Article: My Quest for a New DAC, Part 3 - Denafrips Terminator

[AudioBang]

If the DAC Quest is possibly enroute to a Chord TT2/MScaler which addresses faster transients, it would seem cogent to test what occurs in a NOS setup where Aliasing is removed [OS  input to the DAC]  and ringing is eliminated with the filter removed.

[AudioBang]

BTW, I appreciate Austinpop's observations, time and sharing of his DAC Quest.   The MQA listening observations were  also great data points.

[AudioBang]

If the DAC Quest is possibly enroute to a Chord TT2/MScaler which addresses faster transients, it would seem cogent to test what occurs in a NOS setup where Aliasing is removed [OS  input to the DAC]  and ringing is eliminated with the filter removed.

 

BTW, I appreciate the observations, time and sharing of Austinpop's DAC Quest.   The MQA listening observation was a meaningful data point and appears congruent with the subtle observation described below [not a real "WOW" delivered as Jim Collins, author of "From Good to Great", articulated] - 

 

 

From Stereophile Chord Dave Review by John Atkinson -

"

"I rechecked the MQA Passthrough button, to send the 24/44.1 MQA stream to the Meridian to let it perform all the MQA unfolding. Its display read "352k," and I set the playback level to be the same as with the DAVE. Superficially, the sound with the Ultra DAC was identical to that with the DAVE: same pianist, same piano, same hall. But after a while, I became just a little bit more aware of how the harmonic envelope of a note changed as it died; the pianist's touch on the keys was just a little more developed with the Meridian fully decoding the MQA data. Yes, this was a subtle difference, but not an unimportant one in the context of DACs costing five figures."

[austinpop]

17 hours ago, AudioBang said:

If the DAC Quest is possibly enroute to a Chord TT2/MScaler which addresses faster transients, it would seem cogent to test what occurs in a NOS setup where Aliasing is removed [OS  input to the DAC]  and ringing is eliminated with the filter removed.

 

Thanks for the suggestion. The Chord MScaler/TT2 combo is certainly on my shortlist, but it all depends on whether (and when) Chord can make review/evaluation units available.

 

I'm not so sure about the comparison you propose. Like it or not, a DAC is so much more than "just" its filtering and D/A conversion strategy. Indeed, if my quest has taught me anything, it's that modern DACs today live and die by how well they get the good old-fashioned basics right:

1. analog output stage design
2. power supply design
3. clock architecture
4. parts quality, board layout, and quality of internal connectors
5. design or choice of chipsets used for interfaces like USB, ethernet
6. isolation strategy - both at input, as well as internally
7. Oh and also - filtering and D/A conversion strategy

Comparing #7 while varying 1-6 is like comparing two icebergs only based on what's showing above the water line.

[AudioBang]

Agreed and understood.

[bmichels]

Great review indeed, that reasure me on my purchase of my terminator.  I use it with an Aurender W20.

I use USB now, like you, but I wonder if Coax or AES/EBU will not be better. Many reported AES sound better with Aurender/Terminator

 

--> Did you noticed a difference between AES and USB with the Terminator ?   Does AES still allow DSD natif to the Terminator, like USB does ? 

 

thanks a lot for your answer

[austinpop]

5 hours ago, bmichels said:

Great review indeed, that reasure me on my purchase of my terminator.  I use it with an Aurender W20.

I use USB now, like you, but I wonder if Coax or AES/EBU will not be better. Many reported AES sound better with Aurender/Terminator

 

--> Did you noticed a difference between AES and USB with the Terminator ?   Does AES still allow DSD natif to the Terminator, like USB does ? 

 

thanks a lot for your answer

 

Thanks.

 

Unfortunately, there is no single answer regarding which input is best. In my experience, much depends on the quality of what is upstream of the DAC, especially in terms of the clocks. I did test with AES in my friend's system - which he has optimized for AES - via a chain comprising a Zenith SE music server, the SOtM tX-USBultra, then the SOtM dX-USB HD Ultra to the DAC. It sounded very good in this configuration as I described in the comparison with the Schiit Yggy section of the article. 

 

My system is highly tuned for USB, so that is what I am focusing on in this series. Also, while this may be atypical, I do have a growing collection of content in DXD (24/384) and DSD128 in my library, so I cannot live with AES's 24/192 limitation. 

 

Based on the Terminator's specs, it will accept DSD64 (1x) on the AES inputs.

[bmichels]

thanks for the answer.

[matthias]

@austinpop

thank you for a very good review!

If I understand correctly, you listened to headphones only, not to loudspeakers?

 

Matt

[austinpop]

4 minutes ago, matthias said:

@austinpop

thank you for a very good review!

If I understand correctly, you listened to headphones only, not to loudspeakers?

 

Matt

 

I listened to both. My primary system is headphones, but see this section - Comparison with the Schiit Yggdrasil - where I listened on speakers.

[Shadorne]

On 9/14/2018 at 10:32 AM, austinpop said:

 

Hi Archimago,

 

Thanks for raising this fascinating point. Yes, I agree this is a chicken and egg question. What's in the recording - inherently - vs. what is distortion? I have no expertise to make absolute statements here! Some observations, though:

1. It would certainly be fun to crowdsource here on CA a list of songs that both 
   • exhibit sibilance to some degree, and
   • for which sibilance has been found to improve with system improvements
2. Then for this list, we need some impeccable source who can represent the actual recording/artist, and make a clarification of "intent." Was that "distortion" intentional, or an artifact of the recording?
3. The above sounds pretty daunting, but perhaps possible.

Of course, let's also step back and reiterate that

1. sibilance is only one in many forms of distortion, and
2. improvements in sibilance (or more generally, distortion) are not just DAC-specific, but system-wide.

If this is a subject of interest (and it certainly is for me), it probably deserved a thread of its own.

 

Sibilance is natural from close microphone on a vocalist. Studios use hardware and software de-essers to remove it. A DAC with jitter issues will tend to have digital glare. A DAC that does not compensate for inter-sample overs may also have digital glare. Excessive sibilance doesn’t sound bad although it can be distracting. Digital glare does sound bad.

 

Frankly, you are primarily a classical listener and have chosen headphones that are artificially boosted in the 5 to 8 KHz region (lots of sibilance ends up in that region). Sibilance is rare in classical music - possibly in some opera music - and the boost in that region will certainly give you great articulation in classical - plucked strings etc. I think your choice of a DAC is going to be heavily influenced by your choice of headphones and the synergy. I think a darker less bright DAC with slightly rolled off highs may work best - perhaps this is actually what Denafrips Terminator brings to the table - better synergy with your headphone choices?

[matthias]

I never listen to headphones und it is impossible for me to validate reviews which are primarily based on headphone listening.

 

Matt

[matthias]

@Shadorne

 

I like the statement in your signature:-)

+1

 

Matt

 

[Reggy]

On 9/28/2018 at 11:45 AM, austinpop said:

 

His Yggy unit did not have the new Gen 5 USB stage, nor the new Analog 2 upgrade, but right after our session, it got sent off to Schiit for the upgrades. Hopefully in a few weeks, I'll be able to revisit this comparison with the upgraded Yggdrasil.

Any comparisons to the new Yggy Gen 5 USB stage Analog 2 upgrade? Thanks, I'm really interested to hear this.

[Reggy]

 

On 10/9/2018 at 5:06 PM, austinpop said:

 

I listened to both. My primary system is headphones, but see this section - Comparison with the Schiit Yggdrasil - where I listened on speakers.

Did you manage to get your self on the new Yggy Gen 5 USB to do a fair comparison?

[austinpop]

23 minutes ago, Reggy said:

 

Did you manage to get your self on the new Yggy Gen 5 USB to do a fair comparison?

 

If you notice in my review, the comparison of the Terminator and the Yggy was done over the AES/EBU inputs, not the USB inputs. My friend who owns the Yggy found in his own tests that he preferred the SQ of the Yggy over the AES interface.

 

He did get himself the A2 upgrade, not the Gen 5 upgrade, since he does not use the USB input. We had a small window to redo our comparison before I had to send the Terminator review unit back.

 

To cut to the chase, while the Yggy A2 upgrade was a nice step up in sound quality, it still did not close the gap with the Terminator.

 

I can't speak to the Gen 5, since I do not have access to it.

[Reggy]

On 12/16/2018 at 7:41 PM, austinpop said:

 

If you notice in my review, the comparison of the Terminator and the Yggy was done over the AES/EBU inputs, not the USB inputs. My friend who owns the Yggy found in his own tests that he preferred the SQ of the Yggy over the AES interface.

 

He did get himself the A2 upgrade, not the Gen 5 upgrade, since he does not use the USB input. We had a small window to redo our comparison before I had to send the Terminator review unit back.

 

To cut to the chase, while the Yggy A2 upgrade was a nice step up in sound quality, it still did not close the gap with the Terminator.

 

I can't speak to the Gen 5, since I do not have access to it.

Ok thanks. I didn't realize the USB input was the second part of the upgrade. I'm not sure which one people have been lately raved about.

[exdmd]

purr1n over at SBAF finally got around to reviewing the Denafrips Terminator if you are interested in a contrarian opinion.