What is the benefit of very expensive DACs?

[microstrip]

Agree. But I also feel that like cable makers, DAC designers try to pretend they have some sort of magic potion or fairy dust that they have discovered
and have reinvented the wheel. You cannot change the basics...DAC chips, filers, analog output stages, power supplies..everyone has the same
ingredients, it is how they are assembled.

DACs have no moving parts and it is hard to justify some of the prices we are seeing, except for the fact that these prices create a mystique.

Andre,

If you want to dig in the connection between DACs design and performance you have to separate the marketing and the technical aspects - and as far as I have seen no designer will ever tell you enough to allow you separating them. Do you really know why the Marantz's you are enjoying so much sound so good?

Surely some products create a mystique because of their price - but if you have a top system and room, you will find that the performance of some top DACs, unhappily very expensive, is really something special. I have listened to only a very few in adequate systems, but recognize that they were a fundamental part in the performance of the systems where they were inserted. Replacing them with cheaper units would downgrade the performance of the system.

 

[mep]

It's also obvious that we all don't hear the same nor do we value the same things in what we do hear. Mix in people who have lost their high frequency hearing and you will most probably find that their value judgements and their ability to discern differences among components is going to be different than those with sharper ears.

 

[Andre Marc]

That's completely possible, Andre, I'm no more immune to expectation bias than the folks who believe everything, even the immesurable, Is audible. There are, of course, a reliable ways to verify audibility, but the audiophile community - users, manufacturers, journalists and all, don't seem to have the will, so we'll probably never know.

Tim

What would you consider a reliable way to verify audibility?

As a side note, Michael Fremer just reviewed the $42,000 reference preamp. It measured PERFECTLY. He compared to two other,
flagship, perfectly measuring preamps in the same price range. ALL three sounded different. Same system, same cables
same music.

I long ago stopped assuming anything once I plugged in Acoustic Zen power cord into my ARC amp and
hearing COMPLETELY, and to my mind, better sound than with the stock AC cord. And this was after swearing up
and down I would NEVER go into the hear of darkness that is aftermarket power cords!

I said to my self..this should not be..but it is!

 

[Andre Marc]

Andre,

If you want to dig in the connection between DACs design and performance you have to separate the marketing and the technical aspects - and as far as I have seen no designer will ever tell you enough to allow you separating them. Do you really know why the Marantz's you are enjoying so much sound so good?

Surely some products create a mystique because of their price - but if you have a top system and room, you will find that the performance of some top DACs, unhappily very expensive, is really something special. I have listened to only a very few in adequate systems, but recognize that they were a fundamental part in the performance of the systems where they were inserted. Replacing them with cheaper units would downgrade the performance of the system.

The Marantz sounds good probably due to the sum of its parts, the combination of engineering AND ear tuning via Ken Ishiwata..I am just guessing. it's price point is not high
enough that anybody should be thinking they are being sold fairy dust.

I totally agree that expensive DACs can be something special. I would never argue against that. I wold only comment that like the cable price wars,
DAC makers have entered the same territory. It becomes a dick measuring contest..the kind we see with Magico and Wilson.

 

[mep]

Here is what I believe: You could give a schematic and all of the parts necessary to build a component (pick one-preamp, power amp, phono stage, DAC) to three different companies and there would be differences between the sound from all three companies even though the circuit and the parts were exactly the same. How could this be? All three would lay out their boards differently and possibly one or more would choose to move the power supply outboard to another box.

 

[microstrip]

The Marantz sounds good probably due to the sum of its parts, the combination of engineering AND ear tuning via Ken Ishiwata..I am just guessing. it's price point is not high enough that anybody should be thinking they are being sold fairy dust.

My point. We accept guessing if we like the component and find it affordable. IMHO you should be much more critical at this level of price. If a brand sells a few tens of thousand overpriced DACs it will get much more money away from consumers than some one selling ten ultra priced units per year.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Based on my emm labs / msb shootout I beg to differ. Also, I recall you mentioned it was mandatory to get the $10k galaxy clock to get the most out of the MSB diamond. If this is all within the 1% margin of error that was quite a strong statement.

I had a visitor this week to my room. we listened to redbook discs he was familiar with, redbook files thru my server, and hirez PCM and dsd thru my server......all thru the Playback Designs MPS-5. he commented that digital does not sound nearly as good in his room. he has the dcs Scarlatti transport, dac, clock and upsampler with X-2, Mk2's, Lamm amps and an ARC reference preamp.

my point being that at that level of digital and system performance, the digital source is left behind as the 'main' difference in performance and unless you have these 'uber' dacs side by side there are too many variables to consider.

do I think that I prefer the Playback Designs to the dcs Scarlatti stack? yes, I do.....but it's only an educated guess unless I had them both in my system.

 

[Andre Marc]

My point. We accept guessing if we like the component and find it affordable. IMHO you should be much more critical at this level of price. If a brand sells a few tens of thousand overpriced DACs it will get much more money away from consumers than some one selling ten ultra priced units per year.

