how good is the m-dac

[Sebbyp]

I think it will be interesting to see who first does an ESS9018 implementation which uses 2 chip's per a channel at a reasonable price. 16 dac modules a channel!

Only one I know is $32,000...

http://www.accuphase.com/model/dc-901.html

 

[John_73]

I've owned the M-Dac (for three months) and currently own the Teac UD-H01. The Teac is far more adept at cutting through to the heart & soul of the music. The M-Dac is more architectural, and 'take it or leave it' in comparison. It was a little too sterile and dry sonding in the midband to involve me in the music. It may have been more expensive, and technically superior of course, but the £300 (£150 now) Teac has bought enjoyment back to my digital music collection. And my expectations are high. However, I am not swayed by price tags, or brand names. The music has to be involving, and enjoyable to listen to for long periods. The M-Dac failed that test for me, ultimately.

 

[John_73]

"Good enough for domestic playback," eh? According to who? You?

Some of us have higher expectations and "good enough" simply isn't good enough!

What an elitist, snobby response! What makes his taste in Hi-Fi reproduction any less relevant than yours Steven?

 

[Sebbyp]

I've owned the M-Dac (for three months) and currently own the Teac UD-H01. The Teac is far more adept at cutting through to the heart & soul of the music. The M-Dac is more architectural, and 'take it or leave it' in comparison. It was a little too sterile and dry sonding in the midband to involve me in the music. It may have been more expensive, and technically superior of course, but the £300 (£150 now) Teac has bought enjoyment back to my digital music collection. And my expectations are high. However, I am not swayed by price tags, or brand names. The music has to be involving, and enjoyable to listen to for long periods. The M-Dac failed that test for me, ultimately.

Interesting it's not going to be everyone cup of tea. Out of interest to understand a bit more - what is your system around it?

 

[Steven Toy]

What an elitist, snobby response! What makes his taste in Hi-Fi reproduction any less relevant than yours Steven?

His view is based on some kind of axe-to-grind theoretical viewpoint.

For every alleged elitist, snobby response there are at least as many inverted snobby responses. You don't need to play the apologist here.

Btw, I have no issue whatsoever with your own findings based on experience. I just have an issue with the preaching of a certain mantra.

 

[hammeredklavier]

His view is based on some kind of axe-to-grind theoretical viewpoint.

Not really, I was simply pointing out that excellent DACs can be had for a few hundred quid these days, and that they're hard if not impossible to distinguish from each other and more expensive ones on purely sonic grounds. Obviously your choice of DAC will be swung by considerations such as feature sets and pre-amp features etc. I wanted one with a volume control, two or more digital inputs and a headphone amp for e.g. Cost me £250 from Richers'

I'm not sure I agree that all DACs sound the same, but they certainly sound very very similar these days. As one would expect, if their frequency responses are flat and any noise and distortion is below the audible limit. If you're telling me you can tell a modded from an un-modded DAC that you're very familiar with in a rigorous blind test then I'll take your word for it; but if I gave you, say, a factory M-DAC, Audioengine D1, DAC Magic Plus, Benchmark DAC1 and a TEAC UD-H01 and asked you to tell me which was which under such conditions, I'll bet anything you like you'd fail. Reason is, quite simply, that such differences as there may be are small.

Alex

 

[Sebbyp]

Not really, I was simply pointing out that excellent DACs can be had for a few hundred quid these days, and that they're hard if not impossible to distinguish from each other and more expensive ones on purely sonic grounds. Obviously your choice of DAC will be swung by considerations such as feature sets and pre-amp features etc. I wanted one with a volume control, two or more digital inputs and a headphone amp for e.g. Cost me £250 from Richers'

I'm not sure I agree that all DACs sound the same, but they certainly sound very very similar these days. As one would expect, if their frequency responses are flat and any noise and distortion is below the audible limit. If you're telling me you can tell a modded from an un-modded DAC that you're very familiar with in a rigorous blind test then I'll take your word for it; but if I gave you, say, a factory M-DAC, Audioengine D1, DAC Magic Plus, Benchmark DAC1 and a TEAC UD-H01 and asked you to tell me which was which under such conditions, I'll bet anything you like you'd fail. Reason is, quite simply, that such differences as there may be are small.

Alex

Yeah - I don't agree with that...

I agree that noise and distortion are key areas that can have an effect on sound quality.

But... many people have sub-par amps or speakers. that don't have excellent noise/distortion ratings. So they cannot hear the different voicing between DACs.

Different DAC technologies and output stages do not sound the same.. Simples.

