or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › CD Players & Dedicated Music Transports › DAC or CD player
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

DAC or CD player - Page 2

post #31 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

The NAD upgrade it is based on Burr-Brown TI PCM1796 chip, IMO that's a decent sounding part.

The PCM1796 is an oversampling part, an obvious violation of your previous DAC dogma.

http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/sles100a/sles100a.pdf

post #32 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Note the text in the bottom center:
"Precision Crafted in China"
Designed 'where' is what matters, smart guy. That sets the specs of the parts used inside and reflect in final price.

Your motto must be "Never give the sucker a break" because you keep moving the goalposts.

You said:

"Any garbage made in China."

So I do some research in a vain attempt to educate you.

Then you change the rules and suddenly according to you, my proof is misdirected.

So far today I've proven that Emotiva and Cambridge Audio products are according to you: "Any garbage made in China.", and now you up the ante.
 

 

It's very difficult to have a meaningful discussion with someone who has his own private meanings for otherwise universally understood concepts:

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

For me, 'made in' includes the design and final quality control. Product from start to finish. Otherwise is 'assembled in'...
 
post #33 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Note the text in the bottom center:

"Precision Crafted in China"
Designed 'where' is what matters, smart guy. That sets the specs of the parts used inside and reflect in final price.


Your motto must be "Never give the sucker a break" because you keep moving the goalposts.


You said:


"Any garbage made in China."


So I do some research in a vain attempt to educate you.


Then you change the rules and suddenly according to you, my proof is misdirected.


So far today I've proven that Emotiva and Cambridge Audio products are according to you: "Any garbage made in China.", and now you up the ante.

 

It's very difficult to have a meaningful discussion with someone who has his own private meanings for otherwise universally understood concepts:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

For me, 'made in' includes the design and final quality control. Product from start to finish. Otherwise is 'assembled in'...

Actually, he gave me my point.

He said: "For me, 'made in' includes the design and final quality control. Product from start to finish." which means that every audio component that is not "Made in USA" is still disqualified.

That automatically eliminates at least 90% of the brands mentioned on AVS, and it still disqualifies Emotiva and Cambridge Audio.
post #34 of 60
If for you actually digging the ditch has the same importance as designing the actual electrical system that goes in, then... OK.
Design and quality control makes 99% of a device end performance. Just the assembly part is not 'made in'.

As for PCM1796... it's a decent chip compared to the crap that is in AppleTV. Not compared to PCM1704, that is a great one.
Edited by SoNic67 - 9/2/13 at 4:40pm
post #35 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

If for you actually digging the ditch has the same importance as designing the actual electrical system that goes in, then... OK.
Design and quality control makes 99% of a device end performance. Just the assembly part is not 'made in'.

Truisms and platitudes.

However, quality control and manufacturing work best when implemented side-bu-side.


Quote:
As for PCM1796... it's a decent chip compared to the crap that is in AppleTV. Not compared to PCM1704, that is a great one.

Based on what reliable authority other than your personal say-so?

I guess you are shielded by your ego from how transparent your claims are - you seem to be making this up as you go along and get cornered again and again.
post #36 of 60
As opposed to you, I really tested a LOT of audio DAC's. Bought with my money so there is no 'alternate reason' behind my tests. And I know how to read datasheets too. You just tested three players, and decreed that there all the same. Reality is different - Chinese designed DAC's cut corners on quality, they don't follow the published recommendations, their style fits exactly your mantra - 'it works anyway, nobody can hear the difference'.
As far I am concerned there are way more people that say, like I do, that they hear differences in various DAC's than people that claim contrary (that's only 5 of you here). I think that's enough authority.
post #37 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

As far I am concerned there are way more people that say, like I do, that they hear differences in various DAC's than people that claim contrary (that's only 5 of you here). I think that's enough authority.

Of course. People who engage in bias controlled listening tests are in a tiny minority. If that weren't true, the high end audio industry would no longer exist.
post #38 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

As opposed to you, I really tested a LOT of audio DAC's.

Just measured them - as in looked at numbers? How do you know that the sonic difference is perceptible to human ears? Did you simply conclude that if the numbers are more impressive, there must be a sonically perceptible difference?
Quote:
As far I am concerned there are way more people that say, like I do, that they hear differences in various DAC's than people that claim contrary (that's only 5 of you here). I think that's enough authority.

I doubt anyone would go so far as to disregard someones belief in hearing differences. However, what makes that reality? How do you go beyond just a personal opinion (or a group of shared opinion) to discern reality?

How does the pharmacy industry weed out placebo versus real benefit?

How would you feel if there were no testing done to ensure that a pill you swallowed had a real effect? Would you accept the advice of someone who (in reality) swallowed a placebo and raved about its proposed benefits?

Have you ever considered the fact that there are people educated (not just people with dollars in their hand) in how we perceive sound? Do you think that this topic has not been researched?
Edited by bo130 - 9/3/13 at 5:01pm
post #39 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

As opposed to you, I really tested a LOT of audio DAC's. Bought with my money so there is no 'alternate reason' behind my tests.

I'm not sure you actually tested any of these DACs. What I suspect you did is cable them up and listen to them, and then swap cables and listen again maybe a few times.Sighted evaluation, no proper +/- 0.1 dB level matching. You probably did no measurements that are reliable enough at all.

Those aren't even tests! A test is a reliable comparison to a reference standard. What was your reliable reference standard? Sighted evaluation? Puhleeeze!
Quote:
And I know how to read datasheets too.

