Skip to main content
Contributor III
December 30, 2011

Would I benefit from a dedicated DAC?

In my living room, I have a ZP90 connected to an older Sony A/V receiver (STR-DE597) that I bought on Craigslist. Earlier this year I added a pair of Polk TSi400 with a Polk subwoofer that I use for Sonos and my television.

As I've been learning more about digital audio, I keep seeing references to dedicated DAC units as something that will really boost sound quality.

My question is: with the components that I already have, would a DAC like the Peachtree DAC-iT make a difference? My concern is that since my other components are not very high-end, the better sound quality of the DAC would not really come through.

Since this unit is about $500, would that be better spent on some other component, like a new A/V receiver?

And a related question: how would the DAC be wired? Does the output from the Sonos go to the DAC and then the output from the DAC go to the receiver?
    This topic has been closed for further comments. You can use the search bar to find a similar topic, or create a new one by clicking Create Topic at the top of the page.

    74 replies

    March 26, 2017
    By way of PS: as to which of the two is closer to straight wire becomes of interest only if audible differences survive ABX testing. If they do, it isn't a big deal to establish this little detail.
    March 27, 2017
    The internet is a marvellous place. Here is something interesting I found in about 5 minutes on how the Hugo DAC can be taken to the next level of audio nirvana:
    "The HUGO still impresses after more than a year. But it can be bettered. Not by another DAC, but rather, the REGEN USB, a device that block the +/- 5 volts running up and down your USB cable and the noises with it that would otherwise enter your USB input. It replaces that dirty electricity and provides its own highly regulated and CLEAN voltage to the HUGO's input. Additionally, it reclocks the data stream to lower the jitter appreciably. Lastly, it provides a proper impedance by terminating itself right at the input of the HUGO. The improvement is astonishing and together it's almost better than sex. OK, not sex, but better than sushi.
    Anyone who owns a HUGO will thank me forever and at least a day after that."

    People with the Hugo will immediately realise that it will sound even better with clean electricity if they don't know how much they are losing out by not serving it the squeaky clean voltage it deserves. And of course, the jitter needs to be lowered, for it to fully bloom and flower, conferring music with both attack and decay. Not to mention pace and timing.

    On the other hand, people with Connect are also advised to send it immediately for modifications - to its power supply, for reclocking and more. The certain loss of warranty and the probable loss of reliability is a small price to pay - in addition to the modification charges of course, that may exceed the price of the Connect. But if that is what it takes to fully serve those few gifted with golden ears....
    Lyricist III
    March 27, 2017
    Haha. That's pretty funny. I draw the line at such foolery.

    The bigger point I want to make to you is how convenient it must be to label me the creationist first. Haha. You are right, there is no convincing me, because the world I live in is analog, and has a volume knob.

    Thus far, you admit:

    1) It is not only possible, but probable, that a signal can be modified or colored to alter from the original, such that an audible difference exists (Sonos Room Correction, or even Chord equalization)
    2) You admit that speakers, crossovers, and DB levels (aside from room acoustics) are key determinants in the perception of sound quality.
    3) You site that short of clipping, all amplifiers tonally neutralized sound the same (no argument there).
    4) You accuse me and others of erroneously hearing differences in equipment and systems.

    The flaw in your religion is the constant reference to poorly designed experiments of yester year. “No AB proof in blind studies and nobody can tell a difference so you must be wrong.” I’m surprised that someone of your intellect hasn’t challenged the validity of the test or thought of a more valid test procedure. Perhaps a properly designed experiment would test the system at different points in the energy curve, would measure power and voltage at those points, and continue to measure those values in the system at the boundary conditions at the point things start to clip, all the while gathering end user feedback of the users perception of sound quality. I’m quite confident the world doesn’t behave quite so linearly as you expect, especially when you get into the boundary conditions of the amplification and speaker system. Given that DB levels are one of the key determinants in perceived sound quality, how can you ignore a test of such scope? The reason why there is no test of such scope is because the answer is intuitive and proved out every day. Think Grateful Dead Wall of Sound. Differences do exist in this highly analog world we live in with varying energy levels distributed throughout.

    The reality, none of us live in such a tightly controlled and parameterized world you describe. I turn up the volume. You turn up the volume. Speakers are different, crossovers are different, they consume energy differently, and energy is served up differently. The EXPERIENCE is different. If you deny it at this point, then challenge yourself in terms of who is the creationist here. You were quick to label. What a convenient weapon it is. I’m sure you’ve used that argument before, if not regularly.

    So when I go to my friends house and he’s throwing an outdoor party and his Def Tech speakers are powered by a Connect Amp, and its sounding like crap because its encroaching into the performance limits because the party is cooking, but not as much as it could, don’t insult people by telling them they are imagining the difference.
    March 27, 2017

    The bigger point I want to make to you is how convenient it must be to label me the creationist first. Haha.

    Lol. It isn't convenient, it is just so easy, on seeing the usual fancy footwork in your arguments.