High end vintage vs contemporary DAC's - are sonic improvements real?


The vintage DAC question seems to arise regularly, more or less along these lines:
     "I can get an old XYZ for $2000 or a new ABC for the same $$.  What to do?" 
The answer almost always seems to be "go with the new ABC, the XYZ is older technology," "digital has improved enormously," etc etc. 

Obviously digital technology HAS improved enormously in the last 20 years (or even 10 years, or the last week depending on your belief system).  Sampling rates have marched upwards (though many will say that anything over 24b/96khz is a waste, and I agree) and everything has gotten cheaper and smaller.  Music servers have evolved and storage is cheap.  We have streaming now and use phones as remote controls to manage infinitely large music collections.  The list goes on and on.  Yet in my mind it's really THIS stuff that's embedded in the assertion that "digital is much much better than it used to be."

But how many people have actually compared a high end DAC from, say, 1996 (now selling for $1500), with a new DAC for the same $$?  Sure, features won't be the same - the old unit won't have USB anything, higher sampling rates, etc.  Yet for all that, I can't recall any conversations on actual apples vs apples comparisons of new vs old, especially on the **same** source material, specifically on a Red Book CD or a lossless CD file rip.

Example: In 1992 the Mark Levinson No.30 DAC was sonically at the top of top for Red Book CD reproduction (feel free to substitute your favorite DAC of that era).  Fast forward to the present. How much better does today's DAC de jour sound playing that same CD?  Sure, source file X recorded and mastered at 24b/192khz will likely sound better than the same file downsampled to 16b/44.1khz when played on a decent system.   But will a Red Book CD played on a new DAC sound better than the same CD through that ML No.30? 

To be clear, this isn't about sampling rate or format wars.  Think of it like this:
Let's say I have 15,000 CD's, that's all I ever want to play, and I've $3000 to spend.   What would I get for the same $$ that would sonically do as well as the No.30 playing the same CD?  Is the answer "almost anything, because sonics have improved so much"?  Or maybe it's the $10k such-and-such.  Hopefully this illustrates the question.

Comments and thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
raueda1
Post removed 
raueda1 -

The short answer to your question is easy: No.  You will not get better sound from Redbook CDs than what you have now without spending more than $3K. 

I use a Meridian 598 DP as transport into the 563, and the combination sounds very good, and on Redbook CD is competitive with most of what's available today. 

So stick with your SFD. 

I can't find much online about the Mk3 but the Mk2 version of your dac looks pretty killer very robustly built with a serious looking power supply! And some great reviews as well. Assuming the Mk3 is built along the same lines it's undoubtedly a very fine dac that might indeed give modern dacs a run for their money. Here's a thought rather than improve on it perhaps improve it? Parts Connexion does mods on SF gear, why not see if there is a mod they recommend for your dac?
The MK3 was offered as an upgrade to the MK2.  The main thing was a new digital board and input modules compatible with the D2D-1 (which was thought of as companion piece). I think they only built a couple hundred boards so they're rare as hen's teeth, hence very little info in the larger audiophile community and not something Stereophile would review. SF claimed that the MK3 digital module blows the MK2 away. When I did the MK2 ==> MK3 upgrade Parts Connexion did indeed offer several further upgrade packages.  I actually did spring for one of them but I can't remember exactly what it was - some fancy new caps and direct output coupling maybe.  So it's like an MK3 Gold Edition.

In any case this thing is very serious hardware.  It sounded great in 2001 and it sounds great now.  Yet there's this mantra of "digital has improved greatly."  The farther this thread goes the more I'm convinced that it's much more nuanced than that.  Maybe something like this:
  • New(er) gear has far more features and flexibility than in the past.
  • At the low and medium end things ARE much cheaper than earlier and perform far better than their counterparts 15 or 20 years ago at a similar price point.
  • At the high end this doesn't follow.  To make a sonic improvement I'd have to spend a bloody fortune.
So, this is all wonderful!  I keep it, quit worrying and just enjoy it.  For tweaking I'll look at cables, room treatments etc. Thanks to all!


Room treatment will also be jaw dropping , easily one of my best upgrades . I use gik