What is the benefit of very expensive DACs?

[nonesup]

Oh!, since I'd like to "brag" with an AC Kassandra Limited Edition, an MSB Select, or a stack of Vivaldi DCs, I just don't have the money for it. However, I will never try to ridicule the owners of these extraordinary devices, firstly because I don't feel that need (quite the opposite) and secondly in case someone thought that he was an idiot.

 

[Tim Link]

I know for myself that I can't get any better listening enjoyment from a high end DAC compared to any off the shelf reasonably competent one, even if in some cases I can detect slight differences. If I were loaded I wouldn't mind paying extra for build quality, appearance, features, prestige, and most importantly rock solid reliability and durability.

 

[Gregm]

The concept of bragging rights is inscribed in our nature.

And on some signatures..

...Mine being one of those signatures
That being said, my bragging DAC consistently outperforms my non-bragging DAC!

 

[christoph]

...Mine being one of those signatures
That being said, my bragging DAC consistently outperforms my non-bragging DAC!

And which one is which?

 

[Gregm]

The big Select-2 is the bragworthy, (ruinously) over 20k DAC, the little Ayazi is the humble, well-under 5k contender

 

[AMR / iFi audio]

How do they compare?

 

[Gregm]

How do they compare?

Keeping in mind that one is ladder-based whereas the other is chipbased, on small ensembles the Ayazi + 3R x2 combo is surprisingly close to the Select, sometimes even sounding subjectively crisper (e.g. in certain unplugged blues tracks, etc) and very sweet with (unexpectedly) extended frequency response (e.g. listening to an aria, or Simon & Garfunkel, for example). By close, I mean closer than the difference in price would warrant.

That said, when it comes to a full orchestra and large soundstages, the Select reproduces a superior sense of space and size, the sound is subjectively "fuller" and it and does lose out on detail even on crescendi -- which, I used to find, was (is) a common failing among DACs. The music is expansive and 3dimensional whereas with the Ayazi it is more condensed. Of course both offer excellent frequency response and dynamics.
So to speak, the Select is a large, hi-powered Merc sedan, the Ayazi is a high-powered (reliable) Lotus!

 

[matthias]

Keeping in mind that one is ladder-based whereas the other is chipbased, on small ensembles the Ayazi + 3R x2 combo is surprisingly close to the Select, sometimes even sounding subjectively crisper (e.g. in certain unplugged blues tracks, etc) and very sweet with (unexpectedly) extended frequency response (e.g. listening to an aria, or Simon & Garfunkel, for example). By close, I mean closer than the difference in price would warrant.

That said, when it comes to a full orchestra and large soundstages, the Select reproduces a superior sense of space and size, the sound is subjectively "fuller" and it and does lose out on detail even on crescendi -- which, I used to find, was (is) a common failing among DACs. The music is expansive and 3dimensional whereas with the Ayazi it is more condensed. Of course both offer excellent frequency response and dynamics.
So to speak, the Select is a large, hi-powered Merc sedan, the Ayazi is a high-powered (reliable) Lotus!

Maybe I missed it, but did you compare your Select II to the Ideon Absolute DAC, if yes what was the outcome?
Thanks

Matt

 

[Gregm]

Maybe I missed it, but did you compare your Select II to the Ideon Absolute DAC, if yes what was the outcome?
Thanks

Matt

Yes I did, I had the Absolute on loan for a while.

Well, the short, subjective, answer is that compared to my (otherwise excellent) Select II, the Absolute is in a different league.
Overall, the Select matched the Absolute in a sense of "fluidity" in the sound, but was outperformed in all other aspects. Let me note that I like powerful, dynamic, expansive sound, with naturalness and extended FR where possible, etc, i.e. elements that enhance my enjoyment of music.

I also tried the Absolute in a friend's system who has a much larger listening room (over 50m sq) and the differences were more pronounced, or evident, probably because the larger room capacity -- not to mention bigger speakers -- invited much higher SPL.

Not to make this any longer than it has to be but, admittedly, I was very much surprised!
Regards

p.s. : years ago I would have kept the device without batting an eyelid; today, college fees & Covid mean I will probably have to downsize my system...

 

[matthias]

Yes I did, I had the Absolute on loan for a while.

Well, the short, subjective, answer is that compared to my (otherwise excellent) Select II, the Absolute is in a different league.
Overall, the Select matched the Absolute in a sense of "fluidity" in the sound, but was outperformed in all other aspects. Let me note that I like powerful, dynamic, expansive sound, with naturalness and extended FR where possible, etc, i.e. elements that enhance my enjoyment of music.

I also tried the Absolute in a friend's system who has a much larger listening room (over 50m sq) and the differences were more pronounced, or evident, probably because the larger room capacity -- not to mention bigger speakers -- invited much higher SPL.

Not to make this any longer than it has to be but, admittedly, I was very much surprised!
Regards

p.s. : years ago I would have kept the device without batting an eyelid; today, college fees & Covid mean I will probably have to downsize my system...

