When he announced the release of the ODAC, NwAvGuy posted the the following on his blog (http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2012/04/odac-released.html):
NO SNAKE OIL REQUIRED: Many audiophiles want to believe more elaborate or exotic DACs offer higher fidelity. The ODAC demonstrates you do NOT need any of these for 100% transparent performance:
Asynchronous USB
UAC2 (USB Audio Class 2) Support
Asynchronous Sample Rate Conversion (ASRC),
Minimum Phase Filtering (no pre-ringing)
Non-oversampling NOS DAC chips
Dual DAC chips
Balanced Outputs
Vacuum Tube Stages
Elaborate and/or High Current Power Supplies
Is his position accurate/defensible?
If there was a well-designed DB/ABX test of the ODAC and sub $500/$1000 DAC's (e.g., Audioquest Dragonfly, iFi Micro iDAC, Audioengine D1, Emotiva XDA-2, etc.) that are are Asynchronous, USB Audio Class 2, etc. etc., do you think there would be 'audible/discernible' differences?
The reason that I am asking is that I am curious as to the whether there really is much of an audible difference between various sub $500 or $1,000 DAC's, and I haven't come across any DB tests of DAC's. I have read many
subjective reviews that claim differences are quite noticeable. Of course, there
are major differences in terms of the types and number of inputs and outputs that a DAC may have, whether they include a headphone amp, how portable they are, etc.
I am not trying to start a fight/flame war, I am just curious as to what the 'prevailing wisdom is' on this site. If you think there are differences in sub $500/$1000 DAC's, what do you believe are the relevant factors (e.g., USB vs Toslink/Coax)? I know that 'speakers' make a difference, but am unsure about how much, if any, difference there is between DAC's. Again, just trying to become an informed consumer (and save $), not trying to start fights.
TIA
PS...I should note that I appreciate people like NwAvGuy and others who try to provide quality products, diy options, etc., at reasonable prices.
I'm curious why you felt the need to limit the discussion to sub $500 or $1000 DACs? Is it because you feel that a DAC which costs much more than this WILL sound better in an ABX test?
I'm curious why you felt the need to limit the discussion to sub $500 or $1000 DACs? Is it because you feel that a DAC which costs much more than this WILL sound better in an ABX test?
Good question. I was thinking in terms of what I personally would be willing to spend. However, the question of whether certain components or specs are 'needed' is independent of price.
$500 is far too much for a transparent DAC. You are not going to see any DBT results justifying this figure as a minimum price point from a sound quality perspective in today's dollars, ever.
Most sub-$100 CD players or portable music players have DACs that are better than human hearing. Most regular 'ol soundcards also have DACs that are better than human hearing too, although sometimes the post-DAC analog circuitry in a soundcard can pick-up audible noise from the other circuitry inside the computer.
However, as I just mentioned in another post... It is very expensive to manufacture, market, and distribute stuff in low volumes, and nice looking cabinets are expensive (especially in small quantities), and audiophiles tend to favor expensive things!
$500 is far too much for a transparent DAC. You are not going to see any DBT results justifying this figure as a minimum price point from a sound quality perspective in today's dollars, ever.
Okay, what do you believe is a reasonable price point and what DAC's at that price point do what they are supposed to do w/out adding noise/distortion. Not challenging your statement, just curious. Thanks.
I don't feel challenged, rather it is I who is challenging.
Read DVDdoug's reply. High-performance DAC ICs have been cheap for many years now.
Unfortunately the NwAvGuy has lost interest in the audio scene. His last blog was in May (with a few short responses in the summer) and his last visit to another forum was in July.
Unfortunately the NwAvGuy has lost interest in the audio scene. His last blog was in May (with a few short responses in the summer) and his last visit to another forum was in July.
I noticed that. I'm just curious if his assertions make sense and how much one needs to pay for a DAC that will do what it is supposed to do w/out altering SQ by adding noise/distortion.
You can try for yourself, download this: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5985984/DAC-test.zip (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5985984/DAC-test.zip)
It's a blind test I made with a Sound Blaster X-Fi Surround 5.1 USB-DAC which costed me around 50 euro. The first test has two files, one is the original, the other is that original after it has been played and recorded (looped back over a short unbalanced cable) 24x. So, any degradation coming from the DAC and ADC in that thing has been added and stacked 24 times. Try to find any differences.
