Are DACs a meme?

To convert from digital to analog you will always need a DAC. Some of the being a lot shittier than others. If you already have a decent one, there's no reason to buy a better one.

i replaced my onboard audio with a 2nd gen scarlett 2i2 and i did notice a difference. my music didnt sound as "compressed" (not in a lossy-lossless file way).
DACs as they are sold are a meme though (bad audio chips in oversized cases and overpriced)

>>57753754
>my music didnt sound as "compressed"
You mean you felt a wider soundstage?

>>57753814
pretty much that, yeah.

>>57753824
Huh, maybe I should indeed buy one. I'm not the /g/ definition of "audiophile" who frets over tiny, differences and buys expensive shit for it, but if a DAC does indeed make a difference you can hear..I'm willing to buy one.

>>57753915
depends on your mainboard or what ever converter you're using atm
some of that shit is transparent already

>>57753915
i can also distinguish flac from mp3 320 and mp3 320 from mp3 256.
i don't consider myself audiophile or anything but i have trained ears. so don't spend too much.
I recommend a focusrite scarlett solo, it's an audio interface that will also allow you to plug in a xlr/6.3mm cable for instruments/microphone with phantom power. it's around $100. the integrated DAC is very good.

>>57753941
My computer's pretty old - so there might be indeed a difference.
I know that certain modern motherboards indeed have better shit aimed at audio people and whatnot.

>>57753915
Behringer UCA222 or UCA202 is a fucking great value. The only difference between them is the color.

>>57753984
>i can also distinguish flac from mp3 320 and mp3 320 from mp3 256.
Yeah right.

>>57753748
what's decent?

I have presonus audiobox usb

File: 1480146367980.png (278KB, 1276x1417px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 1276x1417px

Music file quality>>>>>>headphone>dac

>>57754298
Decent is when you don't detect any hiss, crackle or pop. The sound isn't muddled and the music sounds good, clear and crisp to you.

External device eliminates opportunities for interference and dirty power. You've certainly heard whine whenever you scroll your mouse or something weird like that if you're using on board audio.

Anything marketed as a dac for listening is overpriced. Low end pro audio gear has made significant strides in the last 10 years, so any audio interface $150+ will be fine.

Headphones with a crazy high impedance are another thing, and they do in fact need a good amp to get the full spectrum.

>>57753707
Yes there is.

If you have decent ears, you can test them side by side and notice.

Even the highest end onboard audio sounds noticeably worse than a low end DAC.

>>57754319
>Music file quality>>>>>>headphone>dac
Too many >'s.
having decent headphones as opposed to shitty cheap ones makes an enormous difference.
And music file quality depends on what difference in quality we're talking about.
almost as big a difference as shitty earbuds vs shitty headphones.

>>57753707
for studio work, there is absolutely a difference between shit and high end. For video games, fuck no.

>>57754319
This is an oversimplification. It's been objectively determined that the human ear cannot distinguish the difference between a 160kbps mp3 and a lossless file given that all other factors are equal, including playback equipment. If you're listening to an awfully ripped file at an extremely low bitrate, music file quality will make a big difference to your enjoyment of the music. But most music an individual encounters in 2016 will be of sufficient quality that the actual music file will not make that much of a difference to the listening experience.

Headphone quality will make the most immediately apparent difference to the listening experience; an upgrade from a 10 dollar set of headphones to even a 75 dollar pair will make an exponential difference to the sound quality.

DACs will also make a big difference to sound quality if you have a shitty DAC. But most computers and mobile devices have sufficient DACs such that the money spent on upgrades isn't justifiable to most users.

For the most benefit per dollar spent, invest in better headphones.

>>57754298
>what's decent?
Pretty much anything. DACs are a commodity.

>>57754761
>160
Bullshit. I vividly remember switching to listening to 200~320kbps mp3 on itunes, away from just listening to music on youtube, when I was 13, and I inexplicably found everything to sound nicer. Couldn't put my finger on why, but I just enjoyed it more.
I only realized it was the audio quality after a year or so.

>>57754895
>itunes
>when I was 13
Underageb& please go.

>>57754925
>Initial release January 9, 2001; 15 years ago

>>57754972
Nice wiki copy pasta, 2000s baby.

http://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2015/06/02/411473508/how-well-can-you-hear-audio-quality
Here's a link to test audio quality yourself.
For what it's worth. I bought a shciit modi dac and it was very noticeable and better from my mainboard audio with my memeheiser headphones.

>>57754761
The human ear may not be able to but as someone that has worked in a professional studio for a number of years, I can tell you that the hardware and plugins sure as hell can.

If you use reverb on a shitty audio file it will sound full of artifacts, especially using ITB plugins. I can take any person off the street, play them the same file at 44.1 and 192 and they'll be instantly able to hear the difference in the reverb tails. Any modulation effect is also extremely apparent, chorus/trem, hell even saturation breaks up much nicer using a higher sample rate.

So to your point, yes most if not all people cannot hear the difference between 44.1 (CD) and 48 (DVD) let alone higher, but the gear used takes those differences and blows them way out of proportion. It is the sole reason we record in as high definition as possible and downsample later on.

>>57754925
>itunes didnt exist 6 years ago

>>57754761
>FLAC indistinguishable from 160kbps mp3

I'm not an audiophile or anything, but the difference between 192kbps and flac is night and day, you must have some legit hearing damage.