KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Apr 3, 2019 10:00:47 GMT -5
I should mention that Sabre DACs have excellent specifications... so there's no problem there. They are very flat, very quiet, and have very low THD, so none of those seem to be especially in need of improvement.
(So, for example, I see no major benefit to lowering the noise floor even further by combining multiple output channels, when it is very low to begin with.)
There is a big difference in how the 8 channel Sabre Chips are used in different products. In the OPPOs,ony one channel of the Sabre was used per analog output. In some stereo Dacs using the Sabre, again only one channel per output channel might be used. But on the best Sabre stereo dacs four channels are used in parallel per stereo output channel which lowers the noise floor appreciably. Of course, as point out, supporting circuitry such as power supplies and board design all contribute to the overall quality. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Apr 3, 2019 10:18:40 GMT -5
Errrr...... how about SOUND QUALITY?
Seriously, before you spend more than $100 on a DAC, you really should listen to it first.... or make sure whoever you buy it from has a return policy.
Please note that I am NOT suggesting anything, one way or the other, about the RME, or the Mytek Brooklyn, since I haven't heard either one.
HOWEVER, ignoring bells and whistles, there are at least a few DACs currently out there, in the $500 - $1000 range, that don't sound nearly as good as our venerable DC-1. Features are nice, and may be well worth having, but the features really don't matter if it doesn't sound good. Therefore, you really want to audition a DAC, before you spend that kind of money, or far more, on it.
With so many great dac choices in all price ranges, what can Emo bring to the table? Tubes, nah. FPGA, unlikely. MQA, no way. SOTA ? Needs major chops.... A world class headphone amp? I've got it, a really great 12v trigger!! Seriously, not happening. This thread is almost two years old (yawn). |
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on Apr 3, 2019 11:41:46 GMT -5
The DC-1 was great, but history.
Folks wonder why you ditched it without replacement....
Why not reintroduce it? |
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on Apr 3, 2019 11:43:15 GMT -5
I should mention that Sabre DACs have excellent specifications... so there's no problem there. They are very flat, very quiet, and have very low THD, so none of those seem to be especially in need of improvement.
(So, for example, I see no major benefit to lowering the noise floor even further by combining multiple output channels, when it is very low to begin with.)
There is a big difference in how the 8 channel Sabre Chips are used in different products. In the OPPOs,ony one channel of the Sabre was used per analog output. In some stereo Dacs using the Sabre, again only one channel per output channel might be used. But on the best Sabre stereo dacs four channels are used in parallel per stereo output channel which lowers the noise floor appreciably. Of course, as point out, supporting circuitry such as power supplies and board design all contribute to the overall quality. Other possible advantages of using parallel dacs - 1) more load capability, perhaps aiding in a better filter design, and 2) Averaging out of the non linearities of any given channel. |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs 
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,092
|
Post by klinemj on Apr 3, 2019 12:27:31 GMT -5
The DC-1 was great, but history.
Folks wonder why you ditched it without replacement....
Why not reintroduce it? I have been wondering this also. If the issue was that certain parts were no longer available, I would think that adequate replacements could be had for a comparable cost and they'd be back in the DAC business with minimal effort. Mark |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Apr 3, 2019 12:51:05 GMT -5
Errrr...... how about SOUND QUALITY?
Seriously, before you spend more than $100 on a DAC, you really should listen to it first.... or make sure whoever you buy it from has a return policy.
Please note that I am NOT suggesting anything, one way or the other, about the RME, or the Mytek Brooklyn, since I haven't heard either one.
HOWEVER, ignoring bells and whistles, there are at least a few DACs currently out there, in the $500 - $1000 range, that don't sound nearly as good as our venerable DC-1. Features are nice, and may be well worth having, but the features really don't matter if it doesn't sound good. Therefore, you really want to audition a DAC, before you spend that kind of money, or far more, on it.
With so many great dac choices in all price ranges, what can Emo bring to the table? Tubes, nah. FPGA, unlikely. MQA, no way. SOTA ? Needs major chops.... A world class headphone amp? I've got it, a really great 12v trigger!! Seriously, not happening. This thread is almost two years old (yawn). That’s exactly what I did @keithl ,I auditioned the Mytek Brooklyn before showing the DC-1 the door! Loved the sound of the DC-1 but the Brooklyn sounds better to my ear and in my room. By enough to sell the DC-1. Yep, the DC-1 is a great value and is versatile but it just didn’t out preform the Brooklyn, which does have a Sabre DAC. The implementation is pleasing to my ears. I’ve been a Burr-Brown fan for as long as I remember but this DAC is a kitty! ( CatsMeow ) 😋 |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Apr 3, 2019 12:53:48 GMT -5
Let me be absolutely clear then.... Personally..... Over time, I've owned quite a few DACs, several of which used Sabre DAC chips (including a Wyred4Sound DAC2, and an AudioLab MDac, both of which are pretty highly regarded)... I've also owned quite a few lower-prices DACs that used the Sabre chips... from an original Dragonfly, to several Audio G*D models, to an original 0DAC...
Every single one of them exhibited what I would call "the Sabre house sound" to some degree. In some cases, it actually sounded as if there was a bump in the frequency response that was exaggerating the detail in the upper midrange and lower treble, even though measurements showed no such bump was present. If you're familiar with Photoshop, a good visual analogy would be how images look when you use excessive sharpening... details "pop" (but the edges around the details seem over-sharp and exaggerated). (Note that, if your speakers are slightly lacking in detail, this can make them seem to be more detailed - and so may sound quite good.)
Here at Emotiva, from time to time, we also listen to other products on the market, to see what other vendors are selling. And, the last several times when we auditioned products that used Sabre DAC chips, the consensus was that they sounded as if the detail was somewhat boosted. The sound was described as "grainy" and several listeners mentioned that "sibilance sounded exaggerated or unnatural".
I'm not suggesting that Sabre DACs cannot ever sound good... However, from our experience, at best they may be able to sound as good as various high-end DAC chips from Analog Devices, and AKM and Burr Brown... And, at worst, they sound noticeably unpleasant and annoying... It's also worth noting that Sabre DAC chips are one of the more expensive DAC chips available... Therefore, we simply see nothing to suggest that they are worth considering for inclusion in our products...
Such a huge myth. I don't know why you perpetuate this. Sure, there are DACs with Sabre chips that sound bright with endless glare but there are DACs with Burr-Brown and other chips that also sound awful. Much more to the sound of a DAC than the chip choice. An example is the PS Audio Stellar Gain DAC which has an ES9010K2M Sabre chip and it is one of the richest DACs I've heard but it still belts out endless detail. Wow! Company Man at work here, step aside! 😢 |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Apr 3, 2019 13:24:14 GMT -5
And that's just fine.
I had a Wyred4Sound Dac2 and an AudioLab MDac... both of which used Sabre DACs... and neither of which sounded anywhere nearly as good as the DC-1 to me... Since then, I've auditioned quite a few DACs, and none of the ones I've heard with Sabre DACs impressed me. But I haven't heard any of the the MyTek models... and pretty much everything I've heard about them has been predominantly good.
And, to be perfectly fair, many of the others DACs I've heard lately, which used other types of DAC chips, didn't especially impress me either.
I should also mention that, of the three recent units I've heard that had AKM chips, two sounded really good, and one didn't sound good at all.
Which just goes to show that judging how a DAC will sound based on the chips it uses is not a good idea.
Errrr...... how about SOUND QUALITY?
Seriously, before you spend more than $100 on a DAC, you really should listen to it first.... or make sure whoever you buy it from has a return policy. Please note that I am NOT suggesting anything, one way or the other, about the RME, or the Mytek Brooklyn, since I haven't heard either one.
HOWEVER, ignoring bells and whistles, there are at least a few DACs currently out there, in the $500 - $1000 range, that don't sound nearly as good as our venerable DC-1. Features are nice, and may be well worth having, but the features really don't matter if it doesn't sound good. Therefore, you really want to audition a DAC, before you spend that kind of money, or far more, on it.
That’s exactly what I did @keithl ,I auditioned the Mytek Brooklyn before showing the DC-1 the door! Loved the sound of the DC-1 but the Brooklyn sounds better to my ear and in my room. By enough to sell the DC-1. Yep, the DC-1 is a great value and is versatile but it just didn’t out preform the Brooklyn, which does have a Sabre DAC. The implementation is pleasing to my ears. I’ve been a Burr-Brown fan for as long as I remember but this DAC is a kitty! ( CatsMeow ) 😋 |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Apr 3, 2019 13:34:31 GMT -5
And that's just fine.
I had a Wyred4Sound Dac2 and an AudioLab MDac... both of which used Sabre DACs... and neither of which sounded anywhere nearly as good as the DC-1 to me... Since then, I've auditioned quite a few DACs, and none of the ones I've heard with Sabre DACs impressed me. But I haven't heard any of the the MyTek models... and pretty much everything I've heard about them has been predominantly good.
And, to be perfectly fair, many of the others DACs I've heard lately, which used other types of DAC chips, didn't especially impress me either.
I should also mention that, of the three recent units I've heard that had AKM chips, two sounded really good, and one didn't sound good at all.
Which just goes to show that judging how a DAC will sound based on the chips it uses is not a good idea.
That’s exactly what I did @keithl ,I auditioned the Mytek Brooklyn before showing the DC-1 the door! Loved the sound of the DC-1 but the Brooklyn sounds better to my ear and in my room. By enough to sell the DC-1. Yep, the DC-1 is a great value and is versatile but it just didn’t out preform the Brooklyn, which does have a Sabre DAC. The implementation is pleasing to my ears. I’ve been a Burr-Brown fan for as long as I remember but this DAC is a kitty! ( CatsMeow ) 😋 I do believe that we’ve come full circle, it’s not so much the DAC chip that matters, though at minimal a very good one should be used, but it’s the DAC Chip implementation that makes all the difference. I really think we’ve covered this ground before. Even in the Mytek line I believe there may be differences in their DACs, I don’t know for sure as I’ve only experienced the original Brooklyn, the Brooklyn + , I’m told sounds slightly different and the Liberty is their entry level. Mytek is a Pre Line audio company that has been into the home HiFi market for only 10 years or so. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Apr 3, 2019 13:37:26 GMT -5
Averaging out the nonlinearities is a legitimate benefit of using multiple paralleled chips... and there are ways to get even more benefits by feeding slightly different signals to each one and sort-of interleaving them. However, because Sabre DACs already perform very well in the areas where this would be likely to result in further improvement, it seems to be of limited practical usefulness. Being better able to drive a filter is a non-issue with modern designs - for a variety of reasons.
You will find that, especially in a commercial environment, the reasons why things like this are done aren't always obvious. For example, if we were to plan to build 1000 stereo DACs, and 1000 multi-channel DACs, it might simply be cheaper to buy 2000 eight-channel chips than 1000 each of two different chips. It would also be fewer parts to keep track of and reorder.
(And the fact that, by paralleling four chips on each channel in stereo, we could get a slightly better noise spec, would just be an added bonus.)
I should mention that Sabre DACs have excellent specifications... so there's no problem there. They are very flat, very quiet, and have very low THD, so none of those seem to be especially in need of improvement.
(So, for example, I see no major benefit to lowering the noise floor even further by combining multiple output channels, when it is very low to begin with.)
Other possible advantages of using parallel dacs - 1) more load capability, perhaps aiding in a better filter design, and 2) Averaging out of the non linearities of any given channel. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Apr 3, 2019 13:54:02 GMT -5
We didn't "ditch the DC-1 without a replacement".
The DC-1 reached the end of its production run and production commitments. We had a replacement lined up (we showed the original prototype for the DC-2 at the last EmoFest). However, changes in the market since then have caused us to re-think the options we planned to include, and the price point we were targeting.
So, as they say, we went back to the drawing board.
We will absolutely be introducing new DAC models in the future. We just haven't finalized the details of exactly what it will be yet.  The DC-1 was great, but history.
Folks wonder why you ditched it without replacement....
Why not reintroduce it? |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on Apr 3, 2019 14:55:24 GMT -5
The specific reason why the DC-1 was discontinued was not that certain parts became unavailable or even difficult to obtain.
