Gonna cost you 7k though

Yes, 7k for the best and a bit less for other models, both worth their prices with plenty of attention by one of the best in the industry,Ted Smith. There are plenty of KZfaq vids covering their attention to thieir theories and execution. I don't see many companies explaining what they do. They even offer upgraded boards with newer tech for some of their models. So they are still paying attention and helping you not over pay for a whole new DAC whenever possible as the tech. evolves🧐

Employee: how much time can we spend on the output stage? Paul: Yes

@@LuxAudio389 There is, almost always, a way to improve, something. Saying this, how much time & effort, $, are you willing to expend? SACD / DSD, is supposed to sound like, `The master tape.' I've heard - some - excellent consumer products, beginning with high quality reel - to - reel tapes {many were, however disappointing}, through some high quality cassettes & vinyl albums. With 2 lenses - as the McIntosh has - the PS Audio CD Transport should extract a high quality signal, into the high quality DAC. One thing, not mentioned, is that, in addition to the theoretical advantages of these separates, keep in mind: I've purchased both the top, PS Audio CD Transport, AND the DirectStream DAC - no space between `Direct And Stream!' Separating these two words, is very incorrect and, I feel, Naughty! What is not mentioned is: the list prices are about: $6,500 & for the requisite PW DirectStream DAC, no space again, at list $5,999.00 / $6,000, plus recommended, the Network Bridge II, with this las, a total of: $6,899 / $6,900. The list price total is therefore, ultimately, a total of: 6,500 + 6,900 = $13,400.00. You may, or may not! Say, "Ouch!" Did I pay this much? No, because there was a recent, one - third off sale on most of the PS Audio Company Gear, which I took much advantage of! Irresistible! You're smart, figure it out! And, right now, right this moment for a few more days, there is actually a slightly better deal on the PS Audio CD Transport, for just: $3,999. BUY NOW, RIGHT NOW - OR, REGRET! YOU BET!

*DAC of all trades

I've been thinking about this for a while and i didn't find an answer yet?

Well with much worse objective performance.

Truly good fpga based dac is Chord.

Yes

Paul McGowan Thanks ... A lot of work for me now to look for the right DAC... Can't Thank You Enough... Thanks Again

What happened to Paul's response? I don't see it.

When I bought a good sounding system the very knowledgeable salesman explained that a CD player has the “transport” which is the part which reads the CD and then the DAC which converts the digital signal to the analog audio signal. A manufacturer might use the same good quality transport in different CD player models which sell at different price points. Using an external DAC will bypass the often poor DAC inside of a mediocre CD player and use the high quality external DAC instead. So I followed his advice and it sounds great. An additional point is that two different kinds of cords can be used to send the digital signal from the CD player to an external DAC. The first is optical and is called a Toslink which probably won’t sound so good. The digital signal has to be converted from electrical to optic and back to electrical. Every conversion makes the sound a little worse. The other type of output Paul mentioned is called digital out and uses a digital coax cable. This can sound much better because it bypasses the extra conversions which have to be done if the optical output is used instead.

Paul McGowan My laptop is connected to usb sound card which have its own dac and digital spdif output. I'm using SPDIF optical cable to connect sound card with my receiver because I believe my receiver has better dac that my sound card has. Is it possible that digital signal before gets to my receiver is polluted some how because of quality of that sound card ? Thanks

Thank you sir for reply, One day maybe I will afford proper hi-end gear. Now I will look for opportunity to hear PS Audio equipment. Regards

I highly recommend the Schiit Modi DACs. They're cheap and they use a 16V AC power adapter, so the analog stage is very well driven. For $100, you can't beat it. I recommend the Modi 2 Uber or Modi 3, so you also have the Toslink and Coaxial inputs, as well as the USB.

@@sbrazenor2 I still can't decide the Modi 3 vs the Multibit!

@@m.morininvestor9920 depending on the source material, the Modi 3 may be sufficient. I have a Jotunheim multibit and with CD quality it's great, but not dramatically so against my Modi. It's just a bit of dithering mostly. You have to be at significantly higher bitrates, with material that really contrasts the difference for it to matter.

