ACX wrote:I'm happy you like our work
And thumbs up for the DDR enclosure and the Mundorf jewelry!
I read good opinions about the DDDAC around, could you compare it with something else you previously used?
We did some listening tests of course, but the intensive 'testing' is yet to come, one of us (not me) is seriously upgrading his audio equipment.
Until now we compared the DDDAC1794-NOS with three other DACs:
RPI with Hifiberry and Wolfson (both I²S), RPI + Pro-Ject DAC Box USB, the latter obviously connected with USB.
Apart from that we compared it to a Sony X333ES CD-player and a Dual-704 record player (Shure V15/III cartridge).
Amplifier: Yamaha CX-630 + MX-630, Speakers: Infinity Reference 61 MkII
DDDAC vs Hifiberry: both have similar warmth but then you will notice more detail and compactness with the DDDAC, you can locate the various instruments better.
Both have good spatial sound stage, the DDDAC sounding clearer and more dynamic overall. There is one characteristic of the DDDAC that I would describe like an 'analog fluidity' in comparison, you have to hear it, it is not a spectacular attribute and it depends on the music style of course. You don't need this for Techno or Metal (which I heard a lot).
But I think it's the most important attribute though, and you don't have that with the Hifiberry, nevertheless we were surprised how good the Hifiberry held up.
DDDAC vs Wolfson vs Project: the difference is much more obvious there, both sounding thinner and less compact, we were missing the warmth of the DDDAC and Hifiberry too, also the old 'curtain-pulled-away'-buzzword can be applied here more than with the Hifiberry.
Nevertheless: Wolfson and Project still are good DACs, the criticism is on a high level, I lived with the Project for years without complaint.
When you listen to 192kHz and other higher sampling rates there is only one winner (nevertheless it depends on a good production, if you get a bad one 192kHz won't help as we experienced with the vinyl/digital comparison, as you can read below).
DDDAC vs. Sony X333ES CD: the Sony has a very good and dynamic sound (it's from 1993) but it is lacking definition and detail, it sounds blurry in comparison to the DDDAC.
But again, normally you wouldn't complain.
DDDAC vs. Vinyl: this was the most interesting challenge for sure with the additional difficulty in finding similar or identical productions (on the issue:
http://dr.loudness-war.info/ ).
So here are some examples we compared, ranging from 16bit/44,1kHz to 24bit/192kHz.
1) Fleetwood Mac – Rumours vs 24bit/88,2kHz: digital is ahead, much clearer, more dynamic, vinyl sounds dull in comparison. (I must say the vinyl seems to be worn out and played too often, I got it from a friend).
2) Michael Jackson – Thriller: we had different CDs (16bit/44,1kHz) ripped and played with DDDAC, at first vinyl was ahead, then we found a mastering which beat the vinyl clearly in every department.
3) The Police – Every Breath You Take (Best-of-Compilation): this was rather astonishing....after fixing a problem with the rotation speed of the Dual 704 we listened to the record to see if it's alright. Then we were blown away by the unbelievable sound of this record, very good production obviously (I heard the vinyl for the first time this day).
Later we compared it to 24bit/88,2kHz – vinyl won. About a week later I put it on again and compared it to a different 16bit/44,1kHz mastering....and the DDDAC was ahead, I couldn't believe it, but there it was.
4) DiMeola/McLaughlin/DeLucia-Friday Night in San Francisco, live: we compared it to 176kHz, 88,2kHz, 44,1kHz....vinyl won every time. It feels more alive and vibrant, the digital is sounding a bit dry in comparison, but nevertheless perfect. Hard to explain with words.
5) Boston – Third Stage: This was close....both sounding very good. The DDDAC though has more power, more bass (as always). But also the highs are very clear and sounding similar to vinyl. But interestingly the digital sounds more open and spatial overall.
6) Chris Isaak – Wicked Game (Best-of-Compilation): for a long time this was my favorite record to impress people with, show them the quality of vinyl and Dual 704, I never thought digital could come close. But it does, 16bit/44,1kHz and it sounds better overall, more dynamic, more open, the highs are pretty much identical. Still the record sounds very very good of course.
7) ZZ Top-Eliminator: we compared it to 192kHz....vinyl record also sounding very good, DDDAC sounds better in every department, more powerful, more dynamic, better sound stage.
–-
So in the end the DDDAC beats them all (with one exception- the vinyl-live-concert), but the winner with the best price/value ratio is the RPI+Hifiberry for sure, you can do nothing wrong with this combination (sounding like a salesman
), the costs for our DIY-DDDAC (with DDR-enclosure for 30.- Euros and RPI included) are 450.- Euros approximately, worth every cent of course. If you do less or almost no soldering you can double the costs.
One thing is for sure, if you have no DAC and use your old record player this is no bad solution at all, but of course that's not what you are here for.
We were also surprised of the overall sound quality bearing in mind that the rest of the audio equipment is pretty good but surely no high end.
In the next days we will compare that to a much better equipment as stated above and of course we look forward to that, someone has to do the hard work.
And as you like the DDR-enclosure so much....here are more pics with it's new shiny red painting.
In the beginning everything was grey like the one side (now the front) we left because of the inscription reminding of an old era never to come again.
- 5.jpeg (118.2 KiB) Viewed 13514 times
- 6.jpeg (136.55 KiB) Viewed 13514 times
- 7.jpeg (253.48 KiB) Viewed 13514 times
