That is true, the Mola Mola Tambaqui (11.5K) also got recommended, just like the different RME Dacs (all above 1K), just like most of the Benchmark dacs and (pre)amps. Different Ncore builds, going from NAD to local builders like Audiophonics also got recommded. Idem with speakers, their highest rated speakers are not cheap (JBL M2, Genelec 8361A, Neumann KH420G, Revel Salon 2, ...)
They focus on technical perfection, but what I miss is also durability and usability tests. But it's way better than all those subjective tests full of audiowhoo and snobism. What they can't do (but still claim partially) is predict how your personal taste is. Not everybody wants a superclean neutral sound, and they can't get that. And they don't hold the truth, but are very often right in their claims with scientific data to back them up.
They focus on technical perfection, but what I miss is also durability and usability tests. But it's way better than all those subjective tests full of audiowhoo and snobism. What they can't do (but still claim partially) is predict how your personal taste is. Not everybody wants a superclean neutral sound, and they can't get that. And they don't hold the truth, but are very often right in their claims with scientific data to back them up.
Exactly. I have repaired enough expensive audio to know the price does not always translate to longevity. Certainly stuff of which only a few hundred or thousand were (hand)made. Or where a famous designer was involved, devices were hyped because of technical superiority (also here) and stuff dies after a year of normal use and still people defending the brand. Today such stuff can often not even be repaired as SMD is wonderful except when things go very wrong. When software boys were the designers one can be sure that there in no way to repair stuff without the brands support and very expensive replacement boards also requiring software that is not in reach. As an example where this can go: I installed/serviced stuff where my laptop got software installed that was not transferable and the device could only be unlocked with that software registered to me and my laptop for a yearly fee to even function (not audio) when bought new.
Best in technical numbers with tons of features no one uses and then a cheapo that you like better 🙂 The cheapo poses no risk as if it turns out to be a failure you just replace it. Don't be surprised if the cheapo still works after years of use. The suspicion is that many that object to the cheaper stuff have an interest as they are in the same business with about the same or even less good quality and don't like to compete on price.
Best in technical numbers with tons of features no one uses and then a cheapo that you like better 🙂 The cheapo poses no risk as if it turns out to be a failure you just replace it. Don't be surprised if the cheapo still works after years of use. The suspicion is that many that object to the cheaper stuff have an interest as they are in the same business with about the same or even less good quality and don't like to compete on price.
Last edited:
And from a technical pov the cheapo often performs at least as good as the expensive stuff.
Your point on numbers produced is right on the mark. A $ 300 Topping if only a 100 were produced would probabaly cost $ 3000 with no change in performance. Boutique stuff is expensive because it is rare, not because it is good.
Jan
Your point on numbers produced is right on the mark. A $ 300 Topping if only a 100 were produced would probabaly cost $ 3000 with no change in performance. Boutique stuff is expensive because it is rare, not because it is good.
Jan
The largest misconception in todays HiFi is to think a brand and/or high price means quality. Often things are supported by claims that technical innovations/features or simply unusual quirks with a lot of acronyms lead to superiority of the brands stuff and its famous designer Z that used his unique talents but does that always translate to better user experience or better liked performance when actually using the stuff? Tell that to the tube guys. This is just marketing playing with emotion as emotion sells. Emotion that also leads to acceptance of vendor lock in and possibly even brand zealotry. Check the new Mac Mini M4 outright crazy power on/off button and reactions of the brands aficionados 🙂
I recall a demonstration of Devialet stuff (2 glossy plastic vacuum cleaners in a room) where the sales guy proudly mentioned that there was no visible source anymore and how good this was. People attending were shocked as they wanted to see the source and touch/feel buttons and volume control.
I recall a demonstration of Devialet stuff (2 glossy plastic vacuum cleaners in a room) where the sales guy proudly mentioned that there was no visible source anymore and how good this was. People attending were shocked as they wanted to see the source and touch/feel buttons and volume control.
Last edited:
Innuous USB reclocker does not seem to have any galvanic isolation between input and output USB ports so it does not help even with ground loops. Any perceived audible improvement is created between listener's ears.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?attachments/1740198034244-png.430695/
Looking at that mechanical layout, I find it not very smart. Rotate the power supply board 180 degrees and put that board between it and the i/o board. That will make it tight and almost eliminate that convoluted stupid wiring. This is typical for 'designers' that implement a standard app note from a datasheet without really knowing what they are doing.
/rant off ;-)
Jan
/rant off ;-)
Jan
Devices using the Analog Devices ADuM4166 usb isolator and reclocker are appearing on Aliexpress for around £20. Im not sure if they have
a faciltiy to add a separate +5V supply if needed but it wouldnt be difficult to add. These seem to provide the same functions except for the
TCXO which you dont need and are galvanically isolated. Quite a price difference.
Last year I bought one of the AD evaluation boards for this chip for a bit more money (£50 ?) but as usual not got round to trying it
a faciltiy to add a separate +5V supply if needed but it wouldnt be difficult to add. These seem to provide the same functions except for the
TCXO which you dont need and are galvanically isolated. Quite a price difference.
Last year I bought one of the AD evaluation boards for this chip for a bit more money (£50 ?) but as usual not got round to trying it
…Hmmm, perhaps a "preconditioner" would be the next coming out, at only £2,999.
They use a 3ppb oven-controlled crystal oscillator. (1us error per hour roughly) - 4 or so orders of magnitude beyond any reasonable requirement - that's partly where the chumps' money goes. Its not a high grade RF SA or signal source, so why use that oscillator? Also oven control shortens the lifetime as it runs hot and increases the power consumption as its meant to be always-on. Poor engineering decisions, clearly only for rich audiophool chumps.
If it uses a fancy machined aluminum front panel, that may cost a lot too. Completely unnecessary for performance, isn't it. Yet many audiophiles are willing to pay for a nice looking case. In fact, they may demand it.
Unfortunately , it has been my experience that " rich audiophool chumps" systems sound dramatically better than poor DIY ones 😉
Antelope Zodiac Gold DAC which I have is 10 years old ,and is also using oven -controlled crystal and so far no problem at all. I was rather expensive back in the day as well. I wished Chinese Auralic brand wouldn't try to "stick it to the West" with their pricing because I quite like their products.
Antelope Zodiac Gold DAC which I have is 10 years old ,and is also using oven -controlled crystal and so far no problem at all. I was rather expensive back in the day as well. I wished Chinese Auralic brand wouldn't try to "stick it to the West" with their pricing because I quite like their products.
You can get 1ppm OCXO's if you want, a lot cheaper. The place to spend the money is in the room acoustics and speakers first, that's what makes the difference (or in headphones), not ludicrously expensive re-clockers.
I assume people who can afford those ludicrously expensive gadgets already spent the money elsewhere . What I'm interested in is how much a small team of of engineers in EU would charge to design the product from the ground up?
Supposedly a Rolling Stones member told my name dropping friend "Charles you want a cleaning lady half your age plus 5 years " 🙂
Of course. But then at some point for best results everything has to be good.
A $300 Topping dac is fine for some systems because the system can't reproduce a precision soundstage and natural tones and textures anyway. Once the room and the speakers are good enough however, then differences in dacs tends to become more audible. I have/had a $700 original Topping D90 (out on long term loan), which is/was obviously sonically flawed. If you can't hear the problems then by all means fix the room and speakers until you can hear what's wrong with the dac. Then fix the dac (not necessarily with a USB reclocker).
For people using miniDSP stuff (or equivalent) for speaker and room correction, maybe they will never know what's wrong because the dacs inside there are, ahem, very low-cost. I don't see anyone here complaining about cheap junk, only perceived expensive junk. Maybe it is that any equipment one can afford can seem okay enough.
Last edited: