Audio Random DAC/Amp Thread!!

bennysachdev

bennysachdev

Adept
Instead of pouring all our wisdom on the Random IEM/Headphone rant thread and the hijacking of multiple threads has warranted the birth of the Random DAC / Amp thread.

Whether it is portable, transportable or a desktop equipment, this is the place to talk about enquiries, interests, showoffs, appreciations, issues, solutions to issues, everything under the sun(you get the picture ;) ).
 
Nice .. now I wanted to know ... which amps you guys use for headphones worth around 10-15k ? I know all have different tastes but any general one ? I really don't get the highs mids and lows part of music/sound you guys speak of :p .
 
I bought my Burson HA-160 from jaben forums from really nice gentleman who listens to Taylor Swift from his HM801 and find its too analytical and grainy. Fatiguing he meant, i don't blame him, Taylor Swift can do that to a man! ;)

My impressions of the HA-160 will take sometime.

For now I can say that using the HA-160's with the D5000(which are easy to drive headphones, Input impedance, 25 ohms, Sensitivity, 106 dB/mW) I do not hear a night and day difference between :

Xonar STX's headphone out(On high gain) -> Denon D5k
STX Line out -> HA-160 -> D5k

I guess I'll have to spend more time as I've only auditioned them late in the night when I'm really tired from a hard days work. My mind starts to overlook a lotta things.

A new one costs 699USD from Burson's website. I got mine as a trade with the RSA Protector + B&W P5 + 150SGD for the HA-160 + beryllium power cable + RCA cable - 1/4" Pallics connector. Kinda expensive now that I think about it.
 
bennysachdev said:
For now I can say that using the HA-160's with the D5000(which are easy to drive headphones, Input impedance, 25 ohms, Sensitivity, 106 dB/mW) I do not hear a night and day difference between :

Xonar STX's headphone out(On high gain) -> Denon D5k

STX Line out -> HA-160 -> D5k
Click to expand...

I thought I was crazy, guess I'm not :p

Hopefully, the previous owner "burned" in the Burson well enough ;). The manufacturer recommended it to me and despite my own beliefs, I did a 200 hour burn-in.

I have not spent much time with the Burson either, so take this with a bucketful of salt. I did not think Burson improved things greatly, a bit refined - may be. The one distinct advantage I have with the Burson, which I don't have with STX is that it can be setup anywhere in the house with the QA350 feeding it. But, thinking about it, the function of a good amplifier is to be a wire with a gain. I guess Burson does that mostly with a slight bit of warmth added. Check it with other sources and see if it's transparent enough. Check it with a higher impedance can too.
 
My setup is uDAC -> FA-011. These are not easy to drive (160 Ohms!). I have to crank up the volume to almost 75% on the udac to get a comfy hearing level. I am kind of thinking I would need a dedicated amp with the uDAC to drive these properly.
 
@Benny,

Have you auditioned the CEntrace DACPort LX or the DacMini CX?

@kris_one,

Not sure about this. But I think Audinst MX-1 should be able to drive the headphone well. It would be an upgrade to uDAC in terms of SQ too!
 
esanthosh, I think this is what they mean when they say its the best neutral amp. It doesn't add any coloration of its own. I was expecting dropping a bomb and annihilating my wallet to shreds would improve the SQ. Now I know that adding an amp doesn't improve SQ, it just doesn't degrade it. Then again, its too soon to pass judgement. Also i'm trying them with an iem and a can which does not really benefit from amplification, namely the D5k and the SM3. I'm sure a Hd600/650/800 would sound good.

kris_one, An audinst mx1 would do it justice.
 
The Burnson should do wonders with a more laid back Sennheiser. Need to visit either Singapore or Coimbatore to test that theory ! :)
 
IMO, using STX -> Burson -> HD600 was good enough. I will just present the thoughts that ran through my head. Whether I continue to have the same opinion even a week later is up in the air :)

  1. Full size cans go with full size headphone amps
  2. A well rounded sound stage
  3. I do not have to feel that I sank big money down the drain for the Burson

1) I had the audacity to use the Thunderpants with Clip+ and did not find anything to be a hugely better setup back then. With HD600, the portable gear I used (QA350 -> UHA-6S) is much better than Clip+ and is not short of power to drive the HD600 to loud volumes. Yet, with STX -> Burson combo, I felt that it's futile to use portable amplifier with full size cans. It's not the loudness per se, but Burson had better control and refinement in the end.

2) I am not much of a sound stage size freak though I'll be the first to admit that I have a certain weakness for large sound stage. More than the sound stage, it's the presentation which matters. EX-1000 always gives me a large rounded concert hall feel where I am at the center and hearing from performers all around me. HD600's presentation was slightly more rounded and filled with the Burson - I could easily locate an image at a certain place defined by all three dimensions rather than just length and width. Sound stage is not exactly QA350's strength as it lacks depth. UHA-6S improves on this aspect while retaining clarity, reducing a bit of that brightness and in general, add some cleanliness to the sound. However, with Burson, HD600 had a better feel. I would not even describe it as warmth.

3) So far, I was very underwhelmed using Burson with MS1i as I expected a huge jump in SQ, which was not present. Sometimes when you reach a stage where the game is not so much about glaring defects (which is the least defective) and everything is pretty much level on a good basic SQ (which is better preferred), it's the smaller things which decide the matter in favor of one thing or another. Head-fi has a tendency to blow these things out of proportion and show off a 2% difference like it means the world in the end. I thought I had succumbed to head-fi curse yet again. I thought I will figure out what the f#$% PRaT is the moment I start using the Burson (no offense to Mike @ Headfonia), but no matter how hard I tried, I still don't "get" it. I was in fact a little underwhelmed when using MS1i with the lower impedance output jack. But, with HD600 in the high impedance jack, I felt happy. I even considered getting another headphone, but my wallet is not where my mind is, so that was skipped.

This "feeling" has nothing to do with objective proper A:B comparison though :)

PS: Burson has an output impedance of 5 ohms for the headphone out, which might not work well with IEMs below 40 ohms impedance. On top of that, SM3 is notorious for not liking amplification much.
 
The STX dac and the Audinst dac only sound very similar even though they have completely different topologies and dac chips. However the audinst is smoother, has slightly purer tone and if used as a headphone amp, has a far better amplifier section. Detail is almost similar in both.

The STX's implementation of the BB PCM1792 is actually quite poor. Even after an opamp upgrade to LME49720, I still prefer the audinst. The burr brown dac chip has way way more potential. My Ayon uses the same chips but there's no semblance of similarity in their sound. This one is smooth, incredibly detailed, has tremendous drive and in general sounds the way a very high end turntable sounds like. The bass has an authority which most digital devices find hard to replicate. Ridiculously good build quality, great indian prices and fantastic sound - Its the perfect package.

At lower price points, a very interesting DAC is the Lindemann. Heard it recently at a gentleman's place here and it sounded very analog and non fatiguing. Also the Rega DAC is supposed to sound fantastic. Once in a while, there are Reimyos that keep popping up in the used market. At 60-70k used, they are ridiculously good value for money. There's also a made in bangalore brand called Acoustic Portrait which seemingly has a 24/192 async dac that rivals the very best in the business. I've not heard it yet but would probably get a chance soon. For those on a super tight budget, absolutely nothing beats Peter Daniel's Audiosector DAC. It eats most of the entry level cd players and dacs from big name companies for lunch. However you'd be limited to 16/44.

You folks should upgrade your sources and then decide whether you like the burson or not. STX is not good enough to judge high end equipment :p. Also whatever you buy, please avoid the CAs, Musical Fidelitys and Arcams like plague. They are pathetic sounding.
 
Ok maybe I was a bit harsh when I said adding an amp doesn't add to the SQ. Let me correct that by saying that adding an amp doesn't add as much as changing the headphone it self, unless you get one for a power hungry headphone like a LCD2 or a HDXXX. Its like a Power up to your existing gear.

Using the SM3 through the Burson, I had the best night's sleep ever. The soundstage height and the mids just shot up a notch and there was a ever so slight improvement in instrument separation with the SM3. But I cannot 100% conclude it since I know I might fail in a blind test as the difference is barely noticeable with the SM3 or any other low impedance iem. The same could be said about some cans as well.

The only way I can conclude this is if I get a HD650(which I have my eye on) since the HA-160 would do a far better job of driving them compared to the STX.

Let's not forget the STX is an excellent VFM by itself.

--- Updated Post - Automerged ---

Also guys, whats you take on the HRT Streamer Pro, the one with the balanced input jacks. I was thinking of getting that. Would it be an upgrade from the STX and a good pair with the HA-160?
 
Agreed that the biggest influence to sound quality is the transducer at the end. However the second biggest thing in the chain after that is the source. After all its garbage in, garbage out.

Never heard the music streamer but I highly doubt it'd be much better than the STX. Get a proper dedicated dac. If you have the patience to wait for a while, you can try pulling the trigger on the metrum octave. All I've heard about it are glowing praises - not just from reviewers but from end users too.

Since you are in SG, head to adelphi with your headphone and amp and try out as many dacs as you can before deciding. Unlike us, you are sitting on a goldmine :p.
 
IMO, I like STX better than uDAC-1/2 and the kind.

The most important thing for me in the chain is the end IEM / Headphone. Something like Headphone / IEM >> Source = Source Files > Amp >>> Cable is how I approach the setting up of the rig. Whatever coloration one needs to add can be done at the headphone / IEM stage. That way, I can have horses for the courses and different IEMs for different moods / genres / FR requirements.

I've been looking at DacMini CX for sometime now even though it adds another headphone amplifier unnecessarily. It has a RCA In (one of my requirements), seems well built and uses AK4396. Not sure how that compares to AK4399 used by Esoteric, but I doubt the Mac Mini clone would have as great an implementation as the costlier Esoteric. The other DAC I have on my radar is the Audiolab M-DAC, which uses a ESS-Sabre. I am still not sure about these Sabre32 based DACs, but I need to hear one before concluding anything.
 
^^The centrance seems like its a solid dac. From the looks of it, feels like its been built very thoughtfully, has high quality parts and has a good usb implementation at a reasonable price. Assuming it sounds as good as it looks, it might be a good deal. However if it sounds like the esoterics, it will not be my cup of tea :p.
 
I am not a big fan of Srajan's writing style so far, but this caught my eye (From Burson DA-160 review, Page 5)

The CEntrance DACmini. At $795, this converter punches its sticker in below the DA-160. As I put it in the Eximus review, it "produces cutouts overlaid against a black vacuum - very matter of fact. And it really should be about the facts and nothing but. With upscale hifi the facts simply often turn out to have multiple layers or 'hidden meanings' which give them greater context and completeness.Take these sentences. Mary walks her dog. Mary walks her nervous dog. Mary walks her nervous dog under an ominous sky. The first sentence has all the facts relevant for a police statement. The last paints a more complete moody picture for a psychologist looking for meaning. Music and mood are inextricably intertwined. The pure music facts are just tones in proper amplitude and time. The mood facts need more subliminal tertiary data."

All such commentary is always merely relative. While the above did apply vis-à-vis the $2.995 Eximus, now it most assuredly did not. Quite the reverse. In this juxtaposition the DACmini was clearly the more lit up performer, the spatially more informative presenter. Contrast ratio and with it definition and articulation were higher. There was more air, more attack snap on percussive events, more metallic snarl on a plucked upright's strings, more distinct near/far gradations within the soundstage. It's as though the Burson focused deliberately on the physicality of things. This made for an enter-in-front soundstage focus. The DACmini turned on extra stage lights at the rear. This illuminated the same space in a reverse back-to-front sensation kind of way. It enhanced depth of field and quite literally increased the backlighting for more sharply drawn outlines and more worked-out spatial markers. Here the CEntrance added a few mood descriptors to the Burson's shorter sentence of just the plain facts.
Click to expand...

However, Mike's observations and preferences are a little different (From DacMini and DacPort review)

I don’t know for sure what D/A chip the DACmini uses but the voicing of the Burson can be said to be quite in the same range as the DACmini. The two are quite colorless, in contrast to some of the warmer sounding DACs I’ve heard. The Burson is a tad warmer and with more body in the bass, the DACmini is flatter and is less colored. The difference in character is bigger though. The Burson has an edge in the articulation of the individual notes, shorter decay, more noticeable impact on each notes. The DACmini has a more coherent sound where different notes blend together more to produce the music. The DACmini also has better extension on the top and bottom, slightly longer decay, and slightly better ambiance.

What I want to emphasize here is that if you do an A-B between the two, they would sound fairly similar (say in comparison to a warm sounding DAC like the HRT). During longer listening time, however, even when I’m not doing critical listening (say while web browsing or typing), I definitely know that I want to listen to the DACmini when the music is less demanding on PRaT and bass, and on the other hand I would grab the Burson if I am listening to Rock or something else with beats and percussion (even Piano). Imagine two cars, both painted in white color, but one is a luxury sedan with soft suspension while the other is a sports sedan with very stiff suspension. Briefly they may look similar, but when you go and take them for a ride, you’ll realize that the character is very different. I think what happens here is that the brain sub-consciously picks up the little details, and it’s one of those things that makes some people go for Pepsi rather than Coca Cola, even if they don’t have pro-grade taste buds.

If you are using the DAC section only and is pairing them with a separate amp, you can choose the DAC that will help cover your amplifier’s weaknesses better. For instance, the Zana is a bit weak in bass articulation and PRaT, and so I’ll use the Burson DAC with it. With the Graham Slee amps, however, I would opt for the DACmini’s DAC section as it gives me a more open sound than the Burson.
Click to expand...

So, benny if you could listen to DacMini CX which should be there at Jaben (since they sell them) would be helpful. More helpful if you can try DacMini CX As a DAC to HA-160 and see how it goes :D
 
Carrying the Burson & D5k :hap5: not happening bro. I'm a little over protective about my stuff.

Now that I'm home and I'm finally listening to the rig, it sounds................ complete :)

From headfonia's review of the DacMini, he says the Dacmini has lesser PRaT & bass than the HA-160D. So I guess the DacMini is out cause I'd prefer the latter. He also says the HRT sounds warm!!! I've auditioned the HRT MS2 at brendon's place(PC -> HRT MS2 -> RCA male - 3.5mm female jack -> Iems) and I certainly do not feel that they sound warm. Mind you I tried it sans an amplifier in the chain to pick up the true nature of the dac.
 
Back
Top