in this stuff.

[NekoAudio]

The thing to consider with an EQ is that when shifting the frequencies, you're also probably having an effect on the phase.

[dsavitsk]

What exactly does that mean? I am not well versed in this stuff.

When you see that a manufacturer specs a certain amount of distortion, this is typically total harmonic distortion, the aggregation of several harmonic components, at a particular frequency. However, while THD doesn't show it, different components influence the sound differently. 10% 2nd harmonic distortion will be barely noticed, while 0.1% 17th will sound horrible. Additionally, while distortion might be one thing at one frequency, it can be totally different at another. So, what I am saying is that two different DACs that both measure "flat" and that both have similar THD specs might not actually be very similar at all.

Here's a good article that covers this, and some other stuff: http://passlabs.com/pdf/articles/distortion_and_feedback.pdf

[Dusty Chalk]

Is that true? I wonder who they stole the DEQ2496 design from, then. I'd love to have the real deal. The DEQ2496 is a really versatile piece of gear.

I have no idea, honestly, the Behringer is "tight". Also, (a) it's not necessarily one piece of gear -- other things they've done are blatant rip-offs of particular gear -- their mixers, for example -- but they might have reduced it down to what it is today, and truth be told, it might be an evolution from something else (their feedback killer comes to mind). ( That other piece of gear might not even be around any more -- you kind of had to be on top of things at the time to know for sure, and I wasn't. It's been around forever, so it'd have to be a long time ago.

[Azazel]

craptacular

I like to learn new words!

Well, I see the Ultracurve (aka DEQ2496) just as a toy with lots of possibilities and is an easy recommendation at its price. But if you use your computer as a source there are many totally free options to experiment with frequency response 'touch'.

Off course I agree with Antonio most DACs measure ruler flat say to 16-18kHz, but if someone -like Monkey did- thinks there is 'something' in its sources freq resp, he needs to 'play' a bit with this and see the effect by itself. And this is why I put the craptacular Behringer into the eq...ation