What is the benefit of very expensive DACs?

Joe Cohen

Industry Expert
Jun 10, 2012
247
275
968
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!
I can appreciate where this sentiment comes from, but I have written in other threads that, as applied to high end audio systems, the idea of diminishing returns is not necessarily correct. I say this because in my experience and that of others I can quote, when a system achieves a certain critical level of performance smaller changes yield bigger improvements precisely because they are leveraged by what has gone before. That means that the same order of change the next time around will yield an even bigger result. We have experienced this many times over. This is the opposite of diminishing returns. It also means that very large changes such as moving from a modest DAC to a truly high-end one, in that context, can yield changes that are beyond our imagination before we hear them, but which are instantly understood for what they are the moment we hear them. There are two caveats however, 1. If the system is either deficient or if there are impedance mismatches the potential of the DAC will not be experienced, and/or 2. If the highly touted super expensive DAC itself is not really all that it is cracked up to be in the first place and the well tuned system shows that to be the case. I have been fortunate to experience first hand the difference between a very highly touted $80,000+ digital stack verses another DAC (SW1X Level V Special) in the same price range, the difference in the quality of performance is staggering. The profusion of color, micro-dynamics and fine subtle information delivered from the DAC V is beyond compare. As I sell SW1X please take this however you will, but it is an honest representation of my experience.
 

Khorn

Member
Sep 21, 2021
26
22
8
81
…North York (Toronto) Canada
I think DAC technology is the one thing that will experience rapid development over the coming years. Right now because of physical disability I use a Dac/Streamer, a Gold Note DS-10 as my sole front end. I’m very happy with the performance and sound quality but can see upgrading as both the DACs and internet steaming improve.

I do have a good CD/SACD library but no SACD player at the moment. I suppose i‘ll invest in a decent player again so I can access my library. At this point DACs and streamers are a moving target. Love them though.
 

Parsons

Well-Known Member
Mar 31, 2018
101
80
113
Ohio
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!
I am very late to this thread and chime in only to offer a side opinion of someone who has been climbing the DAC ladder for a while and made many bad and a few good investments, so I feel I can offer both opinions fairly objectively. I haven't counted recently but I have owned at least 10 pretty high-quality DACs in about as many years, and still own about 5 at the moment, all in the $2K and above range. Many are in the $4-6K range. I stupidly suck at selling ones I'm not regularly using, although I have 4-5 systems running normally, so many do get used every month.

First, I spent $20Kish on a DAC stack (DAC + clock) a year or so ago for my primary system, and for me, I will state in no uncertain terms that it was worth it to me. I had been dabbling around in the $2-7K range and also had a disappointing experience demoing a $15K one. I am certainly not claiming to be an expert but I do have the ownership experience to feel I can offer my opinion, which can certainly be different than someone else's and I respect that fully.

These days almost all DACs in the price ranges we're discussing are "fantastic" by most standards. They recreate music very well and most in this forum would likely consider the large majority "very musical" and "highly enjoyable." They all require investments in the source which might eventually include clocks, serves/transports, cabling, network filtering, power-filtering, and a host of other expensive investments to get the best of out them. I believe we're long past the "cold/analytic/digital-sounding" DAC days if you have a properly matched DAC and the rest of your system (before and after) compliments each other as well. Your choice of speakers, amplification, source material, and about 30 other things all can affect the ultimate effectiveness of a particular DAC for you, in your system. Your preferences might have the ultimate effect on your enjoyment after all of that is sorted.

My opinion...what you might, might notice when you went to a "$20K"ish DAC is really some subtle but ultimately emotion-driving nuances that other DACs are actually missing--something you would never think to be missing until you heard it in your own system, or maybe spent tens of hours listening to music that you are emotional about in a system with such a capable DAC.

