glt said:
This sort of pseudo-science stretches credibility to breaking point. I wonder if anyone knows of any peer-reviewed studies examining the effect of expectation on perception of sound. I imagine it's a powerful effect and I admire Russ and Brian for their determination to stick to the measurable effects. As the Rock Man in Harry Nilsson's "The Point" wisely said: "ya see what you wanna see and ya hear what you wanna hear - ya dig?"
This DAC should be better (as far as I can tell) than previous DACs, since the chip is the latest and best technology and Russ and Brian appear to be perfectionists.
Anyway, I'm off-topic and don't want to antagonise anyone. I'd love to hear an A/B comparison anyway (if only I could afford one
).I'm desperately trying to find junk I can sell so that I can build a B32 and bathe in its sonic pool of delights.As you were...
Javin5 said:
Personally, I look forward to having my Buffalo 32s put together. And I will compare it side by side with my DAC1, just as I did for the OPUS beta way back when (see TP support site). And it will likely be subjective and my listening preferences.
But, for the record, I have a PhD in Physics and have been a tenured professor. Have I now flipped to pseudoscience? No, science is always the best understanding of what we know today, based on our best inferences from the past.
Do we know all there is to know? Not at all. We need to stay consistent with what we know from science, and open to what science still has not quantified for us. Every time we think we have a full scientific explanation for how well we can see or hear, we get surprised by what we don't know. This makes high-end audio most interesting.
Russ, apologies for the slight off-topic rant. I suggest, we enjoy the surprises and enjoy the music.
Craig
Hi hayenc
My comment was not addressed to you, but I agree with most of what you say. As we all know, each one has its own, subjective listening preference, and this is entirely ok. I'm certainly looking forward to your comparison. If you could add some comparative measurement to your listening evaluation, this would be even more interesting.
I have a Buffalo 32s operating since a couple of days and I have certainly not found it lacking in resolution. If I remember correctly, a number of posters have concurred with this. Trying to describe the sound would really end up describing, to a large degree, the sound of the total system, of which the Buffalo 32s is only one component. Anyway, I'm really happy with the result. Next thing I plan, is to try some higher bit rates from the PC hard disk.
My comment was not addressed to you, but I agree with most of what you say. As we all know, each one has its own, subjective listening preference, and this is entirely ok. I'm certainly looking forward to your comparison. If you could add some comparative measurement to your listening evaluation, this would be even more interesting.
I have a Buffalo 32s operating since a couple of days and I have certainly not found it lacking in resolution. If I remember correctly, a number of posters have concurred with this. Trying to describe the sound would really end up describing, to a large degree, the sound of the total system, of which the Buffalo 32s is only one component. Anyway, I'm really happy with the result. Next thing I plan, is to try some higher bit rates from the PC hard disk.
Yes, we seem to be in agreement, but my concern is with what would constitute a meaningful measurement. We both understand that this is one component in a system in a room and your system and room will be very different from mine, much as I suspect our listening preferences and training will be much different. So we might find a measuring instrument which could make a measurement independent of all the other variables, but I doubt I have to money to afford such an instrument and wonder what it could say that Russ and Dustin have not already said. And would it change my mind as to how I think they sound? Unlikely.
I have read through the Benchmark book that came with my DAC1 and seen all the measurements in there. None seemed to help me with how it would sound, other than showing they clearly understand problems with clock jitter and noise shaping that Russ has also been very cautious with in his design.
In the end, I am left to just enjoy or not enjoy the music that comes out. That is why I buy this stuff.
I have read through the Benchmark book that came with my DAC1 and seen all the measurements in there. None seemed to help me with how it would sound, other than showing they clearly understand problems with clock jitter and noise shaping that Russ has also been very cautious with in his design.
In the end, I am left to just enjoy or not enjoy the music that comes out. That is why I buy this stuff.
Come on dudes. Either you like it or you don't.
There is little correlation between individual subjective experience and objective measurements, when it comes to hi-fi quality. And it should not even matter if there was such correlation.
Especially because the "standard" measurement leaves so much room for the device to sound different anyways. And measuring a good+ DAC with those standard measurement methods is like getting pulse from a dead person.
And if the measurements are good, would you still listen to something you don't like or if they are bad would you turn off something you like?
There is little correlation between individual subjective experience and objective measurements, when it comes to hi-fi quality. And it should not even matter if there was such correlation.
Especially because the "standard" measurement leaves so much room for the device to sound different anyways. And measuring a good+ DAC with those standard measurement methods is like getting pulse from a dead person.
And if the measurements are good, would you still listen to something you don't like or if they are bad would you turn off something you like?
3lviz said:
I thought that is what I just said and what we all agree about.
No desire for any arguing here, just for enjoying the music.
