Another review of the DS DAC

Audio Components DACs
81

I have to think deeper what the independence of MSRP from development effort and the strong or pure dependence from material cost means for decision making and priorities during development…maybe this is usual…it just still seems somewhat strange to me.

It implies something like quite smallish costs connected to huge impact might be ignored due to its calculation factor. On the other hand we benefit from your work time improving firmware (which would otherwise be a quite unaffordable service).

As a developer I’d be somehow unsatisfied as products might be much better with little add. parts cost.

82

I got to choose the parts, my original prototypes cost more than $10,000 per board. A DAC built around that (with a case to match) would cost much more than $100,000. There would have been some economies of scale, but it was still way to expensive for most markets. With PS Audio I worked towards a price point and couldn’t make it, they considered and based on intermediate prototype I built for them they decided to raise the price so I could do what I thought was needed. Tho, in hindsight, there are somethings we’d do different (which is always the case) I don’t think I made price based compromises on the digital and analog board.

[Heck, I don’t know how to word that last sentence: there are always price based compromises. But I’m happy with the balance of costs I chose for this price point.]

83

The last time I went to an audio show, about 3 years ago, I spoke to the Marketing Manager of Dynaudio about their new Contour range. He told me the remit was to build a range of 3 speakers to fixed retail price points of €4,500, €7,000 and €9,000. Of course they had 40 years of research behind them, but a fixed brief based on specific market positioning of the product focuses the mind and it has proven very successful.

That’s pretty brutally commercial, but an approach I favour. PSA seem to have been capable of doing that with some products like regenerators, but not others!

84

Thanks, it must be hard and an art (once you heard your prototype) to strip down and decide which compromises to make. Audiophiles hate to go backwards :wink:

85

That distribution cost really does seem crazy, and I still don’t really understand how it works. I’m sure PS Audio has been banging their heads about it.

My own reference is a two channel microphone preamp called the John Hardy M1. It has Jensen input transformers, 990C op amps, and JT-11-BMQ output transformers (and a very clean sound) for $1715. Obviously there is way more to building a DAC than an mic amp, but here the transformers MSRP cost are greater than the entire John Hardy preamp. I’m sure Ted and PS Audio have looked into all this at great length and they went the only way they could, but as I said, it’s hard for me to understand that kind of cost increase.

86

As I mentioned up a little higher, from their specs:

THD+N 0.0010% (= 17 bits)
S/N Ratio -124dB (= 20.5 bits)
Dynamic Range >132dB (= 22 bits)
Stereo Crosstalk -110dB (= 18 bits)

At a recent show a fellow from the Denafrips room asked me to come look at a DAC. I said it looked like a pretty good DAC. He was surprised, I guess he thought that I’d think that DSD was the only way to go. I explained that DSD was the way for me to go, but I really appreciate pieces that take an idea to the limit like they do.

87

This is where I think Devialet are totally unique. The Devialet Expert 130 has the same streamer, DAC and casing as the £13,500 250 model. The phono stage is slightly more basic and it is 130w into 6ohms, but can be run at full power with basically no distortion or clipping. The 130 costs £4,500. So you get this:
image
image

for quite a bit less than the price of this:

image
image.jpg700×562 256 KB

image
image.jpg698×287 39.8 KB

It would not surprise me that if PS Audio tried to fabricate the casing of the Devialet, and the image does not show the 4mm solid copper base, it would cost more than making the entire DSD DAC.

Also bear in mind the Devialet is made in France when about 80% of European audio is made in China. They do so because it is cheaper and more efficient to make it in France. Chord is another example, all made in the UK.

Forget the sound quality, the real problem seems to be that so much high end audio is made in small batches (relative to most audio), a lot of the processes are subcontracted out and a lot of it is hand made. This is spectacularly inefficient.

The reason why Devialet is so cheap for very high quality audio is because they use manufacturing processes that the Japanese would consider normal, or even impress them (and it is difficult to impress the Japanese, they are inscrutable).

The likes of Yamaha and Pioneer can do this for a wide range of products as they are big global companies. They make really good 100w integrated amps for £350. Devialet can do it on a small scale (sales of around $100million pa.) because they only really have three products.

Linn and Naim can’t really compete with Devialet 130, and Hegel come pretty close with the 390 (which I think is made in China to a very high standard), but is about £1,000 more expensive.

I’ve always thought hi-end audio is utterly mad because it is so utterly inefficient in manufacturing, marketing, distribution and retail.

Ted’s story only proves the point. It is not unique, I believe the guy behind Wilson speakers started making speakers as a business/hobby and they were well into 6-figures per pair in the 1980s, and he had to work very hard to design a product that was affordable even to people with cash to burn.

88

Why the heck does it have to have higher noise floor? Also, I wasn’t happy with old 18bit CD players in 90s, not alone in 2019.

89

Did you look at the noise floor for the link you posted?

https://www.denafrips.com/terminator

I explained a little higher that I could easily lower the noise floor: it would sound worse. With DSD the un-noise-shaped noise floor is -6dB, that can be lowered by noise shaping, moving some of the noise from the audio band to the higher frequencies and then filtering it out in analog. The more aggressive your analog filter is the more it messes with the sound. It’s simple physics. Most DAC chips get around this by noise shaping to 5 or 6 bits and then convert that to analog using multiple low resolution DACs at random to average out the noise… That’s another way to do things and if you like that sound, there are plenty to choose from.

90

Hi Ted,

Maybe that’s an idea. Have a user selectable filter that lower the noise floor for people who wanna do measurements or care for such sound. That would probably lower such objections from measurement crowd.

91

Filter selections aren’t free in resources or sound quality. I have one setting that does something related which is the 20dB attenuator. It helps some systems, but it’s far from a total solution.

I’ve spent some time working on a good way to sonically transparently allow adjusting of the analog filtering, so far I haven’t found anything I like, but I’m not giving up. Some early SACD players had a switch for this, but they definitely added a haze when engaged.

92

That’s great to know! Good for you.

93

In my experience…
Sometimes you have to trust the “vision”.

Sure, you pin your coat to one that suits your subjective tastes, but there’s something to be said for finding something that just works for you.

The DS does this for me, as does what my SET poweramp…do.

Both unique takes on how to make music, for me the goosebumps on my arms when I’m hearing a musician riff off another in a live performance, the realism of an offbeat note that makes you sit up,and take notice it’s a real human being playing…the emotion breaking thru someone’s vocal when they are living what they are singing…

Is what it’s all about.

And that’s why I buy PS Audio.

94

Amir verified by measurement what I suspected was true about the DS’s analog like sound and what I love about it. The specs seem more akin to a top flight reel to reel tape deck. Increasing distortion at the frequency extremes and a higher noise floor reflect a pleasing to the ear sound - kind of like tubes. The DS dac presses the right psycho-acoustic buttons of the brain making its sound pleasing to the ear. To my thinking it is the art in the product that makes it endearing. Measurement accuracy be damned.

95

Wonder how a live performance measures…?
No slight on Amir and his methodology, but surely it’s not THAT simple?

96

It’s not that simple because the nature of the distortion and noise is important. You would have to hit on the right quality and balance. Perhaps this is what’s selected for when Paul and team listen to the various firmware compiles before selecting the best one.

97

The built quality for the price was and is impressive from the one or other industry-like manufactured gear. In my memory and even now, they just never earned the fame for sound quality, as Ted‘s products do. Not sure if the major geniuses are not attracted by such companies to realize their vision, but it seems so. Many really are not bad…take Linn, B&W…but they are not at the peak anymore for whatever reason as soon as they are kind of „mass“ manufactured. It’s also a matter of trust once you know a background. I trust Ted to be smarter than 95% of DAC designers and that his design sounds better than most others independent of the optical impression of the exterior or interior.

98

Hi Ted,

You didn’t answer one question. What about the Jr? Is the noise issue due to using transformers in DS (as Amir concluded) not the case as you’re using op amps in junior? so that it may measure with less noise but not as good sounding?

99

There’s no noise from the transformers, there may be some minor zero crossing distortion (on very low level signals) and some harmonic distortion on very loud material. In general people attribute a lot things to the transformers that aren’t from the transformers. The transformers are actually part of the high frequency noise filter.

Anyway the DS Jr has about 6dB more noise across the spectrum as the DS: internally the DS has four copies of the digital switches in parallel (compared to the DS Jr which only has one) which lowers the noise of that section of circuitry by 6dB. Something has to give when building a lower priced unit.

While most prefer the sound of the Sr there are a few that really like their Jr’s better, but it’s not because of the transformers (or lack thereof) affecting the sound quality.

There are some who don’t like transformers as a matter of principle, I understand that. As I stated above I was not a fan of transformers until my ears convinced me otherwise.

100

You make a good point about economy of scale, BUT that’s actually what I personally LIKE about the high-end audio, it’s smaller companies, passionate about what they do, employing REAL people (not robots or slaves), making stuff with their hearts and minds. One of the last industries who does that, and I hope it continues unlike almost all other industries who essentially operate in monopolies and are soulless, heartless, with no identity.

On another note, have you listened to Diavelet? It’s extremely harsh sounding and horrific if paired with B&W with ZERO bottom end! Two monoblock Diavelet sounded much WORSE than one Naim powering B&W 803s.