One such quality is somewhat hard for me to describe, but the front-to-back dimensionality of a particular track can sometimes come off as "flatter/less dimensional" in some $2-6K DACs, with that perspective. Those DACs can still have a phenomenal side-to-side and top-to-bottom, full soundstage sound that doesn't remotely feel compressed and can even come off as "massive." They will sound beautiful and musical and be worlds better than lesser DACs still. Some will even do a decent job front-to-back vs. some of the truly impressive ones. This quality is the sign of a great DAC to me, and no doubt there are some truly superb DACs in this price range. However, what you might find you are missing later is that very subtle but largely noticeable front-to-back, I can "walk around in the song" dimensionality that you would never know you were missing until you hear it in the context of a really, really amazing DAC. If you have this, and spend hundreds (thousands?) of hours listening to your favorite artists and albums and music that you are truly emotional about, taking that extra layer of nuance away later might be very noticeable.

Related, the micro-dynamics available and audible at lower volume levels is also something you must hear to appreciate and understand. A truly, truly incredible DAC (and surrounding system) can play at pretty low levels and still convey an almost unbelievable but certainly emotional and dynamic experience that you might not have felt possible before you heard it. I haven't yet heard a DAC in the $2-4K that does this as well as my much more expensive stack, all other equipment equal.

This sounds very cliched, but I would certainly recommend you try to hear an "even higher-end" DAC than what you have grown to love. I know with today's environmental constraints (covid, less local dealers, dealers' understandable reluctance to ship a $20K loaner piece of equipment, etc.) this becomes really hard to do without trusting the forums and buying one yourself, with the obvious risks in that. I am not saying you will definitely agree with me, nor that even if you hear "improvements" you will justify to yourself the additional (in some cases "substantial") costs. $20K is a really big sum of money for most--I get that--and as I said I respect that value is very subjective. I just don't feel that "delusional" is accurate for some who have done a lot of listening. The emotional impact of some of these seemingly small "on paper" nuances can be pretty intoxicating once you hear them, and could be really hard to live without once you have them.
 

Joe Cohen

Industry Expert
Jun 10, 2012
247
275
968
It is impossible to generalize whether SQ is or isn’t proportional to dollars spent across different brands of DACs because where and how those dollars are spent is particular to the design philosophy of each individual company. I personally would always seek out designers who emphasize SQ above maximum compatibility with all formats.
 

Legolas

VIP/Donor
Dec 27, 2015
1,042
387
455
France
I am very late to this thread and chime in only to offer a side opinion of someone who has been climbing the DAC ladder for a while and made many bad and a few good investments, so I feel I can offer both opinions fairly objectively. I haven't counted recently but I have owned at least 10 pretty high-quality DACs in about as many years, and still own about 5 at the moment, all in the $2K and above range. Many are in the $4-6K range. I stupidly suck at selling ones I'm not regularly using, although I have 4-5 systems running normally, so many do get used every month.

First, I spent $20Kish on a DAC stack (DAC + clock) a year or so ago for my primary system, and for me, I will state in no uncertain terms that it was worth it to me. I had been dabbling around in the $2-7K range and also had a disappointing experience demoing a $15K one. I am certainly not claiming to be an expert but I do have the ownership experience to feel I can offer my opinion, which can certainly be different than someone else's and I respect that fully.

These days almost all DACs in the price ranges we're discussing are "fantastic" by most standards. They recreate music very well and most in this forum would likely consider the large majority "very musical" and "highly enjoyable." They all require investments in the source which might eventually include clocks, serves/transports, cabling, network filtering, power-filtering, and a host of other expensive investments to get the best of out them. I believe we're long past the "cold/analytic/digital-sounding" DAC days if you have a properly matched DAC and the rest of your system (before and after) compliments each other as well. Your choice of speakers, amplification, source material, and about 30 other things all can affect the ultimate effectiveness of a particular DAC for you, in your system. Your preferences might have the ultimate effect on your enjoyment after all of that is sorted.

My opinion...what you might, might notice when you went to a "$20K"ish DAC is really some subtle but ultimately emotion-driving nuances that other DACs are actually missing--something you would never think to be missing until you heard it in your own system, or maybe spent tens of hours listening to music that you are emotional about in a system with such a capable DAC.

One such quality is somewhat hard for me to describe, but the front-to-back dimensionality of a particular track can sometimes come off as "flatter/less dimensional" in some $2-6K DACs, with that perspective. Those DACs can still have a phenomenal side-to-side and top-to-bottom, full soundstage sound that doesn't remotely feel compressed and can even come off as "massive." They will sound beautiful and musical and be worlds better than lesser DACs still. Some will even do a decent job front-to-back vs. some of the truly impressive ones. This quality is the sign of a great DAC to me, and no doubt there are some truly superb DACs in this price range. However, what you might find you are missing later is that very subtle but largely noticeable front-to-back, I can "walk around in the song" dimensionality that you would never know you were missing until you hear it in the context of a really, really amazing DAC. If you have this, and spend hundreds (thousands?) of hours listening to your favorite artists and albums and music that you are truly emotional about, taking that extra layer of nuance away later might be very noticeable.

Related, the micro-dynamics available and audible at lower volume levels is also something you must hear to appreciate and understand. A truly, truly incredible DAC (and surrounding system) can play at pretty low levels and still convey an almost unbelievable but certainly emotional and dynamic experience that you might not have felt possible before you heard it. I haven't yet heard a DAC in the $2-4K that does this as well as my much more expensive stack, all other equipment equal.

This sounds very cliched, but I would certainly recommend you try to hear an "even higher-end" DAC than what you have grown to love. I know with today's environmental constraints (covid, less local dealers, dealers' understandable reluctance to ship a $20K loaner piece of equipment, etc.) this becomes really hard to do without trusting the forums and buying one yourself, with the obvious risks in that. I am not saying you will definitely agree with me, nor that even if you hear "improvements" you will justify to yourself the additional (in some cases "substantial") costs. $20K is a really big sum of money for most--I get that--and as I said I respect that value is very subjective. I just don't feel that "delusional" is accurate for some who have done a lot of listening. The emotional impact of some of these seemingly small "on paper" nuances can be pretty intoxicating once you hear them, and could be really hard to live without once you have them.
Interesting and well put. I have to agree. I am now an Aries Cerat distributor, but before that I too went 'around the houses' with DACs, low/mid/high priced units. I think the common thought process on DACs is 'it is all about the chip' or 'they all sound the same'. It really comes down to trying units out in a revealing system and finding out with your own ears.

IMO a lot of budget designs do in fact sound remarkably alike. Why? It is probably as most will use the exact same Sabre chip and have simple power supplies and basic gain stage. If we consider a DAC for a moment as a pre-amplifier, it is highly recognised such a device can affect the systems sound quality to a large degree. So we can also see why a DAC, having power supplies, gain stage also has a marked effect.

On top of this we have the chip, it's architecture, oversampling or not, filter or not, R2R, or FPGA, optimised input type, ext clocks, it goes on.

Then we have to consider what feeds the DAC as well, as a decent server also has an impact (in a positive way).

So IMO, not unlike a good pre-amplifier, we need to view a good DAC as having a very good power supply design, and very good gain stage, before we even talk about which chip or digital engine it uses.

Back to the original point, I do feel DACs can and do make a big difference to an audio system.

And not unlike a good pre-amplifier, most tend to be outside of the budget bracket.
 

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
I can appreciate where this sentiment comes from, but I have written in other threads that, as applied to high end audio systems, the idea of diminishing returns is not necessarily correct. I say this because in my experience and that of others I can quote, when a system achieves a certain critical level of performance smaller changes yield bigger improvements precisely because they are leveraged by what has gone before. That means that the same order of change the next time around will yield an even bigger result. We have experienced this many times over. This is the opposite of diminishing returns. It also means that very large changes such as moving from a modest DAC to a truly high-end one, in that context, can yield changes that are beyond our imagination before we hear them, but which are instantly understood for what they are the moment we hear them. There are two caveats however, 1. If the system is either deficient or if there are impedance mismatches the potential of the DAC will not be experienced, and/or 2. If the highly touted super expensive DAC itself is not really all that it is cracked up to be in the first place and the well tuned system shows that to be the case. I have been fortunate to experience first hand the difference between a very highly touted $80,000+ digital stack verses another DAC (SW1X Level V Special) in the same price range, the difference in the quality of performance is staggering. The profusion of color, micro-dynamics and fine subtle information delivered from the DAC V is beyond compare. As I sell SW1X please take this however you will, but it is an honest representation of my experience.

