I used an analogy, not a scientific test. You may disagree, and that is fine, but that does not make it incorrect. If you want science based tests, there are plenty of those around.
You also realize that IC salesmen, ferrites salesmen, etc., are also trying to figure out how to get you to buy their products. Marketing knows how to entice engineers with datasheets; what they include and what they leave out leaves only what they want you to see. They only tell you about the flaws when the new, improved version comes out.
At home... we have a Schiit Magni with DAC, a Nitsch Pietus Maximus with multibit DAC ( https://nitschsound.com/products/pietus-maximus ) and a Topping D90LE... and more...
The Pietus Maximus is a Magni that somehow went on steroids and took lots of stuff from other Schiit products including the ability to accept the better DACs. More like a Jotunheim 2 on steroids with better parts.
I think the Magni uses the same DAC as the Modi?
Daughter uses the Magni as a DAC/preamp, she likes how it sounds, better then the old Nuforce UDAC-5 she used before. I too think it sounds pretty good into a pair of active Quad 9LS.
In the single ended mode, I think I prefer the sound of the Nitsch over the Topping. Have not yet tried the balanced output or the headphones. I think the Nitsch approaches the sound of the Burson Swing with the Burson V7 opamps.
I do not run any optional filters in our DACs and bypass the volume in them as much as possible. In the Nitsch, middle gain setting with full volume is unity gain. I'm running them now with the USB output of a WiiM Ultra which ensures bit perfect playback from Tidal Connect, so I see Red Book all the way up to 24/192.
The Nitsch and Burson sound the most natural in the midrange. The Topping has a more "extended" treble. None are harsh. Good bass from all. I think the DACs are all good, but the analog side of the house makes a big difference even if only just a unity buffer.
In the Schiit World... I think the multibit DAC is worthwhile over the standard Schiit USB DAC.
BTW, if you like the Schiit Modi, you might want to look at the Nitsch Magni Piety which is a Magni with much better tweaks. https://nitschsound.com/products/magni-piety
Last edited:
I think growing tomatoes is safer.
I grew jalapenos one year, near the Japanese shishitos. Guess what? Half of them all got very hot! Our stir fry dinners become a crap shoot. You never knew if the next byte of a shishito would bring a flush of taste or incite a scream of pain...
Oh, I just bought the 3rd WiiM Ultra. My wife loves it, I think I need to buy a fourth one now for her home office setup. Thanks for the other thread.
Surely, you know how to handle a scope, eh? And an RF frequency gizmo.... I mean, the ASR people never listen to their components, they just put a machine on it and watch the numbers. Sort of like being the Julian Hirsch Memorial Society.
Remember the words of the Wizard: " And when they come out, they think deep thoughts and with no more brains than you have. But they have one thing you haven't got: a diploma.”
And no idea how to grow tomatoes.
Watch out for the habaneros.
My wife "lost" our college diplomas... she retired and decided to clean up the house. Now she doesn't know where they went.
Last edited:
Auralic , Chinese company is making decent products judging by my experience with their old, cheapest offering ( still not cheap by any means) ASR " discounted " phones I wanted to buy- AkG 701. $70 like new. What's not to like about them scientists?
This is expected behavior by shishito peppers. Maybe they borrowed Scovilles of the jalapeno 😉
The Carolina Reaper is the one to be careful with. Incredible.
Last edited:
Why is linearity and bandwith made complicated by people. It really isn’t..
And 100 years of science has made some really good explenations.
120 dB is one part per million. How can that ever be a large part if it is not an extremly toxic exotic or something
And 100 years of science has made some really good explenations.
120 dB is one part per million. How can that ever be a large part if it is not an extremly toxic exotic or something
Understood.
If your analogy includes factually incorrect statements/claims, then hard to understand why its not incorrect. This is a separate concern from whether or not your analogy is apt.
Okay, great. This is exactly what I am looking for. Please provide links to the science based tests supporting your claims.
Oh, I'm was gonna trust you guys on that and am a topping fan/owner myself, but I don't think topping TOTL is near as good as some of the stuff out there. Might have to discard the DAC3 opinion then.
I still use this excellent cheap dac.(Akliam PD6).
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...sive-chinese-dacs.419478/page-12#post-7882196
Had in the beginning some strange sounds from the connected PC.
After using a USB- C cable with separate power supply input everything is perfect.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...sive-chinese-dacs.419478/page-12#post-7882196
Had in the beginning some strange sounds from the connected PC.
After using a USB- C cable with separate power supply input everything is perfect.
For one thing, what you described is not placebo effect. Placebo effect has a very specific meaning. It would mean that what people claim to hear is real, because placebo effect does not mean imaginary. It means there is a real effect, such as people heard more real differences between dacs because they listened more carefully, or something of that nature.
You said:
Please provide links to the science based tests you were referring to.
Last edited:
Okay. But what about the distortion and or correlated-noise effects that are not measured? Thing is, sigma-delta dacs are not linear amplifiers. Such dacs are extremely nonlinear devices internally. They also spew out RF into the I/V opamp. Standard measurements haven't caught up to measuring those things. Also, manufacturers don't want to have to pay AP for more tests that just make it harder for the manufacturers to pass. AP is not going to add new tests unless their customers are willing to pay more annual licensing fees. And so on.
In addition, unfortunately it appears that a lot of people don't really understand how FTs work at a low level, including for FFTs. Many people are still confused about spectral analysis and signal averaging too. Thing is, what looks like low level noise on an FFT may or may not be too quiet to hear. For one possibly extreme example there could be occasional loud popping noise and it could look just the same on a typical audio FFT as some low level hiss. If people don't understand FFTs well enough, then they can't understand how those things could look the same using FFT spectral analysis.
Last edited:
Shanlings and Abraxalito's member DACS are good and chineese; I surmise Abrax's ones to be a better bang for the bucks.
I am not sure at iso low price a chineese developped dac is better than Cambridge or japanese hifi brands, at the end 90% are assembled in chineese plants.
But ASR to choose a DAC...really no thanks. people interrested just by the level of bits and noise floor only, i.e. what they don't hear as a focus VS what can be heard to makes music, don't have any idea of what music reproduction is, and for the said science side, well what a joke, how low the inteluctual level is nowadays at reading many guys there; hoppefully some valuable members, seen here already though. The SINAD brigad are visibly not real experienced guys with hifi imho. Makes me think of people judging a sport car on the spec but not able to drive them to judge about what it is made for when being in front of the wheel.
I am not sure at iso low price a chineese developped dac is better than Cambridge or japanese hifi brands, at the end 90% are assembled in chineese plants.
But ASR to choose a DAC...really no thanks. people interrested just by the level of bits and noise floor only, i.e. what they don't hear as a focus VS what can be heard to makes music, don't have any idea of what music reproduction is, and for the said science side, well what a joke, how low the inteluctual level is nowadays at reading many guys there; hoppefully some valuable members, seen here already though. The SINAD brigad are visibly not real experienced guys with hifi imho. Makes me think of people judging a sport car on the spec but not able to drive them to judge about what it is made for when being in front of the wheel.
Those are not science based tests that show how dacs sound to humans. They are also not science based tests that can show "audible transparency." The latter thing is only a pet theory of Amir. There is not any scientific study published in any science journal showing his theory is true.
The tests include a lot more data than just "bits and noise floor only". See for yourself. If you think there should be additional data, please explain what data should be included.
But, the tests are missing the affects of sprinkling holy water on the components before assembly and the blessing of the final assembled product by Zeus. 😛
The tests include more data than just SINAD numbers. For audio transparency, the output ports need to be coated with sweat from a leprechaun. 😛
Once again: random noise jitter, random correlated-amplitude noise, correlated-noise sidebands as intermodulation products of the audio signal with noise (where noise is any unwanted signal).
In the above examples, correlated means the noise has become part of the audio signal. If no audio signal, then no correlated noise to measure. One example of correlated noise was hump-distortion, but it happened to be a type of correlated noise that could be seen in some standard FFT tests. Other types of correlated-noise can be harder, or sometimes much harder, to measure because they involve more random types of noise. Its that if the unwanted signal we refer to as noise is periodic then it may show up in some way in spectral analysis, such as by having a widening effect on spectral line noise skirts. But looking at noise FFT noise skirts is a non-quantitative type of measurement. Also, there is no published research as to their effects on audibility, so there is no scientific "proof" they don't or can't affect dac sound.
Last edited: