Its fine with me. Just so long as we know music is first with you. Mark4 is trying to do something that improves music repro, also. For low cost. Do you own a DAC?
Which electrostatic headphones do you have and what is wrong with them?
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
I don't think Mark4 is trying to improve music, he's trying to improve his subjective experience of music reproduction. Not the same thing.
No, I am going for accuracy. I use DAC-3 as a listening comparison reference. It measures SOA according to Sterophile and they rate it as A+ recommended in terms of sound quality. That I am doing it more by listening and less by measurements is in many instances simply due to an unfortunate lack of funding to for a well equipped, professional quality electronics lab. All I have at this point is my ears and brain, a 100MHz digital scope, multimeter, LCR meter, and some ability to do 1kHz steady test tone FFTs. Its not really enough to evaluate things like jitter from an ASRC at 10Hz offset, or even to evaluate single tone FFTs at 100Hz and 10kHz. So, I do the best I can with what I have. So far, it has worked out reasonably well, but sometimes I think it is probably more the hard way than the easy way.
Ha! Beat you by a bit!
This just shows how being in the right place, at the right time, and getting lucky with the market is more important than smarts or any of those other virtues. (Speaking only of myself, here...)
I'd also like to note that lots of people profited very nicely from the above. I was not one of those folks, aside from getting a decent salary and an occasional bonus. The latter was probably by mistake, too.
My point is, money is a funny measuring stick for most everything. That's true whether you just count the bank account and investments, or the amount spent on audio. (BTW... If you diy your Audio, how do you score that? A custom phono preamp built to your own preferences might be truly worth far more than any commercial gear, regardless of selling price.)
Markw4, keep on truckin! At least you use your ears, (as objectively as practical) to evaluate DAC's. Yes, there are differences, and we still don't know exactly what is 'imperfect' with DAC's. If I didn't have something remotely similar, I too would probably pick a DAC-3 for my system. But I could not turn away a gift which happened to be the OPPO-105. Now, I KNOW that it is imperfect, because I can hear problems, but then I rely on my own personal listening impression and ignore all my critics. Now what are those problems? That is what I would like to know about. I have made the 105 'acceptable' for general digital playback, but what could be done to make something better? It doesn't have to be DAC's, it could be power amps, (still working on that problem), speakers, even high performance cars. One facet of engineering is IMPROVING THINGS, not just making them cheaper. In fact, I make a living by improving audio circuits, and I am not embarrassed to say so. I can hear the difference, even if most of you can't. And it just so happens that people all around the world agree with me.
Now, do I sometimes compromise? Yes, I built a phono series for Parasound that uses IC's. I had at first even designed in Scott's AD-797 as the primary component, but as the years passed, others made equal quality listening IC's with the same input noise, etc. but seriously cheaper. But is this phono stage my best effort? No, it is like a Porsche 924, sort of a Porsche, sort of a VW. Is it listenable? Most people like it, but I do better, but it costs more to do better. So my Vendetta Research phonos, (still available on the used market), Constellation (big bucks, but sounds good), and the recently to be introduced Audible Illusions phono preamp cost 5 to 50 times more, BUT they they do sound better than the Parasound (with IC's) can do. That is life, and I can only blame it on the IC's, because that is the most important difference in the designs.
Now, do I sometimes compromise? Yes, I built a phono series for Parasound that uses IC's. I had at first even designed in Scott's AD-797 as the primary component, but as the years passed, others made equal quality listening IC's with the same input noise, etc. but seriously cheaper. But is this phono stage my best effort? No, it is like a Porsche 924, sort of a Porsche, sort of a VW. Is it listenable? Most people like it, but I do better, but it costs more to do better. So my Vendetta Research phonos, (still available on the used market), Constellation (big bucks, but sounds good), and the recently to be introduced Audible Illusions phono preamp cost 5 to 50 times more, BUT they they do sound better than the Parasound (with IC's) can do. That is life, and I can only blame it on the IC's, because that is the most important difference in the designs.
Last edited:
It's just me and the wife at that stage of the evening. Consenting adults only etc
Koss ESP/950. Nothing wrong with them just a case of needing a longer interconnect cable and sorting out a new power supply so I can sit on the sofa to listen to them. I could dig out the battery pack, but does eat D cells a bit. All simple jobs just lacking the time.
It's been covered already back in November. "How is one ever to tell if something is better and not merely a preference, isn't a preference all any kind of listening test can ultimately do, after showing a difference?"
So my guess was right that you didn't level match when comparing OPPO disc player.
Last edited:
Don't worry, Richard, I believe you when you say that the OPPO 105 does not sound as good as the DAC-3.
I used to think the opamp/IC should be nearly perfect for low level work....
In a lot of cases it is very good.
I read here of so many headphone amps using IC's and commercial ones with IC selling well to happy customers.... I went to the best Headphone site and got one of their top rated models. All op-amps inside.
OMG. I spent about $450 on it with the best IC's in it. It was really disappointing as far as realistic/accurate sound reproduction is concerned. So, I designed my own little discrete circuit and it sounds SO much better.
Much greater clarity, detail and depth. More realistic. Then helped hundreds of people DIY and build it.
So, I convinced myself that IC's alone can do well only to a certain level which is just short of the best possible with discrete. This is in line with JC and many other designers regarding IC opamps.
THx-RNMarsh
In a lot of cases it is very good.
I read here of so many headphone amps using IC's and commercial ones with IC selling well to happy customers.... I went to the best Headphone site and got one of their top rated models. All op-amps inside.
OMG. I spent about $450 on it with the best IC's in it. It was really disappointing as far as realistic/accurate sound reproduction is concerned. So, I designed my own little discrete circuit and it sounds SO much better.
Much greater clarity, detail and depth. More realistic. Then helped hundreds of people DIY and build it.
So, I convinced myself that IC's alone can do well only to a certain level which is just short of the best possible with discrete. This is in line with JC and many other designers regarding IC opamps.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Nor the ML-9600 analog outputs.
Today, I am going out via digital port of the ML-9600 to DAC3 dig input. Analog out of DAC3 to PA. In a week, I will go to PA with dig signal also. Ordered the AES3 110 Ohm cables with XLR.
I can compare now analog out of player to analog in of DAC to analog out of DAC to PA analog input. With -- dig out of player to dig in of DAC to dig out of DAC to dig in of PA.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
My testing regime is much less official in that I have three systems that are used daily; office, home, and car. Having a couple references is very helpful after changing anything.
I would be pretty lost if I were to go and fiddle with all of them at once.
It is nice when my family members groove on the systems now and then, and the inverse is also true sometimes. That’s when the half broken CD player in the garage is the best system, just because of what’s playing and who’s listening.
I would be pretty lost if I were to go and fiddle with all of them at once.
It is nice when my family members groove on the systems now and then, and the inverse is also true sometimes. That’s when the half broken CD player in the garage is the best system, just because of what’s playing and who’s listening.
Actually, in a way that is true. i am running 150mA X 4 output devices for my HPAmp.
THx-RNMarsh
So what, I can get 1A from an LT1210 or similar. You can build a composite amplifier that will outperform your design in every way.
If ICs are so bad, how is your beloved DAC3 Stereophile A Rated?
I find it ironic some here use it as an example, when it's a sea of IC op-amps, delta sigma converters, switching regulators, and I think I've seen some ferrite beads in there. Headphone output is "only" an LME49600 inside an op-amp loop. Designed by a bunch of heretics that measure. Forgot that it has at least one active ASRC and maybe two. I think that covers every single crackpot "bad sound" theory thrown about around here all in one box.
Surely it must sound just as crap as the OPPO.
I don't really understand how you can have it both ways. Are you Mr. T&M and perfection? Or do you really believe "ICs sound bad and discrete is good", in which case you are wasting your time with all the digital gear you own.
Last edited:
What elegance, Mr. Wurser. Looks like Colonel Sanders making fun of the chef of a great restaurant or Mr. Strauss levis debugging a great fashion designer.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.