The second test is another piece of music, with a few files looped back 4 times, 8 times and 12 times IIRC, and two on which I just applied some random (small) gain to make it a little harder to get the answer right if you're just guessing.
Even this cheap stuff performs very well. I don't think you'll hear any differences at all. Enjoy.
Okay, what do you believe is a reasonable price point and what DAC's at that price point do what they are supposed to do w/out adding noise/distortion. Not challenging your statement, just curious. Thanks.
You could start with a $40 Sansa Clip+: play a file through it, record it with some high quality ADC, align and volume match with the original file, and ABX that. I'd be surprised if you were successful.
Personally, I love my O2/ODAC: it matches my needs perfectly, it's fully transparent, and yeah, I enjoy it even more because of my expectation bias. I can recommend it to anyone who can afford it, simply on the grounds that it's convenient, well built (can't say the same about my FiiO E7), compatible with pretty much any headphones and IEMs, it's transparent and sounds great, without comparing it to anything else, without claiming that nothing cheaper could do the job.
Unfortunately the NwAvGuy has lost interest in the audio scene. His last blog was in May (with a few short responses in the summer) and his last visit to another forum was in July.
I have strong suspicions that he is actually quite active on some audio-related forum, under another pseudonym. I won't say who nor where, because I can't think of a good reason to break his anonymity, which he clearly wants to protect. If I'm right though, I haven't the slightest clue as to why he stopped posting on his blog. I dearly miss his insights.
Okay, what do you believe is a reasonable price point and what DAC's at that price point do what they are supposed to do w/out adding noise/distortion. Not challenging your statement, just curious.
Every DAC ever made or that will be ever made can be counted on to add noise and distortion.
However, that is not the relevant question.
The relevant question is what does it take in the way of DACs to be sonically transparent or free of audible noise and distortion as actually used to listen to music, etc..
The fact of the matter is that the DACs in a Sansa Clip+ are sonically transparent, and they are components of a Computer SOC (System on a Chip) that sells for $10 or less.
The answer to your question is < $1. For example there are 8 channel 24/192 DACs that have 105 dB dynamic range and are used on the outputs of the DSPs in AVRs. Less than $3. Each DAC costs about 3/8 of a dollar or $0.375.
Thanks to all who have replied. Very informative, and the responses have made me rethink possible solutions to an audio components connection issue that I am trying to resolve...guess I need to start a new thread,lol.
Thanks again...
Okay, what do you believe is a reasonable price point and what DAC's at that price point do what they are supposed to do w/out adding noise/distortion. Not challenging your statement, just curious.
Every DAC ever made or that will be ever made can be counted on to add noise and distortion.
However, that is not the relevant question.
The relevant question is what does it take in the way of DACs to be sonically transparent or free of audible noise and distortion as actually used to listen to music, etc..
The fact of the matter is that the DACs in a Sansa Clip+ are sonically transparent, and they are components of a Computer SOC (System on a Chip) that sells for $10 or less.
The answer to your question is < $1. For example there are 8 channel 24/192 DACs that have 105 dB dynamic range and are used on the outputs of the DSPs in AVRs. Less than $3. Each DAC costs about 3/8 of a dollar or $0.375.
How a given chip is incorporated into a DAC will affect 'measurable performance', whether there are audible differences between reasonably well designed, properly built DAC's, probably not; at least not for me as I am pretty sure that I am not afflicted with 'golden ears'...
Haha skamp exactly why I love my zunehd! Its shinier feels more sexy in my hands than my clip+. So it sounds better. As quoted from the matrix - ignorance is bliss.
On topic, any differences between dacs is beyond human ears nowadays...whats more important is clean signal path as well as speakers. Any device can have a good dac but if theres poor internal design you can get interference in the analog part of the circuit, ie, a cell phone might have a great dac but introduce buzzing and pops when navigating onscreen menus. Hence a device with a "lesser" dac but a cleaner signal path will sound better.
How a given chip is incorporated into a DAC will affect 'measurable performance', whether there are audible differences between reasonably well designed, properly built DAC's, probably not; at least not for me as I am pretty sure that I am not afflicted with 'golden ears'...
All things are possible and one of those things is the possibility that a good enough DAC would be hobbled by output buffer circuits that add quite a bit of distortion. There are even common examples of this such as the way that a Sansa Clip or Fuze distorts at least an order of magnitude worse with a 16 ohm load as compared to a 10K load.
Thing is, even with the added distortion performance is still below the thresholds of hearing, and not by a little bit.
IME Golden Ears are a state of mind more so than a state of body. Most people who cliam have them have to be retrained considerably to become effective listeners. The goldeness of their ears disappears when you remove the crutch of sighted listening.
btw Arnold, the folks at Zanden would disagree with your 0.375 claim http://www.zandenaudio.com/product/m5000.php (http://www.zandenaudio.com/product/m5000.php) they claim $13000 to be more realistic
btw Arnold, the folks at Zanden would disagree with your 0.375 claim http://www.zandenaudio.com/product/m5000.php (http://www.zandenaudio.com/product/m5000.php) they claim $13000 to be more realistic
I believe Arnold was talking about the DAC chips themselves not what they end up being used in
btw Arnold, the folks at Zanden would disagree with your 0.375 claim http://www.zandenaudio.com/product/m5000.php (http://www.zandenaudio.com/product/m5000.php) they claim $13000 to be more realistic
I believe Arnold was talking about the DAC chips themselves not what they end up being used in
Yes, you can always screw up the buffers/I-V converters that usually follow DAC chips, but actually doing so to the extent that it is audible is rare.
The irony being that a DAC with analog reconstruction filters and thermionic nonlinear distortion generators such as the Zanden Audio DAC might actually fit the bill!
http://www.zandenaudio.com/product/m5000.php (http://www.zandenaudio.com/product/m5000.php)
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/zanden/mkII.html (http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/zanden/mkII.html)
You can try for yourself, download this: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5985984/DAC-test.zip (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5985984/DAC-test.zip)
It's a blind test I made with a Sound Blaster X-Fi Surround 5.1 USB-DAC which costed me around 50 euro. The first test has two files, one is the original, the other is that original after it has been played and recorded (looped back over a short unbalanced cable) 24x. So, any degradation coming from the DAC and ADC in that thing has been added and stacked 24 times. Try to find any differences.
I haven't had time to look at the second set, but on test test1-1 vs test 1-2, it was really easy to discern the difference between the two - the noise floor in test1-2 was very different from the one in test1-1. I think it took me about a minute to do ten trials.
Test done using ABXer on OSX, with the FLAC files converted to .wav using ffmpeg in order to have playable files. Test log follows:
ABX Test Completed: 2013-02-04 19:28:17 +0000
Number of tests performed: 10
Number of correct answers: 10
Percentage correct: 100%
File 1 = /Users/arve/Downloads/DAC-test/wav/test1-1.wav
File 2 = /Users/arve/Downloads/DAC-test/wav/test1-2.wav
File placement was static.
n [A] [X] [B] Choice Score
1 [2] [2] [1] A 1/1
2 [2] [2] [1] A 2/2
3 [2] [2] [1] A 3/3
4 [2] [2] [1] A 4/4
5 [2] [1] [1] B 5/5
6 [2] [2] [1] A 6/6
7 [2] [1] [1] B 7/7
8 [2] [2] [1] A 8/8
9 [2] [1] [1] B 9/9
10 [2] [2] [1] A 10/10
--------------------------------------------------------------
At extremely elevated levels (which with normal level music signals would be deafeningly loud and clip any external amplifier), I would assume the noise floor of almost any two devices or circuits, which differs by one or more dB, would be discernible with musical silence as the test signal. That means nothing in real world use though.
At extremely elevated levels (which with normal level music signals would be deafeningly loud and clip any external amplifier), I would assume the noise floor of almost any two devices or circuits, which differs by one or more dB, would be discernible with musical silence as the test signal. That means nothing in real world use though.
Note, I didn't perform this test with a high volume at all - listening volume was entirely typical for daily listening - average SPL when playing a pop recording is between 75-80 dB(A) in the listening position. Setup is near-field using a pair of M-Audio BX5 D2's, so nothing particularly high end either.
I also had a look at the first two files from the second test set, and based on those two files the test set is unsuitable for ABX testing because of level differences that are trivially detectable using rapid-switching ABX (I typically switch 1-3 times/second during a test, and alternate between A and X and B and X).
