Have to love the DAC threads, where people with just enough knowledge to be dangerous think they are "improving" products.
As all the tips i had read there are the same that works on improving analog: Better clean voltages on rails, isolation, better clocks etc. i had read there nothing that goes against the rules or the simple good practices.
What could be dangerous for me would be to change the chip of the DAC. I will not risk it ;-)
And then, we have to start somewhere, when we want to learn ?
Actually, I was first introduced to this concept in philosophy courses I followed at uni.
Too often, Don't quite know what you are trying to say in the current context.
It wasn't always like that. With an analog break out board and some well defined modifications on the digital side, I got an 9038 board to perform at <0.005% distortion level, measured with results published in the thread:
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/314935-es9038q2m-board-42.html#post5383493
After that, the guru's took over and I lost interest. For the simple reason that after that, not 1 relevant measurement was shown iirc.
Philosophers described something they called expectation bias? Was this in a recent class?
Benchmark DAC-3 measures as state of the art. That means its as good as it gets, right?
You seemed to be commenting that I accepted some things without question. Just because I say okay (for now) and continue on doesn't mean that I don't have un-vocalized reservations.
That’s the whole schtick; some believe a golden ear levels the field. An EE with 30+ years in electronics design is placed on the same foot with a high school graduate audio salesman with a big mouth, that never went beyond Ohm’s law (if that). We had quite a few of the latter over the years here.
Happens all the time in the audio business, the other example that comes to mind is alternative medicine practitioners. Equally quacks, only more dangerous.
Last edited:
Mola distortion is -130dB from what I read in the specs if one includes the analog output stage. Since DAC-3 includes an output stage, that might be a more appropriate comparison.
Also, what independent testing similar in scope to what Stereophile publishes can I read to confirm Mola results (with the output stage).
Thanks.
Last edited:
Probably 1979 or so. And of course the word was not an English one. I still remember the story used to illustrate the phenomenon.
Suppose you drive on a dimly lit road and you expect it to go into a slow left hand corner, based on what you remember from last time (whereas in reality, it goes to the right). You may filter out all sensory inputs that would enable you to correct this mistake until it is to late.
That is how accidents often happen. Many airplane crashes are also due because of preconceived notions about the situation the are in, with the subsequent inability to perceive reality in objective terms, and take the appropriate corrective action.
I hear you thinking: philosophy, smilosophy, and you are right. There is no rigid or scientifical understanding of the underlaying mechanism. But the phenomenon has been identified for a long time. And that is that your expectations shape your perceptions, oftentimes dangerously so.
with this)
I know that was meant humorously, but I don't think depictions of firearms are useful in a discussion about audio electronics (or anything other than firearms).
Mola distortion is -130dB from what I read in the specs if one includes the analog output stage. Since DAC-3 includes an output stage, that might be a more appropriate comparison.
Also, what independent testing similar in scope to what Stereophile publishes can I read to confirm Mola results (with the output stage).
Or does Mola only publish the most favorable looking numbers as claimed by the manufacturer? Of course, could be they don't think detailed measurements matter all that much
Thanks.
The DAC was described in detail in a blog post by Bruno P (who designed it). Not sure if the page still exists. Bruno does not mess around. Based on his track record and description of the converter, it's likely that his claims are true and it measures better than any Sabre part.
Maybe you can enlighten me to how it can deliver +20 dBu (almost 8V RMS) output without an "output stage". The 130 dB spec is for a cut down version that fits in a preamp. That is SNR, btw, not distortion. The distortion is unmeasurable with an AP and estimated at -150 dB.
Last edited:
One has to pick and choose what battles to fight. Arguments about who hears what with what capacitor attached to what clock, etc., are unsettleable in a forum context. Some of the claims are obviously way off the reservation, but I can't control it, and I can't say that people don't hear something, even if they make an error interpreting whether it is a change for the better or for worse.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.