Metrum Octave Dac - What are the Chips used - Page 17 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Line Level

Digital Line Level DACs, Digital Crossovers, Equalizers, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 3rd April 2012, 08:25 PM   #161
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
Quote:
Originally Posted by qusp View Post
nope, thats note going to be good enough really, but will still be interesting.
For the level of distortion that I expect to result, I think is gonna be just all right

CD was born with 44.1kHz and 16 bit because that was the state of the art of storage back then. It was a compromise good enough for Anno Domini 1980. There is no point in obsessing about that 44.1kHz, it's just a transport stream for data.
The designers of the CD recognized right away the limitations and used 4x OS to feed the DAC's.
I might not be smart enough, but I think that the engineers from Philips and Sony, that created the CD, where smart enough and wouldn't go for OS if it was that bad and NOS was better. After all they where in competition...
Claiming that all those engineers are retarded and deaf and that you know better than them how a DAC should be fed is just... childish. More like a show-off attitude.

Last edited by SoNic_real_one; 3rd April 2012 at 08:27 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2012, 09:20 PM   #162
jitter is offline jitter  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
jitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
@Ken Newton
I knew before I auditioned the Octave that NOS + no analogue filter doesn't measure well according to traditional views on DA-conversion, but it's probably what intrigued me the most. From the first time I read Kusunoki's article, I've always had a feeling that his views made sense and that those measurements don't actually tell much about perceived sound quality. Last Saturday, after hearing the Octave, those views were confirmed, for me.
One thing, though, the non-fatiguing character of NOS DACs wasn't something that struck me during auditioning, but that might have been the result of listening to an unfamiliar (but very good!) setup.

@qusp, SoNic_real_one
I'm willing to make some basic measurements with my PC-DSO and post them here. Resolution will be limited, though, but as has been mentioned, NOS distortion should be high enough show up just fine.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2012, 11:28 PM   #163
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Eastern Pennsylvania
Quote:
Originally Posted by jitter View Post
@Ken Newton
One thing, though, the non-fatiguing character of NOS DACs wasn't something that struck me during auditioning, but that might have been the result of listening to an unfamiliar (but very good!) setup.
The fatiguing aspect of CD can be quite subtle - at first. Usually, I'm not aware of it for the first few tracks. When I begin listening to a CD via a typical brickwall digital filter, it usually sounds very clean and very upfront or forward to me. Nothing immediately strikes me as awry. After awhile, usually less than a full CD, I typically begin experiencing one of two feelings. Either I begin to become disinterested in the music, or I begin to feel increasingly anxious or uneasy. Again, the effect is quite subtle at first, but builds. The end result of either feeling is that I become fatigued with the listening session. Conversely, I feel more relaxed or at ease as soon as the music stops. The fatiguing effect is usually more quickly revealed via music featuring massed brass or volins. Indeed, among the most egregious failures of CD digital is the congested and irritating sound often exhibited by massed brass and violins. NOS, at least, as I experienced it via the AD1865 based DAC I built greatly ameliorates this effect, to my ears.
__________________
Ken

Last edited by Ken Newton; 3rd April 2012 at 11:47 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2012, 11:35 PM   #164
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
Quote:
Originally Posted by jitter View Post
I'm willing to make some basic measurements with my PC-DSO and post them here. Resolution will be limited, though, but as has been mentioned, NOS distortion should be high enough show up just fine.
That would be great. I did post some measurements in the tread from my signature for 991kHz (at -3dB and -60dB) and for 19+20kHz at -1dB (16bit/44.1kHz files generated with Arta). I am really not in to modding back my TDA1541 to NOS... didn't have the performant sound card back when I did have it NOS to grab some measurements.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2012, 11:45 PM   #165
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 100
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic_real_one View Post
The designers of the CD recognized right away the limitations and used 4x OS to feed the DAC's.
Nope, Sony as co-designer of CD designed its first CD player as NOS - it had a single DAC running at 2X OS but shared between L and R channels. Of course since it was designed by engineers following the theory, it had a fairly steep analog reconstruction filter beyond the DAC.

Quote:
I might not be smart enough, but I think that the engineers from Philips and Sony, that created the CD, where smart enough and wouldn't go for OS if it was that bad and NOS was better.
You presume too much. Remember Philips came up with 1-bit 'Bitstream' - but then abandoned it. That history falsifies your hypothesis - they didn't listen really.

Quote:
After all they where in competition...
Claiming that all those engineers are retarded and deaf and that you know better than them how a DAC should be fed is just... childish. More like a show-off attitude.
False dichotomy.
__________________
When you design something for other people you don't have as much motivation to make it beyond excellent - Woz
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2012, 12:28 AM   #166
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
Dichotomy? When two people tell you that you are drunk, you probablly are.

Sony designed the first one as 2X (the zero's are still at 2x) and they decided that is not sounding good. First Ph bitstream was too slow for what was needed to do (some 5.644MHz).
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2012, 02:17 AM   #167
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Connecticut
There is no point arguing with "true believers". I guess a spectrum analyzer is good enough for aerospace and medical but for audio you just gotta listen with your ears, man.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2012, 03:53 AM   #168
diyAudio Member
 
5th element's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: England
That's the point I was trying to make before. You can argue scientific, technical/engineering reason backed up by industry standards till the cows come home, it doesn't matter. The subjectivist will always turn around and say 'but it sounds better'. There is nothing you can do to argue with that and why should you? They are happy with their choice and you are happy with yours.
__________________
What the hell are you screamin' for? Every five minutes there's a bomb or somethin'! I'm leavin! bzzzz!
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2012, 10:49 AM   #169
qusp is offline qusp  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
qusp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5th element View Post
That's the point I was trying to make before. You can argue scientific, technical/engineering reason backed up by industry standards till the cows come home, it doesn't matter. The subjectivist will always turn around and say 'but it sounds better'. There is nothing you can do to argue with that and why should you? They are happy with their choice and you are happy with yours.
yep, engineering science/math/measurements are only used when its a convenient 'truth' and then and only then its given all the weight of a proven fact, often taken out of context so as to present only the parts wanted. if it doesnt gel with their viewpoint the research/science is flawed and not up to the job, we dont listen with instruments afterall... its the same with the parts, the engineers are competent enough to design the parts, but when it comes to using them properly they dont have a clue.

I agree there is little to be gained in this argument because the views are not reconcilable and nor should we deny them their (somewhat flawed) nirvana. but as has been said, its when we are told we must be deaf or stupid if we dont agree that it gets infuriating. Often the line is that worse is actually better, or more transparent/true to source somehow and there is magic vapor trails in the audio relating to 'fatigue' that are masked by the added resolution......because its the wrong kind (unholy?) of resolution I guess..... this information somehow alludes measurement, when the looking glass is turned on it, it vanishes.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th April 2012, 03:19 PM   #170
qusp is offline qusp  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
qusp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
the above is a bit harsh; I do not suggest that all in this thread are in this group (though some are) and i do not reject your reality but i think you have to find a way to demonstrate these effects before you can call anyone who doesnt believe deaf. I do not think we know it all just yet; thus im interested in Jitter's results.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
dac chips kiwi88 Digital Line Level 2 5th August 2009 02:25 PM
dac chips for trade tubedude63 Swap Meet 1 25th May 2007 10:04 PM
Looking for 6 x TDA1545A DAC chips WALTER BURKHARD Swap Meet 2 5th April 2007 10:24 PM
F.S.: various Dac-chips Cobra2 Swap Meet 4 23rd November 2004 10:00 PM
Best DAC chips 5th element Digital Source 7 7th June 2004 04:08 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:07 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2