I have written before that the engineering law of diminishing returns is overrun by the audiophile law of the hyperbolic differences. Once we are educated to perceive and valuate the differences, small subjective aspects can make the difference between a good sound reproduction and an astonish quality sound reproduction experience.

Unfortunately DAC's, that are supposed to be still an evolutionary product, seem to be a good example of it. Being essentially a digital listener I have no doubt that my unreasonably expensive digital system has been and is a key part of my system for the way it can present the maximum of the recording information in a way I find realistic.
 

allhifi

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2016
93
15
113
I could be kidding myself, but I thought the difference between the EMM labs DAC2X and MSB signature was quite substantial. Others have reported the same.
Yes, there are considerable distinctions between DAC's including the ones/models mentioned.

And you'd be right: If a $10K DAC doesn't blow away a $5K one, what's the point ?

But this talk of "you'll get 90-99% performance/SQ from a $2K -or$5K DAC than a waaay more expensive one makes no sense; no one
(not many) would fork over the substantial difference for a piddly 5%-10/20 or 50% improvement. The improvement should be considerable.

Fact is, once prices jump in doubles/triples, the more expensive DAC (Amp/speaker/cable) should blow away the lesser component.
It shouldn't even be close. It should be at least twice as good. More often than not, the term "In a different league" applies. And rightfully so.
That's the only metric that makes any sense. And those that hear/feel it (know it) can now justify the expenditure. It's the 'price of admission'.
It's real. It's obvious. It's (often) expensive. And yet, not all pricey gear automatically comes with that status. Far from it. But those that 'make-the--grade' are clearly deserving -and command those frightening prices.

pj
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pokey77

Mike Lavigne

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 25, 2010
12,467
11,363
4,410
I have written before that the engineering law of diminishing returns is overrun by the audiophile law of the hyperbolic differences. Once we are educated to perceive and valuate the differences, small subjective aspects can make the difference between a good sound reproduction and an astonish quality sound reproduction experience.

Unfortunately DAC's, that are supposed to be still an evolutionary product, seem to be a good example of it. Being essentially a digital listener I have no doubt that my unreasonably expensive digital system has been and is a key part of my system for the way it can present the maximum of the recording information in a way I find realistic.
100% agree.

as much as i love my vinyl, being able to immerse myself in digital music is a high priority for me. degrees of realism with digital is like steps to heaven which get you closer to perfect Kharma. the vinyl can do this more predictably but the effort cost and music access is a detriment. with digital the music essentially unlimited at my fingertips.

i'm not sure why small up-tics in digital performance seem so significant?

are dac's now a mature product type where they have reached their peak?

i don't really know the answers to these questions.
 

AMR / iFi audio

Industry Expert
Aug 21, 2019
2,636
1,153
260
43
UK
ifi-audio.com
Analogue is always going to be the reference point, but digital is catching up. Some even prefer digital. It's got many advantages - for instance, transportation, storage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tim Link

Tim Link

Well-Known Member
Feb 12, 2019
271
182
128
55
Analogue is always going to be the reference point, but digital is catching up. Some even prefer digital. It's got many advantages - for instance, transportation, storage.
I found this video on the return of analog computers to be interesting, and it made me think of this thread and your comment.


What this video pointed out to me was that "digital" really means storing information as abstract symbols and performing calculations abstractly. The analog computers it shows for predicting tides were amazing. I never knew such things existed. The failure of the Norden bombsight was interesting too. Analog methods have their limits and their strengths. I'm looking forward to seeing the next video that promises to explain just how analog computing might make a comeback. Analog audio has certainly made a comeback in terms of LP sales. I've never thought of record players or DACs as computers but they really are. A record player is clearly a full analog computer. DACs are bridging two worlds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: the sound of Tao

Legolas

VIP/Donor
Dec 27, 2015
1,042
387
455
France
100% agree.

as much as i love my vinyl, being able to immerse myself in digital music is a high priority for me. degrees of realism with digital is like steps to heaven which get you closer to perfect Kharma. the vinyl can do this more predictably but the effort cost and music access is a detriment. with digital the music essentially unlimited at my fingertips.

i'm not sure why small up-tics in digital performance seem so significant?

are dac's now a mature product type where they have reached their peak?

i don't really know the answers to these questions.
Interesting points Mike. I think since the 1980s there has been a desperate expectation that silver discs would be the answer to all our dreams, and then the excruciating wait / disappointment / roller coaster / cost in finding it was not there yet.

Fast forward to 2020 and we finally have arrived IMO.
 

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
I found this video on the return of analog computers to be interesting, and it made me think of this thread and your comment.


What this video pointed out to me was that "digital" really means storing information as abstract symbols and performing calculations abstractly. The analog computers it shows for predicting tides were amazing. I never knew such things existed. The failure of the Norden bombsight was interesting too. Analog methods have their limits and their strengths. I'm looking forward to seeing the next video that promises to explain just how analog computing might make a comeback. Analog audio has certainly made a comeback in terms of LP sales. I've never thought of record players or DACs as computers but they really are. A record player is clearly a full analog computer. DACs are bridging two worlds.

As said in the video, analog computer can be either mechanical or electronic. A known example is the differential analyzer built by Hartree in the 1930's in Manchester from Meccano parts and used to solve many problems in physics. Even today Meccano collectors and builders assemble their analyzers and bring them to Meccano shows - I have all the parts and the plans but never had the time to build one. https://hackaday.com/2016/08/08/differential-analyzer-cranks-out-math-like-a-champ-at-vcf-2016/

a1.webp.jpg

But I remember that when graduating I had to design an analog circuit to solve a second degree differential equation using operational amplifiers as part of one examination of analog. electronics!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bobvin and Tim Link

DasguteOhr

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2013
2,352
2,510
645
Germany
Interesting and well put. I have to agree. I am now an Aries Cerat distributor, but before that I too went 'around the houses' with DACs, low/mid/high priced units. I think the common thought process on DACs is 'it is all about the chip' or 'they all sound the same'. It really comes down to trying units out in a revealing system and finding out with your own ears.

IMO a lot of budget designs do in fact sound remarkably alike. Why? It is probably as most will use the exact same Sabre chip and have simple power supplies and basic gain stage. If we consider a DAC for a moment as a pre-amplifier, it is highly recognised such a device can affect the systems sound quality to a large degree. So we can also see why a DAC, having power supplies, gain stage also has a marked effect.

On top of this we have the chip, it's architecture, oversampling or not, filter or not, R2R, or FPGA, optimised input type, ext clocks, it goes on.

Then we have to consider what feeds the DAC as well, as a decent server also has an impact (in a positive way).

So IMO, not unlike a good pre-amplifier, we need to view a good DAC as having a very good power supply design, and very good gain stage, before we even talk about which chip or digital engine it uses.

Back to the original point, I do feel DACs can and do make a big difference to an audio system.

And not unlike a good pre-amplifier, most tend to be outside of the budget bracket.
You nailed it,a good power supply, a good output stage with tubes or transformer coupled. Keeping the digital processing of the signal as simple as possible is an excellent way. who needs component graves today. fewer but good components in the signal path are usually better,then it sounds more like music instead of hifi
 

skids929

Well-Known Member
Dec 31, 2020
201
98
93
54
Interesting points Mike. I think since the 1980s there has been a desperate expectation that silver discs would be the answer to all our dreams, and then the excruciating wait / disappointment / roller coaster / cost in finding it was not there yet.

Fast forward to 2020 and we finally have arrived IMO.
Where did we arrive? I am dying to know.
 

Mike Lavigne

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 25, 2010
12,467
11,363
4,410
Interesting points Mike. I think since the 1980s there has been a desperate expectation that silver discs would be the answer to all our dreams, and then the excruciating wait / disappointment / roller coaster / cost in finding it was not there yet.

Fast forward to 2020 and we finally have arrived.
Where did we arrive? I am dying to know.
i think we have arrived at a place where the digital listening experience can be completely satisfying. part of this is the high quality playback of dacs and servers of many different levels and price points. and part of it is the seamless access to music at reasonable costs.

and as a total analog addict i think i'm qualified to say that today's very best digital playback is more than good enough. the experience will never be the analog experience. but it does not need to be that, to deliver on the original promise.

we won't all agree with my view; but i know i seriously listen to digital music 20-25 hours a week. when i have 4 nice turntables and 10,000+ records i can quickly listen to. i listen because the total experiential equation for digital music i love is very, very high. and hopefully it's about to get higher.
 

The Knife

Well-Known Member
Nov 13, 2020
141
103
115
Stockholm, Sweden
i think we have arrived at a place where the digital listening experience can be completely satisfying. part of this is the high quality playback of dacs and servers of many different levels and price points. and part of it is the seamless access to music at reasonable costs.

and as a total analog addict i think i'm qualified to say that today's very best digital playback is more than good enough. the experience will never be the analog experience. but it does not need to be that, to deliver on the original promise.

we won't all agree with my view; but i know i seriously listen to digital music 20-25 hours a week. when i have 4 nice turntables and 10,000+ records i can quickly listen to. i listen because the total experiential equation for digital music i love is very, very high. and hopefully it's about to get higher.
Hi Mike,

I concur in that Digital and Analogue (LP´s) both should play an important role in a music aficionados life. The two formats have their respectively benefit. As you basically have the end game set up within both formats, do you believe that the different formats get closer to each other (quality wise) when moving up the ladder of equipment refinement, or is it the other way around, they drift more apart and become more distinguished in what they are, do and sound?

Browsing through your breathtaking system setup pictures on Audiogon, what immediate caught my interest especially was the Taiko Audio Streamer. I my self is about to upgrade my "digital channel", and currently I have the Metronome DSS streamer under evaluation. Now this streamer cost only a fraction of the Taiko streamer, and accordingly does not contain the same parts, but still, it request a considerable amount of investment (in my view). My question is: how important do you think that the streamer is in the Hifi-Chain? How much would you recommend to invest in the streamer (as part of the total system)? 10%? 25%?

One view to take is that a streamer is just to "collect" the digital package from the Qubuz or Tidal server, and send it to the DAC, and there need not to be a "machine of miracles" to do this, another view of course is that the streamer is fundamental, to not deteriorate the package/signal, containing the music.

Would much appreciate your thoughts and advice on this.

Kind regards from Sweden
 

Mike Lavigne

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 25, 2010
12,467
11,363
4,410
Hi Mike,

I concur in that Digital and Analogue (LP´s) both should play an important role in a music aficionados life. The two formats have their respectively benefit. As you basically have the end game set up within both formats, do you believe that the different formats get closer to each other (quality wise) when moving up the ladder of equipment refinement, or is it the other way around, they drift more apart and become more distinguished in what they are, do and sound?
digital and analogue are different in certain ways. maybe the biggest difference is that with vinyl the pressing is king. you can have vinyl set-ups of all price points and set-up quality lined up, but the best pressing will be the dominant factor. with dacs/servers/transports digital differences in formats and files are much less significant. i make this point because to compare digital and vinyl we have to ask whether we are talking about better vinyl pressings? or just a general situation? i'd say if we take a medium tt and normal easy to find and buy pressings, then we have a degree of convergence. they are closer together, where the best possible digital is right there. OTOH the best vinyl set-ups playing the best level pressings is going to be a different story. vinyl has improved as much as digital at the tip top. which is why i still have lots of vinyl focus even with the best digital.

as far as the sound, analog sourced vinyl will always have a slightly different sound/presentation compared to native digital recordings. many recordings in both formats are mixed, and so we have more convergence there.
Browsing through your breathtaking system setup pictures on Audiogon, what immediate caught my interest especially was the Taiko Audio Streamer. I my self is about to upgrade my "digital channel", and currently I have the Metronome DSS streamer under evaluation. Now this streamer cost only a fraction of the Taiko streamer, and accordingly does not contain the same parts, but still, it request a considerable amount of investment (in my view). My question is: how important do you think that the streamer is in the Hifi-Chain? How much would you recommend to invest in the streamer (as part of the total system)? 10%? 25%?
i don't have personal experience with servers at all levels, other than a few years back at shows. so i'd be guessing about your question. my hunch is that there are various levels of servers and dacs, and that the dac differences at various price points are more dramatic than the server differences. but as you move up in dac quality, servers make bigger differences. so it's a multiplier effect for the dac.
One view to take is that a streamer is just to "collect" the digital package from the Qubuz or Tidal server, and send it to the DAC, and there need not to be a "machine of miracles" to do this, another view of course is that the streamer is fundamental, to not deteriorate the package/signal, containing the music.

Would much appreciate your thoughts and advice on this.

Kind regards from Sweden
i think server quality is critical as your system and dac evolve to a higher level. a server will hold you back if you are a big streamer. but where those breaks are i have not done the work to be helpful.
 

AMR / iFi audio

Industry Expert
Aug 21, 2019
2,636
1,153
260
43
UK
ifi-audio.com
As said in the video, analog computer can be either mechanical or electronic. A known example is the differential analyzer built by Hartree in the 1930's in Manchester from Meccano parts and used to solve many problems in physics. Even today Meccano collectors and builders assemble their analyzers and bring them to Meccano shows - I have all the parts and the plans but never had the time to build one. https://hackaday.com/2016/08/08/differential-analyzer-cranks-out-math-like-a-champ-at-vcf-2016/

View attachment 87304

But I remember that when graduating I had to design an analog circuit to solve a second degree differential equation using operational amplifiers as part of one examination of analog. electronics!
Sounds really interesting, do you have any reliable articles diving deeper into it?
 

The Knife

Well-Known Member
Nov 13, 2020
141
103
115
Stockholm, Sweden
digital and analogue are different in certain ways. maybe the biggest difference is that with vinyl the pressing is king. you can have vinyl set-ups of all price points and set-up quality lined up, but the best pressing will be the dominant factor. with dacs/servers/transports digital differences in formats and files are much less significant. i make this point because to compare digital and vinyl we have to ask whether we are talking about better vinyl pressings? or just a general situation? i'd say if we take a medium tt and normal easy to find and buy pressings, then we have a degree of convergence. they are closer together, where the best possible digital is right there. OTOH the best vinyl set-ups playing the best level pressings is going to be a different story. vinyl has improved as much as digital at the tip top. which is why i still have lots of vinyl focus even with the best digital.

as far as the sound, analog sourced vinyl will always have a slightly different sound/presentation compared to native digital recordings. many recordings in both formats are mixed, and so we have more convergence there.

i don't have personal experience with servers at all levels, other than a few years back at shows. so i'd be guessing about your question. my hunch is that there are various levels of servers and dacs, and that the dac differences at various price points are more dramatic than the server differences. but as you move up in dac quality, servers make bigger differences. so it's a multiplier effect for the dac.

i think server quality is critical as your system and dac evolve to a higher level. a server will hold you back if you are a big streamer. but where those breaks are i have not done the work to be helpful.
Thanks! Appreciate your input. For now I will focus on strengthening my digital signal path, as that is somewhat easier done then the analogue one. I will audit the dCS Network bridge tomorrow and see if I can distinguish any differences in the audible realm between it and the Metronome.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing