2005-02-16, 12:46
Can someone recommend a good DAC for the budget conscious music lover
Emile
-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com
[mailto:discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com] On Behalf Of Triode
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 2:28 PM
To: Slim Devices Discussion
Subject: [slim] audiophile cred
Michael,
If you want serious hifi and are using an external DAC then you don't
want lots of analogue stuff in the transport! Why pay for it?
With a separate DAC, the beauty of devices like the squeezebox is that
they are only responsible for sending a digital bitstream out of the
back end. The signal is in the digital domain the whole way though so
no errors which are induced. Assuming you have a good digital copy of
the original music on your server and stream it uncompressed to the
squeezebox, an accurate bitstream will come out of the digital out.
Arguably if you rip your music with something like EAC (which checks for
errors at reading time) and store an uncompressesed or losslessly
compressed (e.g. FLAC) copy, then you have a more accurate copy on your
hard disk than many CD players manage to read.
To get the ultimate hifi quality you really need a dac which is capable
of removing any jitter on the link from the slimserver.
Although the jitter on the output is very low (as good as many CD
transports to my ears), it is not the lowest. [My CD transport is
noticably slightly better that the squeezebox with a simple dac - but
then I've spent more that the cost of the squeezebox on upgrading the CD
transport...!] However I would put it as good as many off the shelf
transports. One of the problems with CD players is all the high current
motors and servos necessary to read the disk can impact the clock and
signal processing unless lots of attention is played to the power supply
design - putting the cost up. For squeezebox and devices like it, there
is no need as all this stuff is done in the PC.
Audioasylum PCAudio: http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/pcaudio/bbs.html
usually has interesting stuff to say about PC based hifi.
Adrian
----- Original Message -----
From: "momerath" <michael.warnock (AT) gmail (DOT) com>
To: "Slim Devices Discussion" <discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 5:03 PM
Subject: [slim] audiophile cred
> Hi,
>
> I got my squeezebox last week and I'm really pleased with it so far.
> I think it sounds great as transport for my Ack dAck, which is fairly
> transport sensitive, and I was very pleased with the analog out
> quality from the little critical listening I've done of it so far. I
> trust my ears more than other audio enthusiasts, but there is a
> recently started thread on my discussion forum of choice (head-fi.org)
> concerning the design of the SB. The last comment posted was this:
>
> well, unless there are components mounted from bottom, which I don't
> believe, than there is no serious analog output circuitry, I can't see
> chip markings from the pic here, what I see is some Micronas IC, some
> all-in-one solution with integrated DACs and amps and everything, and
> some smaller one next to it, probably some logic.. regarding digital
> output, there is no transformer coupling.. I'd say it's as simple and
> cheap as you can get.. my comments are based purely on seeing this pic
> here.
>
>
> I just wanted to give those here, who might have knowledge to the
> contrary, to chime in and, perhaps, prevent potential customers from
> being turned off. And, of course, I'd love to know that the $280 I
> spent wasnt on something "as simple and cheap as you can get".
>
> The thread can be found here:
>
http://curie.rad.mcw.edu/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www6.head-fi.o
rg/forums/showthread.php?threadid=106254
>
> ~Thanks,
> Michael
>
Emile
-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com
[mailto:discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com] On Behalf Of Triode
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 2:28 PM
To: Slim Devices Discussion
Subject: [slim] audiophile cred
Michael,
If you want serious hifi and are using an external DAC then you don't
want lots of analogue stuff in the transport! Why pay for it?
With a separate DAC, the beauty of devices like the squeezebox is that
they are only responsible for sending a digital bitstream out of the
back end. The signal is in the digital domain the whole way though so
no errors which are induced. Assuming you have a good digital copy of
the original music on your server and stream it uncompressed to the
squeezebox, an accurate bitstream will come out of the digital out.
Arguably if you rip your music with something like EAC (which checks for
errors at reading time) and store an uncompressesed or losslessly
compressed (e.g. FLAC) copy, then you have a more accurate copy on your
hard disk than many CD players manage to read.
To get the ultimate hifi quality you really need a dac which is capable
of removing any jitter on the link from the slimserver.
Although the jitter on the output is very low (as good as many CD
transports to my ears), it is not the lowest. [My CD transport is
noticably slightly better that the squeezebox with a simple dac - but
then I've spent more that the cost of the squeezebox on upgrading the CD
transport...!] However I would put it as good as many off the shelf
transports. One of the problems with CD players is all the high current
motors and servos necessary to read the disk can impact the clock and
signal processing unless lots of attention is played to the power supply
design - putting the cost up. For squeezebox and devices like it, there
is no need as all this stuff is done in the PC.
Audioasylum PCAudio: http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/pcaudio/bbs.html
usually has interesting stuff to say about PC based hifi.
Adrian
----- Original Message -----
From: "momerath" <michael.warnock (AT) gmail (DOT) com>
To: "Slim Devices Discussion" <discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 5:03 PM
Subject: [slim] audiophile cred
> Hi,
>
> I got my squeezebox last week and I'm really pleased with it so far.
> I think it sounds great as transport for my Ack dAck, which is fairly
> transport sensitive, and I was very pleased with the analog out
> quality from the little critical listening I've done of it so far. I
> trust my ears more than other audio enthusiasts, but there is a
> recently started thread on my discussion forum of choice (head-fi.org)
> concerning the design of the SB. The last comment posted was this:
>
> well, unless there are components mounted from bottom, which I don't
> believe, than there is no serious analog output circuitry, I can't see
> chip markings from the pic here, what I see is some Micronas IC, some
> all-in-one solution with integrated DACs and amps and everything, and
> some smaller one next to it, probably some logic.. regarding digital
> output, there is no transformer coupling.. I'd say it's as simple and
> cheap as you can get.. my comments are based purely on seeing this pic
> here.
>
>
> I just wanted to give those here, who might have knowledge to the
> contrary, to chime in and, perhaps, prevent potential customers from
> being turned off. And, of course, I'd love to know that the $280 I
> spent wasnt on something "as simple and cheap as you can get".
>
> The thread can be found here:
>
http://curie.rad.mcw.edu/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www6.head-fi.o
rg/forums/showthread.php?threadid=106254
>
> ~Thanks,
> Michael
>