Best alternative: Preamp with built in DAC chip or Modern DAC

[Blizzard]

Paul McGowan nonetheless uses a tube preamp (Aesthetix Calypso) between his DAC and Poweramp, and will be releasing his own PS audio preamp shortly. I actually kept urging him to try one having achieved great results with ARC 5SE, and he finally gave in and changed his position that preamps always degrade sound quality.

It all depends on what you like subjectively. Some people might like the sound better if 100' of home depot extension cord if used for speaker cable. If they do, are they wrong? No, there's no right or wrong in audio.

What's wrong is paying a bunch more money for an end result that isn't as pleasing to your own ears as something that could have cost much less. But even that can be up for debate, as some like the status that comes with the high price, and that's #1 to them.

 

[Purite Audio]

I can't think of any other way to explain the issue to you Blizz, google the Weiss white paper on digital attenuation.
Keith.

 

[edorr]

It all depends on what you like subjectively. Some people might like the sound better if 100' of home depot extension cord if used for speaker cable. If they do, are they wrong? No, there's no right or wrong in audio.

Correct. This is why there is no substitute for trial and error. After I ditched the Spectral pre, I kept my AC cord and kept a slot open in my audio rack for the new PS audio tube pre, just give it a whirl and see if I can recreate the benefits of what the ARC 5SE did.

 

[PeterA]

And make sure to try without HQplayer adding the fairy dust when the Pass is connected as well. As this is how 98% of users experience the NADAC when connected through a preamp.

Do you mean that 98% of NADAC plus preamp users do not use any filters? I asked Ian and Alan whether or not they tried bypassing all filters when they listened to the NADAC.

 

[Blizzard]

Do you mean that 98% of NADAC plus preamp users do not use any filters? I asked Ian and Alan whether or not they tried bypassing all filters when they listened to the NADAC.

Did you not read their impressions already where they clearly say how the PCM sounds without HQplayer?

Without HQplayer filters:

"After three ibuprofen tossed back with three cups of coffee for good measure, I wanted to run some experiments to see how the DAC was performing. First, I wanted to hear how the DAC sounded at native PCM rates without upsampling to DSD. Here we learned that the DAC is clearly designed for DSD. The native PCM rates resulted in a collapsed sound stage with a loss of dynamics. In fact, if I had only heard this DAC played at native PCM rates, I would think it is a rather poor DAC."

(Native PCM meaning no HQplayer filters, no resampling PCM to DSD with HQplayer)

With HQplayer filters:

"Ian had mentioned that when we were upsampling to DSD, we were listening to a filter that was designed to highlight transients and cleanliness. He said there was another filter that supposedly offered a more immersive sound stage, with possibly somewhat reduced transients. I wanted to hear it, so he changed the setting in HQ Player.

This, for me, was musical bliss. Beautiful, smooth, enveloping sound with warmth and yet plenty of detail to keep me happy. I no longer felt any compunction to have the subs put back in the system. I was flabbergasted at how good the system sounded. The analog setup sounded smaller and rather dry in comparison. The digital actually had more liquidity and smoothness than the analog, and the bass of the digital rig was far superior"



I'm saying 98% of NADAC users likely don't use it in conjunction with HQplayer, and the HQplayer SDM/SRC filters. They actually bundle the DAC with their own media software called Emotion. Most Roon users use Roon on it's own. Jriver media centre is the most popular media player software. Then you have all the Mac software, but you are limited to DoP and DSD 128 on a Mac, so not recommended with a Mac. Although many will anyways due to their fetish with Apple products.

Alan says "The DAC was clearly designed for DSD" however if he preformed the same experiments with any DSD capable DAC that uses an SDM type DAC chip, he would of had the same impressions.

 

[PeterA]

For the sake of my sanity when you pop round to madfloyds please definitely try the dac direct and with pre then compare.

Bring your thoughts Back here as I will be most interested.

Blizzard has already created an expectation bias by so strongly telling me what I will hear at Ian's house and what the NADAC sounds like. Now you are adding the stress that you, and perhaps others, are anxiously awaiting the results of my efforts to directly compare Ian's analog to his HQPlayer/NADAC. I don't know if I can handle the pressure. Anything I report will be questioned by someone and new qualifications will be used to explain what I heard. Magic, fairy dust, see what I mean? All of this may take the fun out of the listening session.

If we listen to the NADAC direct without filters to the amps, and I report that it sounds warm, Blizzard will blame the Pass amps for adding coloration to the sound, because he know they were designed to sound warm. If not the amps, then the speaker positions, or the cable connections, or anything else. As I have no idea what the engineers heard during the mastering, there is no way for me to know how transparent the NADAC really is. This listening session will be fraught with flaws and expectations, perhaps too large to satisfy anyone. Perhaps we should all just hear the NADAC and a great turntable set up for ourselves.

I may go back on my earlier promise to report my impressions here on this forum. Blizzard did that in the Myth Busting thread, by saying that it might be a quiet group in the Seattle area that does not share their results. I may do the same and simply have a listen, make up my own mind, and keep it to myself. Less stressful that way and less open to criticism.

Just look at how Blizzard insisted that the NADAC be heard by die hard vinyl guys, and the one person who has actually heard it in Ian's system and preferred it to analog, is a digital only guy. I know him well, and he is a great listener, but he is not a die hard analog guy. Blizzard immediately spread the word of that positive report all over the forum. Talk about rapid response! Yet it was with the highly colored Pass XS preamp. So this is, and always has been, really only about listener's preference. Not transparency to the recording. That is a different subject which used to be the topic filling up the pages of the Myth Busting thread.

Al M. and I will go and listen and see what happens. I look forward to it and hope to learn something, but I think it will be better if I don't make any more promises. And spazmatron, you are far too nice a guy for me to risk effecting your sanity in any way.

 

[nc42acc]

A shimmering light of sanity midst the chaos. Thank you Peter!

Blizzard has already created an expectation bias by so strongly telling me what I will hear at Ian's house and what the NADAC sounds like. Now you are adding the stress that you, and perhaps others, are anxiously awaiting the results of my efforts to directly compare Ian's analog to his HQPlayer/NADAC. I don't know if I can handle the pressure. Anything I report will be questioned by someone and new qualifications will be used to explain what I heard. Magic, fairy dust, see what I mean? All of this may take the fun out of the listening session.

If we listen to the NADAC direct without filters to the amps, and I report that it sounds warm, Blizzard will blame the Pass amps for adding coloration to the sound, because he know they were designed to sound warm. If not the amps, then the speaker positions, or the cable connections, or anything else. As I have no idea what the engineers heard during the mastering, there is no way for me to know how transparent the NADAC really is. This listening session will be fraught with flaws and expectations, perhaps too large to satisfy anyone. Perhaps we should all just hear the NADAC and a great turntable set up for ourselves.

I may go back on my earlier promise to report my impressions here on this forum. Blizzard did that in the Myth Busting thread, by saying that it might be a quiet group in the Seattle area that does not share their results. I may do the same and simply have a listen, make up my own mind, and keep it to myself. Less stressful that way and less open to criticism.

Just look at how Blizzard insisted that the NADAC be heard by die hard vinyl guys, and the one person who has actually heard it in Ian's system and preferred it to analog, is a digital only guy. I know him well, and he is a great listener, but he is not a die hard analog guy. Blizzard immediately spread the word of that positive report all over the forum. Talk about rapid response! Yet it was with the highly colored Pass XS preamp. So this is, and always has been, really only about listener's preference. Not transparency to the recording. That is a different subject which used to be the topic filling up the pages of the Myth Busting thread.

Al M. and I will go and listen and see what happens. I look forward to it and hope to learn something, but I think it will be better if I don't make any more promises. And spazmatron, you are far too nice a guy for me to risk effecting your sanity in any way.

 

[Blizzard]

Blizzard has already created an expectation bias by so strongly telling me what I will hear at Ian's house and what the NADAC sounds like. Now you are adding the stress that you, and perhaps others, are anxiously awaiting the results of my efforts to directly compare Ian's analog to his HQPlayer/NADAC. I don't know if I can handle the pressure. Anything I report will be questioned by someone and new qualifications will be used to explain what I heard. Magic, fairy dust, see what I mean? All of this may take the fun out of the listening session.

If we listen to the NADAC direct without filters to the amps, and I report that it sounds warm, Blizzard will blame the Pass amps for adding coloration to the sound, because he know they were designed to sound warm. If not the amps, then the speaker positions, or the cable connections, or anything else. As I have no idea what the engineers heard during the mastering, there is no way for me to know how transparent the NADAC really is. This listening session will be fraught with flaws and expectations, perhaps too large to satisfy anyone. Perhaps we should all just hear the NADAC and a great turntable set up for ourselves.

I may go back on my earlier promise to report my impressions here on this forum. Blizzard did that in the Myth Busting thread, by saying that it might be a quiet group in the Seattle area that does not share their results. I may do the same and simply have a listen, make up my own mind, and keep it to myself. Less stressful that way and less open to criticism.

Just look at how Blizzard insisted that the NADAC be heard by die hard vinyl guys, and the one person who has actually heard it in Ian's system and preferred it to analog, is a digital only guy. I know him well, and he is a great listener, but he is not a die hard analog guy. Blizzard immediately spread the word of that positive report all over the forum. Talk about rapid response! Yet it was with the highly colored Pass XS preamp. So this is, and always has been, really only about listener's preference. Not transparency to the recording. That is a different subject which used to be the topic filling up the pages of the Myth Busting thread.

Al M. and I will go and listen and see what happens. I look forward to it and hope to learn something, but I think it will be better if I don't make any more promises. And spazmatron, you are far too nice a guy for me to risk effecting your sanity in any way.

I'm not the one who reported the listening impressions on this DAC. And as I pointed out in the last post, the sound was clearly nowhere in the ball park for PCM without HQplayer. We have one very experienced audiophile that likes it better, and another who likes the analog better (although may change with further tweaking)

Also keep in mind the cost differences when comparing the $10500 DAC to the $200000 or so worth of turntable,tone arm, phono stage, pre amp, and cables in the analog system. I know this is likely irrelevant to folks like you, but for the other 99% reading this forum, this may be a limiting factor. Also keep in mind that the $4200 Merging Hapi will likely sound 95% as good.

 

[DaveC]

Blizzard has already created an expectation bias by so strongly telling me what I will hear at Ian's house and what the NADAC sounds like. Now you are adding the stress that you, and perhaps others, are anxiously awaiting the results of my efforts to directly compare Ian's analog to his HQPlayer/NADAC. I don't know if I can handle the pressure. Anything I report will be questioned by someone and new qualifications will be used to explain what I heard. Magic, fairy dust, see what I mean? All of this may take the fun out of the listening session.

If we listen to the NADAC direct without filters to the amps, and I report that it sounds warm, Blizzard will blame the Pass amps for adding coloration to the sound, because he know they were designed to sound warm. If not the amps, then the speaker positions, or the cable connections, or anything else. As I have no idea what the engineers heard during the mastering, there is no way for me to know how transparent the NADAC really is. This listening session will be fraught with flaws and expectations, perhaps too large to satisfy anyone. Perhaps we should all just hear the NADAC and a great turntable set up for ourselves.

I may go back on my earlier promise to report my impressions here on this forum. Blizzard did that in the Myth Busting thread, by saying that it might be a quiet group in the Seattle area that does not share their results. I may do the same and simply have a listen, make up my own mind, and keep it to myself. Less stressful that way and less open to criticism.

Just look at how Blizzard insisted that the NADAC be heard by die hard vinyl guys, and the one person who has actually heard it in Ian's system and preferred it to analog, is a digital only guy. I know him well, and he is a great listener, but he is not a die hard analog guy. Blizzard immediately spread the word of that positive report all over the forum. Talk about rapid response! Yet it was with the highly colored Pass XS preamp. So this is, and always has been, really only about listener's preference. Not transparency to the recording. That is a different subject which used to be the topic filling up the pages of the Myth Busting thread.

Al M. and I will go and listen and see what happens. I look forward to it and hope to learn something, but I think it will be better if I don't make any more promises. And spazmatron, you are far too nice a guy for me to risk effecting your sanity in any way.

I understand, but I'd guess 99% will be respectful wrt your observations. Don't worry about the others...

 

[PeterA]

A shimmering light of sanity midst the chaos. Thank you Peter!

Thank you, nc42acc. I appreciate the kind words. I'm glad I started this thread in the amplifier/preamp forum and that the discussion did not derail MadFloyd's system thread.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Blizzard has already created an expectation bias by so strongly telling me what I will hear at Ian's house and what the NADAC sounds like. Now you are adding the stress that you, and perhaps others, are anxiously awaiting the results of my efforts to directly compare Ian's analog to his HQPlayer/NADAC. I don't know if I can handle the pressure. Anything I report will be questioned by someone and new qualifications will be used to explain what I heard. Magic, fairy dust, see what I mean? All of this may take the fun out of the listening session.

If we listen to the NADAC direct without filters to the amps, and I report that it sounds warm, Blizzard will blame the Pass amps for adding coloration to the sound, because he know they were designed to sound warm. If not the amps, then the speaker positions, or the cable connections, or anything else. As I have no idea what the engineers heard during the mastering, there is no way for me to know how transparent the NADAC really is. This listening session will be fraught with flaws and expectations, perhaps too large to satisfy anyone. Perhaps we should all just hear the NADAC and a great turntable set up for ourselves.

I may go back on my earlier promise to report my impressions here on this forum. Blizzard did that in the Myth Busting thread, by saying that it might be a quiet group in the Seattle area that does not share their results. I may do the same and simply have a listen, make up my own mind, and keep it to myself. Less stressful that way and less open to criticism.

Just look at how Blizzard insisted that the NADAC be heard by die hard vinyl guys, and the one person who has actually heard it in Ian's system and preferred it to analog, is a digital only guy. I know him well, and he is a great listener, but he is not a die hard analog guy. Blizzard immediately spread the word of that positive report all over the forum. Talk about rapid response! Yet it was with the highly colored Pass XS preamp. So this is, and always has been, really only about listener's preference. Not transparency to the recording. That is a different subject which used to be the topic filling up the pages of the Myth Busting thread.

Al M. and I will go and listen and see what happens. I look forward to it and hope to learn something, but I think it will be better if I don't make any more promises. And spazmatron, you are far too nice a guy for me to risk effecting your sanity in any way.

I understand, but I'd guess 99% will be respectful wrt your observations. Don't worry about the others...

well.....maybe.....but.....the issue is.....at this point in time that 1% (or 10% or 15%) controls the narrative on WBF. and nothing foreseeable is going to change that. and the passionate on the other side of that equation are either gone or dormant (such as myself).

 

[Blizzard]

well.....maybe.....but.....the issue is.....at this point in time that 1% controls the narrative on WBF. and nothing foreseeable is going to change that.

Start your own threads, or avoid mine if you don't like the conversation. I know this wasn't my thread, but we were having this conversation elsewhere, and continuing it here. And if anyone learned anything of value on this thread, I deeply apologize. This thread wouldn't exist if we weren't having the conversation. Either would Madfloyd even buying the NADAC, and setting it up to sound in some peoples impressions, better than his vinyl. So I deeply apologize for that as well. I hope the grieving won't last too long.

 

[PeterA]

I'm not the one who reported the listening impressions on this DAC. And as I pointed out in the last post, the sound was clearly nowhere in the ball park for PCM without HQplayer. We have one very experienced audiophile that likes it better, and another who likes the analog better (although may change with further tweaking)

Also keep in mind the cost differences when comparing the $10500 DAC to the $200000 or so worth of turntable,tone arm, phono stage, pre amp, and cables in the analog system. I know this is likely irrelevant to folks like you, but for the other 99% reading this forum, this may be a limiting factor. Also keep in mind that the $4200 Merging Hapi will likely sound 95% as good.

Another baseless and incorrect assumption. I certainly care about what things cost, which is precisely why I chose to focus my limited resources on optimizing one format, and why, unfortunately, I can not own the electronics and speakers that my good friend MadFloyd enjoys. I think most of us buy what sounds best to us given our individual budgets. Of course, this is the WHAT'S BEST forum. I tend to prioritize sound quality rather than value, although value does have its place in all of this.

 

[Al M.]

With HQplayer filters:

"Ian had mentioned that when we were upsampling to DSD, we were listening to a filter that was designed to highlight transients and cleanliness. He said there was another filter that supposedly offered a more immersive sound stage, with possibly somewhat reduced transients. I wanted to hear it, so he changed the setting in HQ Player.

This, for me, was musical bliss. Beautiful, smooth, enveloping sound with warmth and yet plenty of detail to keep me happy. I no longer felt any compunction to have the subs put back in the system. I was flabbergasted at how good the system sounded. The analog setup sounded smaller and rather dry in comparison. The digital actually had more liquidity and smoothness than the analog, and the bass of the digital rig was far superior"

Of course you omitted that Ian later added that Alan, whom you cite, had listened to the analog with a phono cable that Ian thinks is inferior.

Insignificant detail to you perhaps, but not to many others here.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Start your own threads, or avoid mine if you don't like the conversation. I know this wasn't my thread, but we were having this conversation elsewhere, and continuing it here. And if anyone learned anything of value on this thread, I deeply apologize. This thread wouldn't exist if we weren't having the conversation. Either would Madfloyd even buying the NADAC, and setting it up to sound in some peoples impressions, better than his vinyl. So I deeply apologize for that as well. I hope the grieving won't last too long.

on your myth busting thread you both mentioned me by name and called me out by name and then inferred to me as a 'known vinyl enthusiast'.

so if you don't want me on your threads then stop bringing me up.

 

[Blizzard]

Of course you omitted that Ian later added that Alan, whom you cite, had listened to the analog with a phono cable that Ian thinks is inferior.

Insignificant detail to you perhaps, but not to many others here.

Ok deal breaker. Folks go spend the $200000 and forget about the NADAC.

 

[Al M.]

Blizzard has already created an expectation bias by so strongly telling me what I will hear at Ian's house and what the NADAC sounds like. Now you are adding the stress that you, and perhaps others, are anxiously awaiting the results of my efforts to directly compare Ian's analog to his HQPlayer/NADAC. I don't know if I can handle the pressure. Anything I report will be questioned by someone and new qualifications will be used to explain what I heard. Magic, fairy dust, see what I mean? All of this may take the fun out of the listening session.

If we listen to the NADAC direct without filters to the amps, and I report that it sounds warm, Blizzard will blame the Pass amps for adding coloration to the sound, because he know they were designed to sound warm. If not the amps, then the speaker positions, or the cable connections, or anything else. As I have no idea what the engineers heard during the mastering, there is no way for me to know how transparent the NADAC really is. This listening session will be fraught with flaws and expectations, perhaps too large to satisfy anyone. Perhaps we should all just hear the NADAC and a great turntable set up for ourselves.

I may go back on my earlier promise to report my impressions here on this forum. Blizzard did that in the Myth Busting thread, by saying that it might be a quiet group in the Seattle area that does not share their results. I may do the same and simply have a listen, make up my own mind, and keep it to myself. Less stressful that way and less open to criticism.

Just look at how Blizzard insisted that the NADAC be heard by die hard vinyl guys, and the one person who has actually heard it in Ian's system and preferred it to analog, is a digital only guy. I know him well, and he is a great listener, but he is not a die hard analog guy. Blizzard immediately spread the word of that positive report all over the forum. Talk about rapid response! Yet it was with the highly colored Pass XS preamp. So this is, and always has been, really only about listener's preference. Not transparency to the recording. That is a different subject which used to be the topic filling up the pages of the Myth Busting thread.

Al M. and I will go and listen and see what happens. I look forward to it and hope to learn something, but I think it will be better if I don't make any more promises. And spazmatron, you are far too nice a guy for me to risk effecting your sanity in any way.

Yes, let's avoid the stress, Peter. I personally will certainly report on my own opinions about the comparison, but I just cannot promise to Spazmatron to listen to the NADAC without the pre-amp in that first session. Perhaps if the listening session turns that way, but I don't want a burden of stress on something that is supposed to be fun.

Possibly in a second follow-up session. One thing at a time, I would say.

***

As for digital-only guys, I am one as well. Yet nonetheless, given my experience with top-level analog I am frankly biased against the NADAC. I won't stress out about that but instead I simply tell the truth about it. I honestly don't care of Blizzard climbs up the wall in furor about this and accuses me of the usual blah-blah nonsense. If the NADAC can break through and convince me that it is the winner nonetheless, then the more power to this unit!

 

[Al M.]

Ok deal breaker. Folks go spend the $200000 and forget about the NADAC.

Seriously, is that your reaction?

And by the way, I cannot and will not spend $ 200,000 on an analog rig. And neither will I spend $ 5,000. I will spend precisely zero dollars on analog in my remaining life-time. I personally rather invest in better digital. That does not mean that I will deny the virtues of top-level analog. I value the judgment of my ears too much for that.

 

[Al M.]

on your myth busting thread you both mentioned me by name and called me out by name and then inferred to me as a 'known vinyl enthusiast'.

so if you don't want me on your threads then stop bringing me up.

Exactly.

 

[JackD201]

Blizzard, your assumptions that the NADAC is 100% neutral just because it is of pro provenance and has Sabres in it is such a leap of faith it made my eyes water. I suppose next years Merging and Sabre's next chip will now be colored because they already got it 100% now. Perfect sound forever, all over again.