When we introduced the DC-1, our main priority was sound quality, although we did include a few features that were cutting-edge at the time. (When the DC-1 was introduced, it was one of very few DACs with an analog input, and one of very few with an ASRC to reduce jitter.)
Since then, the market has come to expect other features that the DC-1 lacked, like support for higher sample rates, and support for DSD, and support for some sort of wireless audio. Therefore, we created the DC-2, which adds those features that we feel are necessary in order to compete in the market today. We also incorporated the new AKM DACs, which we now use in most of our other new high-end equipment, and which we feel result in the DC-2 sounding slightly better than its predecessor.
Unfortunately, after the design was finished, we realized that we would be unable to sell the DC-2 at the price point we had hoped.
We also realized that, in the last few years, the DAC market has become even more driven by features. Most people these days don't have an opportunity to audition a DAC before they buy it - so they make their buying decisions based on the list of features it offers. This makes it even more difficult for us to sell the DC-2 for a higher price than some of its competitors, especially those with impressive feature lists, based solely on the fact that it sounds better than they do.
Therefore we've been forced to go back to the drawing board.
The DC-1 was great, but history.
Folks wonder why you ditched it without replacement....
Why not reintroduce it? I have been wondering this also. If the issue was that certain parts were no longer available, I would think that adequate replacements could be had for a comparable cost and they'd be back in the DAC business with minimal effort. Mark |
|
ronf
Seeker Of Truth
Posts: 9 
|
Post by ronf on Apr 3, 2019 15:20:34 GMT -5
And that's just fine.
I had a Wyred4Sound Dac2 and an AudioLab MDac... both of which used Sabre DACs... and neither of which sounded anywhere nearly as good as the DC-1 to me... Since then, I've auditioned quite a few DACs, and none of the ones I've heard with Sabre DACs impressed me. But I haven't heard any of the the MyTek models... and pretty much everything I've heard about them has been predominantly good.
And, to be perfectly fair, many of the others DACs I've heard lately, which used other types of DAC chips, didn't especially impress me either.
I should also mention that, of the three recent units I've heard that had AKM chips, two sounded really good, and one didn't sound good at all.
Which just goes to show that judging how a DAC will sound based on the chips it uses is not a good idea.
That’s exactly what I did @keithl ,I auditioned the Mytek Brooklyn before showing the DC-1 the door! Loved the sound of the DC-1 but the Brooklyn sounds better to my ear and in my room. By enough to sell the DC-1. Yep, the DC-1 is a great value and is versatile but it just didn’t out preform the Brooklyn, which does have a Sabre DAC. The implementation is pleasing to my ears. I’ve been a Burr-Brown fan for as long as I remember but this DAC is a kitty! ( CatsMeow ) 😋 I think this is interesting; as I recently purchased an inexpensive Sabre-based DAC / headphone amp on Massdrop for use away from home, and with good headphones - I experience an etched and slightly fatiguing sound, but with less expensive headphones the detail is very good. I wound up with the impression that the intent was to create a line of DAC chips that would sound great - targeting speakers and headphones that were in a specific price range and capability used by a large target audience. I think what I bought sounds good, but I would be wary to purchase another Sabre-based DAC in the future, especially for use in my main system. At home, I primarily stream FLAC files using a Squeezebox Touch connected to an eleven year old CI Audio VDA.2 DAC. This DAC uses a Burr Brown part that must be three, possibly four generations old now, but it still sounds good if not the last word in detail and transparency today. I don't intend to stream MQA or DSD in the future - just FLAC, and when or if I ever replace my Squeezebox, it will most likely be with a Raspberry Pi as I don't see the point in spending what I consider to be a considerable sum on a Linux-based music-streaming client configured by somebody else. So all that matters to me, is when streaming FLAC, that a DAC sound incredible driving my great Emotiva preamp/amp system. I suspect despite the age of my current DAC, that there might be nothing under $1K today that will clearly out preform what I am using now. I have been waiting however for the DC-2 to come out, as I bet it will sound great and I would like to have an all-Emotiva system in my rack. A DAC with USB input would be useful in the future but otherwise keeping things very simple seems prudent. I figure If I only purchase gear with features I will actually use, the better off I am. I am curious if the Cherry DAC DAC 2 HS would be worth a tryout, well back to listening now ... Madrugada's Majesty stops me in my tracks every time. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Apr 3, 2019 15:29:34 GMT -5
The specific reason why the DC-1 was discontinued was not that certain parts became unavailable or even difficult to obtain. When we introduced the DC-1, our main priority was sound quality, although we did include a few features that were cutting-edge at the time. (When the DC-1 was introduced, it was one of very few DACs with an analog input, and one of very few with an ASRC to reduce jitter.) Since then, the market has come to expect other features that the DC-1 lacked, like support for higher sample rates, and support for DSD, and support for some sort of wireless audio. Therefore, we created the DC-2, which adds those features that we feel are necessary in order to compete in the market today. We also incorporated the new AKM DACs, which we now use in most of our other new high-end equipment, and which we feel result in the DC-2 sounding slightly better than its predecessor.
Unfortunately, after the design was finished, we realized that we would be unable to sell the DC-2 at the price point we had hoped. We also realized that, in the last few years, the DAC market has become even more driven by features. Most people these days don't have an opportunity to audition a DAC before they buy it - so they make their buying decisions based on the list of features it offers. This makes it even more difficult for us to sell the DC-2 for a higher price than some of its competitors, especially those with impressive feature lists, based solely on the fact that it sounds better than they do. Therefore we've been forced to go back to the drawing board.
I have been wondering this also. If the issue was that certain parts were no longer available, I would think that adequate replacements could be had for a comparable cost and they'd be back in the DAC business with minimal effort. Mark Keith I agree that the emphasis should absolutely be on the sound quality. The only features I would care about are an HDMI passthrough. For me this is probably the most real concern for anybody using it to its full advantage like I do (in a home theater 2.0 settting connected to multiple devices). When I bought the DC-1 I already knew its real potential was upgrading the sound of multiple devices - my CD's, DVD's, blu rays, netflix, youtube, video game system and finally the PC. BUt with most of these new (4k) systems are having only HDMI outputs which is fast obsoleting my DC_1 as a legitimate media center. This is the one feature that would keep this relevant. Otherwise the DC-1 basically becomes a dac meant for one device - PC based files (usually USB) or an old CD player. The DC-1 still doesn't dissapoint in the sound quality department sounding quite great. I have heard units that do things in a way that I prefer more (multibit). But there's no getting around how nice the sound is. But I think with the addition of things like MQA, ethernet, bluetooth all are enticing things that attract the user over "sound quality" which they can't hear before purchase. Which is a pity, because its real strength was no holds barred sound quality. |
|
ronf
Seeker Of Truth
Posts: 9
|
Post by ronf on Apr 3, 2019 16:49:22 GMT -5
The specific reason why the DC-1 was discontinued was not that certain parts became unavailable or even difficult to obtain. When we introduced the DC-1, our main priority was sound quality, although we did include a few features that were cutting-edge at the time. (When the DC-1 was introduced, it was one of very few DACs with an analog input, and one of very few with an ASRC to reduce jitter.) Since then, the market has come to expect other features that the DC-1 lacked, like support for higher sample rates, and support for DSD, and support for some sort of wireless audio. Therefore, we created the DC-2, which adds those features that we feel are necessary in order to compete in the market today. We also incorporated the new AKM DACs, which we now use in most of our other new high-end equipment, and which we feel result in the DC-2 sounding slightly better than its predecessor.
Unfortunately, after the design was finished, we realized that we would be unable to sell the DC-2 at the price point we had hoped. We also realized that, in the last few years, the DAC market has become even more driven by features. Most people these days don't have an opportunity to audition a DAC before they buy it - so they make their buying decisions based on the list of features it offers. This makes it even more difficult for us to sell the DC-2 for a higher price than some of its competitors, especially those with impressive feature lists, based solely on the fact that it sounds better than they do. Therefore we've been forced to go back to the drawing board.
Keith I agree that the emphasis should absolutely be on the sound quality. The only features I would care about are an HDMI passthrough. For me this is probably the most real concern for anybody using it to its full advantage like I do (in a home theater 2.0 settting connected to multiple devices). When I bought the DC-1 I already knew its real potential was upgrading the sound of multiple devices - my CD's, DVD's, blu rays, netflix, youtube, video game system and finally the PC. BUt with most of these new (4k) systems are having only HDMI outputs which is fast obsoleting my DC_1 as a legitimate media center. This is the one feature that would keep this relevant. Otherwise the DC-1 basically becomes a dac meant for one device - PC based files (usually USB) or an old CD player. The DC-1 still doesn't dissapoint in the sound quality department sounding quite great. I have heard units that do things in a way that I prefer more (multibit). But there's no getting around how nice the sound is. But I think with the addition of things like MQA, ethernet, bluetooth all are enticing things that attract the user over "sound quality" which they can't hear before purchase. Which is a pity, because its real strength was no holds barred sound quality. Interesting - I think your statement exemplifies an issue that Emotive is running into, in finalizing a design for the DC-2 DAC; you state that a feature you must have is 4K HDMI passthrough. I suspect very few 2-channel DACs being offered today have this feature, and I doubt Emotiva would consider including such capability outside of an AV processor. The Bryston BDA3 DAC comes to mind of course, but this is an exception to the rule. I believe the best option then, is a separate and inexpensive device, which extracts the audio from the HDMI stream, and outputs via an SPDIF port, then send it to what will be a great DC-2 using it's SPDIF input. |
|
|
|
Post by Loop 7 on Apr 3, 2019 19:41:34 GMT -5
I still don't get the DSD thing. There are so few albums available in that format. Has to be ~1% of total albums available.
A company like Schiit doesn't offer DSD nor MQA and they seem to have an extremely successful line of DACs (I think the new MODI 3 is remarkable for $100).
|
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Apr 3, 2019 19:52:24 GMT -5
I still don't get the DSD thing. There are so few albums available in that format. Has to be ~1% of total albums available. A company like Schiit doesn't offer DSD nor MQA and they seem to have an extremely successful line of DACs (I think the new MODI 3 is remarkable for $100). Hum! I’ve heard the Gumby and passed, though the DC-1 was superior. But that’s just my  |
|
|
|
Post by Loop 7 on Apr 3, 2019 20:35:55 GMT -5
Hum! I’ve heard the Gumby and passed, though the DC-1 was superior. But that’s just my I had a Bifrost (non-multibit) on loan for a few months during the time I owned a DC-1 and I preferred the DC-1 by a lot but I've not heard the Gumby. The MODI 3 impresses me so much (bought one for a pal so I've heard it at length) because it sounds really big and smooth for a $100 DAC but also has Schiit's latest USB technology in addition to optical and SPDF inputs. AND, the sucker is assembled in the US. From the Schiit web site: "Designed and Assembled in USA
By “designed and assembled in USA" this is what we mean: the vast majority of the total production cost of Modi 3—chassis, boards, transformers, assembly, etc—goes to US companies manufacturing in the US. Our chassis are made minutes from our facility. Our PCBs are done just over the hill from us, or done in NorCal. Yes, the wall-warts are made in China, but there's some give and take at this price point." |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Apr 3, 2019 20:49:11 GMT -5
Hum! I’ve heard the Gumby and passed, though the DC-1 was superior. But that’s just my I had a Bifrost (non-multibit) on loan for a few months during the time I owned a DC-1 and I preferred the DC-1 by a lot but I've not heard the Gumby. The MODI 3 impresses me so much (bought one for a pal so I've heard it at length) because it sounds really big and smooth for a $100 DAC but also has Schiit's latest USB technology in addition to optical and SPDF inputs. AND, the sucker is assembled in the US. From the Schiit web site: "Designed and Assembled in USA
By “designed and assembled in USA" this is what we mean: the vast majority of the total production cost of Modi 3—chassis, boards, transformers, assembly, etc—goes to US companies manufacturing in the US. Our chassis are made minutes from our facility. Our PCBs are done just over the hill from us, or done in NorCal. Yes, the wall-warts are made in China, but there's some give and take at this price point." |
|
|
|
Post by Raven on Apr 3, 2019 21:14:51 GMT -5
Sorry for off-topic question
By any chance anyone has auditioned Rockna Wavedream DAC?
|
|