Thanks Gregm,

now I am curious why the Absolute did not replace your Select II (since the Absolute outperformed it and is much less expensive )

Matt

 

[AMR / iFi audio]

So to speak, the Select is a large, hi-powered Merc sedan, the Ayazi is a high-powered (reliable) Lotus!

The automobile metaphor captures the difference pretty well.

 

[Gregm]

Thanks Gregm,

now I am curious why the Absolute did not replace your Select II (since the Absolute outperformed it and is much less expensive )

Matt

Hi Matt, the reason is financial—I mentioned it above
I cannot afford to exchange my Select, I need to sell instead. I am fortunate to have a buyer lined up— despite the loss, the price offered will easily cover more than a year’s college fees & living expenses!
The Select is the most sell-worthy piece of equipment i (still) have

 

[AMR / iFi audio]

Select II definitely does not represent a cheap end of the DAC spectrum, but I am sure that if everything works with the college, then after a few years you'll be able to get it back (only if you wanted to)

 

[thedudeabides]

For the "average" audiophile type, not much.

 

[AMR / iFi audio]

I referred to Greg's situation. Select II is definitely not an impulse purchase.

 

[Gregadd]

anything worth doing is worth overdoing. or I can't get enough of a good thing.

 

[Joe Cohen]

The SW1X DAC IV

The advantage of having the rectifier and output tubes sitting on top of the DAC IV and DAC V is simply that larger tubes can be employed. In this case bigger is better as larger tubes have greater transconductance which translates to a more robust and holographic presentation.

 

[allhifi]

RE:

• Sep 13, 2013
• #2

jpetek said:
I heard a M2 Vaughan. Sounds very good, not as good as the best analog gear but anyhow.

Now my Question: What is the benefit of a DAC lets say for over 20k? The last 5% or less or just the name?

I am using a Windows 8 with Foobar and Jplay (please do not start any discussion). I do not think that JRiver 19 is better.

Josef

In Germany it is impossible to get one of the big DACs for testing
Click to expand...

The conventional wisdom is they sound better (no big surprises here). The question is how much better and at what price difference, and how fast is price performance improving.

I was slightly disheartened to read the Stereophile review of the new $3500 Marantz NA11-S1 network streamer / DAC, and the reviewer commenting he was hard pressed to hear ANY difference between it and the $43,000 MSB stack. While this observation should delight the general audiophile population, it inevitably has the small population of uber expensive DAC owners (of which I am one) second guessing the wisdom of their investment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Realizing full well the age of the OP, we nonetheless should be reminded of a few things:

1) A "Sterophile" reviewer (any writers) comments are poor indications of a products performance capabilities. Does the "reviewer" really have the experience and more importantly the expertise to describe the 'under-review' component from the remainder of the signal chain ? A big, fat, NO is often the answer.

2) Comparing a $3,500. Marantz vs. DcS stack -or any DcS /or MSB DAC is most welcome of course, but to think it can/does compare, even remotely, to what the industry/audiophiles at large consider to be the finest is rather absurd. If that were so, nobody in the right mind would bother to consider more expensive gear. Why would they (if great SQ was the only objective) ?

3) The 'investment' in hi-fi is often not one of a monetary nature; its worth/value/investment should, more reasonably, be measured by that near inexplicable connection to music that only the finest equipment imparts.

Also worthy of mention is the notion of 'Percentage-(of performance)-Compared-To XYZ' is a useless metric. The best-of-the-best must be (and often are) so much superior to lesser gear that a reasonable comparison cannot be made; lesser products simply doesn't compare -even remotely. It's not even in the same league -or universe in fact.
Put another way, a $2-$3K DAC/CDP (whatever component) if asked to rate its performance vs. the 'BEST' (in percentage of) may even reach 1-5% (one-to-five-percent) compared to the finest would be rare. Naturally, that's not even a comparison. And honestly, once in this exhalted league, lesser hi-fi simply doesn't even deserve a single percentage -it does not compare whatsoever.

Finally, in no way do I subsribe to " if not one-zillion dollars it's crap" mentailiity, there are great sounding components/systems in the sensible/reasonable-dollar-amount category that easily blow-away a poorly constreucted/assmbled hi-fi. I hear it all the time. BUT, in
the hands of a genuine 'pro', the 'best-of-the-best' occupy a unique -and earned- place in the hi-fi universe.

pj

 

[Joe Cohen]

RE:

• Sep 13, 2013
• #2

The conventional wisdom is they sound better (no big surprises here). The question is how much better and at what price difference, and how fast is price performance improving.

I was slightly disheartened to read the Stereophile review of the new $3500 Marantz NA11-S1 network streamer / DAC, and the reviewer commenting he was hard pressed to hear ANY difference between it and the $43,000 MSB stack. While this observation should delight the general audiophile population, it inevitably has the small population of uber expensive DAC owners (of which I am one) second guessing the wisdom of their investment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Realizing full well the age of the OP, we nonetheless should be reminded of a few things:

1) A "Sterophile" reviewer (any writers) comments are poor indications of a products performance capabilities. Does the "reviewer" really have the experience and more importantly the expertise to describe the 'under-review' component from the remainder of the signal chain ? A big, fat, NO is often the answer.

