Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
All the people who own sizable CD collection could try R-2R DACs like May DAC and/or Denafrips DACs, and use their NOS filters :-) .....
Before doing any listening, I measured the May with my Audio Precision SYS2722 system (see the January 2008 "As We See It"). Apple's USB Prober utility identified the May as "Holo Audio UAC2.0 Gen2 Enhanced" from "Holo Audio." The USB port operated in the optimal isochronous asynchronous mode, and Apple's AudioMIDI utility revealed that, via that input, the May accepted 24-bit integer data sampled at all rates from 44.1kHz to an extraordinary 1536kHz. The AES/EBU and S/PDIF inputs, including Toslink optical, accepted data sampled at rates up to 192kHz.
The May's maximum output level at 1kHz in NOS, OS, and OS/PCM modes was 5.8V from the balanced outputs, 2.9V from the unbalanced outputs. The maximum output levels in OS/DSD mode were half the levels in the other modes, ie, 6dB lower. Both sets of outputs preserved absolute polarity (ie, were noninverting) in all four modes. The balanced output impedance was a low 27.5 ohms at all audio frequencies; the unbalanced output impedance was half that magnitude, as expected.
All the following measurements were taken from the balanced outputs. (I didn't find any differences with the single-ended outputs.) Fig.1 shows the May's impulse response with 44.1kHz data in NOS mode. Ignore the very small amount of symmetrical ringing before and after the single full-scale sample, which is due to the antialiasing filter of Audio Precision's A/D converter operating at a sample rate of 200kHz. This graph indicates perfect time-domain behavior due to the absence of a low-pass reconstruction filter. However, without such a filter, the DAC's output consists of the unsmoothed voltages represented by each digital word. The DAC's sample-and-hold mechanism results in a "stair-step" waveform (fig.2).
In the frequency domain, the absence of a reconstruction filter means that the spectrum of the audioband signal is mirrored on either side of each integer multiple of the original sample rate (footnote 1). This is graphically illustrated in fig.3, which shows the spectra of white noise and a 19.1kHz tone, both sampled at 44.1kHz and plotted up to 100kHz. The mirroring of the baseband spectra results in nulls at 44.1kHz and 88.2kHz, and there is only a gentle ultrasonic rolloff.
Looking at the May's impulse response with 44.1kHz data and the OS, OS/PCM, and OS/DSD modes revealed that these three modes feature an identical reconstruction filter with a minimum-phase character (fig.4), with all the ringing following the single sample at 0dBFS. This filter's ultrasonic rolloff (fig.5, magenta and red traces) reaches full stop-band attenuation at 24kHz with complete suppression of the aliased image at 25kHz of a full-scale tone at 19.1kHz (cyan, blue). The harmonics associated with the 19.1kHz tone all lie below 104dB. The only difference between the OS and OS/PCM modes and OS/DSD mode is that the latter's spectrum has a gently rising noise floor above 55kHz (fig.6).
Fig.7 shows the May's frequency response in NOS mode with data sampled at 44.1, 96, and 192kHz. All three responses start rolling off in the top two audio octaves. With 44.1kHz data (green and gray data), the rolloff reaches 1.5dB at the top of the audioband, but the measured level is adulterated with aliased image energy. The actual rolloff is probably closer to 3dB at 20kHz (see fig.16). The response at the higher sample rates is down by 1dB at 19kHz (96kHz data, cyan and magenta traces) and 22kHz (192kHz data, blue and red traces). The response with 44.1kHz data in OS and OS/PCM modes (fig.8, green and gray traces) is 0.65dB at 20kHz, with then a sharp rolloff. With data at the higher sample rates, the response features a relatively gentle ultrasonic rolloff, but the 192kHz response (blue and red traces) doesn't extend significantly higher in frequency than that with 96kHz data (cyan and magenta traces). Even with 192kHz PCM data, the May's response in OS/DSD mode (fig.9, blue and red traces) rolled off sharply above 20kHz.