The problem is good DAC's have become so cheap/competitive - that the partnering equipment isn't of a sufficient level to demonstrate some of the significant changes.

What is your system around your TEAC?

 

[hammeredklavier]

What is your system around your TEAC?

I settled on a DacMagic Plus actually, but I had the Teac a few days.

A Samson 120a and Vienna Acoustics Haydns, although I mostly listen via headphones (AKG K550s).

 

[Sebbyp]

amps?

 

[hammeredklavier]

amps?

A 120a. It's a pro-audio power amp for studio monitors.

 

[Sebbyp]

Are you using your headphones out via the samson or DAC's?

 

[hammeredklavier]

Are you using your headphones out via the samson or DAC's?

The DAC's. I don't want to poo-poo the amp's headphone out though - if truth be told I've honestly never tried it!!

 

[Sebbyp]

Anway the distortion and SNR on your amp is dreadful.

Samson:
THD+N (80 kHz LPF @ 1 kHz rated output power) .... 0.01%
My amp:
Distortion THD+N, 0.0007% 0.002 % 20Hz<f<20kHz*, 4ΩPout<PR/2

It's a shame they don't plot an THD graph to see it in more detail.

Edit: The headphone amp will be much better through the DAC's Samson has bad ratings on the headphone out.

 

[John_73]

Interesting it's not going to be everyone cup of tea. Out of interest to understand a bit more - what is your system around it?

I have three different systems which I 'rotate' quite regularly:

Ground-up rebuild (to original spec) pair of Quad IIs.

Recently re-capped Quad 606 power amp.

Audiosector dual mono 'Gainclone'.

Pass Labs B1 buffer on pre-amp duties.

Mission M72 speakers.

Audio-Technica ATH-AD700 headphones.

My findings/preference with MDAC vs Teac was constant with all the above. My Audio-Widget (www.diyaudio.com ESS9023 based USB async dac) with Shunt reg. PSU also bested MDAC for me too.

John.

 

[Sebbyp]

Cheers John

 

[flatpopely]

How do you do that, do have to keep switching it on and off?
Or perhaps, listening with your fingers?

I have installed shutters on my ears that open and close 44.1 thousand times a second, I tried it faster but there was no improvement heard. I use them when listening to vinyl as well because everyone keeps telling me digital is best!

 

[hluga]

As i'm a mdac owner my words have a lot of partiality. What i can say is that since i've got an mdac I listen to more music than before. I mainly use headphones directly plugged to mdac and there's no comparison with other sources i got (maudio firewire audiophile or macbook headphones port) the sound is more rich, more detailed in all frequencies.

 

[hammeredklavier]

Anway the distortion and SNR on your amp is dreadful.

Samson:
THD+N (80 kHz LPF @ 1 kHz rated output power) .... 0.01%
My amp:
Distortion THD+N, 0.0007% 0.002 % 20Hz<f<20kHz*, 4ΩPout<PR/2

It's a shame they don't plot an THD graph to see it in more detail.

Edit: The headphone amp will be much better through the DAC's Samson has bad ratings on the headphone out.

It isn't dreadful is it, 3% is dreadful! I reckon it's transparent at that but as you say, it is not beyond measurable improvement.

All my DACs have been chosen because they have good built in headphone amps, that's what I use them for. The HiFi doesn't get a lot of use, it sounds okay but it's just a boom box really.

 

[Dark Energy]

What the Bob Marley is a Sovereigned MDAC? Bin in Jamaica for a couple of years, me just got back to me Black MDAC. Which is jolly good in its standard guise, but mo better is better!

Dark (really really dark) Energy.

 

[Sebbyp]

It isn't dreadful is it, 3% is dreadful! I reckon it's transparent at that but as you say, it is not beyond measurable improvement.

All my DACs have been chosen because they have good built in headphone amps, that's what I use them for. The HiFi doesn't get a lot of use, it sounds okay but it's just a boom box really.

Dreadful may of been over the top and there is many other variable's that will play into how transparent the amp is... but I just wanted to make a point. Your amp at around 60 amperage is hanging around 0.8%THD.

The Dac Magic's noise level is:
THD @ 1kHz -10dBFs: <0.001%
THD @ 20kHz 0dBFs: <0.002%

and the M-DAC's noise level is:
Total Harmonic Distortion RCA: <0.002%; XLR: <0.0008%

Are you getting a true picture of what M-DAC or the Dacmagic is doing when your amp has higher distorition then both of them by a significant margin? Do you just prefer the headphone output on one of the DAC's because that would then become subjective of the HA not the DAC.