DAC-3 measures as state of the art, and sounds great. It is on the Stereophile recommended equipment list. It is used in recording studios and mastering rooms to make records people listen to. It is a superb example of a clean, accurate dac that just plays what on the record without getting it's own sound in the way. That is the way I like my dacs, and that is what I aim towards. If it isn't someone else's cup of tea, that's fine. Some people prefer distortion to clean, no question.
What I meant was that, by doing that, the 'best' you can get is only as good as the sound of that particular DAC (which no one denies is fairly good, or extremely good... even best in class). But this means you cannot get any 'better' than that... you are 'limited' by another house's product.
It's like if a Ferrari F1 were modeled measuring how good they are next to a McLaren running in the circuit. You can match them, but using that approach, you are limited by the McLaren's own research and developments. You are not 'free' to actually find the best performance.
Surely the idea is to be the best you can, period. Not to say 'we sound almost as good as DAC XXX', no matter how good that XXX could be.
At least that is my take on this, and almost every other aspect of life
.
Rafa.
It's like if a Ferrari F1 were modeled measuring how good they are next to a McLaren running in the circuit. You can match them, but using that approach, you are limited by the McLaren's own research and developments. You are not 'free' to actually find the best performance.
Surely the idea is to be the best you can, period. Not to say 'we sound almost as good as DAC XXX', no matter how good that XXX could be.
At least that is my take on this, and almost every other aspect of life
.Rafa.
For me at least, DAC-3 is like the aural equivalent of an AP analyzer. I use it as a listening reference since its measurements and sound quality as of today are among the best in the world, no exaggeration. It could be some other dac could serve the same purpose, and so long as it is among the best few in the world, it would probably be plenty good enough for my purposes. If by chance some other dac were to come along that is better, I would know it right away when I A/B compare them.
Last edited:
Sure, DAC-3 doesn't do much or anything to make recorded music sound better. It is more like a step closer along the way to making sound like there is no dac at all, but we are still not all the way there yet. However, so long as Benchmark is a standard in recording studios and mastering rooms, it is what is used to decide how records will sound and it is what artists use to know what they are signing off on as their art. If one wants to hear a record in the same way, then it is a good dac for that.
Also, a slightly newer dac that uses similar technology to DAC-3, but with AKM chips, is Crane Song Solaris. It is rapidly becoming a favorite in recording studios. Jitter may be a bit lower than DAC-3, from what Dave Hill says about Solaris jitter performance. However, Crane Song doesn't post much in the way of measurements. They mostly sell to people who buy with their ears. Crane Song Solaris |
Also, a slightly newer dac that uses similar technology to DAC-3, but with AKM chips, is Crane Song Solaris. It is rapidly becoming a favorite in recording studios. Jitter may be a bit lower than DAC-3, from what Dave Hill says about Solaris jitter performance. However, Crane Song doesn't post much in the way of measurements. They mostly sell to people who buy with their ears. Crane Song Solaris |
Last edited:
There is no formal system of standardization. They are widely used in those places, especially in places that can afford them. I know a dealer that sells primarily to the pro audio trade and who would like to keep a low profile. He is one of my sources, but not a public one for sharing, sorry. You don't have to believe me if you don't want to, up to you. If you think about it though, they obviously measure exceptionally well and are known for accurate, uncolored, and very detailed sound quality. Those are usually attributes needed for pro audio purposes.
Last edited:
Let me put it this way, yes, it is 'a standard' in those places. While I believe that to be factual, I don't think any formal corroborating data has been published. Therefore, you may take it as my opinion.
Neither the Benchmark nor the Crane Song are standards, it is all about opinions.
Read what Brian Lucey says about Solaris (post #872):
Dangerous Convert-2 vs Crane Song Solaris - Page 30 - Gearslutz Pro Audio Community
Matt
I had contacted allo customer service whether Im elligible with the free Isolator 2 upon the receipt of Katana 1.2. She said that it is only for those who already paid but not yet delivered/received the unit.
