DAC vs. Interface

[Minithril]

Hello, everyone. I've got more of a conceptual question than advice on a purchase. I'm new to audio tech in general - I learned about interfaces over the weekend and bought one - and I'm not really understand the point of choosing some higher end consumer-grade DACs or interfaces. I'm really talking in the ~$400-600 range, but it came to my attention even with, say, re-looking at the Schiit stack.

 

I get it that a for a budget, that it's about prioritizing strictly getting as much quality as cheaply as possible. An Interface for people who need XLR compatibility and a DAC for only sound reproduction. It could just be that I'm not looking into it hard enough, but I really don't quite get what the purpose of having a dedicated DAC just for headphones when most audio interfaces have a way of monitoring already integrated into it. It doesn't seem very sensible to have both an interface and a dedicated headphone DAC (or DAC/Amp combo) when it seems that there is a much better solution with spending a little more money for a singular all-in-one package.

 

It is really making me think that there is some kind of disconnect here that I'm not seeing.

[LIGISTX]

12 minutes ago, Minithril said:

Hello, everyone. I've got more of a conceptual question than advice on a purchase. I'm new to audio tech in general - I learned about interfaces over the weekend and bought one - and I'm not really understand the point of choosing some higher end consumer-grade DACs or interfaces. I'm really talking in the ~$400-600 range, but it came to my attention even with, say, re-looking at the Schiit stack.

 

I get it that a for a budget, that it's about prioritizing strictly getting as much quality as cheaply as possible. An Interface for people who need XLR compatibility and a DAC for only sound reproduction. It could just be that I'm not looking into it hard enough, but I really don't quite get what the purpose of having a dedicated DAC just for headphones when most audio interfaces have a way of monitoring already integrated into it. It doesn't seem very sensible to have both an interface and a dedicated headphone DAC (or DAC/Amp combo) when it seems that there is a much better solution with spending a little more money for a singular all-in-one package.

 

It is really making me think that there is some kind of disconnect here that I'm not seeing.

I guess I don't understand what an interface is? So maybe I am the wrong person to be commenting...

 

But, I do have a Schiit lyr (which has their multibit DAC and a tube amp, all in one, and my brother has schiit stack, Magni Heresy and Modi 3), so I at least know the schitt set up, a bit....

 

As far as I know, the only reason to offer the DAC and AMPs separately is power solution to cut down noise, although the noise introduced on these low end offerings is not really a concern, few of us are going to spend the money on power cleaners and such anyways. And the other reason is so you can mix and match amps and dacs more easily. My lry is an all in one combo, but I knew I wanted the multibit, and I wanted a solid tube amp, so here I am, and I do not regret it at all. I love it. That said, my brothers schiit stack, which cost ~500 less, is about 90% as good imo. Its a different sound, but its a fantastic sound none the less. I just like the smooth buttery sound a tube amp provides...

 

So, what exactly is an "interface"? 

[Minithril]

1 minute ago, LIGISTX said:

-snip-

What I mean by that is going towards, let's say low end for kicks, something more along the lines of an Audient iD4, Focusrite Scarlett ___, Steinberg UR____, etc. DACs used for recording vocals or instruments from microphones into a digital signal (As far as I understand it, please correct me if I'm wrong). 

[LIGISTX]

3 minutes ago, Minithril said:

What I mean by that is going towards, let's say low end for kicks, something more along the lines of an Audient iD4, Focusrite Scarlett ___, Steinberg UR____, etc. DACs used for recording vocals or instruments from microphones into a digital signal (As far as I understand it, please correct me if I'm wrong). 

Aren't those, like you said, more for recording? If so, they would have good analog to digital converters, not sure how good their digital to analog is. I am just not sure... Guess I am the wrong person, I am just not well informed enough about them

[The Flying Sloth]

9 minutes ago, LIGISTX said:

Aren't those, like you said, more for recording? If so, they would have good analog to digital converters, not sure how good their digital to analog is. I am just not sure... Guess I am the wrong person, I am just not well informed enough about them

They're for both recording and mixing so both the DAC and ADC are of relatively high quality. While technically the conversion may be slightly better on high-end standalone DACs the difference is not noticeable to most. Now, as for amps, many tube and other standalone amps are designed to colour sound in a way pleasing to the ear, this is the reason tube mic preamps and tume microphones remain so popular in studio settings. In that situation an interface will have a comparatively extremely neutral amplifier by design. The main reason I suggest interfaces on here a lot (over standalone DACs) is that I have more experience with interfaces, I dislike the idea of hardware ecosystems (like Apple, Schiit, etc, etc) and the value proposition is often much better than a standalone DAC, especially if the user is likely to want to upgrade to a decent (XLR) microphone in future. I personally use a UMC1820, have history with the X32 and am (hopefully) soon upgrading to the RME Digiface USB, the only one of those options more expensive than a mid-level standalone DAC being the X32 and considering the feature set it's totally justified.

Sloth

[Minithril]

53 minutes ago, The Flying Sloth said:

-snip-

So, ideally, you run a combination of both an interface specific for audio going in and then either a DAC or DAC/Amp setup for audio going out? Hmm, I'd make the argument about excessive specializing and introducing failure points, but I have a dedicated microphone and headphones instead of a headset. So, that kind of goes out the window.

[Kdog]

Interfaces have both and ADC an DAC component to them usually with high quality preamps. If you have an xlr microphone and a pair of speakers/headphones then I'd recommend running with an interface. If you just have headphones, a DAC should work fine and may even be better as they're specialized for outputting audio. Most people don't have both a DAC and an interface, especially if they have a high quality interface such as an Apollo from Universal Audio or something from Focusrite's higher end range. 

 

Let me know if you have any other questions.

[The Flying Sloth]

4 hours ago, Minithril said:

So, ideally, you run a combination of both an interface specific for audio going in and then either a DAC or DAC/Amp setup for audio going out? Hmm, I'd make the argument about excessive specializing and introducing failure points, but I have a dedicated microphone and headphones instead of a headset. So, that kind of goes out the window.

No, for studio use and all but the most overkill daily use scenarios you just use an Interface......
Using an external DAC/AMP paired with extremely expensive headphones for critical listening is usually handled by a completely separate media player or computer as the level of gear you would have to buy to notice a difference is high end enough that money really can't be an issue.
Besides, when using a DAW for recording you run ASIO drivers which force audio exclusivity, you literally couldn't use another DAC if you wanted to.

Sloth

[Minithril]

7 hours ago, The Flying Sloth said:

-snip-

But, is it still possible? I mean, how do ASIO drivers "force audio" to the point of preventing the use of a DAC/Amp when those are specifically made to be audio outputs? Because, how I'm thinking about this is:

 

Microphone -> Interface -> Computer -> DAC (->Amp) -> Headphones

Computer -> DAC (->Amp) -> Headphones

 

I'm obviously over simplifying it, but where in that stream is the driver preventing an audio signal from being generated and sent through to the DAC?

 

Not to mention, like previously described, the purpose of tubes is to change the sound in some way. You couldn't utilize a tube for that feature if you use an XLR microphone is what I'm getting from that.

[rice guru]

15 minutes ago, Minithril said:

But, it's still possible? I mean, how do ASIO drivers "force audio" to the point of preventing the use of a DAC/Amp when those are specifically made to be audio outputs? Because, how I'm thinking about this is:

 

Microphone -> Interface -> Computer -> DAC (->Amp) -> Headphones

Computer -> DAC (->Amp) -> Headphones

 

I'm obviously over simplifying it, but where in that stream is the driver preventing an audio signal from being generated and sent through to the DAC?

 

Not to mention, like previously described, the purpose of tubes is to change the sound in some way. You couldn't utilize a tube for that feature if you use an XLR microphone is what I'm getting from that.

Any interface with a headphone out has a DAC basically built in so what you can do I just plug the amp into a line out our off the headphone out only risk is you don't want to touch the interfaces headphone headphone out gain controls with that method.

 But you can probably do what you are suggesting I believe. But I actually haven't tried it myself but playing with windows settings may make it possible

[The Flying Sloth]

11 hours ago, Minithril said:

But, is it still possible? I mean, how do ASIO drivers "force audio" to the point of preventing the use of a DAC/Amp when those are specifically made to be audio outputs? Because, how I'm thinking about this is:

Microphone -> Interface -> Computer -> DAC (->Amp) -> Headphones

Computer -> DAC (->Amp) -> Headphones

If you're using a DAW, no, you could not use this signal chain, ASIO drivers force all audio to route through the single device that is the audio interface, all other audio devices will not be seen by the program, one at a time only. This exclusivity is to ensure all audio runs at the same bit/sample rates and avoid major technical problems associated with conversion to and from higher sample rates. This works slightly differently on Mac with conglomerate audio devices (the only justifiable reason beyond Finalcut and Logic to buy a Mac) but since I have so little experience with Apple products I can't really comment on how well (or how) it works.

But again, the audio interface already has inbuilt DAC chips that will be far higher quality than inbuilt audio as they are meant for use in audio mixing, any improvements notices in a standalone DAC would be extremely minimal. Studios most often just send outputs from the interface to studio monitors (through a monitor controller with headphone amps).

As for your tube point, I'm really not sure I understand it as just about every studio on the planet has Tube mic preamps, tube mics and tube compressors available for use, these are all purely analogue components placed before the ADC chips on an interface and thus are not impacted at all by the use of said interface.

Sloth

[Minithril]

1 hour ago, The Flying Sloth said:

-snip-

Thanks for the input, like I said, I'm just trying to clear some things up. Get any misconceptions I have out of my head while talking about it.

[The Flying Sloth]

4 minutes ago, Minithril said:

Thanks for the input, like I said, I'm just trying to clear some things up. Get any misconceptions I have out of my head while talking about it.

Was too lazy to make my own so have an extremely old basic wiring diagram that may help you.


Sloth