2. misc-audio
  3. 173737-20253

I'm not all in on digital systems because I'm not all in on DACs

We were lucky to have the makers of the @Arion1 speaker line join us in another conversation.  One of the points the rep made was he didn't understand what the problem was with digital among audiophiles. 

I am in many ways a digital music guy.  I have no vinyl and use Roon for all of my playback but this all stops when it leaves my Mytek DAC.  I've taken a great deal of care in selecting my integrated amplifier, and my speakers and how they are configured.  I rely heavily on OmniMic and Roon's DSP before the DAC... so why won't I just let go and go 100% digital?  Why don't I use digital crossovers after my preamp and convert my system to fully active?

The answer is in a series of experiences I've had with digital playback.  DAC's can sound wildly different.  I'm staring at two right now.  A Topping DX3 and a Mytek Brooklyn.  One sounds thin and lacking energy and bass while the other sound really good.

The same thing happened to me when I was trying to upgrade from my Theta Casanova.  I was looking for a processor that was HDMI friendly and inexpensive.  I went through a number of them which had the same problem:  Thin and gutless until I got an Oppo BluRay player which sounded better than all of them.  Sadly the Oppo DAC/headphone amp was a horrible ear drill to my ears.

So I'm not against digital signal processing or DACs, but within my budget I'm not willing to give up control over the sound of my DAC to a new crossover in the chain without listening.

What are your thoughts?

erik_squires
closenplay
54 posts
 

Erik, you seem to enjoy tinkering (as I have for some 40+ years building passive and active loudspeakers) and DEQX makes tools that are a tinkerer's dream. Go to their website and read up on them. Too many capabilities for a hunt and peck typist like me to explain on this thread. Feel free to DM me if any questions on the what's and how's. 

Regarding the OPPO players, compared the 105 and the 205 balanced analog outputs into powered studio monitors----the 105 very good (I believe same dac as in your 103), the 205 (using newer processor) was an order of magnitude improvement over the 105 IMHO. The 205 also has six filter options (much fun) as well as MQA decoding (hope no one is triggered) if you like. 

DEQX is coming out with newly designed products using newer processors and four channel capabilities (up from 3) to diy fully active speakers (8 channels). Can be used on conventional speakers as well, just not to the full benefit that fully active can provide (at the cost of more complexity).

BTW, I have no financial interest in DEQX or OPPO. Just feel as though I have some useful info/experience for a perceived kindred audio spirit.

This machine will also have you rethinking using a sub with your 2 ways.

Have fun!

closenplay
54 posts
 

Correction.... The above should read "....four stereo channels (up from 3 stereo channels) to diy fully active speakers (8 total channels)."

erik_squires OP
15,611 posts
 

Thanks for the information on DEQX!

I'm afraid they are a little rich for rmy blood and I'll have to stick to miniDSP for a long while.  They do have some with purely digital paths.

jerryg123's avatar
jerryg123
3,429 posts
 

Really good thread here.

 I will stick with my Bel Canto e.One DAC 2.7 I am like @nonoise  here there are to many flavors.

I have had a few DAC over the years a demoed a few and there is just to much out there.

Did like my Border Patrol DAC but limited on inputs, Have the e.One Stream and e.One CDt3 and not wanting to switch sources cable.

Have a great day.

 

 

 

elliottbnewcombjr
5,081 posts
 

My CURRENT opinion: we find 'PREFERRED' not 'BETTER'.

What we eventually choose is the results of a particular maker's 'BAG-O-TRICKS', their 'MIXED SALAD':

this DAC, how many DACS?, then the bag-o-tricks: up..., over ... anti.. filter ..... shaping ....

Like Phono, get thee RETURN Options, try till you find a salad that tastes great, to you.

More to discover