Actually, I have a pretty good idea of what makes the Marantz sound good. I am just not qualified to make any definite statements.

Marantz's proprietary circuit layout, their choice of parts, and analog output stage are all part of the mix. It is hardly as if I am totally in the dark.

Marantz freely published photos of their components with all inner workings exposed.

http://us.marantz.com/us/Products/Pages/ProductDetails.aspx?CatId=ReferenceSeries&ProductId=NA11S1

 

[microstrip]

Actually, I have a pretty good idea of what makes the Marantz sound good. I am just not qualified to make any definite statements.

Marantz's proprietary circuit layout, their choice of parts, and analog output stage are all part of the mix. It is hardly as if I am totally in the dark.

Marantz freely published photos of their components with all inner workings exposed.

http://us.marantz.com/us/Products/Pages/ProductDetails.aspx?CatId=ReferenceSeries&ProductId=NA11S1

Although I love seeing the inside of equipment, I am not able to correlate photos of equipment with sound quality. And expressions such as Marantz's proprietary circuit layout, are just marketing for me, as well as the nice things I have read in the Marantz literature. I will have to take your positive opinion as my only guide about the Marantz's sound quality - what matters most - until I listen to it sometime.

The photos only suggest they love copper plating of metal surfaces, a common practice of many japanese manufacturers since the 80's.

 

[Andre Marc]

Although I love seeing the inside of equipment, I am not able to correlate photos of equipment with sound quality. And expressions such as Marantz's proprietary circuit layout, are just marketing for me, as well as the nice things I have read in the Marantz literature. I will have to take your positive opinion as my only guide about the Marantz's sound quality - what matters most - until I listen to it sometime.

The photos only suggest they love copper plating of metal surfaces, a common practice of many japanese manufacturers since the 80's.

LOL. I was not suggesting that photos and sound quality are related. Only that they have nothing to hide, and that the inside
is full of electronic parts, not magic dust.

Please don't take my word for it, assuming you really even care what it sounds like. Read John Atkinson's very thorough review
for his opinion, again if you really care.

 

[mauidan]

The October 2013 issue of Stereophile has their recommended components. Here their recommended DACs/Ratings/MSRPs:

A+ Ayer QA-9 and QB-9 ($3950 and $3250), Bricasti M1 ($8595), dCS Debussy ($11,499), Grace M903 ($1995), MSB Diamond DAC Plus ($27,995), NAD M51 ($1999), Weiss DAC202 ($6966)

A Abbington Music Research DP-777 ($4995), Antelope Zodiac Gold ($3595), Arcam FMJ D33 ($3199), Bel Canto e.One DAC 3.5 MKII ($3495), Benchmark DAC1, DAC1 USB, DAC HDR ($995, $1195, $1595), Bryston BDA-1 ($1995), CEtrance DACmini CZ ($799), Halide Design DAC HD, USB-S/PDIF ($495, $395), M2Tech Young ($1499), Musical Fidelity M6DAC ($2999), Mytek Stereo192 ($1595)

B Alpha Design Labs GT-40 ($499), AudioQuest DragonFly ($249), CEtrance DACport, DACport LX ($299, $249), Musical Fidelity M1SDAC, M1DAC ($1499, $799), Rega DAC ($999), Schiit Bifrost ($349)

C HRT Music Streamer II+, II ($349.95, $179.95), Sonos Connect ($349)

D Apple AirPort Express ($99)

 

[edorr]

The October 2013 issue of Stereophile has their recommended components. Here their recommended DACs/Ratings/MSRPs:

A+ Ayer QA-9 and QB-9 ($3950 and $3250), Bricasti M1 ($8595), dCS Debussy ($11,499), Grace M903 ($1995), MSB Diamond DAC Plus ($27,995), NAD M51 ($1999), Weiss DAC202 ($6966)

A Abbington Music Research DP-777 ($4995), Antelope Zodiac Gold ($3595), Arcam FMJ D33 ($3199), Bel Canto e.One DAC 3.5 MKII ($3495), Benchmark DAC1, DAC1 USB, DAC HDR ($995, $1195, $1595), Bryston BDA-1 ($1995), CEtrance DACmini CZ ($799), Halide Design DAC HD, USB-S/PDIF ($495, $395), M2Tech Young ($1499), Musical Fidelity M6DAC ($2999), Mytek Stereo192 ($1595)

B Alpha Design Labs GT-40 ($499), AudioQuest DragonFly ($249), CEtrance DACport, DACport LX ($299, $249), Musical Fidelity M1SDAC, M1DAC ($1499, $799), Rega DAC ($999), Schiit Bifrost ($349)

C HRT Music Streamer II+, II ($349.95, $179.95), Sonos Connect ($349)

D Apple AirPort Express ($99)

I own both an msb signature and an NAD m51 (for my surround channels) both a+. Just for kicks I could do a shootout and see how they compare.

 

[microstrip]

I own both an msb signature and an NAD m51 (for my surround channels) both a+. Just for kicks I could do a shootout and see how they compare.

It is a pity the NAD M51 does not play .dff DSD files - it looks a great unit.

I still own an old vintage NAD 3020 that still plays faultless despite being more than 30 years old. Some years ago I replaced the electrolytic capacitors and cleaned the switches and potentiometers with a quality spray and it is now ready for the next decades. BTW, it does not sound better than my main system amplifier.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

What would you consider a reliable way to verify audibility?

Carefully designed double-blind listening tests carried to enough samples to be statistically significant, of course. That's not a trivial thing to do, but not nearly as difficult, and much more revealing than the audiophile community will allow. They won't do it, because while they seem to believe in things that science cannot reveal, most appear to hold no interest in what it can show us if there is a good chance it will show something we don't want to believe. And the scientific community? Well, I think we all know if they thought there was any real chance that high-end audio was filled with the immeasurable secrets and revealing the undiscovered capabilities of human hearing that this community believes in, their labs would filled with high end gear and test listeners as we speak.

But they seem to have no interest in high end audio's breakthroughs in human perception.

Tim

 

[Andre Marc]

Carefully designed double-blind listening tests carried to enough samples to be statistically significant, of course. That's not a trivial thing to do, but not nearly as difficult, and much more revealing than the audiophile community will allow. They won't do it, because while they seem to believe in things that science cannot reveal, most appear to hold no interest in what it can show us if there is a good chance it will show something we don't want to believe. And the scientific community? Well, I think we all know if they thought there was any real chance that high-end audio was filled with the immeasurable secrets and revealing the undiscovered capabilities of human hearing that this community believes in, their labs would filled with high end gear and test listeners as we speak.

But they seem to have no interest in high end audio's breakthroughs in human perception.

Tim

Guess, what..I have NO problem with introducing blind testing into the audiophile hobby. I wonder how many
companies would still be in business.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Guess, what..I have NO problem with introducing blind testing into the audiophile hobby. I wonder how many
companies would still be in business.

I didn't think you did, Andre. Unfortunately, it won't happen beyond the odd study like Meyer & Moran, or under the influence of highly unusual people like Toole and Olive. And to get enough testing happening to disprove or verify all the hobby's unverified beliefs would require a high level of interest from the scientific community or the industry. And that definitely won't happen.

Tim

 

[puroagave]

Guess, what..I have NO problem with introducing blind testing into the audiophile hobby. I wonder how many
companies would still be in business.

they say you eat with your eyes first, me thinks many of us equate superior sound with the price tag or badge on the fascia well before the music hits our ears

back in the day, JA of stereophile did ABX tests at their shows and it should be brought back, if for educational purposes only. I participated in the now infamous tubes vs SS or adcom 555 vs vtl 225 abx tests and the sonic differences between amps were far more difficult to discern than one would think, which is why id never call myself a 'golden ear.'

id love to see a live, real world abx test at one of the major shows between say the top-end playback designs or dcs dac and anyone of the sub $1000 dacs.

 

[NorthStar]

Guess, what..I have NO problem with introducing blind testing into the audiophile hobby.
I wonder how many companies would still be in business.

Fewer, only the best, and with down-to-earth prices?

 

[mep]

I didn't think you did, Andre. Unfortunately, it won't happen beyond the odd study like Meyer & Moran, or under the influence of highly unusual people like Toole and Olive. And to get enough testing happening to disprove or verify all the hobby's unverified beliefs would require a high level of interest from the scientific community or the industry. And that definitely won't happen.

Tim

Tim-Why do so many of your posts incessantly refer to double-blind tests? Double-blind tests performed correctly takes knowledgeable people, time, and money in order to conduct them properly and withstand scientific scrutiny. Like motherhood and apple pie, objectivists profess their love for them and yet they remain removed from the reality of normal audiophile life. I guess it's fun to keep bringing them up in your responses to other people's posts though.

As for Meyers and Moran, I thought their study was discredited. I thought their SACDs were actually up-sampled PCM files that of course wouldn't sound different than the CD version.

 

[Bruce B]

The October 2013 issue of Stereophile has their recommended components. Here their recommended DACs/Ratings/MSRPs:

A+ Ayer QA-9 and QB-9 ($3950 and $3250), Bricasti M1 ($8595), dCS Debussy ($11,499), Grace M903 ($1995), MSB Diamond DAC Plus ($27,995), NAD M51 ($1999), Weiss DAC202 ($6966)

A Abbington Music Research DP-777 ($4995), Antelope Zodiac Gold ($3595), Arcam FMJ D33 ($3199), Bel Canto e.One DAC 3.5 MKII ($3495), Benchmark DAC1, DAC1 USB, DAC HDR ($995, $1195, $1595), Bryston BDA-1 ($1995), CEtrance DACmini CZ ($799), Halide Design DAC HD, USB-S/PDIF ($495, $395), M2Tech Young ($1499), Musical Fidelity M6DAC ($2999), Mytek Stereo192 ($1595)

I totally disagree with this... IMO... the Bricasti, Grace and Weiss do not belong in A+
The Benchmark, Halide and M2Tech do not belong in "A" either.

I would put each in the next lower category. The QA-9 is an "A" at best.