I find digital recordings generally tiring to listen to, even if transferred to an analog replay medium. This does not typically happen for recordings which predate the digital era, when replayed on analog media such as vinyl - at least not for me.
Have Never tried Mono cartridge..
I purchased volume 1 of the 78 Project..
For curiosity Our Story |
I purchased volume 1 of the 78 Project..
For curiosity Our Story |
SACD doesn't,t pull me in far enough like the best vinyl can.
There's an emotional block of some limit to digital that is evaporated with vinyl.
Have no answer as to why
Regards
David
There's an emotional block of some limit to digital that is evaporated with vinyl.
Have no answer as to why
Regards
David
For me the HAP-Z1ES I mentioned gets about as close as I have heard, but I still find in most instances the TD124/II with SPU A95 and Schick arm just does some things better.
The HAP does seem to outperform my lesser table and pre-amp combo by a small margin, and seems more analog like than my modified SCD-777 sacd player.
The convenience of digital is hard to beat, and there are some recordings that are pretty convincing, and unfortunately many more that are not.
The HAP does seem to outperform my lesser table and pre-amp combo by a small margin, and seems more analog like than my modified SCD-777 sacd player.
The convenience of digital is hard to beat, and there are some recordings that are pretty convincing, and unfortunately many more that are not.
All my old music is on LP, so it would be like cutting my arm off to throw them out. But soundwise, digital wins hand down. If it doesn't, something is wrong with your setup.
Braided cable, I would at least hope you mean twisted pair!!!
Using 75ohm BNC and 75ohm co-ax would be the best bet signal integrity wise..... and that's what you are after.
No, I want to talk about braided cable, not twisted ! I know what I do.
For this I take 3 ptfe insulated wire of 0.12 mm2 (russian mgtf) . I put two wire to the ground and the other on the signal. On the third of the length (side dac) I put a suppression ferrite. This cable has far exceeded quality cables such as Wireworld starlight for a few $. This cable works well provided it is quite short (<1 m). Capacity about 45 pf only.
For this I take 3 ptfe insulated wire of 0.12 mm2 (russian mgtf) . I put two wire to the ground and the other on the signal. On the third of the length (side dac) I put a suppression ferrite. This cable has far exceeded quality cables such as Wireworld starlight for a few $. This cable works well provided it is quite short (<1 m). Capacity about 45 pf only.
If in ABX testing an A/D/A conversion cannot be detected, we may conclude it is transparant.
An LP played through an A/D/A conversion cannot be distinguished from a direct playing of that same record.
In other words, whatever an LP does to you, it is not due to the quality of its reproduction, but rather due to its defects.
So, excellent reasoning.
Why, I like analogue sources such as LP but I am aware that digital is better, so why poor reasoning more reality based.......
Not the best solution for transmitting the digital signal. or for minimum jitter as that seems to be the new bogyman in digital audio... digital is very robust though as designs with no ground plane for return currents show as they work, but for ultimate signal integrity (which is the major concern) then goo engineering practices have to be followed...
For SPDIF co-ax at 75ohms would be the BEST solution, followed by twisted pair (not really the best) anything else is a compromise, but will work to an extent ( below 1m in this case showing that signal integrity issues are being added by a far from optimum cable).
Have you ever tried this type of cable before saying a coaxial BNC is the better ?? (remember < 1m)
For those who have the courage to read this article:
kusunoki
"
The difference between the non-oversampling DAC and the conventional DAC with the digital filter lies whether you attach importance on the accuracy in the time domain or in the frequency domain. In other words, whether you choose the musical performance or the quality of a sound. This trade-off line defines the boundary of the current digital audio format .
A natural, stress-free sound that communicates the musicians' intention directly to you. That is the sound of non-oversampling DAC. The feel of this sound is closer to that of analog reproduction.
"
kusunoki
"
The difference between the non-oversampling DAC and the conventional DAC with the digital filter lies whether you attach importance on the accuracy in the time domain or in the frequency domain. In other words, whether you choose the musical performance or the quality of a sound. This trade-off line defines the boundary of the current digital audio format .
A natural, stress-free sound that communicates the musicians' intention directly to you. That is the sound of non-oversampling DAC. The feel of this sound is closer to that of analog reproduction.
"
Thanks killmister.
Your work is well organized..
I'm going to make the TNT.
I'll order the parts and put the project in the projects lineup..
I'll likely have some questions later..
Your work is well organized..
I'm going to make the TNT.
I'll order the parts and put the project in the projects lineup..
I'll likely have some questions later..
Last edited:
I've had dac's in the past with the ability to turn off the oversampling and always preferred it off.
Thank you.
also forgot to say that it is better to put a lm317 instead of irf830 . In the original design , there are oscillation problems.
I built this dac there almost 15 years and I do not get enough . Some audiophile friends were amazed by this dac against their high-end hardware .
non oversampling = time domain respect ( like analog record see kusonoki article) and better transient response which gives a good presence in music like a vinyl.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.