Anybody can see I don't look like him except if you compare him to me using DBT - then everybody looks the same, anyway 😀 😎
+1
It would also be really nice if some long running flame wars on this thread died out. I feel there are some hatchets that could really do with burying. However given this is the only thread where bad behaviour is not immediately stamped out so it is a folorn hope until piggie squadron glides past.
I do hope you have procured a second DAC3 in readiness. I assume once out there and settled in you will be going for the long term plan of miniDSP for X-over driving a pair of DAC-3 into 4 of your monoblocks?
This should be a significant step forward and will be interested to know if it seems that way when realised.
Thanks Mark and Richard for your input. We all know that RFI can be locally generated in digital equipment, so extra shielding could make a real difference, sonically. Measurements only change with some changes. That is why OPPO politely ignored my suggestions of how to improve their digital player, years ago now.
Which is funny because on this Upgrade Company site he claims that Oppo does great work and they took lessons from his mods in the later players. 🙄
I tend to think they don’t know who this guy is and wouldn’t listen to him... but he loves Oppo gear.
You're right that no one would agree on the audibility, but it would be nice if he published his measurements to show you that his mods did anything at all.
Last edited:
Funny you should ask... Some years ago Peter Aczel wrote about this in The Audio Critic. He had been talking about the importance of level matching to <0.1dB for some time, and someone asked him "When comparing amplifiers, how can I be sure that the levels are matched to within 0.1dB?" His answer was "When you have adjusted the levels to where you cannot hear a difference, then you you have got it within 0.1dB" 😀
The facts are clear to me.
Both believe that one unit sounds better than the other. Both agree on which unit sounds better than the other.
There may be debate (as it appear there already has been) on whether their beliefs and observations are verifiable with other means (dbt), other listeners, and whatnot, but I have no doubt that they believe the statements they made.
In defense of prose, most* scientific papers are written in prose.
* If I said all, no doubt some you-know-what-retentive (thanks for the image, Mr. Freud) poster would find a scientific paper written entirely in poetry.
That's not the case at all.
Chips makers such as AKM and ESS do subjective testing or utilize feedback from customers.
Pro Audio manufacturers that use these chips and/or others, do extensive subjective testing.
Even complete objective die hard manufacturers such as PrismSound, for example, reluctantly admit that the numbers don't tell the whole story WRT how a bit of gear will sound.
T
I would use the miniDSp that I have for a first cut with better PA's. But, i measured the M2 cross-over that is stored in the Crown amps. I will make an analog version of those curves.
First cut for the analog cross-over will use opamps. Final, discrete.
Anyone: What is the most neutral/accurate opamp out there?
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
You have (to me) a funny definition for “fact”.
Fact is, tomorrow the sun is going to rise.
A sounds better than B is a fact only after proven true. Until, it is an opinion which could be very well based on false premises.
Now, that M4 stated “me and Richard think A sounds better than B” is indeed a fact, no doubts about. But a fact that is irrelevant in the matter under discussion (the DAC-3 mods). It is what I would call a fact about a possible fact, or a meta-fact.
My opinion, of course.
Last edited:
They will tell you they use subjective testing, and AKM apparently does, but has it ever impacted a design? I doubt it. They are chasing numbers, it is a marketing spec war. I would love to hear of some change ESS or AKM made that resulted in a degradation of any of the datasheet parameters. They are in it to sell chips and make money, which means keeping the customers happy in any way possible.
I'd also like some evidence that the actual high volume pro audio interface guys do or care about subjective testing. I doubt Benchmark does much besides giving lip service to it. Same with RME, Focusrite, Digidesign, MOTU, Lynx, etc.
You've quoted one manufacturer. That does not mean it is true. What do you think they are going to say? They need to sell as many units as possible. Alienating a part of your potential customer base just because they live in a fantasy world is not good business.
Richard,
For accurate, probably Weiss. AFAIK, currently unmatched by anything. Most likely very expensive.
I believe Sparkos are also very good. I have not used either.
Both use some form of TPC (two pole compensation).
What circuit / topology are you thinking of using? I have a client / friend with M2's in his studio that looks like going a similar route at some stage in the future.
For your chip based proto, I recommend trying OPA1642, namely because it has very low CM distortion in non inverting mode with high source impedances. In any xover / equalizer this is should be a benefit.
There are other ways to mitigate this that make real sonic improvements but it's a little more involved.
T
Maybe you should have been a lawyer. You might have enjoyed being a prosecutor, since they get to make up stories called a 'theory of prosecution' to help the jury see how the evidence supports conviction of the accused. Of course, some people in jail are false positives and some people not in jail are false negatives. Since those types of errors don't seem to bother your subjective bent, you might have been a natural fit for the job.
Exactly, the engineering has already been locked in and the wafers manufactured for chip production.
I believe that MM99 has answered that he is not. Your mode is tiresome, you have all sorts of opinions about others, let's hear about you.
Your lack of details is insulting to other members actually, so go ahead, fill in the blanks, let us know who you are and what your experience is, your affiliations, you have nothing to hide right ?.
Dan.
Last edited:
Quoted from an interview with AKM's head of audio ADC / DAC design:
"Sato: I bring a test sample to the client and ask for their opinions while listening to the test sample together. Then I convey their feedback to the engineering section or bring an engineer with me to see the client.. We talk about not only the sound but also technical matters."
It would have been a convincing rebuttal if you cited facts to dispute chris719's points.
Thx. The reviewer's (Srajan) writing style is 'boring' but there's no way he can write all that if he doesn't have good ears and have access to such 'transparent' amps. His description of the Purifi, it's similar to my favorite amp, in that it 'makes mistakes' but is fine and always enjoyable to listen to.
On page5 he writes "I felt inclined to believe that ultrasonic bandwidth is in fact the primary cause. So what were these differences?".
I'm unhappy because I don't expect class D to mature too soon (I can learn but the manufacturing is beyond DIY). But I'm happy because when reviewing such expensive stuffs he didn't mention anything about my favorite amplifier quality aspect, which is 'SOUND SEPARATION'. It is obvious to me why this is very important aspect of amp quality.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.