In my case I already received it. Im entitled for the the new Isolator 2 if I pay the return of My Katana 1.1;Also if I do not reimburse it they will ship me this free Isolator 2.
Its not the customer fault! Allo should shoulder the cost of recall! This should be charged to cost of poor quality!
Allo commercialized a Beta Product in the market! This is embarassing..I thought having an isolator would appease the customers who expected allot from Katana 1.2.
In my case I already received it. Im entitled for the the new Isolator 2 if I pay the return of My Katana 1.1;Also if I do not reimburse it they will ship me this free Isolator 2.
Its not the customer fault! Allo should shoulder the cost of recall! This should be charged to cost of poor quality!
Allo commercialized a Beta Product in the market! This is embarassing..I thought having an isolator would appease the customers who expected allot from Katana 1.2.
Matt, Respectfully disagree. At any point in time there are a small number of converters that are among the best currently in production. Dangerous Convert-2 is among them at this period in time. There is probably something like a probability distribution of the best converters and the number of people who prefer them. People do not have highly random opinions about what is best, there is a cluster of those units that are most suitable for professional work.
Last edited:
I couldn't disagree more. If hi-if audio has taught me anything, is that people's opinions are as random as they come! And they would bet their lives that they are hearing "night and day" changes in audio from placing a feather on top of he pillow they are sitting in to listen to music.
And in the 'best' department, there are as many opinions as there is equipment. I find that most people actually have very poor listening and they are driven mostly by price: UH! This DAC costs $20.000? Wow, it HAS to be incredible, I'm going to tell my ears to listen to those 20K bucks.
So no, I completely disagree, people have highly random opinions of what is best, even amongst the really recognized reviewers out there.
Rafa.
Oh, audiophiles have random opinions. Professionals do need to have a certain degree of accuracy to do their work. Reviewers are mostly audiophiles, most could not master a record if they had to.
EDIT: With this I am done arguing. No more so say, take it or leave as you wish. Good day.
EDIT: With this I am done arguing. No more so say, take it or leave as you wish. Good day.
Last edited:
But only the right kind of feather! I've spent a lot of time feather-rolling. Pigeon feathers bring out the bass a bit, but also add a hint of sibilance. Crow feathers have a laid-back presentation, sometimes useful for very long listening sessions or easing up overly analytical gear. Blue jay feathers pair well with class D amplifiers, but forget about it with class A or AB amps! Turkey feathers are like 20 veils removed from the midrange, but bass tightness suffers a bit. Peacock feathers don't seem to do much of anything, but they do look nice. Hummingbird feathers are great for micro-detail and DDR.
Exactly! Well put, couldn't have said it better myself. We here in Ecuador have access also to Cormoran feathers, where the sound is a bit muffled and the highs are less refined, but you can clearly see why Darwin used them to come up with his evolution theory.
Oh, and PS: hummingbird feathers need AT LEAST!!! 500 hours of burn in before you can see the added micro-detail. Straight "off the bird", the don't have that much effect either.
Oh, and PS: hummingbird feathers need AT LEAST!!! 500 hours of burn in before you can see the added micro-detail. Straight "off the bird", the don't have that much effect either.
Last edited:
Agree, I got a Katana 1.1 too ! I'm still waiting for official announcement !!!
I think you guys got it all wrong!
There's nothing wrong with the early Katana!!! I think that's been claryfied
more then once.
You better be grateful that you can get a replacement (enhancement!) and a goody on top.
That's more than fair!
And I think it's also more than fair that you return your fully working unit at your own cost.
You still make a nice profit!
If you don't like that just keep your device.
Bottom line. You guys better cut the crap!
There's nothing wrong with the early Katana!!! I think that's been claryfied
more then once.
You better be grateful that you can get a replacement (enhancement!) and a goody on top.
That's more than fair!
And I think it's also more than fair that you return your fully working unit at your own cost.
You still make a nice profit!
If you don't like that just keep your device.
Bottom line. You guys better cut the crap!
Last edited: