by purist I meant no dsp
What DAC has no DSP? NOS DAC with an analog anti-imaging filter maybe.
I think a DAC and a DSP are different things and almost everyone else doesn't?
DSP means 'Digital Signal processing'. As Scott has noted, all bar the very edge cases of DACs contain DSP. Loony NOS stuff and some homebrew DSD only units every DAC has DSP in it.
Flipping it over what do you define as a 'DSP'?
What DAC has no DSP? NOS DAC with an analog anti-imaging filter maybe.
Yes, a very bad DAC. Sounds like he wants a crappy non-OS TDA1543. Those used to be all the rage around here.
Gotcha, ok, a DAC contains an element of DSPDSP means 'Digital Signal processing'. As Scott has noted, all bar the very edge cases of DACs contain DSP. Loony NOS stuff and some homebrew DSD only units every DAC has DSP in it.
Exactly that, processing in the digital domain, no analogue involved.Flipping it over what do you define as a 'DSP'?
I would consider a DAC not to "process" the sound at all, but accept that the "DSP" element may affect the sound signature.
Not processing in the same sense as a DSP is used to process the signal, ie, change or modify it in some way, am I wrong? It does seem a semantic issue, a DAC and a DSP are not the same thing, that is all I was saying because there seemed to be some confusion, it could be mine, in that I didn't understand exactly what Bob was driving at.
That would be part of perception. I wrote in simple sentences in plain English about audible.Right, what measurements correlates to "deeper soundstage"?
What DAC has no DSP? NOS DAC with an analog anti-imaging filter maybe.
Yes,
I understand what Matt’s saying, but as you say most all dacs already utilize dsp in some way/shape/form then implementing full dsp control shouldn’t be a problem....as is already proven/done.
Edit.....if you told me I’d be advocating dsp a couple yrs ago I’d laugh in your face but after seeing/hearing what it can do (even in mid-fi capacity) it has me convinced it is the future of audio reproduction.
Last edited:
...it has me convinced it is the future of audio reproduction.
DSP is part of audio reproduction now and has been for decades. Just because you suddenly become aware of it of course doesn't mean things will change quickly from the way they are now. However, already there are cheap $200 4-output channel integrated amplifiers with self-tuning room correction. They even come with their own calibration mic.
Unfortunately, I heard one in operation at someone's home and it didn't sound very good at all. The class-D power amp modules distorted at all volume levels (not broken sounding, just ugly). The auto room correction algorithm didn't work very well judging by the resulting spectrum, there was no user access for manual tuning, and EQ couldn't fix the room and speaker problems very well anyway no matter what EQ was used (I tried it using other equipment). Replacing the speakers, putting them in a new location, and turning off the DSP sounded best.
Last edited:
It’s not that I just became aware of it, I kept track of it and always found analog manipulation superior. The better technology was only available at prices above my limits but it has recently (last few yrs) began to trickle down.
I might come off as a moron Mark, I’m just not savvy in the technical aspects.
The unit that opened my eyes is the Yamaha R-N803, it’s a mid fi 2.1 channel reciever with ypao.
I might come off as a moron Mark, I’m just not savvy in the technical aspects.
The unit that opened my eyes is the Yamaha R-N803, it’s a mid fi 2.1 channel reciever with ypao.
I might come off as a moron Mark, I’m just not savvy in the technical aspects.
You seem like an intelligent fellow, and you seem to hold your own around here remarkably well considering you are not really an electronics guy. In other words you come off fine IMO. Also, some of my last post was directed more generally at those who still think cheap dacs, cheap power amps, etc., are as good as anyone can hear.
Bob, you might be interested to know that yesterday we compared the Benchmark DAC-3 and a Topping D90. Besides the dacs we used 24/192 recorded music, the Benchmark AHB2 power amp, and the Sound Lab speakers.
For anyone wondering, the two dacs do not sound the same and would not sound the same to anyone. At the 24/192 sample rate we mostly listened to, the D90 definitely won (although it has some audible imperfections compared to the AK4499 eval board setup in its present state).
Among other things it could easily be heard and felt/experienced that ESS dac sound could not be tolerated for very long before we felt we heard enough, it was too fatiguing, time to go do something else. At least the D90 was enjoyable to listen to, it had a great, wide stereo sound stage, and bass to kill for (with the Sound Labs anyway 🙂 ). Very good for a $700 dac!
Last edited:
Dude if you could implement app/WiFi controlled dsp into what you’ve learned with the 4499 eval board, into a stand-alone unit (no computer).....keep it around $1500
You’d be right up there with wonder bread in my book. 😀
Thx for the info on the d90 btw.....maybe the best way to implement my vision would be the full digital ‘shd studio‘ and a couple d90’s......still need that pesky computer though.
You’d be right up there with wonder bread in my book. 😀
Thx for the info on the d90 btw.....maybe the best way to implement my vision would be the full digital ‘shd studio‘ and a couple d90’s......still need that pesky computer though.
Why go back to these almost meaningless comments?
Okay then, as can be seen from measurements at ASR they measure a little bit differently.
Now you understand how they sound different, NOT.
Is that an example of a descriptor that has meaning to people other than yourself?
Bob will likely take some useful meaning from it. You are different, can't help you.
Okay then, as can be seen from measurements at ASR they measure a little bit differently.
Now you understand how they sound different, NOT.
Wow you are confused no such claims are made anywhere, please show me where you got that.
Wow you are confused no such claims are made anywhere, please show me where you got that.
I was trying to provide information to Bob that he might find of interest. I know there are other people reading along that have similar interests.
Therefore I don't know what else to say when you complain about describing sound in words, as if measurements are the only thing with meaning. Maybe they are to you, but not everyone agrees with you on that. You should know that by now. Out of frustration, the second sentence in my original post was written sarcastically so please don't take it literally.
Last edited:
the second sentence in my original post was written sarcastically so please don't take it literally.
No problem, I'm unsubscribing from all the DAC threads anyway. I have to say there is a core of folks on one side of this that virtually never talk about just listening to music for its own sake, trading recommendations of performances without putting any obsession with "accuracy" or fidelity in the way.
I wonder how much that group are able to enjoy music purely for it's own sake. "Accuracy" of reproduction is a misnomer which misses the point entirely, if your particular DAC effects box gives you pleasure that's fine, please don't pretend it's doing any more than that, you do real music lovers a disservice by implying they are missing some magical ingredient, it's just not true IMO.I have to say there is a core of folks on one side of this that virtually never talk about just listening to music for its own sake, trading recommendations of performances without putting any obsession with "accuracy" or fidelity in the way.
- Home
- Member Areas
- The Lounge
- If it's purely an engineering challenge why bother designing yet another DAC?