I'm not sure it's so easy to have a "Game Over" in the dac's game. Cheap stuff can sound good... but they don't sound high-end, no way !

@@francois-xaviergonnet7216 I'm going to assume you've never used an SU-8. If you want to spend more then the SMSL VMV-D1 is likely pricey enough to help you feel better. :D

@@ImHavingaCoronary : I've red many time SMSL dacs are good, but I've never red somebody telling his SMSL beat a really good performing dac of the market. From my point of view, I'm not looking for good stuff, I'm looking for better stuff... better than what I already have.

Yes and no. The digital player may be the strongest link, but the digital format itself is the weakest link. Not the player, but the CD. The sampling rate is too low for the highest frequencies - which are too low for audiophile standards. 20K is not the limit of all hearing, it is the limit of the average ear. Which means half of us, especially younger people, can hear beyond 20Khz. But there's absolutely zero beyond 20KHz. There's nothing to restore, nothing to equalize, no way of getting any of it back. Look at TV and video. From NTSC to 6k, how many times have we been able to upgrade our media libraries? (HD, DVD, blueray, 4K, 6k) Now how often have we been able to do the same for our audio library? (um, once - but it's not available for most music). While I admit that almost nothing happens at 20Hz, we're still technically capable of extending the CD below that. I'm not concerned, but some others might want that. But I certainly want digital audio extended to at least 24KHz and possibly up to 28. Second, while digital is certainly capable of excellent dynamic range, everything that has been remastered in the last 20 years has been compressed. The latest stuff to come out has almost no dynamic range to it. Trying to restore the dynamic range heard in the studio requires such extreme processing that it introduces audible distortion. While the hardware may be the most capable part of any system, the media leaves a lot to be desired. And the way the media is engineered these days makes it far worse.

@@jdlech If you can hear above 20 kHz, you are among a very very limited part of the population . Besides , there is practically no meaningfull musical information there with the exception of some very high harmonics that add very little to the experience of the music . Highest notz on an acoustical instrument is 4 Khz : 20 kHz gives you every harmonic up to the fifth , more than enough to distinguish a piano from a piccolo flut

@@gerritgovaerts8443 Then I suppose you don't drive anything but the most cheapest of economy cars because there's "practically no meaningful" option or vehicle to improve the experience of driving? And yes, I *could* hear well past 20KHz. And those upper frequencies provided ambience and spacial information to anything I heard. How would you even know it doesn't if you can't hear past 20KHz? This is like a color blind guy telling me there's nothing of value in the color green. I'm over 50 now and I cannot hear those frequencies anymore. But I still remember what certain songs sounded like when I could. And trust me - what I hear now is mostly flat and uninteresting due to the lack of high frequencies. It's not my stereo, nor my music; it's my hearing. But I am so glad I have fond memories of something I lost, rathan than your "sour grapes" sanctimonious rationalization of something you never had.

@@jdlech Good for you , but totally irrelevant to the great majority of people . The CD standard was laid down and decided upon by input of scientist , engineers and musicians , Von Karajan being both an engineer and conductor (he pushed for the 16 bit Philips proposal vs 14 bit Sony due to the need for dynamic range in calssical music) If those expert. , especially people like Von Karajan , had a need for anything above 22 kHz , they would have said so . The truth is that by the time people reach adulthood , the overwhelming majority has already lost the capacity of hearing 20 kHz . My hearing is now down to 14 kHz and it does not in the least diminish my appreciation of music.

@@gerritgovaerts8443 The standard was established largely in consideration of the technological constraints of the time. In fact, the Sony consortium published a promise that the standard would improve as digital technology improved. A promise, I should add, they never fulfilled. Remember, son, I said I'm over 50. I was there at the time they set those standards. My hearing may be shot, but my memory still serves me well. And I'm sure there are a lot of people under 30 who might take exception to your assumption that they are not people. And once again, I'm glad I have fond memories of something you never had. Your own satisfaction with your poor hearing is not my problem.