- 2008-01-08 11:51 pm
I thought you guys knew something about how to do measurements or are you saying you have no idea how to evaluate equipment?
Testing the DCX ain't hard, I've done it.
1st there is the noise issue if you want to run consumer levels.
2nd there is the spurious harmonic content of the output circuits about about 1KHz. I've posted those graphs before. They sound harsh to me, others don't notice them. The lower 1/2 of the spectrum isn't bad, really.
A better output stage will kill most of that high harmonic noise. Opamp, tube, cap, transformer, take your pick. I happen to like transformers. It's all pretty straight forward.
These plots show how the DCX stock output has a distortion that rises with frequency and the transformer has a distortion that drops with frequency. To my ear, this must be why I feel that the transformers remove a lot of digital glare or brittleness that I don't like.
The big sound stage and spacious presentation was missing in action. The sound stage was quite narrow and shallow. Dynamics were squashed. The depth presentation barely made it the 3 feet to the back wall.
Can you comment on the official specs of the DCX where it shows the maximum noise achievable is 112dB.
Are you saying that they state a value which is less than the maximum because they are very shy manufacturers who don't like to put their best figure in the specs in case it might be seen as boastful?I'm not sure how you go from a -112dB spec to "maximum noise achievable." Are you saying that their spec is a lie?
Are you saying your unit is different to Pano's because this is his quote?If Pano heard "brittleness and glare" or squashed soundstage and dynamics chez moi, he didn't say anything about it. His major complaint was some bass boom, which was my stupid programming fault.
If Pano heard "brittleness and glare" or squashed soundstage and dynamics chez moi, he didn't say anything about it.