You did notice that he said that two of the files had slightly different gain?
You did notice that he said that two of the files had slightly different gain?
Oops - I forgot to go back and read the entire post before commenting on that bit of the test, oh well. I at least identified the odd one out
You did notice that he said that two of the files had slightly different gain?
The level difference is about 1 dB in the left channel, according to a CEP2.1 analysis of the file from about 7.4 seconds in, to the end of the file (after the applause, just the music.
The applause portion of waveform undergoes major visible changes, but the music does not change that much.
The difference in noise level is about 3 dB at the approximately -55 dB level.
The response at 20 KHz falls by about 20 dB, but is pretty close up to 16 KHz.
Not bad for 24 generations through a fairly average audio interface.
I would expect the overall level difference to be the most audible change. The ca. 1 dB difference should be pretty easy to hear.
It would be interesting if someone eliminated or reduced the olevel difference to a tenth of a dB or 2 tenths, and tried again.
My question here is, if the sansa clip+ provides linear output, why would anybody need the odac to begin with. If the odac is somewhere between 3 and 4 times the price. If the clip+ is linear is it not capable of providing linear dac conversion into a larger amp?
My question here is, if the sansa clip+ provides linear output, why would anybody need the odac to begin with. If the odac is somewhere between 3 and 4 times the price. If the clip+ is linear is it not capable of providing linear dac conversion into a larger amp?
Exactly. The ODAC has great performance, but it is deep into diminishing returns, performance-wise.
Sure, the ODAC is overkill, but that's not a bad thing. Its price may be a bad thing, but you're also comparing two very different devices with different uses. The Clip+ is a portable DAP, and if you're going to plug it in some kind of line-in, you're going to need a lot of gain. The ODAC is a desktop DAC with a real line-out, no gain needed. Also, the ODAC was designed by NwAvGuy to make a point (excellent performance, way beyond audibility, doesn't have to cost $1,000 or more), and it's not mass produced like the Clip+. While it is (somewhat) expensive ($150), at least it's not snake oil.
If you want the best bang for the buck, you can try FiiO products like the E07k ($89), as a desktop solution.
Sure, the ODAC is overkill, but that's not a bad thing. Its price may be a bad thing, but you're also comparing two very different devices with different uses. The Clip+ is a portable DAP, and if you're going to plug it in some kind of line-in, you're going to need a lot of gain.
There should be no problem plugging a Clip+ into either a consumer or a production line in. It hasn't been a problem when I've done so. Consumer audio gear generally needs about 100 mv to be driven to full output, and if memory serves, it can put out more like 1 volt.
Pro audio gear has been contending with semi-pro gear that only puts out -10 so long that again the Clip+ headphone jack is even overkill.
The ODAC is a desktop DAC with a real line-out, no gain needed. Also, the ODAC was designed by NwAvGuy to make a point (stellar performance, way beyond audibility, doesn't have to cost $1,000 or more), and it's not mass produced like the Clip+. While it is (somewhat) expensive ($150), at least it's not snake oil.
I think the most salient comment above it the lack of volume production.
If you want the best bang for the buck, you can try FiiO products like the E07k ($89), as a desktop solution.
Agreed. However a FIIO E3 plugged into a UCA 202 gets you there for less than half of that.
Of course the big limitation of clip is that while it does demonstrate you can make a quality DAC for little money, you can't plug it into a coax or optical output.
Almost 10 years ago paid under $100 for a Denon unit with several inputs of both types, plus Dolby digital decoding, a couple of real knobs, and remote. Getting a piece of gear fully kitted out is a real consideration that costs at least a few bucks.
Of course the big limitation of clip is that while it does demonstrate you can make a quality DAC for little money, you can't plug it into a coax or optical output.
Looks like cherry picking to me. The Clip+ implements something far more complex and potentially costly than a coax or optical input - it impmlments a full function music playing including gigabytes of storage. Coax and optical inputs contain only a few very inexpensive parts.
Agreed. However a FIIO E3 plugged into a UCA 202 gets you there for less than half of that.
If I am understanding you correctly, you are suggesting bypassing the built-in headphone out already found on the UCA-202 and instead using its
line out to the Fiio E3 to drive some headphones?
Agreed. However a FIIO E3 plugged into a UCA 202 gets you there for less than half of that.
If I am understanding you correctly, you are suggesting bypassing the built-in headphone out already found on the UCA-202 and instead using its line out to the Fiio E3 to drive some headphones?
BTW I made a typgraphic error above. I meant FIIO E5. I had to look at the one on this computer to refresh my memory! ;-)
Yes. The headphone jack on the UCA 202 has a source impedance of about 50 ohms which can lead to audible frequency response changes with some headphones.
The Fiio e5 is said to provide a source impedance of less than 1 ohm:
http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011/03/fiio-e...dphone-amp.html (http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011/03/fiio-e5-headphone-amp.html)
I really wish I could see more curves than just that.
Heres another 30 or 40 devices and a bunch of headphones:
http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/index.php?dir=Comparisons (http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/index.php?dir=Comparisons)
http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/index.php?dir=Single_Players (http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/index.php?dir=Single_Players)
For all we know the amount of deviation plummets with a conventional, non-balanced armature design with a similarly low impedance, or if one accepts deviations of say +/- 1 dB as being relatively benign (considering the much larger, comparatively rollercoaster curves of different headphones in general, one model to the next), his "rule" becomes more like "1/2" or "1/4" , for all we know.
I'd say hes quite conservative. The impact of output impedance is enormous, and it factors into more then just frequency response (see THD at 1/2 vs. 1/8 for instance).
I really wish I could see more curves than just that.
Heres another 30 or 40 devices and a bunch of headphones:
http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/index.php?dir=Comparisons (http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/index.php?dir=Comparisons)
http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/index.php?dir=Single_Players (http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/index.php?dir=Single_Players)
...
I'd say hes quite conservative. The impact of output impedance is enormous, and it factors into more then just frequency response (see THD at 1/2 vs. 1/8 for instance).
Thanks, but might you do me a favor and point out a particular example within those 100 files [all of devices with output impedances that are unknown to me and to the best of my knowledge not stated within the file itself], which demonstrates that breaking the 1/8th rule by just a little, (say closer to 1/4, 1/5th, 1/6th or 1/7th) causes a response variation one would expect to be audible?
The purple line on this graph looks pretty audible to me. I'll leave evaluation of the rest of the parameters to you.
http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/Comparisons...ip%2B%29/fr.png (http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/Comparisons/Archos%2032%20-%20Loads%20%28vs.%20Sansa%20Clip%2B%29/fr.png)
Blue and purple here seem problematical:
http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/Comparisons...y%20A845/fr.png (http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/Comparisons/32%20Ohm%20Multi-Armature%20-%20Samsung%20R0%2C%20Sansa%20Clip%2B%2C%20Cowon%20J3%2C%20%20Sony%20A845/fr.png)
Green and purple here, and the problem is relatred to the output coupling caps, not source Z
http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/Comparisons...%20Vibez/fr.png (http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/Comparisons/Comparison%20-%2016%20Ohm%20-%20H340%2C%20D2%2C%20Clip%2C%20Vibez/fr.png)
Green and white here, and again its a coupling capacitor problem, not source Z
http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/Comparisons...%20Loads/fr.png (http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/Comparisons/Comparison%20-%20Cowon%20D2%20-%20Samsung%20YP-U1%20-%20Sansa%20Clip%20-%2048%20Ohm%20Loads/fr.png)
Hope this helps.
To resurrect an really old thread....
I'm currnetly having this discussion with someone about the FiiO X1 vs X5 Digital Audio Players. The claim is that the X5 has a far superior DAC, and that will make your music sound better. I am of the general belief even the DAC on your motherboard is more than good enough for all your music listening needs, and any difference between between these two is merely a matter of perception based on the price tag you paid. If you get no pops, whistles, clicks or hiss, your DAC is doing a good job.
The X1 uses a Texas Instruments PCM5142
The X5 uses a Texas Instruments PCM1792
The discussion quickly devolved to comment such as "I used to be just like you, the I bought a pair of [insert name of expensive ($800+) headphones here] and then I could tell the difference."
Finances prevent me from buying both these DAPs and ABXing them, so I am asking for other people that have actually ABXed DACs: did you ever find a difference between DACs that allowed you to discern a difference?
I get extremely annoyed when the answer to asking for a ABX test of something is that my issue is I am not willing to spend thousands of dollars on equipment in order somehow hear a difference in my music that objectively does not exist.
To resurrect an really old thread....
I'm currnetly having this discussion with someone about the FiiO X1 vs X5 Digital Audio Players. The claim is that the X5 has a far superior DAC, and that will make your music sound better.
The claim on the Fiio X players is the high quality headphone amplifiers, not the DAC, which is fine but not really the reason you'd buy an X5. My guess is this person is just not very informed and also probably not worth arguing with.
To resurrect an really old thread....
I'm currnetly having this discussion with someone about the FiiO X1 vs X5 Digital Audio Players. The claim is that the X5 has a far superior DAC, and that will make your music sound better.
The claim on the Fiio X players is the high quality headphone amplifiers, not the DAC, which is fine but not really the reason you'd buy an X5. My guess is this person is just not very informed and also probably not worth arguing with.
Well, headphone amplifiers make things louder, so you can drive higher impedence headphones. I don't really see how a better headphone amplifier can give you "better sound."
The two players do have different DACs in them. There's gotta be something different between the part numbers. The real question is, is the difference perceptible to the human ear?
To resurrect an really old thread....
I'm currnetly having this discussion with someone about the FiiO X1 vs X5 Digital Audio Players. The claim is that the X5 has a far superior DAC, and that will make your music sound better.
The claim on the Fiio X players is the high quality headphone amplifiers, not the DAC, which is fine but not really the reason you'd buy an X5. My guess is this person is just not very informed and also probably not worth arguing with.
Well, headphone amplifiers make things louder, so you can drive higher impedence headphones. I don't really see how a better headphone amplifier can give you "better sound."
In practice, almost all of the difference between portable players comes down to the quality of the headphone amplifier. A poor one has a lot more distortion than a good one.
The two players do have different DACs in them. There's gotta be something different between the part numbers. The real question is, is the difference perceptible to the human ear?
Its been a very long time since the differences between remotely quality DACs were audible.
To resurrect an really old thread....
I'm currnetly having this discussion with someone about the FiiO X1 vs X5 Digital Audio Players. The claim is that the X5 has a far superior DAC, and that will make your music sound better.
The claim on the Fiio X players is the high quality headphone amplifiers, not the DAC, which is fine but not really the reason you'd buy an X5. My guess is this person is just not very informed and also probably not worth arguing with.
Well, headphone amplifiers make things louder, so you can drive higher impedence headphones. I don't really see how a better headphone amplifier can give you "better sound."
In practice, almost all of the difference between portable players comes down to the quality of the headphone amplifier. A poor one has a lot more distortion than a good one.
The two players do have different DACs in them. There's gotta be something different between the part numbers. The real question is, is the difference perceptible to the human ear?
Its been a very long time since the differences between remotely quality DACs were audible.
I HATE these damn audiophile snake oil guys. Latest post said "I was you two years ago. Once I got a good quality DAC and some good cans, that made all the difference."
Well, headphone amplifiers make things louder, so you can drive higher impedence headphones. I don't really see how a better headphone amplifier can give you "better sound."
A well-designed headphone amp can also provide a lower source impedance, which can improve sound quality with low impedance headphones.
The two players do have different DACs in them. There's gotta be something different between the part numbers. The real question is, is the difference perceptible to the human ear?
People need to learn that just because there are trivial differences between two different audio components, there is no guarantee that they actually sound different.
There are probably 100 or more different audio DAC chips for sale. A few of them, especially some recent ones actually have poor enough performance or can be configured so that they have poor enough performance that they may sound different.
I HATE these damn audiophile snake oil guys. Latest post said "I was you two years ago. Once I got a good quality DAC and some good cans, that made all the difference."
What he didn't get is any experience with reliable listening tests.
Rely on sighted evaluations and you too can become him.
I'm currnetly having this discussion with someone about the FiiO X1 vs X5 Digital Audio Players. The claim is that the X5 has a far superior DAC, and that will make your music sound better.
Does your someone have to stare at/fondle the X5 for a month or two for this betterness to manifest?
Or is it (say, "organicness") glaringly obvious from the first note?
cheers,
AJ
p.s. you familiar with the saying, "You can't fix stupid"?
