You forgot "Silver wire sounds terrible and is clearly audible compared to copper wire..."
I think there are more people that maintain the latter. But I think the reason is because most people use the cheap silver stuff with only 4 nines (pointless...
) 
I use cardas silver solder for some projects for the same reason Nils Bohr had a horseshoe above the entrance of his house.
@Sy
I bought that CD after first hearing it at a hifi show. It is now the most despised cd in my collection.
I'm going to suggest that if a music playback system "feels" better to an individual listener....... then it it IS better, to that listener.
Examples...
If someone uses silver wire and exotic capacitors, in a preamp, they may "feel/believe" it will make a difference, therefore enjoying the diy building experience.....and most importantly, the music coming from it.
It may also be the case (different person), depending on what this person believes to be true, that the same satisfied results will be because they believe that capacitors can't be "heard", and that wire quality is irrelevant....and will be most satisfied with these results.
_______________
About specs......who here has the equipment and skill to test their builds?....and of those who do, have they ever been surprised at less-than-perfect specs, but great sound?
I believe there is an ingrained trend on this forum, and in the audiophile community, -----to seek objective answers to subjective questions. And that there is an air of "audio correctness" that can't be proven unless A/B/X long-term listening tests are done. Not very practical (but not impossible).
I take the stance that there is a "mean" averaging when considering the opinions. reviews, and even the cold-hard facts (as in specs) in relation to "what is supposed to sound good"......I remove the nutty ideas off the upper and lower extreme viewpoints, and then proceed to build gear that will bring me pleasure in MY living room, listening to MY favorite music.
I have several pieces of gear that have been in my listening system for 10 years or so.
Yes, I can be satisfied.
=RR=
Examples...
If someone uses silver wire and exotic capacitors, in a preamp, they may "feel/believe" it will make a difference, therefore enjoying the diy building experience.....and most importantly, the music coming from it.
It may also be the case (different person), depending on what this person believes to be true, that the same satisfied results will be because they believe that capacitors can't be "heard", and that wire quality is irrelevant....and will be most satisfied with these results.
_______________
About specs......who here has the equipment and skill to test their builds?....and of those who do, have they ever been surprised at less-than-perfect specs, but great sound?
I believe there is an ingrained trend on this forum, and in the audiophile community, -----to seek objective answers to subjective questions. And that there is an air of "audio correctness" that can't be proven unless A/B/X long-term listening tests are done. Not very practical (but not impossible).
I take the stance that there is a "mean" averaging when considering the opinions. reviews, and even the cold-hard facts (as in specs) in relation to "what is supposed to sound good"......I remove the nutty ideas off the upper and lower extreme viewpoints, and then proceed to build gear that will bring me pleasure in MY living room, listening to MY favorite music.
I have several pieces of gear that have been in my listening system for 10 years or so.
Yes, I can be satisfied.
=RR=
Not really being fair there Conrad. As you're using 'marketing' most of National Semi's 26 audio product app notes fit the bill (http://www.national.com/apnotes/AudioProducts.html.). They're written to provide minimal guidance to potential users and hence stimulate sales. The target audience is very wide. Some of the other include resistor calculations to set opamp gain and determining the corner frequency of an RC passive filter. App notes in general don't appear to be the place for hardcore mathematical enlightenment as to the validity of approaches, it's not unique to AN-1651. The author was pretty clear it wouldn't be covered and left to the reader to follow up on the citations:
You're also working from the assumption all engineers would agree with your design choices. The 5532 specifies a 100 dB PSRR ratio. As traditional a manufacturer as Benchmark chose to regulate the supply for the DAC1, originally a non-audiophile product meant as a pro-studio handy box. Was the choice 'audiophile hand waving'? If so on that basis anything more complex than RC filtering is too. I read a series of comments by a member of the design team explaining the decision and it was the furthest thing from flooby-dust.
I also don't understand the objection to passive/active RIAA, it's been the subject of AES papers and in the marketplace for at least a quarter century. Is there an electronics field where one, and only one, design approach reigns valid?
You may object to specific practices but that's hardly an indictment against NS for recommending them. Again, at no point has any manufacturer cited made the claim they're willing to sacrifice a single measured parameter for subjective improvement. I don't understand the source of the objections. That listening was part of the design loop?
jlsem, Lesly first appeared on one of the Stereophile discs. The 'Lesly Test' figured in many an Oshler review, a valid and clever one since he knows his wife's voice very well. It had no relevance to those who didn't. A result of that exposure to my knowledge was a couple audiophile releases and trade show appearance or two.
You're also working from the assumption all engineers would agree with your design choices. The 5532 specifies a 100 dB PSRR ratio. As traditional a manufacturer as Benchmark chose to regulate the supply for the DAC1, originally a non-audiophile product meant as a pro-studio handy box. Was the choice 'audiophile hand waving'? If so on that basis anything more complex than RC filtering is too. I read a series of comments by a member of the design team explaining the decision and it was the furthest thing from flooby-dust.
I also don't understand the objection to passive/active RIAA, it's been the subject of AES papers and in the marketplace for at least a quarter century. Is there an electronics field where one, and only one, design approach reigns valid?
You may object to specific practices but that's hardly an indictment against NS for recommending them. Again, at no point has any manufacturer cited made the claim they're willing to sacrifice a single measured parameter for subjective improvement. I don't understand the source of the objections. That listening was part of the design loop?
jlsem, Lesly first appeared on one of the Stereophile discs. The 'Lesly Test' figured in many an Oshler review, a valid and clever one since he knows his wife's voice very well. It had no relevance to those who didn't. A result of that exposure to my knowledge was a couple audiophile releases and trade show appearance or two.
Of course the rest of the app notes are marketing- that's the only reason they'd spend money to produce them. Jim Williams of LT lays it out very well at the beginning of one of their app books as well- they do it to sell parts. Nor do I object to any of their design choices per se. What I do believe is that when a non-obvious design is presented, that the basic reasons for such a choice be supported by some numbers, not just stated as a given fact. The reality is that almost no one, myself included, has the time and money to track down the references every time a non-standard idea is presented. Not that I haven't seen the approaches taken in the app note before, but I can assure you that they're new concepts to non-audiophile designers. Also, I've no objections to the parts themselves. IMO, they're fantastic and they're what I'm using right now! I think they're better than 5534, OPA-627, AD845, and a bunch of others.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.