Channel separation was superb, at >122dB in both directions below 3kHz, decreasing to a still superb 115dB at 20kHz. An increase in bit depth from 16 to 24, with dithered data representing a 1kHz tone at 90dBFS, dropped the May's noise floor by 38dB (fig.10). This implies a resolution of more than 22 bits, which is the highest I have encountered, even exceeding that of the 21-bit resolution Weiss DAC502 that I reviewed in the August issue, and implying superbly low linearity error. The red trace in fig.11 shows the error in NOS mode as a 24-bit 1kHz tone swept down from 0dBFS to 140dBFS; it is negligible to below 120dBFS. For reference, fig.12 shows the same test result for the Weiss DAC502, which features even lower linearity error.
When I played undithered 16-bit data representing a tone at exactly 90.31dBFS, the HoloAudio's waveform was symmetrical, with negligible DC offset, and the three DC voltage levels described by the data were free from noise (fig.13). With undithered 24-bit data, the May's very low analog noise floor means it can output a perfect sinewave, even at this very low signal level (fig.14).
As implied by the blue and cyan traces in fig.4, the May produced very low levels of harmonic distortion with full-scale data, even into the punishing 600 ohm load (fig.15). The second and third harmonics were the highest in level, but each lay at a negligible 120dB (0.0001%). Intermodulation distortion with an equal mix of 19kHz and 20kHz tones at 6dBFS sampled at 44.1kHz was very low (fig.16), with the difference tone at 1kHz lying at 114dB (0.0002%). This graph was taken in NOS mode, and the aliased images of the two tones at 24.1kHz and 25.1kHz are almost as high in level as the fundamentals. (Note that levels of the latter are closer to 9dB rather than the correct 6dB; see fig.7.) Repeating the test with data sampled at 96kHz (fig.17) moved the aliased products to much higher frequencies but revealed the presence of verylow-level intermodulation products. With 44.1kHz data and OS mode, the aliased images are absent (fig.18), but the noise floor is not as clean as I anticipated.
The HoloAudio processor offered excellent rejection of word-clock jitter. Fig.19 shows the spectrum of the May's output when it was fed high-level 16-bit J-Test data via AES/EBU. All the odd-order harmonics of the undithered low-frequency, LSB-level squarewave lie at the correct levels, and the central spike that represents the high-level tone at one-quarter the sample rate (Fs/4) is narrow. Though a trio of spurious tones is present between 9kHz and 10kHz, these are low in level. These tones were still present when I repeated this test with 24-bit data (fig.20).
In almost every way, the HoloAudio May (Level 3) is the best-measuring D/A processor I have encountered, rivaled only by the Weiss DAC502 and MBL N31.John Atkinson
All the people who own sizable CD collection could try R-2R DACs like May DAC and/or Denafrips DACs, and use their NOS filters :-) .....
JA1 did a comparison between May DAC and Weiss DAC502 ...... JM has MBL N31 player/DAC ...... May be JM could do a follow-up comparison review between May DAC and MBL N31 :-) .......
+ Bricasti Design M21. I am looking for a ladder DAC with volume control. :-)
Bricasti M21 costs $19,000 ...... If you don't mind a pre-amp, you could use a pre-amp like the Parasound JC 2BP which has gain controls (reviewed by Stereophile) ...... May DAC + JC 2BP cost less $10k :-) .......
Thanks Bogolu! For some reason, I thought the M21 was $13K. I am trying to stay away from another component. To be consistent with my current system, it would mean another $3250 for another XLR and power cable. Something to consider though as the M21 is expensive. :-)
You are welcome ...... You could donate that extra $10k to me, since I'm thinking about buying the May DAC + JC 2BP, myself :-) .......
Congratulations! Someone on the audioaficionado site mentioned that the M21 is $8K more than the M3 which is $5K. I need to follow up on the price. If you are correct, I may make the same choices as you. I currently have a A21+ amplifier so that pre-amp would look at home. Why are you going for it versus the LA-4?
I checked the price of M21 DAC on the internet ...... LA4 would be a good choice too ...... JC 2BP has HT bypass (a.k.a processor loop) ........
If you listen to headphones also, HPA4 would also be another good choice :-) .....
And as you remember, I purchased it and LOOOOOVE it. Just food for thought.. lol.
Bogulu, If you want the reference grade Benchmark HPA4 ($3.3k) preamplifier / headphone amplifier, why not also get the reference grade (non-R-2R) Benchmark DAC3 B ($1.8k), and maybe add a (non-Benchmark) WiiM Mini ($0.08k) streamer, and a pair of (also non-Benchmark) Buckeye Purifi 1ET7040SA Monoblock v2 amplifiers ($0.95k per each).
We (Sonore) used the M21 for our demo system at RMAF in 2019. Sonore Signature Rendu SEoptical renderer-M21 DAC-M25 power amp-Vivid Audio Kaya 45 speakers.
The system sounded fantastic both via the R2R section of the M21 for PCM, and especially via the discrete, single bit converter section for DSD.
I would offer a very high recommendation for the M21. The price is actually very, very fair, as the the build quality (inside and out) on the Bricasti DACs needs to be seen to be appreciated. Also consider that the M21 features three separate DACs internally: dual chip SD DAC for DSD and PCM, dual chip R2R DAC for PCM, and a discrete single bit converter for DSD, and made in uSA of course, with outstanding customer service from Bricasti.
After hearing what the M21 could do for DSD input, I purchased its little brother the M3, which has the same discrete single bit converter stage for DSD, and analog volume control as the M21. I convert all formats to DSD 256 in the server, and send that to the M3 for final conversion, and this approach sounds fantastically good here, direct to amp, using the M3's analog volume control.
They are really missing out on % of sales with some that prefer to go direct to power amp and control the volume from the dac.
Love the test report, especially how clean the -90db wave forms are, and low impedance drive capabilities down to 600ohms!! which at 3v-se, 6v-bal out deserves a volume control.
Cheers George
I would love to listen to this DAC both in NOS mode and in NOS mode with upsampling and a filter in SW in my computer- I use Audirvana with an iZotope filter similar to Ayre's "Listen." I would then use Audirvana's volume control in my preamp-less system.
Bill
remind all you preamp-less folks that gain management is one of the most important considerations a recording studio or home audiophile must address. Overall system gain affects signal-to-noise levels, perceived dynamics, and the ability to make subtle (but not too subtle) volume level adjustments.
hr
Both Benchmark LA4 and HPA4 have 256-step volume controls ...... So, gain controls may not be a big issue :-) ......
Yes, the Benchmarks are excellent but how one manages system gain best depends on all the components in the chain, not just on the presence/absence of the preamp.
Kal (preamp-less)
I am talking about an audio system's total gain-matrix which is the gain sum of all active stages. Typically an amplifier has 22-27dB and a line-level preamp has 5-10dB. Most well-managed audiophile systems come in around 30-35dB total. 20dB total is very low. 40dB will scare your pets and make the volume control almost useless.
h
If you (KR) are using the Parasound A31 and A21+ for your 5-channel surround sound system, they come with built-in gain controls ....... That should help .....
I thought you are/were using the Okto dac8 Pro, 8-channel DAC/preamp with volume control for your surround sound system? .......
Both LA4 and HPA4 are 2-channel preamps ...... You have to use 3 of those preamps for your 5-channel surround sound system :-) ........
If you (KR) are using the Parasound A31 and A21+ for your 5-channel surround sound system, they come with built-in gain controls ....... That should help .....
Nope. I have neither of those amps. However, the Benchmark AHB2 are more suitable with its gain selections.
I thought you are/were using the Okto dac8 Pro, 8-channel DAC/preamp with volume control for your surround sound system? .......
Yes but I have other DACs and sources.
Both LA4 and HPA4 are 2-channel preamps ...... You have to use 3 of those preamps for your 5-channel surround sound system :-) ........
I've already done that but it is clunky and inconvenient.
https://www.stereophile.com/content/benchmark-la4-line-preamplifier-multichannel-application
the combo of the LA4 and the AHB2 have almost no equal at the price. 3 settings on the amp and 10db worth of volume level changes on the pre- and the quality of the sound doesn't change one iota at any gain or volume setting choice. Level matching sources is a breeze.
I definitely agree, Mr. Reichert. It is often overlooked, but very important. Optimally any attenuation should be minimized, digital (especially) or analog. Ideally everything should be running close to "wide open" at optimal listening levels.
The analog preamp is interesting these days with many DACs having volume control, analog and/or digital. Both the analog output stage and the digital attenuation scheme in these DACs must be excellent.
There was an era where passive preamps rose to prominence (the 90s?). This brings important considerations in impedance. I used a set of EVS "ultimate attenuators" in that era (two small boxes plugged directly into the amp RCAs with a rotary switch selecting individual resistors). Thankfully it was a headphone system so I was sitting next to them. :)
Later I built a transformer-coupled DAC (GREAT sound) that needed minimal attenuation.
Many reviewers found passive "preamps" lacking, especially in dynamics. JA has always emphasized the importance of active line stages, describing them as the most important link. Many preferred a great active line stage to passive, and several since have noted improvement bypassing DAC volume controls and using external line stages.
Back to gainstaging. I sold off my entire system before going overseas in 2012. I was full-on exotica to that point (tubes, vinyl, stats, etc.). When I returned and build back up I did it slowly and less exotically, leaning toward pro stuff and simplicity. I use an RME ADI-2 at its lowest gain setting into a Benchmark amp at its lowest setting and listening with a total of 0.5 to 6db of attenuation (with the volume control in the RME) when listening. It is pretty cool.
If I could get the gainstaging right, I wouldn't hesitate to use the Holo DAC with a bit of digital attenuation.
Best,
Bill
I can see an ad ....... Want cure for audiophile depression? .... buy D'Agostino Momentum HD preamp ($40k, reviewed by Stereophile :-) .......
Of course, not everyone reading my rave review of this monster preamp will have the spare cash to buy one in the middle of a pandemic. But high-priced gear is reportedly selling well of late. I still consider this baby a "monster" that intensifies colors in a distinctly musical way, increases size and weight of images, and raises a system a major level.
Way back, I tried a friend's passive preamp. I found that it detracted rather than added to the presentation. Not so with many of the active preamps that have come my way for review.
jason
Based on my readings elsewhere, I believe the best way to achieve May's peak performance is to use external DSD conversion/oversampling - like HQPlayer to convert any PCM to DSD 512 - then to feed May in NOS mode.
I wish reviewers would test equipment like the May this way, with HQPlayer (or even just via Roon, which still does pretty well oversampling to DSD 256). The oversampling chip used in the May has been shown in measurements to be pretty poor in performance when compared to HQPlayer, which is not surprising consider the difference in processing power available in a small chip like that, compared to what HQPlayer uses in a computer server to oversample to DSD 256...
Continuing in this vein: again I find lacking that when Stereophile measures DACs which have completely separate conversion paths for DSD and PCM that they do not provide complete measurements for DSD and PCM. I would want to see complete measurement sets for DSD and PCM, and also including spot measurements for oversampling to higher rates in software.
"Overall system gain affects signal-to-noise levels"
Yes and if you don't use all the source has to offer, your just adding more noise from the active preamp gain stage. (really think about it, your shunting the source signal to ground with a active preamp volume control just to make it back up again with it's own gain stage)
Most sources today can output well over 3v, most amps only need .5v to 1.5v in for full wattage output!!
Quote from Nelson Pass:
Nelson Pass,
āWeāve got lots of gain in our electronics. More gain than some of us need or want. At least 10 db more.
Think of it this way: If you are running your volume control down around 9 oāclock, you are actually throwing away signal level so that a subsequent gain stage can make it back up.
Routinely DIYers opt to make themselves a āpassive preampā - just an input selector and a volume control.
What could be better? Hardly any noise or distortion added by these simple passive parts. No feedback, no worrying about what type of capacitors ā just musical perfection.
And yet there are guys out there who donāt care for the result. āIt sucks the life out of the musicā, is a commonly heard refrain (really - Iām being serious here!). Maybe they are reacting psychologically to the need to turn the volume control up compared to an active preamp.ā
Cheers George
You may be interested in reading the article 'Relay-controlled volume' on Benchmark media blog :-) .....
A volume control should, in almost all cases, really be called a signal attenuation control. It is very, very rarely a gain control and, generally, system gain is determined by a number of elements with fixed gain.
One consequence of this is that the more you attenuate the signal the more you reduce the SNR since the noise is fixed). So gain management consists of adjusting and/or selecting a chain of components that will amplify the signal enough to listen to and not much more.
Of course, that is constraining in use so having a variable attenuator somewhere is useful. Where to put it and how to construct it are separate matters.
A preamp like the JC 2BP has both gain controls and volume control ...... Does that work? :-) ......
Recenty reviewed MBL N11 preamp has both unity gain control and volume control ...... Does that work? :-) .......
Without examining either of those, I will say that it is not about a single component. System gain matching involves all the components in a system. Some individual ones make the effort easier.
You (KR) reviewed both the JC 2BP and the A21+ :-) ........
Yeah, you can get them SE or Bal like this one.
https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Finished-Relay-Volume-controller-Balanced-Po...
Cheers George
Are they 256-step volume controls like the Benchmark LA4 and HPA4? :-) ......
read the ad.
I have the SE one somewhere around here with remote and 4 inputs, very well built, same guy.
https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Finished-HIFI-Remote-volume-Controller-128-s...
Cheers George
Why are you not using it? ...... Is it still working? .... Are you sure it is the same Benchmark guy who built it? :-) .......
There's even better, look at my avatar! the only thing that betters it, is source with digital domain volume control direct to amp. (so long as it's not use too low (<75% of full) as to introduce "bit stripping")
Cheers George
The only thing that can better the Lightspeed Attenuator is a preamp which has 1024-step, relay-controlled volume ....... Just kidding :-) .....
Why not try the Parasound JC-5 or the A21+? ....... They both come with built-in gain controls :-) .......
Are they gain controls?
See, my comments above :-) .....
AHB2 has built-in gain control settings ...... Are they gain controls? :-) ......
@John Alexander, would be nice one day to measure, an R2R dac with digital domain volume control to see at what level those dacs start to "bit strip" Wadia and ML have been aware of it since the early days.
As this from Wadia states with final gain stage setting to get the max resolution from using a digital volume. https://ibb.co/vcd8dMP
Cheers George
"Are they gain controls?"
Level/gain Kal, they both control the sources signal voltage going to the amp, one just does it cleaner and is direct coupled without any active components in the signal path, causing added coloration's and distortions, that aren't needed to begin with. As the sources today have all the voltage they need to drive amp to full output and much more these days. Just as Nelson Pass stated above.
Cheers George
So, what does Nelson Pass do with his preamps ...... How does he design them? :-) .......
Makes money, he's not stupid!
Cheers George
'Do what I say, but don't do what I do' :-) ......
You may also be interested in reading JVS' interview with Jugen Reis, designer of MBL N11 preamp ...... In that interview Reis describes his 'unity gain' design principles :-) ......
Like I said, he supplies to the market that want them, and makes money from those preamps, he's not stupid
Cheers George
'If you build them, they will come' ..... especially, if your name is Nelson Pass :-) .......
JA2 could do a follow-up comparison review(s) between Pass Labs XP-22 ($9.5k) and Pasound JC 2BP ($4.5k)) and Benchmark LA4 ($2.6k) :-) .......
As far as I know, Nelson designs the amps, not the preamps.
Interesting Victor, didn't know that, well if right that makes his quote about passive preamps quote look even more legit in what he says.
Nelson Pass:"What could be better? Hardly any noise or distortion added by these simple passive parts. No feedback, no worrying about what type of capacitors ā just musical perfection.really - Iām being serious here!".
But there is a impedance matching proviso with 10k passive preamps as their highest output impedance is around 2.5k.
First "the amp" input impedance has to be more than >33kohm input impedance (most are except for some Class-D's), and "if" it has capacitor input coupling, the cap has to be 5uF or higher or bass roll off will occur.
Second "the source" should have a low output impedance, most solid state ones are. But many tubes ones are not.
Cheers George
So, Pass preamps work well with Pass designed power-amps ....... just like, darTZeel preamp and power-amp combo :-) ........
That kind of a combo could provide a transparent window between the source and the loudspeakers (straight wire with gain) :-) ......
I thought Stereophile had a 5 dealer minimum policy before reviewing a product.
But Holo has no USA dealers and you have to shell out $4,9898.00 sight unheard with NO refunds? Sounds pretty crazy to me.