A well-designed headphone amp can also provide a lower source impedance, which can improve sound quality with low impedance headphones.
Is there a reasonably priced headphone amp that falls in this category?
I HATE these damn audiophile snake oil guys. Latest post said "I was you two years ago. Once I got a good quality DAC and some good cans, that made all the difference."
Audiophile prerequisites are never ending. It's like a pledge drive that just keeps going. Too bad there are no gifts that come with your contributions, like a T-shirt that says "Proud DAC owner,
and hearing all the difference!"
A well-designed headphone amp can also provide a lower source impedance, which can improve sound quality with low impedance headphones.
Is there a reasonably priced headphone amp that falls in this category?
I think I paid about $25 for the FiiO E6. Its output is very similar to the Fiio X1 IIRC.
A well-designed headphone amp can also provide a lower source impedance, which can improve sound quality with low impedance headphones.
Is there a reasonably priced headphone amp that falls in this category?
There are many. Last one I bought was a FIIO A3.
A well-designed headphone amp can also provide a lower source impedance, which can improve sound quality with low impedance headphones.
Is there a reasonably priced headphone amp that falls in this category?
I think I paid about $25 for the FiiO E6. Its output is very similar to the Fiio X1 IIRC.
Hmm... $25 might be worth trying. I shall have to go take a look.
A well-designed headphone amp can also provide a lower source impedance, which can improve sound quality with low impedance headphones.
Is there a reasonably priced headphone amp that falls in this category?
There are many. Last one I bought was a FIIO A3.
Another reasonably priced option. Decisions.... Decisions...
Thank you everyone for your help.
I HATE these damn audiophile snake oil guys. Latest post said "I was you two years ago. Once I got a good quality DAC and some good cans, that made all the difference."
What he didn't get is any experience with reliable listening tests.
Rely on sighted evaluations and you too can become him.
Even if I wanted to become him, which I don't, I couldn't afford it.
The audiophile always adds some new piece of equipment that needs to be bought in order to justify things.
Audiophile: You need a headphone amp to get better sound.
Me: You buy a headphone amp and you don't hear better sound.
Audiophile: You need to buy better headphones now that you have an amp.
Me: You get better headphones and don't hear a difference.
Audiophile: Well, if course, now that you have good headphones, that $50 amp won't do.
Me: You buy a $100 amp and don't hear a difference.
Audiophile: Well, DUH! You need to get a tube headphone amp.
Me: I'm not spending that kind of money.
Audiophile: Well, then you're missing out and you'll never know how awesome your music can be.
And if you won't hit their price point, then the fault is yours and not theirs.
I'm currnetly having this discussion with someone about the FiiO X1 vs X5 Digital Audio Players. The claim is that the X5 has a far superior DAC, and that will make your music sound better.
Does your someone have to stare at/fondle the X5 for a month or two for this betterness to manifest?
Or is it (say, "organicness") glaringly obvious from the first note?
cheers,
AJ
p.s. you familiar with the saying, "You can't fix stupid"?
You have to start with one of these reasonably-priced units and work your way backwards to appreciate the difference:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...=details&Q= (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=1163696&is=REG&A=details&Q=)
You have to start with one of these reasonably-priced units and work your way backwards to appreciate the difference:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...=details&Q= (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=1163696&is=REG&A=details&Q=)
Is there any audible difference?
You have to start with one of these reasonably-priced units and work your way backwards to appreciate the difference:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...=details&Q= (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=1163696&is=REG&A=details&Q=)
Is there any audible difference?
Certainly your wallet will make less of a sound as you throw it on the sideboard when you come home.
None of the widgets mentioned are DACs. So even if there were a difference, real or imagined, how it could be ascribed to the "DAC" is beyond my unaudiophile comprehension.
cheers,
AJ
You have to start with one of these reasonably-priced units and work your way backwards to appreciate the difference:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...=details&Q= (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=1163696&is=REG&A=details&Q=)
Is there any audible difference?
Based on the two user reviews who say the $3500 unit died within a day or two, I think there might be an (in)audible difference.
You have to start with one of these reasonably-priced units and work your way backwards to appreciate the difference:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...=details&Q= (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=1163696&is=REG&A=details&Q=)
Is there any audible difference?
I don't think crying inside makes a noise, does it?