NOS verses Oversampling ? Choosing a Dac

[don]

Gidday all after introducing my self I now wish to post my first question to you guys! I need to make a choice about purchacing my first dac to play PC based music. My budget is about $400 Australian. After much research i have come down to 2 choices in NOS

Both NOS Dacs, which are known for there analogue type easy listening tones, use the Philips TDA1543 Dac chips( 8 chips in parrallel). They do not utilize opamps.

Valab NOS DAC (2009 Version)

Gigalab NOS USB DAC TDA1543 1ppm TCXO +Re-clock Circuit

Beresford 7520 built by Stan is my choice for a Oversampling DAC after reading excelent reviews on this forum and others.

I have no experience with DACS so any advice on these Dacs or opinions on NOS verses Oversampling would be much appreciated.
Don

[DSJR]

Greetings!

I don't know the two DAC's you mention and can only speak from positive reviews here and elsewhere on the Beresford. So why bother posting? Well, all I can say is that the more complex you make something, the more room for errors IMO.

The other point I'd like to make is that DAC chips these days aren't very expensive and, if implemented well, don't perform too differently IMO, many Top End designers adding a flavour to suit their tastes (and very expensive casework too).

I suppose my recommendation would be for the Beresford. Try this for a while and then try the others to see what you think.

I'd be interesting to read what others have to say...

[StanleyB]

My budget is about $400 Australian.

At AUD265 odd for the TC-7520 AoS Export, that leaves you quite a bit of beer change.

[NRG]

I've not heard the 1543 but my experience of the 1541A in NOS mode is of a very lucid and detailed midrange, great bass and an ever so slightly rolled off treble. Given a good implementation, which is very key to getting the best out of these chips as Leo will tell you, they are capable of a very captivating and engage performance much more so than the Burr Brown and Wolfsen DAC's which sound a bit too incisive, bright and lean in comparison.

Trouble is you are asking for a recommendation but only you really know what is best suited to you and your choice in music, I would say the Ebay DAC's are a bit more of a risk / lottery sound quality and reliability wise unless you are prepared and capable of driving a soldering iron to fix things if you find out you've bought a bad one.

Modern DAC's can and do sound similar mainly IMHO due to datasheet engineering that results in similar layouts and component use. The 154x DAC's can sound very different amongst similar DAC's (layout, PSU etc) and certainly sound different to the Burr Brown etc. DAC's. I prefer the 1541A sound but that's not to say it would suit you.....tricky choice...

[ReachtheSky]

Hi Don. I can’t help you with your NOS choices, but I can reaffirm all the good things that have been said about Stan and his 7520. It’s a great product at a great price (with suitable opamp upgrades - only A$10 to A$20 each). It is a top DAC, headamp and digital preamp for power amps all in one box. IMO I don’t think there is a product to compete with it in this price range. And Stan is very accommodating to deal with and provides prompt delivery to Australia. (However your listening tastes may prefer the easy laid back TDA154x analogue sound!)

[StanleyB]

dac to play PC based music.

Both the TC-7510 and TC-7520 were developed to get the best from musc files and streamed audio. It's a gap that I detected in the DAC market some years ago. In the main, most DACs out there appear to be aimed at the CD and DVD market, where the player is used as a transport and the D to A decoding is done by the external DAC.
From my experience, the NOS DAC chips are squarely aimed at CD audio. But that is not surprising since they were designed to decode CD audio in the first place. High resolution PC audio files did not exist in the days when NOS chips sets were developed. To get an idea of what I mean, play back a low resolution mp3 file through a TDA1541 and through an oversampling DAC chip and compared the two in a listening test. The main thing that sticks out is that the OS chip sounds far more like the original uncompressed audio sound. The NOS chip just doesn't sound anywhere as detailed and shows up the imperfections in the mp3 file far more. That disrupts the listening pleasure.

STan

[StanleyB]

Modern DAC's can and do sound similar mainly IMHO due to datasheet engineering that results in similar layouts and component use.

Really? The facts do not support your assertions. There are current and voltage chips out there. There are also different types of DAC chips format as well. You have single bit, 8x, 64x, etc oversampling. Some chips have inbuilt filters of different kinds. Output levels varies. Some chips need 1, whilst others need two supplies. Some have an inbuilt clock, whilst others need an external clock.
All of the above affects the sound of each chip and design of the DAC circuitry. It is far removed from your suggestion that they follow similar layouts and component use.

Stan

[Marco]

I've not heard the 1543 but my experience of the 1541A in NOS mode is of a very lucid and detailed midrange, great bass and an ever so slightly rolled off treble. Given a good implementation, which is very key to getting the best out of these chips as Leo will tell you, they are capable of a very captivating and engage performance much more so than the Burr Brown and Wolfsen DAC's which sound a bit too incisive, bright and lean in comparison.

I don't normally participate much in this area of the forum, but I think this requires some comment.

Neal, I fully concur with most of the above, as that's exactly how my DAS-R1 sounds, apart though from the "ever so slightly rolled off treble". I have found no evidence of this myself when the 1541A has been optimally implemented and used in the right system. There of course could be a multitude of variables responsible for why this is what you've experienced, and none of them necessarily related to the chip itself.

I've compared Burr Brown and Wolfson-based DACs head-to-head in my system with the DAS-R1, and the former sound exactly as you describe. However, as far as treble goes, I would describe it as the former having a sonic signature which unnaturally over-emphasises the upper frequencies, or perhaps rather that their leaner nature in the bass draws more attention to the treble, therefore making one feel that it is over-emphasised.

The DAS-R1 (using 1541s) has no such treble over-emphasis: it is simply more 'natural' sounding in that area, rather like vinyl in that respect, and/or perhaps as above, it also has excellent bass which gives music proper 'foundation', thus not drawing one's attention to the upper frequencies and laying them bare for 'forensic inspection', in the way of BB or Wolfson-based DACs (although these can of course be successfully implemented so that the effect is minimised and the overall result is very musical sounding).

Choose whatever explanation you think best fits the truth, but there is no evidence in my (extensive) listening experience which suggests that the 1541A has an "ever so slightly rolled off treble", *providing* that it has been implemented optimally, and by "optimally" I mean something at least of the calibre of my Audiocom-modified DAS-R1, which no doubt your own designs, and those of Leo's, for example, ably emulate.

If you're hearing an "ever so slightly rolled off treble" with a 1541A, then IMHO something else in your system is responsible, restricting or influencing the signal in some way, which could be set-up related (cables, stands, mains - your room - goodness knows what!), 'cos it ain't happening chez-moi

Marco.

[StanleyB]

The 'rolled off treble' has absolutely nothing to do with the TDA1541. The roll off comes from the anti aliasing filter network that bolts on to the audio output of the TDA1541.

[Marco]

................ *if* indeed you hear this "rolled off treble" in the first place!

Marco.