Deadneddz Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 The AKM 32bit Dac is interesting to me as I commonly see people refering to it as a wonderful sounding Dac. Also to add that it seems to be found in a couple very high end sources such as the APL NWO 3.0 GO and Esoteric D-05 Dac. I myself have auditioned the APL NWO 3.0 and I do realize that it has something insane like twenty 32bit converters in each channel, but I cannot forget that smooth yet detailed sound I enjoyed so much. This is why I want to audition the D-05 and APL Denon 3910.(with the AKM dac) I have a couple questions about sources that would help clarify my understanding. First, im sure that its not just the dac in a source that determines the sound quality but other factors such as transport, output stage ect. But what are main factors in what makes a high quality source? Second, take this dac for example:Cary Audio Xciter DAC - Head-Fi: Covering Headphones, Earphones and Portable Audio It seems to incorporate the AKM Dac, but would this be a viable option for me to audition since I have interest in this Dac chip? Im looking for sources that have the AKM Dac to audition because im intrigued with the sound of it and would also like more information and general knowledge about this dac and sources in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icarium Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 How it does I/V, analog output stage and to some extent digital filter and how it handles input/jitter. Then the usual stuff like parts/grounding. The NWO 3.0 GO is in the end not the best thing I've ever heard and the AKM chip isn't really all that great. If I wanted to check out something with 32 bits the ESS Sabre 32 chip has much better specs, but either way as has been noted in most other threads 32 bits is next to pointless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penger Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Doesn't the Slimdevices Transporter also have the AKM chip in it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sacd lover Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Everyone keeps saying how good the Buffalo chip is. But, in the end I think the Buffalo is the dac I like the least of the multiple dacs I have right now. Maybe the Buffalo output stage is the problem and the dac chip is ok. I have my Buffalo off getting a new output stage so at some point I will see. However, these wonderful dac specs plus the TPA IVY arent translating into anything special sound quality-wise to my ears. From my perspective the output stage seems to make far more difference that the dac chip. I havent heard any dac or player, regardless of the dac chip, sound anything less than excellent with a zap filter output stage. Bottom line .... even the older 20 bit PCM63s plus whatever discrete output stage is in my Monarchy 33 and 22C dacs crushes the Buffalo/ IVY. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 LOL @ "Buffalo chip". And: yay for zap filters! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morphsci Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Everyone keeps saying how good the Buffalo chip is. .... Different beast .... ES9018 not ES9008 chip. But no one has heard it yet, just talking specs and pixie dust right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grahame Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Doesn't the Slimdevices Transporter also have the AKM chip in it? It uses the AK4396 DAC as you can see, here ws photo galleries- powered by SmugMug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icarium Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Doesn't the Slimdevices Transporter also have the AKM chip in it? Yup and the EMU 0404 usb uses the AKM4396 as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manaox2 Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 LOL @ "Buffalo chip". And: yay for zap filters! I happen to have both... don't think anyone has tried it yet that I've heard of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naamanf Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 From my perspective the output stage seems to make far more difference that the dac chip. I havent heard any dac or player, regardless of the dac chip, sound anything less than excellent with a zap filter output stage. Bottom line .... even the older 20 bit PCM63s plus whatever discrete output stage is in my Monarchy 33 and 22C dacs crushes the Buffalo/ IVY. Just goes to show different strokes for different folks. I didn't like the Zap filter with the TPA Opus compared to it running with a output stage or to the BALSIE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manaox2 Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Just goes to show different strokes for different folks. I didn't like the Zap filter with the TPA Opus compared to it running with a output stage or to the BALSIE. Really? I've never heard that. All I read is that the Balse didn't compare... I was planning on keeping the Zapfilter with the OPUS. I have a Balse too with no real plans for it currently. Looks like I have testing to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asr Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 And to a lesser extent, a good power supply also contributes to a high-end source - the toroidal transformer, filtration, regulation, etc. So it's the whole system of parts & sections that makes a good high-end source, not just the DAC, analog output stage, master clock, et al. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Filburt Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 AK4399 is a voltage output chip using the usual SCF output, buffer, so forth and the standard schematic employing a capacitor to block DC prior to the analog LPF. In other words, nothing new in that respect. They specify -105dB @ 1KHz on 20KHz BW, but don't provide an FFT, a 20-20KHz sweep, or even THD20. So, not exactly a particularly informative figure, and this isn't a competitor, IMO, for the Sabre32. The NatSemi parts are alright; I know some people really dig them. I prefer ADI's AD797. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanY Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 In other words, nothing new in that respect. They specify -105dB @ 1KHz on 20KHz BW, but don't provide an FFT, a 20-20KHz sweep, or even THD20. So, not exactly a particularly informative figure, and this isn't a competitor, IMO, for the Sabre32. To be fair, the Sabre32 datasheet/documentation isn't all that informative either. Slightly better than the AK4399 though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spritzer Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Like others have said, the DAC chip is only a small part of the puzzle. With the APL players, the choice of output tubes/transformers probably had a bigger impact on the over all sound then the chips. I for one didn't buy an APL player due to the 32bit crap but rather the features. There aren't many players that will play all the audio formats, have a built in volume control and a digital input. I must say I liked the ECC99 tube too since even the premium version is dirt cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tachikoma Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 Everyone keeps saying how good the Buffalo chip is. But, in the end I think the Buffalo is the dac I like the least of the multiple dacs I have right now. Maybe the Buffalo output stage is the problem and the dac chip is ok. I have my Buffalo off getting a new output stage so at some point I will see. However, these wonderful dac specs plus the TPA IVY arent translating into anything special sound quality-wise to my ears. From my perspective the output stage seems to make far more difference that the dac chip. I havent heard any dac or player, regardless of the dac chip, sound anything less than excellent with a zap filter output stage. Bottom line .... even the older 20 bit PCM63s plus whatever discrete output stage is in my Monarchy 33 and 22C dacs crushes the Buffalo/ IVY. You could try the Sabre DAC (perhaps in voltage mode) with the Zapfilter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manaox2 Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 You could try the Sabre DAC (perhaps in voltage mode) with the Zapfilter. Why not current? I thought the Buffalo was a current output DAC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tachikoma Posted April 21, 2009 Report Share Posted April 21, 2009 I'm guessing that the Zapfilter works better as a current buffer for V-out DACs rather than an I/V converter for I-out DACs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.