Will an $800 DAC make my music sound better

>>105606025 (OP)
no

>>105606025 (OP)
it'll make your fake gender feel more real

not expensive enough

>>105606031
why do they sell them then??????

>>105606025 (OP)
Schiit is scam. All you need is $160 S.M.S.L DL200

>>105606065
take advantage of niche situations and/or buffoons who trust audiophiles

>>105606125
If Jason Stoddard were to read this thread, what would be his honest response?

>>105606031
fpbp
/thread

>>105606025 (OP)
No, you need to spend at least $2000

>>105606065
same reason why they sell golden usb cables

>>105606074
SMSL is a scam. All you need is a $10 Apple USB-C dongle and maybe an amp if you have very low sensitivity headphones.

>>105606025 (OP)
>Will an $800 DAC make my music sound better
probably not. i hear stuff mixed on million dollars worth of gear and it still sounds like trash. if you have no talent at mixing and producing then no amount of money or dacs will save you. they are pretty good for recording things.

>>105606025 (OP)
It will make you think it sounds better. Does anything else really matter?

>>105606025 (OP)

if you listen to troon shit or nigger slop shit, no amount of hardware will ever make it sound good.

>>105606025 (OP)
audio has been solved for a while now. it's mostly about status/design/craftsmanship these days. and mental disease

lol
lmao even

>>105606025 (OP)
No, but it will make you feel better about the sound of your music.

>>105607510
spreadsheet please so I can search easily

>>105606025 (OP)
had lots of DACs , both consumer and pro audio.
Currently use £200 SMSL from Amazon. which replaced a £2000 Prism Sound. Can't tell the difference in audio quality, but the SMSL has a remote.

The most important feature in a DAC for me these days is the ability to easily switch inputs. I need to juggle audio inputs for 2-3 machines at a time, so I'd pay extra for that.

>>105607510
ASR are the biggest bunch of lying fucks on the internet. I cannot take anything they say seriously.

>>105606025 (OP)
if you don't pair them with $20k speaker cables and 100k speakers, minimum, you wont hear the difference

>>105607510
many of those things are using the same/similar chips. no wonder the drop off is very slight until the bottom of the autism chart.

>>105606025 (OP)
No because you have high frequency hearing loss from years of headphone use, and can no longer tell the difference.

>>105608345
>if you don't pair them with $20k speaker cables and 100k speakers, minimum, you wont hear the difference
you could plug any modern dac into a setup like that and not hear the difference. those that believe they can hear a difference have huffed way too many of their own farts.

>>105606025 (OP)
by better do you mean hearing the mistakes that went into the production of the track(s)?

DACs were perfected both economically and technically like 20 years ago kek wtf why is this so expensive?

>>105606025 (OP)
What do you think it's going to be doing to your digital music that isn't already happening to it during playback?

>>105606025 (OP)
Get a topping e70 instead. You're not going to get a sound improvement past $100, but you do get more features.

>>105606025 (OP)
It might, if you currently use a device with an extremely old or low quality DAC chip.
The real question is whether a $800 DAC will make your music sound better than a $10 Apple dongle or similar.

>>105606025 (OP)
it has three trademarks, so it's gotta be at least a $100 DAC with $700 worth of bullshit marketing added on top of it, right?

>>105609184
They are truly a solved problem, you can only go in two directions from this point:
The $1000 DAC with a bunch of superflous engineering. It's only purpose to beat others by the tiniest margin on the most precise audio analyzing equipment.
The $10000 artisan DAC featuring a bunch of outdated components that measures like dogshit compared to a $10 dongle. But audiophiles will die on a hill defending it.

Yes, as long as you think it does.

>>105606025 (OP)
even if it did sound better (it doesn't), you'd be better off changing the way you hear music in the first place. Prefer listening to what the musician has to say via their performance or songwriting vs the quality of the production on a track. If you want the best audio quality experience, then go see a live performance that's acoustic from an actually talented musician. Plenty of colleges have free classical performances from students and visiting musicians.

>>105608389
>those that believe they can hear a difference have huffed way too many of their own farts. Poorfag cope. Same people who can only afford $10 wine or a hyundai say they are the pinnacle of alcohol and driving.

That said, Chifi chip DACs under $800 all sound the same.

>>105607510
>112
Pretty diminishing returns above what I have. Safe to say I won't be upgrading.

>>105606035
>Schiit has JUST been declared a tranny brand
Holy shit, I am throwing out my stack now, thank you for the heads-up kind sir!

>>105609799
i never followed audiophaggot stuff closely until i watched Mend it Mark repair a $35k pre-amplifier. it's hilarious how it costs as much as a car yet is all nigger rigged together like one of my autistic hobby projects. never mind that it's just retardedly overdesigned in the most wasteful and pointless way.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOuetLQgM4w

>>105606025 (OP)
No but one in general will. No one needs to spend that much.

>>105607005
>>105606035
>hey guys here's a question about hardware
>TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY TRANNIES TRANNIES EVERYWHERE
Why are you bots allowed to post?

>>105610852
It is a tranny brand
all they use to do is trap people for years with horribly made products that would constantly break due to qc issues and then they refused to warranty them. They are popular because they are silver garbage for ikeacels who only buy things for aesthetics

>>105606065
Because retarded audiophiles pay for it

>>105610625
> " Poorfag cope"
> mentally destroyed by facts
your mental breakdown is just embarrassing. nobody here has any of that gear, and we're most certain you've only got a $100 soundbar from amazon. please stay out of conversations had by straight white men that know how DACs and basic electronics works. you seem like the kind of drooling retard that would use a hdmi cable from a computer to digital amp and claim you can hear a difference if you used gold plated hdmi cable instead.

You don't need expensive dac, get an expensive amp instead. 3x cost of dac

>>105612480
pretty much anon. i have seen some fuck knuckles talking wild shit about type of dac and they got digital connection between dac and amp, rendering all their arguments completely useless. audiophiles really don't understand just how retarded they are. they live in facebook groups and forums where they all celebrate their severe mental disabilities and visit audiophile websites created by the very same mentally challenged people.

Just get a FiiO thing. Cheap and effective. Avoid these gay brands.

>>105610732
You can't hear the difference between anything over about 95-100 anyway, even with well calibrated ears.

>>105606025 (OP)
The improvement is so marginal i cannot in good faith recommend an 800 dollar dac to anyone.

I would recommend a dac for sure, but ideally get one in between 100-200 dollars.

Anything over that and youre overspending.

>>105612441
>your mental breakdown
>you've only got a $100 soundbar from amazon.
>you seem like the kind of drooling retard
>claim you can hear a difference if you used gold plated hdmi cable instead
a lotta nonsensical assumptions and weird aspie outrage
Smells like poorfag cope

>please stay out of conversations had by straight white men that know how DACs and basic electronics works.
And reddit/ASR isn't full of ethnic poors who cope with low-fi iem chink setups and post like they know shit all. idgaf about 70yo boomers with $100K elephant penis speaker cables.

What's the point of dacs
Just plug the goddamn headphones into the computer, why a middleman

>>105612061
At least it’s not chinkshit. But yes sir, I’ll comply with the anti-woke movement sir. Anything for the movement sir.

>>105606035
>nobody:
>poltard: TRANNIES

>>105613708
> the mental breakdown is this severe
really is this easy for anons to uncover tech illiterate chimps that have no idea how anything works.

>>105606025 (OP)
No, but it'll make you claim it did online to cope with buyer's remorse

>>105608328
How so?

>>105606025 (OP)
i love the ibasso dc elite but it is low power, so use balanced on easy to drive headphones

>>105613909
output impedance on mobo audio is horribly high.
this means you get an enormous amount of muddy bass

>>105607510
I have a Topping DX3 Pro+ ("Excellent 117") and a Topping DX1 (unlisted unless I missed it).
They sound EXACTLY the same and my desktop motherboard sounds the same as well.

My €2300 laptop does sound like shit, don't know what's up with that.

>>105614344
This explains why my Sennheiser 598 always sound very different coming from my desktop mobo VS any standalone, external kind of audio setup

>>105613909
I like having a volume knob and a headphone jack on my desk.
My PC lives on the floor so it's a bit awkward to plug into.

I also use a bluetooth DAC with my TV so I don't have to lay a long cable across my floor.

>>105614344
do audiophiles really

>>105613909
So my kilobuck headphones don't sound like absolute shit. like if you were to pair an rtx 5080 with an i5 7500.

>>105614459
its a proven, measurable and audible thing you chucklefuck

>>105606025 (OP)
yes but it only works with 64kbps mp3s

>>105614459
Nigga, it's just physics. But not all headphones are affected, only headphones with non-flat impedance. Manufacturers only provide a single number so you'll have to look it up online. Or buy a $20 dongle with <1 Ohm output impedance and never worry about this shit again.

>>105610732
>>105612927
SINAD is a useless number, distortion and noise shouldn't be combined. For IEMs and sensitive headphones you only check noise at 50mV, for insensitive headphones you only check max power. You are not going to hear less than 60dB distortion because your own headphones distort more than that.

>>105608345
The other way around.

>Don't trust your taste. That meal doesn't taste good according to measurements
>Don't trust your sight. That picture is unattractive according to measurements
>Don't trust your smell. That piece of dogshit is highly rated according to measurements
>Don't trust your touch. That cock is not lubed enough according to measurements

Why are ASRetards and redditfags like this? Is is because you're a poor ethnicel or an autistic retard who can't into sounds? I suggest you also get butthurt at any hobby that requires more than $200 investment in chink equipment.

it will, but only if you listen to it on $6000 bluetooth headphones

>>105606025 (OP)
For anyone who wants a not retarded answer, the price in dacs is due to increased feature sets. More ports, remote, configuration options, input/output switching, etc. In terms of "sound quality" dacs have always mattered the least and have also been a completely solved game the last 20-30 years. There is no reason to own a dac over 100 dollars unless you want some specific feature.

why don't audiophools just buy a low loss audio transformer and stick that on the built in system dac if they insist on 10 lb alien headphones that sound identical to $20 earphones?

>>105614686
The sooner you realize your senses ARE shit the sooner you'll get a setup you actually like, instead of a setup you think you like. We all know optical illusions, you think hearing is any better? A $1000 DAC most likely won't make your setup any better, a $1000 speaker very well might make it better, pick your battles.

>>105607510
Seeing stank ass LG smartphones on that list gave me a nice chuckle. Wish they had some of the older ones on the list

>>105608328
explain how objective measurements can be lies

>>105606025 (OP)
No, in fact you will likely not hear any difference at all. Audio DACs for human hearing are mostly a solved problem and as long as you don't buy something extremely shitty and get anything remotely decent it will sound just the same. Most likely the only difference you could possibly hear is output level, some will be quieter and some will be louder.

>>105615740
No. Human hearing is bullshit. You'll hear a difference even if absolutely nothing has changed. It's one of the first things you must learn when navigating the audio space.

>>105614156
>But yes sir, I’ll comply with the anti-woke movement sir. Anything for the movement sir.
I don't know what your talking about
i simply stated that schiit is a garbage company and why they are, I called them a tranny brand as a joke. Regardless, audio is so filled with horrible unethical companies that make literal garbage and refuse to honor warranties that I can't even recommend you something better than schiit, still worth noting they are total kikes who make shit for ikeacels

>>105606025 (OP)
>hedonic adaptation copium
anon you need LESS not more!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4ZOE5pAdCI

>>105615722
match fixing, book cooking, or more often than either. measuring statistics that dont matter

>>105618161
What matters more for a DAC measured stats like output level, noise, distortion, and frequency response?
We are doing digital audio in which everything IS quanta. What part of the output signal is not quantifiable?

>>105618216
i listen to lo fi (the sound quality) so i don't care, I am just telling you that its very easy to lie about "objective" measurements such that theres multiple industries built around it
verification not etc

>>105606025 (OP)
The ones who make music use a 100-200 euro focusrite so no lol.

>>105618304
Sure. Even within audio you have companies making misleading specifications and outright lying. Nobody is going to start a class action against GRS because their 12" woofer has an fs of 26hz and not 22hz. Within the context of shitting on audiosciencereview, you're talking about third-party measurements done by hobbyists as a public service, which actually contains useful information. I have seen bad takes and errata in some posts and some users posting stupid stuff, but overall I would say they're a good influence for consumers and for companies to compete on making better, more affordable products.
The idea of someone having actual resentment for these nerds posting graphs seems quite silly to me.

>>105618326
>benefit for consumers
I would say the same about telaviv tech tips but they are still jewish shills anon.