Hi all,
Have a really vintage 90s Esoteric p0 transport. Still working great. Anyone has any good experience pairing it with any particular DAC?
Or any good modern DAC to pair it with? Preferably with volume control?
Thank you.
tj
I would look to an NOS type DAC, there are lots of great ones on the market now, steer clear of DS DACs IMO. Depending on budget, and needing a volume pot - look to Metrum Accoustics, Lampizator, TotalDAC. Don't forget to consider used.
Thanks astrostar59 for the quick reply!
Can I ask why a NOS type DAC would work better? Also, what is a DS DAC?
Thanks for pointing to the different makes. Will definitely check them out and check out the used market. I heard a lot about Stahl-Tek. In your opinion, would they also work? Or should I be also considering an Esoteric DAC since the transport I am using is from them?
Thank you.
NOS = Non-OverSampling = Has no digital reconstruction/interpolation filter unit. This is a techical area related to yet different from that of SDM versus full-multibit DAC core debate. This has to do with the oversampling digital filter unit which typically precedes a DAC's core architecture. NOS DACs lack this filter unit, which, while theoretically incorrect, does produce a sound many audiophiles perceive as much more relaxed and natural than with the digital filter. You'd have to audition for yourself to know which best suits your own ears.
In my demos over the years and owning both types for 20 years+ I have settled on NOS types. They seem to sound more natural to me. Not sure in my tests wether upsampling achieves anything if the DAC has no filter. The whole point of up sampling either in the DAC or in the PC prior to the DAC is to give the filter an easier time. Anyway, don't take my word for it, get some demo's to see what floats your boat. But on Esoteric DACs in the ones I have heard, they are firmly in the 'technical & detailed' camp, and I would say far over to the right and NOS is far over to the left. Not to say NOS isn't detailed (on the whole) it is, but it doesn't throw things at you in a colder 'hifi' way IMO.
There is another camp, the FPGA DACs like Chord, dCS and the Lampizator GG with the DSD engine, the latter which is quite unique as also uses Directly Heated Triodes which some believe are the ultimate amplifying devices. And in that DAC you can flavour the sound by tube rolling. I have rolled the tubes in my Audio Note DAC to great effect, it gives you more control to ensure it 'fits' with the rest of the chain and speakers.
Good luck.
Without any filtering and oversampling prior, I would of thought a NOS DAC would be as digital as digital can sound. I assumed a NOS DAC would be desired when the filtering and oversampling is done prior to getting to the DAC. Be it a separate box or HQPlayer or such.
NOS = Non-OverSampling = Has no digital reconstruction/interpolation filter unit. This is a techical area related to yet different from that of SDM versus full-multibit DAC core debate. This has to do with the oversampling digital filter unit which typically precedes a DAC's core architecture. NOS DACs lack this filter unit, which, while theoretically incorrect, does produce a sound many audiophiles perceive as much more relaxed and natural than with the digital filter. You'd have to audition for yourself to know which best suits your own ears.
Some great info in there Ken, thanks for that. And I find I agree with most of it. But I would add the thrust of the article is around an NOS DAC with or without the filter. I am convinced it is best without a filter. So maybe the article is more about the effect of the filter in or out, not NOS v DS? Unless you can set the AD1865 to upsample into DS mode? I am thinking not here. Only the filter in or out. Maybe you can clarify.
But there are many other things at play as well. The PS and line stage have a huge impact on the sound (of any DAC). not just the digital topology. So if we look to compare the NOS v DS DAC design and resultant sound, we need to compare directly to another DS DAC at similar price points, or at least pitch against well regarded DS DACs to have more relevance? That or possibly have a DS board that can be switched in and out v the NOS board. otherwise we have no datum points.
To complicate things further we have Multibit NOS (Kassandre), FPGA NOS and discrete NOS, then single chip NOS (Zanden, Audio Note). R-2R which seemed to be regarded as NOS but many DACs now seem to upsample (MSB, CH Precision).
Ken, not entirely correct, there are many NOS DACs that do have a permanent filter applied and it is not defeatable. It depends how the manufacturer has set up the chip. The up sampling is part of it, but the filter is another part. My AMR DAC has NOS and it has a permanent filter applied. My thoughts on why some apply the filter is to garner better lab results for reviews / acceptance, as in my opinion it largely sounds better without it. Audio Note used to have a filter, but later removed it, and offered a retro service to apply to previously sold units.
Hi Ken
Thanks for the clarification. I didn't intend to say those topologies were mutually exclusive. For example Chord is not NOS and uses a FPGA, and the C1 is R-2R is not NOS as upsamples everything and applies a filter, as does the MSB units (except apparently the Select).
There are DACs that are NOS but apply a filter. Here is the detail from my AMR DP-777 manual:
With a 44.1/48kHz source (e.g. CD transport, files ripped from CDs), the following setup will be automatically selected for optimal playback:
?DAC:
Zero Jitter Mode: Filter: Upsampling:
Classic DAC Enabled Bit-Perfect II Disabled
As you can see, it is using NOS but has a filter applied. The chip is NOS Redbook to 96K no up sampling.
There are also NOS DACs that have no digital filter, but have some filtering in the analogue domain.
Only true if that permanent filter is an post-conversion analog filter. Not true if it is a pre-conversion digital filter. Again, NOS means that the DAC is not utilizing a digital reconstruction filter in the data path. A DAC having a switchable digital reconstruction filter simply enables that DAC to be dual mode, but does NOT enable that DAC to simultaneously be both NOS and OS.
Upsampling and Oversampling both utilize digital filter circuits and are essentially the same function. The distinction between the two terms is one that largely exists only in the digital audio world, where oversampling is usally taken to refer to synchronous sample rate conversion, while upsampling is usually taken to refer to asynchronous sample rate conversion.
I can't really tell from that brief description what AMR is exactly describing. However, NOS mean just that, Non-oversampling. If an oversampling digital filter is being employed the DAC is no longer operating as NOS. Any post-conversion analog reconstruction filtering utilized, obviously, would not be a digital filtering.
Hi Ken
Can I ask what DAC you landed with? I am very happy with my Audio Note DAC 5, but the DAC sector has exploded recently, and discrete R-2R DACs are being launched at a rapid rate. Everyone wants an end game DAC that beats the 'giants' or DACs north of 30K, myself included! But it seems to me anyway, the 'giants' of even 3 years ago are not talked about, and we have another one taking it's place. It might also be dangerous to invest that much money in digital especially with the smaller niche companies
Ken, you are 100% correct. What I do believe is many magazine reviewers don't understand this topic either, as they often say as in an Aqua La Scala DAC review, I read:
is non oversampling and utilises no filter, unlike some other NOS types.
I also dug a bit further and found this in the AMR manual:
4.4 Classic 16-Bit DAC Algorithms
The DP-777 under the Classic 16-Bit DAC offers 2 user-selectable methods of filtering that can be cycled through during playback by pressing the “Filter” button (RD9) on the RC-707.
The Filtering options are:
CD1. Bit-Perfect I – this mode directly takes the data extracted from the inputs and re-clocked to generate the music signal. Due to the complete lack of digital or analogue filtering, the treble frequencies are slightly rolled off, making the sound somewhat soft and laid-back. For the same reason, the mid-range and below is very natural and realistic. The reproduction of impulses is completely undistorted. This mode often helps to tame overly-bright recordings.
CD2. Bit-Perfect II – this mode is identical to Bit-Perfect I but complements this with a special analogue filter which corrects the slight roll-off in the treble frequencies. As a result, the tonality is more accurate in the treble. We therefore recommend this mode as the benchmark with which to enjoy music.
This mode also appears to operate as NOS, just like the mode above, but with the adddition of post-conversion analog EQ to correct the zero-order-hold based high treble droop, and possibly adds an analog reconstruction (low-pass) filter, but that's not clear. The necessary EQ plus an low-pass reconstruction filter can well be implemented as a single passive circuit.
Maybe it is possible to build a giant killer DAC for under 10K that takes on anything out there?
Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |