Older DAC an Option?


Hi, all. Does anyone know if the DAC's made in the early part
of the 2000's and late 90's - like Perpetual Technology's P-3A
and MSB's Link - would sound good by today's standards.

The sampling rate of these dac's only go to 96 KHz, as opposed
to the standard 192 used in most dac's today. Also, the chips
used have of course been obsolesced by the manufacturers to
purportedly better, cheaper ones today.

Nevertheless, the price quotient on these quality units is
tempting, since I have a high-end thirst, but a a low-end
budget. I'm currently using an inexpensive 24/192 up-sampling
DAC from China, off brand, that uses the 1791 chip. It's not
bad for the money, but I get some glare in the upper mid-range.
It's bad enough that I can't turn up the amp to levels I enjoy,
because it starts to hurt my ears. Not cool!

So, I was thinking that the problem is the output stage, and
that the previously mentioned dac's would have better op amps
and filtering in the output stage (higher quality components,
etc). I would appreciate any comments or suggestions on
whether this would be a trade-up or a downgrade - going to the
older but higher quality dac?

Terry
rwinner
So, I was thinking that the problem is the output stage, and
that the previously mentioned dac's would have better op amps
and filtering in the output stage (higher quality components,
etc).

This is why I keep my 12 year old cdp. I can't find a smoother sounding player.
The dac I use with my Mac Mini is the PS Audio DLIII which offer the 96 or 192 sampling; I much prefer the 96. These dacs are hard to beat for the money.
Here's an Audiogon thread from a few years ago discussing this very same topic:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1237515477&read&keyw&zzolder=dacs
#
This is why I keep my 12 year old cdp. I can't find a smoother sounding player. The dac I use with my Mac Mini is the PS Audio DLIII which #offer the 96 or 192 sampling; I much prefer the 96.
#

You don't miss the higher resolution, frequency response of the newer DAC's?
You don't miss the higher resolution, frequency response of the newer DAC's?
Rwinner

Do they really provide higher resolution? My source is Redbook cd or cds ripped to the Mac Mini via XLD with accurate rip verification so what bits of information is there to resolve that aren't pulled out with an older dac?
Read this 6moons review for a pretty good explanation of what the reviewer considers reasons for bright/edgy digital sound. My experience leads me to agree with him.
But to answer your question directly, no, I don't miss the higher resolution.


05-27-12: Mofimadness
Here's an Audiogon thread from a few years ago discussing this very same topic:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1237515477&read&keyw&zzolder=dacs


Thanks for the link - will read it. I think since I mostly use a DAC for Redbook and MP3's, 96 KHz sampling seems like enough. Upsampling itself introduces distortion.
Quoteth Timrhu:
Read this 6moons review for a pretty good explanation of what the reviewer considers reasons for bright/edgy digital sound. My experience leads me to agree with him.

...

Thank's Timrhu - will have a read.

Terry