Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Deepspace57
52
Jun 9, 2019
Single ES9038PRO vs Dual AK4497; what do you think?
JJayJJ
472
Jun 9, 2019
Deepspace57Not much to think about ESS Chips suffer a dreaded hardware flaw that many have named the "ESS Hump" I'd pass on all ESS devices out of principle until they get their act together and fix this.
(Edited)
Deepspace57
52
Jun 9, 2019
JJayJJMate! but, es9038pro is sounding so clearly; especially so successful at layering mids. Btw, never heard dual ak4497, maybe which helps us to get wider soundstage, better instrumental separation. No idea at all!
JJayJJ
472
Jun 10, 2019
Deepspace57My friend.. There is no such thing as a DAC that will give you "better soundstage". Because soundstage isn't something that is provided on the -processing of signal- level. Also "layering mids" doesn't make much sense from a DAC point of view (especially nothing in the modern day), what does "unlayered mids" even sound like?
JohnVF
39
Jun 12, 2019
JJayJJSpoken like somebody without a lot of listening experience.
Helpbot
310
Jun 12, 2019
JohnVFMaybe they just haven't heard bad DAC's?
verifonix
1181
Jun 12, 2019
JohnVFSpoken like someone believes in magical audiophile descriptions :D
JohnVF
39
Jun 12, 2019
verifonixI own several DACs. Each sounds different. Each conveys the soundstage in a different manner. Some wider, some deeper, some more flat overall. You can chuck it up to the different power supplies if this interferes with your worldview. But it’s only an argument you can make online. In front of the gear, between the speakers, you’d look like a fool to say there weren’t soundstage differences.
Deepspace57
52
Jun 12, 2019
verifonixThere is an enormous difference between DACs , each of which has unique sound signature. BTW, i have headphones of 2000 $ . I can easily detect which one is which (tested SU-8 and D1).
verifonix
1181
Jun 12, 2019
JohnVFI've owned over 10 playback devices, and the only one that actually impacted sound stage was rolling tubes in a tube amp due to distortion characteristics and phase fuckery. Over time I also preferred the clean solid state output over the distorted tube output so I wouldn't even call it positively impacted. I would say the person that claims to hear sound stage differences between multiple well performing, modern devices (especially DACs) would look the fool :)
(Edited)
JohnVF
39
Jun 12, 2019
verifonixAgain, only an argument you can make online. Are you solely a headphone listener?
verifonix
1181
Jun 12, 2019
JohnVFI have cheap speakers and a lousy room so yes, headphones 99% of the time. I'd love to hear these real-world differences on a speaker set-up though, would love to be proven wrong
JohnVF
39
Jun 12, 2019
verifonixI ask because when I'm referring to soundstage, its mostly in relation to listening to speakers, as I've heard much less difference in soundstage, if any soundstage at all (at least as how I think of it) when listening to headphones, beyond the big difference in perception between closed and open-backed headphones, in my case my open-backed Audeze LCD-2s compared to my Focal "Spirt Professional" closed back headphones. On speakers, with different DACs, the width, depth, and scale of performers varies ..to my ears. On my headphones, maybe...but its not nearly as perceptible. And I guess that makes sense given how the brain processes spatial cues with both ears, in particular the differences in phase/timing between one sound as heard by first one and then the other ear. It's really why I prefer listening to speakers more than headphones, I'm a bit of a soundstage junkie. That said, I don't have an explanation FOR those differences, though I would imagine that it would originate more in differences in the analog output stage and power supply than in the DAC chips themselves, which I admit are so close in numbers on paper that there's no logical explanation for sonic differences between them, if just considering the chips themselves in a vacuum. Thing is, they aren't used in a vacuum. Their implementation varies from unit to unit, to bigger and lesser degrees obviously. For reference my main DAC is a Berkeley Audio Design Alpha DAC, which is a professional studio DAC that found its way into home audio circles. You can actually vary the soundstage with it by employing different filters on it, several are available and they're for using as reference when mixing/mastering, to mimic the sound of DACs in cheap home gear, so you can hear what a particular mix/master job will sound like when not employing what was then (2006) a state of the art DAC. I'm purchasing the Topping DAC to see how close it can come, at $425, to what was at one time a $5000 professional studio reference DAC. I have a feeling that it'll be close, though the healthy power supply and analog output of the Berkeley might make up for 13 years of time passage between its converters and these converters. I've used DACs by BMC, Universal Audio, Apogee and EMM Labs as well, FWIW. Its not my point to try to change your mind, but I do believe that there are differences. If you don't...well, variety is the spice of life even in opinions.
verifonix
1181
Jun 12, 2019
JohnVFWell at the least I see you respect my opinion which is appreciative to me in today's audio circles which are all far too angry for their own good. Appreciate you writing out your thoughts. I'm in general a bit of a sceptic on these things, especially from my own experience with many devices too and the fact that there just is too much snake oil around, manufacturers all too gladly jumping on "jitter reducing", "sound stage widening" "burn in" tweaks and myths.
(Edited)
Deepspace57
52
Jun 12, 2019
verifonixActually, what makes you bias about DACs is your current low quality USB cable, LOL :)
JohnVF
39
Jun 13, 2019
verifonixI completely get where you're coming from, sorry for my rude comment out of the gate..I'm just kind of a soundstage fetishist. I play around in the 'audiophile' circles and there's a LOT of magical thinking. A lot of my most expensive gear has a pro-audio/studio background, which I tend to feel more comfortable about. The Berkeley DAC comes from the people behind Pacific Microsonics, which made studio reference ADC and DACs (maybe they still do), and EMM Labs were partially the folks behind SACD and make studio reference ADCs/DACs as well. I've, as well, tended to move away from tube gear to high quality solid state. Though I don't mind admitting that much of what I like in tubes is actually what could be considered distortion. Similar to why I like vinyl... the distortions are things that are actually pleasing to my ear. And one of the best things for soundstage "bloom" is channel crosstalk.
verifonix
1181
Jun 13, 2019
Deepspace57I have a perfectly fine wireworld cable which I got for free with another purchase a long time ago. Not that it made even a whimper of a difference.
06S2k07Si
19
Jul 4, 2019
JJayJJIt appears as though Topping has corrected this issue...at least on the replacement D50s... https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/review-and-measurements-of-new-topping-d50s-dac.7914/

JJayJJ
472
Jul 5, 2019
06S2k07SiThey have indeed, and added a remote, and Bluetooth input. Absolutely wonderful refresh of an already great DAC.
PRODUCTS YOU MAY LIKE
Trending Posts in Audiophile