I have two Opus's, one the beta, and another dual mono. Missed on the original Buffalo, but am building out the 32s now. Russ can attest to how much I have supported his work and what that means as respect for his products. I don't plan to send any of them back or turn them off, but I will let you in on a secret. My DAC1 has not seen power for months.
All the best,
Craig
3lviz said:
Is that true? I would've thought that objective measurements will have a bearing on subjective experience insofar as the accuracy of an electronic sound-generating device goes.
What I want from a DAC is transparency/accuracy. I want the analogue signal coming out of it to be as close to the one that was originally digitised in the first place. Is that not the ultimate goal of a DAC?
. Hugs 
.Duffy Moon said:
Well, i have heard Benchmark DAC-1 for 2-3 years so far. The device is supposed to be pretty much flawless in every test there is. I mean there is not much you can do better with the measured results. Pretty much all DACs get the same "neutral" results in the tests. But to me B32s is much better playing music than DAC1. The 0.0X% better (or worse, who cares) bench results would not explain the much more enjoyable sound quality.
Its all about what you want to listen to. For me B32s is the recipe, but maybe its not for the rest of the world. That leaves you to find out what you want. Imo, there is no shortcut.
Buffalo32S + Juli@ I2S - Yessss
I am very happy with my new Buffalo32S. Brian and Russ have produced an amazing DAC.
The Buffalo32S is stunning. I did not expect such a leap in soundstage and detail compared to the Perpetual DAC. Music is more enjoyable even at lower volume levels, there is so much more detail and pinpoint location of instruments and vocals.
I use surplus dual linear power supplies which have LM723 regulators. They were already set up for +/- 15V @ 1.5A operation. I had to modify one of them to get +5V which was a little challenging since the supplied schematic did not match the actual units. These supplies are probably overkill.
I am using the I2S outputs from Juli@ sound card, each connected to rather long RG174 mini coax cables due to the layout of my office. I have been driving the Perpetual P-3A ( soon to be up for sale, I think ) in this configuration for a year or so. Lock ON is instantaneous.
I am using the latest version of cPlay with the SOX upsampler at 96kHz. cPlay has two upsamplers each with different upsampling rates, so I will be trying different configurations.
No fancy packaging for me yet. I just attached the power supplies to a piece of poplar, the DAC to a chunk of that "clipboard" pressed board material.
I am very happy with my new Buffalo32S. Brian and Russ have produced an amazing DAC.
The Buffalo32S is stunning. I did not expect such a leap in soundstage and detail compared to the Perpetual DAC. Music is more enjoyable even at lower volume levels, there is so much more detail and pinpoint location of instruments and vocals.
I use surplus dual linear power supplies which have LM723 regulators. They were already set up for +/- 15V @ 1.5A operation. I had to modify one of them to get +5V which was a little challenging since the supplied schematic did not match the actual units. These supplies are probably overkill.
I am using the I2S outputs from Juli@ sound card, each connected to rather long RG174 mini coax cables due to the layout of my office. I have been driving the Perpetual P-3A ( soon to be up for sale, I think ) in this configuration for a year or so. Lock ON is instantaneous.
I am using the latest version of cPlay with the SOX upsampler at 96kHz. cPlay has two upsamplers each with different upsampling rates, so I will be trying different configurations.
No fancy packaging for me yet. I just attached the power supplies to a piece of poplar, the DAC to a chunk of that "clipboard" pressed board material.
Attachments
Re: Buffalo32S + Juli@ I2S - Yessss
I could not agree with you more; I am running cPLAY 25, with SPDIF directly from the Juli@ board upsampling to 96kz; it is time to take the plunge on the I2S mod.
To Brian and Russ - it has been a pleasure to build the psu's and put the Buffalo together - worked first time - no problems locking, no nasty high-pitch noises - nothing but music.
A very satisfied customer.
wackyterbacky said:
I could not agree with you more; I am running cPLAY 25, with SPDIF directly from the Juli@ board upsampling to 96kz; it is time to take the plunge on the I2S mod.
To Brian and Russ - it has been a pleasure to build the psu's and put the Buffalo together - worked first time - no problems locking, no nasty high-pitch noises - nothing but music.
A very satisfied customer.
I can only confirm this. The 32s is indeed amazing. I had mine up and running one hour after the package arrived (using previously assemled LPBPS and LPDPS). In the absence of music, there is absolute silence when turning up to full volume, not a trace of hum or hiss. And it immediately locked in narrow to the SPDIF-outputs of three differnt players I tried. I'm not an expert in soldering, but I had no problem so far with any of the TP-kits, all parts clearly labeled, easy to assemble. And I experienced a truly first rate customer service from Russ and Brian when I had a question. I really don't know how they find the time for this, with all the other work, but somehow they do. Thanks a lot!
can we have more people comparing the buffalo 32 to their previous DAC? like DAC-AH, MF X-DAC, TDA1541A NOS, WM8410, other CDP (accuphase, Rotel, Cambridge ) etc...
How's the mid, high, low, decay, soundstage, etc before and after buffalo 32?
I just happen to hear a buffalo sabre, 9008(IVY + LPBPS and LPDPS). Wasn't impress due to the extreme dull/ dark sounding presentation (IMO which I simply cannot accept). This is why I am really hesitant to get one, B32s.
Thanks in advance.
Hi Russ/ Brian, I am not trying to ruin ur thread but just gathering honest opinion.
How's the mid, high, low, decay, soundstage, etc before and after buffalo 32?
I just happen to hear a buffalo sabre, 9008(IVY + LPBPS and LPDPS). Wasn't impress due to the extreme dull/ dark sounding presentation (IMO which I simply cannot accept). This is why I am really hesitant to get one, B32s.
Thanks in advance.
Hi Russ/ Brian, I am not trying to ruin ur thread but just gathering honest opinion.
Are you really going to rely on what someone else's ears (read as lots of personal interpretation) tell them about lows, mids, highs, soundstage to make a purchasing decision? Thats like asking someone to test drive a car for you and then you go buy it! I think all you can rely upon is that many people like it and thats about as far as you can take a comment like that without hearing it...
I just find it interesting on what people need or what qualifies as decision makers nowadays...
I just find it interesting on what people need or what qualifies as decision makers nowadays...
Well, before I put the $$ in, I just want to hear what owners are saying about them. There isnt one set I can check out locally. This is the best out of this non Ideal situation, I guess......HaLo6 said:
Javin5 said:
Its being compared to 4x TDA1541A NOS thru SPDIF, everything else being the same. The only advantage is sabre has deeper soundstage, other than that no other attribute is close to the 4x TDA1541A NOS.
I just wanted to be sure coz I read too many good user reviews to hear something very contradicting. I am also guessing... undue mods may have being done to it.
I have heard in my system (some of these belong to me)
Theres others I tried but the below is the ones I've had
Benchmark DAC1
Modded Beresford TC7510
Buffalo+IVY totally rigged out with Paul Hynes shunt regulation ,Russ's latest filter for the IVY
Buffalo32S currently using Paul Hynes regulation for the VD and VA
Pedja Rojic AYAII (upgraded with TDA1541S2)
One of those CS4397 Ebay dacs (highly modified)
PCM1794 Ez dac ,
various TDA1543 including Audiosector based and a Storm audio Pandora using x 16 parallel chips
Various diy 1 x and 2 x TDA1541A's with various output stages TDA1545 Monica3
For me three dacs stood out between these, The modded Buffalo, Buffalo32s and the AYAII
If I'm honest the modified Buffalo gave the new and fresh (not much burn in ) Buffalo32s a hard time, one thing the modded Buffalo dac wasn't and that was dull/dark sounding, its dynamics was some of the best I've heard, bear in mind its regulation was not standard and this to me had a large impact on the sound, also the newer IVY filter made a difference
Buffalo32s is now maturing nicely and continues to improve, tbh I was a little disapointed at first but now its had a week or so on it , the grounding issue now sorted and since adding the shunt regulation its sounding much more to my taste, it now does some things better than the modded Buffalo
AYAII will always remain one of my favourite sounding dacs, this is a personal thing, some music with this dac just sends me into a trance, it does not have the dynamics of the modded Sabres though
Theres others I tried but the below is the ones I've had
Benchmark DAC1
Modded Beresford TC7510
Buffalo+IVY totally rigged out with Paul Hynes shunt regulation ,Russ's latest filter for the IVY
Buffalo32S currently using Paul Hynes regulation for the VD and VA
Pedja Rojic AYAII (upgraded with TDA1541S2)
One of those CS4397 Ebay dacs (highly modified)
PCM1794 Ez dac ,
various TDA1543 including Audiosector based and a Storm audio Pandora using x 16 parallel chips
Various diy 1 x and 2 x TDA1541A's with various output stages TDA1545 Monica3
For me three dacs stood out between these, The modded Buffalo, Buffalo32s and the AYAII
If I'm honest the modified Buffalo gave the new and fresh (not much burn in ) Buffalo32s a hard time, one thing the modded Buffalo dac wasn't and that was dull/dark sounding, its dynamics was some of the best I've heard, bear in mind its regulation was not standard and this to me had a large impact on the sound, also the newer IVY filter made a difference
Buffalo32s is now maturing nicely and continues to improve, tbh I was a little disapointed at first but now its had a week or so on it , the grounding issue now sorted and since adding the shunt regulation its sounding much more to my taste, it now does some things better than the modded Buffalo
AYAII will always remain one of my favourite sounding dacs, this is a personal thing, some music with this dac just sends me into a trance, it does not have the dynamics of the modded Sabres though
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.