The End of My DAC Journey?

[Bodhi]

My next dac could well be my end of the journey dac - the APL Hif DSD-MR SE. I've heard the original DSD-MR several times which is the most natural sounding dac i've ever heard. But the latest SE model is orders of magnitude better, and is close to the flagship Galactic Reference dac. So ... v good.

 

[Mike Hanson]

My next dac could well be my end of the journey dac - the APL Hif DSD-MR SE. I've heard the original DSD-MR several times which is the most natural sounding dac i've ever heard. But the latest SE model is orders of magnitude better, and is close to the flagship Galactic Reference dac. So ... v good.

I'm already spending far more than any "normal" person would spend on a DAC. I don't think I could bring myself to reach to those levels.

 

[Mike Hanson]

Shoot out:

Watching a compressed YouTube recording through my tele via a lo-fi Sonos Arc is definitely how all critical comparisons should be done

But with a bit of volume it's not that hard to pick out consistent differences track to track, which is surprising. One DAC the the reverb trails / decay are more apparent which creates a slightly more spacious sound, the other a drier but smoother slightly warmer/fuller sound. Which correlated exactly to his findings at the end.

He also preferred the Laiv the Holo May KTE which suggests it could be a relative bargain at around half the price of the May.

Those Qualia speakers look pretty tasty, BTW.

I just realized that my perceptions of LAiV versus T+A from this video continued into real life.

• When I had both of them in my house, I found the T+A DAC200 and Ferrum Wandla+Hypsos sounded very similar (with the T+A ever so slightly better).
• When I watched this video with samples from the T+A and the LAiV Harmony, I noticed that the LAiV had less attack than the T+A.
• When I compared to the Ferrum combo to the LAiV, they showed the same difference.

I guess the moral of the story is that you can sometimes discern differences with a mere YouTube video.

 

[Bodhi]

I'm already spending far more than any "normal" person would spend on a DAC. I don't think I could bring myself to reach to those levels.

I guess it's about priorities. I'm only spending a limited amount on my next speakers and cables, but plan to 'spend the farm' on my sacd transport and dac. But that's not to say you can't find good value in dacs. The new LTA Aero is a good example.

 

[Salamander]

My next dac could well be my end of the journey dac - the APL Hif DSD-MR SE. I've heard the original DSD-MR several times which is the most natural sounding dac i've ever heard. But the latest SE model is orders of magnitude better, and is close to the flagship Galactic Reference dac. So ... v good.

I clicked onto your link and clicked on to review link on the page. I would take the quotes from the review with a 'pinch of salt' when the reviewer makes statements like this. "In fact dCS made a mash of rock music, producing just a wall of sound without any separation or definition"

 

[Bodhi]

I clicked onto your link and clicked on to review link on the page. I would take the quotes from the review with a 'pinch of salt' when the reviewer makes statements like this. "In fact dCS made a mash of rock music, producing just a wall of sound without any separation or definition"

Without knowing their specific equipment list I wouldn't take that comment as gospel. And everyone's ears are different.

 

[Del monaco]

I don’t think it’s ever going to be an end to your Dac journey!

 

[Bodhi]

I don’t think it’s ever going to be an end to your Dac journey!

Many higher end dacs are designed with a modular architecture so the dac can be easily updated when upgrade modules are available. Given how quickly digital technology evolves, that is the smart way to go. But that isn't viable for more budget-friendly dacs.

 

[tuga]

Many higher end dacs are designed with a modular architecture so the dac can be easily updated when upgrade modules are available. Given how quickly digital technology evolves, that is the smart way to go. But that isn't viable for more budget-friendly dacs.

Has digital technology evolved that much in the last decade or two?
Other than more complex filters and modulators I don't see what's changed.

 

[Mike Hanson]

Has digital technology evolved that much in the last decade or two?
Other than more complex filters and modulators I don't see what's changed.

DSD, DoP (DSD over PCM), I²S input, balanced output, MQA, upsampling filters, speeds beyond 192KHz, spatial audio (Atmos), Asynchronous USB...

 

[tuga]

DSD, DoP (DSD over PCM), I²S input, balanced output, MQA, upsampling filters, speeds beyond 192KHz, spatial audio (Atmos), Asynchronous USB...

All available 10 years ago except the niche stuff (Atmos and cråppy MQA).

 

[Muttley2]

All available 10 years ago except the niche stuff (Atmos and cråppy MQA).

you could start an argument in empty room!

 

[CoherentSystems]

I find the T+A 200 dac and in fairness the T+A audio sound in general akin to a German naim sound, just infinately better constructed and easier on the eye (not the ear) It is quality absolutelty and resurringly heavy as well!

Although on more than a few occassions I have listened to a T+A system and brutal is word that word spring to mind, once even with a pair of expensive Logan's it was quite sharpe shall we say. To the point he placed tea towels across the top of the speakers. No Joke!

Only one occassion have I listen to T+A and felt this is enjoyable, only one piece of T+A was in that system.

HQ player is great if you are 25 year IT desk jockey that wishes to play around with the 20 billion ploysinc filter combinations to flesh out that sound, due to boredom at work and has virtual unlimited access to a PC.

Also ideal if you have a dac which is forward and overly leading edge centric or can inject mogadon directly intravenously into your eyeballs. Yes than it can positive after many hours spent finding the golden exilar filter. Humm wait a minute? didn't audiophiles used to do this in the 80's with grahpic equalisers?

Joking aside, why not find the correct dac for you, it may take a while, however you will be left with best long term solution imho.

 

[Salamander]

Although on more than a few occassions I have listened to a T+A system and brutal is word that word spring to mind, once even with a pair of expensive Logan's it was quite sharpe shall we say. To the point he placed tea towels across the top of the speakers. No Joke!

Although it's a few years ago now and their signature may have changed, I would have said quite the opposite for T+A. We had their integrated on home dem, more valve like in presentation, much preferring the Audionet power amp and using the Rossini as a pre. We also heard a full T+A at a show soon after, a very listenable system, nothing like you would expect from Naim.

 

[Mike Hanson]

All available 10 years ago except the niche stuff (Atmos and cråppy MQA).

You did say a decade or two.

 

[CoherentSystems]

Although it's a few years ago now and their signature may have changed, I would have said quite the opposite for T+A. We had their integrated on home dem, more valve like in presentation, much preferring the Audionet power amp and using the Rossini as a pre. We also heard a full T+A at a show soon after, a very listenable system, nothing like you would expect from Naim.

Dave,

T+A giving a valve like presentation? Outstanding sir

 

[Mike Hanson]

I find the T+A 200 dac and in fairness the T+A audio sound in general akin to a German naim sound, just infinately better constructed and easier on the eye (not the ear) It is quality absolutelty and resurringly heavy as well!

Although on more than a few occassions I have listened to a T+A system and brutal is word that word spring to mind, once even with a pair of expensive Logan's it was quite sharpe shall we say. To the point he placed tea towels across the top of the speakers. No Joke!

Only one occassion have I listen to T+A and felt this is enjoyable, only one piece of T+A was in that system.

HQ player is great if you are 25 year IT desk jockey that wishes to play around with the 20 billion ploysinc filter combinations to flesh out that sound, due to boredom at work and has virtual unlimited access to a PC.

Also ideal if you have a dac which is forward and overly leading edge centric or can inject mogadon directly intravenously into your eyeballs. Yes than it can positive after many hours spent finding the golden exilar filter. Humm wait a minute? didn't audiophiles used to do this in the 80's with grahpic equalisers?

Joking aside, why not find the correct dac for you, it may take a while, however you will be left with best long term solution imho.

I absolutely require the leading edge of the notes, perhaps moreso than any other aspect. In this regard, your description of T+A is apt.

As for brutal, I suppose one could use that word to describe what I heard when trying to use the DAC200 as a preamp. (I used the word hard.) That was easily solved by using a separate preamp.

Bottom line, of the DACs I tried, the T+A was the best.

 

[CoherentSystems]

Hi Mike

Thank you for your thoughts.

I have the Dac200 amongst my collection, I would never use it's internal 'pre amplifier' direct into a power 100% agree and yes by selecting an appropriately matching pre amplifier then it can be made listenable imho.


leading edge is only one part of the musical reproduction and it is important, but not at the expense of all of the other traits, to give music palpable three dimensionality and realism the trail note body and decay has to be present and correctly dispensed so to say!

Also correct rendering of dynamic contrasts, interplay between musicians, poise and space between the notes. Also leading-edge definition is crictial WHEN it is required by the musical passage being, for example a Steve Vai's first strike at the start of "Juice", Wagnerian ring special or the Salisbury specials 'The Race' / "On her Maj's Secret service" etc played correctly and not with accentuated upper frequency highlights that are thrown at you like a professional compressed air flocking gun relentlessly.

Leading edge definition correct delivered WITH trailing note body goes long way to recreating a decent stab of realism. I went down the whippet thrasher & toe tapper route, but found it initially good but ultimately unsatisfying due to the relentless nature of the presentation. However, they are dac's out there which will deliver quite special leading edge, yet also all of the missing spatial information that glues the music together correctly, that don't cost two kidneys to acquire.

 

[Columbo]

Hi Mike

Thank you for your thoughts.

I have the Dac200 amongst my collection, I would never use it's internal 'pre amplifier' direct into a power 100% agree and yes by selecting an appropriately matching pre amplifier then it can be made listenable imho.


leading edge is only one part of the musical reproduction and it is important, but not at the expense of all of the other traits, to give music palpable three dimensionality and realism the trail note body and decay has to be present and correctly dispensed so to say!

Also correct rendering of dynamic contrasts, interplay between musicians, poise and space between the notes. Also leading-edge definition is crictial WHEN it is required by the musical passage being, for example a Steve Vai's first strike at the start of "Juice", Wagnerian ring special or the Salisbury specials 'The Race' / "On her Maj's Secret service" etc played correctly and not with accentuated upper frequency highlights that are thrown at you like a professional compressed air flocking gun relentlessly.

Leading edge definition correct delivered WITH trailing note body goes long way to recreating a decent stab of realism. I went down the whippet thrasher & toe tapper route, but found it initially good but ultimately unsatisfying due to the relentless nature of the presentation. However, they are dac's out there which will deliver quite special leading edge, yet also all of the missing spatial information that glues the music together correctly, that don't cost two kidneys to acquire.

Talk about a cliff hanger.

Which DACs do you prefer over the T+A that only cost one kidney? Thanks

 

[Mike Hanson]

Hi Mike

Thank you for your thoughts.

I have the Dac200 amongst my collection, I would never use it's internal 'pre amplifier' direct into a power 100% agree and yes by selecting an appropriately matching pre amplifier then it can be made listenable imho.


leading edge is only one part of the musical reproduction and it is important, but not at the expense of all of the other traits, to give music palpable three dimensionality and realism the trail note body and decay has to be present and correctly dispensed so to say!

Also correct rendering of dynamic contrasts, interplay between musicians, poise and space between the notes. Also leading-edge definition is crictial WHEN it is required by the musical passage being, for example a Steve Vai's first strike at the start of "Juice", Wagnerian ring special or the Salisbury specials 'The Race' / "On her Maj's Secret service" etc played correctly and not with accentuated upper frequency highlights that are thrown at you like a professional compressed air flocking gun relentlessly.

Leading edge definition correct delivered WITH trailing note body goes long way to recreating a decent stab of realism. I went down the whippet thrasher & toe tapper route, but found it initially good but ultimately unsatisfying due to the relentless nature of the presentation. However, they are dac's out there which will deliver quite special leading edge, yet also all of the missing spatial information that glues the music together correctly, that don't cost two kidneys to acquire.

Don't get me wrong! I want all the other stuff too, but my recent experience comparing the LAiV Harmony to the Ferrum Wandla+Hypsos combo is a case in point. The LAiV was very slightly more textured, but the Ferrum had a clearly better sense of the leading edge. I cannot stand for a "relaxed" presentation, especially when I know the music is percussively exciting. So, I'm willing to forego perfection in some respects, but my priority is always PRaT.

My friend isn't so flexible. His highest priority remains in the land PRaT, but he needs even more of those other things than I do. He's very discerning, and his "ear splinters" prevent him from enjoying reproduction that dips too far below his expectations. Consequently, he's spending far more on his system than I am, just to attain a "good enough" state.

I appreciate those extra aspects in his system, but I don't need them to be that good. What I have is truly "good enough". Having said that, I will likely improve things occasionally--not because I'm dissatisfied, but because I appreciate better.