2) Comparing a $3,500. Marantz vs. DcS stack -or any DcS /or MSB DAC is most welcome of course, but to think it can/does compare, even remotely, to what the industry/audiophiles at large consider to be the finest is rather absurd. If that were so, nobody in the right mind would bother to consider more expensive gear. Why would they (if great SQ was the only objective) ?

3) The 'investment' in hi-fi is often not one of a monetary nature; its worth/value/investment should, more reasonably, be measured by that near inexplicable connection to music that only the finest equipment imparts.

Also worthy of mention is the notion of 'Percentage-(of performance)-Compared-To XYZ' is a useless metric. The best-of-the-best must be (and often are) so much superior to lesser gear that a reasonable comparison cannot be made; lesser products simply doesn't compare -even remotely. It's not even in the same league -or universe in fact.
Put another way, a $2-$3K DAC/CDP (whatever component) if asked to rate its performance vs. the 'BEST' (in percentage of) may even reach 1-5% (one-to-five-percent) compared to the finest would be rare. Naturally, that's not even a comparison. And honestly, once in this exhalted league, lesser hi-fi simply doesn't even deserve a single percentage -it does not compare whatsoever.

Finally, in no way do I subsribe to " if not one-zillion dollars it's crap" mentailiity, there are great sounding components/systems in the sensible/reasonable-dollar-amount category that easily blow-away a poorly constreucted/assmbled hi-fi. I hear it all the time. BUT, in
the hands of a genuine 'pro', the 'best-of-the-best' occupy a unique -and earned- place in the hi-fi universe.

pj

It is not surprising that a $3500 DAC may compare favorably with something on the order of a dCS stack. It is my opinion that all Sigma Delta style DACs will sound more similar to each other regardless of their cost because of the nature of the technology involved. Sigma Delta conversion by design injects noise into the signal and then quantizes and resamples that signal in order to create a waveform that resembles the original signal. They must of necessity use bad sounding parts such as field programmable gate arrays. This technology is necessary to achieve super Hi-Rez bit rates and oversampling. In my estimation the cost of achieving these rates is at the expense of the music itself. By comparison R2R ladder DACs directly convert the digital impulses into an analog signal. Once the original signal is tampered with in this fashion (Sigma Delta) you can never recapture it again. As an example a customer of mine owned a three box Vivaldi dCS stack that was completely outfitted with our highest level PranaWire Nirvana cables. We lent him an SW1X Level II DAC. Since he owned an Aurender 20SE server he was able to output via the AES/EBU output to the dCS gear ($70,000+ not counting the cables) and via the SPDIF output to the SW1X DAC II ($3800 hooked up with cheap no name cables) simultaneously and was able to switch back-and-forth in real time using his remote. I can only report what he told me as at the time we had yet to have vaccines available and I was not going anywhere. He said that the dCS was slightly warmer and slightly louder than the SW1X DAC II but that otherwise they were the same. Later on we lent him a higher quality cable at which point the quality of the DAC II surpassed that of the dCS and he asked us to help him sell the DCS gear, which we did. After some time he received his SW1X Very Special DAC V with pure silver wound signal output transformers. That DAC of course is in the same price range as the dCS stack, however the difference is that the preponderance of cost was applied to parts and materials in the analogue section and power supply that are able to deliver a super robust, musical and holographic presentation. It is to date the most significant piece of equipment I have ever encountered.

This demonstrates to my satisfaction, at least, that 1. You can have a great sounding DAC at an affordable price (SW1X DAC II) and that 2. money spent on a super DAC can deliver the goods in proportion to the expense If the costs in the design and production of that DAC are applied in a correct fashion.

 

[STUART1927]

I heard a M2 Vaughan. Sounds very good, not as good as the best analog gear but anyhow.

Now my Question: What is the benefit of a DAC lets say for over 20k? The last 5% or less or just the name?

I am using a Windows 8 with Foobar and Jplay (please do not start any discussion). I do not think that JRiver 19 is better.

Josef

In Germany it is impossible to get one of the big DACs for testing

I don't believe Dacs are any different to any other commodity on the planet! There is a diminishing return as you get more expensive. In todays money I don't think there is any real "need" to go beyond $2-3k for a dac and certainly not beyond $5k to get 99% of the sonic performance of something that is $20k. I honestly don't believe it is even a 5% improvement between the best of the sub $2k dacs and a dac in the $10's of k's. I think the majority of people making claims otherwise have either spent the money themselves, and therefore hear the improvement to justify the expense, or are otherwise deluding themselves. I don't have any objections to someone buying a $20k plus dac.....hell, I might even do it myself if I was a millionaire, but I really don't believe the sonic improvements are real. Sure, you might get top of the line components and finish.....but that's really what you are paying for. Dac's are no different to handbags!