Not well based on some of your previous comments. For openers I see no evidence you know how to relate chip datasheets to sound quality.
Quote:
You just tested three players, and decreed that there all the same.

Actually, that would be a figment of your imagination. Obviously the players are different. Nobody would be foolish enough to say that they are the same. However, unless you have a good idea about what performance measurements are sonically signficiant, you don't actually know how to read spec sheets.
Quote:
Reality is different - Chinese designed DAC's cut corners on quality, they don't follow the published recommendations, their style fits exactly your mantra - 'it works anyway, nobody can hear the difference'.

So you're saying that you know the nationality of every DAC engineer in the business? Tell you what, why don't you list out the names of all the DAC engineers that work for Texas Instrument and provide DNA tests indicating whether they are of Chinese descent. I got this feeling that many of them are - but TI is a US company! You are headed for yet another contradiction of yourself!
Quote:
As far I am concerned there are way more people that say, like I do, that they hear differences in various DAC's than people that claim contrary (that's only 5 of you here). I think that's enough authority.

Yes, we all know that science is determined by popularity contests even today, just like it was during the days of Galileo. In those days more people believed the pope than believed Galileo, right? ;-)
Edited by arnyk - 9/3/13 at 6:15pm
post #40 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

As far I am concerned there are way more people that say, like I do, that they hear differences in various DAC's than people that claim contrary (that's only 5 of you here). I think that's enough authority.

Of course. People who engage in bias controlled listening tests are in a tiny minority. If that weren't true, the high end audio industry would no longer exist.

 

+1

 

Sonic's position is: "Eat sh*t - a million flies can't be wrong". :)

post #41 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by bo130 View Post
 
 
Have you ever considered the fact that there are people educated (not just people with dollars in their hand) in how we perceive sound? Do you think that this topic has not been researched?

 

I think Sonic, and many like him, don't believe that acoustics is a branch of science. They seem to attribute 'mystic-like' qualities to components - qualities which can only be decided by listening and which cannot be measured in any way. They have an ultimate faith in their hearing and no amount of scientific evidence which shows how easily the human ear/brain is deceived holds any sway with them. All the work of the great acousticians such as F. Alton Everest, Floyd Toole, Sean Olive etc mean nothing to Sonic - he takes the view that his ears know best

 

Many have compared this attitude with religious belief and, of course, one cannot logically discuss faith, by definition, so any attempts to persuade the Sonics of the world that he is wrong fall on stony ground. It is unfortunate because if these guys would open their minds just a little bit, they would get the chance to vastly improve their SQ, and at a far lower price than they currently spend. I mean, in the end, even the Catholic Church had to recognise that Copernicus/Galileo was actually right. Such recognition did them no harm, and their ultimate faith is unaffected.

 

@Sonic - buddy, I am not dissing you personally here. I am just using you as an illustration of the kind of guys I am talking about.

post #42 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

As opposed to you, I really tested a LOT of audio DAC's. Bought with my money so there is no 'alternate reason' behind my tests. And I know how to read datasheets too. You just tested three players, and decreed that there all the same. Reality is different - Chinese designed DAC's cut corners on quality, they don't follow the published recommendations, their style fits exactly your mantra - 'it works anyway, nobody can hear the difference'.
As far I am concerned there are way more people that say, like I do, that they hear differences in various DAC's than people that claim contrary (that's only 5 of you here). I think that's enough authority.

define a LOT.

explain in detail your testing procedures, tools used, methods, controls etc.

prove reliably that all so called Chinese designed DAC's cut corners that affect sound quality. - Tests and examples please.

what factual evidence do you have that there are more people that believe the way you do?

what factual evidence do you have that supports that claim that there are only 5 of us on all of AVS who are claiming that there is virtually no audible difference amongst modern, competently designed dac's?


I am gonna guess you are going to ignore my post, as you have in the past when I asked you serious questions. rolleyes.gif
post #43 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

As opposed to you, I really tested a LOT of audio DAC's. Bought with my money so there is no 'alternate reason' behind my tests. And I know how to read datasheets too. You just tested three players, and decreed that there all the same. Reality is different - Chinese designed DAC's cut corners on quality, they don't follow the published recommendations, their style fits exactly your mantra - 'it works anyway, nobody can hear the difference'.
As far I am concerned there are way more people that say, like I do, that they hear differences in various DAC's than people that claim contrary (that's only 5 of you here). I think that's enough authority.

define a LOT.

explain in detail your testing procedures, tools used, methods, controls etc.

prove reliably that all so called Chinese designed DAC's cut corners that affect sound quality. - Tests and examples please.

what factual evidence do you have that there are more people that believe the way you do?

what factual evidence do you have that supports that claim that there are only 5 of us on all of AVS who are claiming that there is virtually no audible difference amongst modern, competently designed dac's?


I am gonna guess you are going to ignore my post, as you have in the past when I asked you serious questions. rolleyes.gif

Don't take it seriously Jason, he has been doing the same thing to me for weeks.

He seems to have a track record of being long on claims and short on support for those claims. Lately I can't even get him to tell us which article he gleaned his latest holy revelations from.
Edited by arnyk - 9/4/13 at 6:03am
post #44 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

As far I am concerned there are way more people that say, like I do, that they hear differences in various DAC's than people that claim contrary (that's only 5 of you here). I think that's enough authority.

Words of a desperate man. When someone descends to arguments this weak, he's pretty close to done.
Quote:
Quote:
Of course. People who engage in bias controlled listening tests are in a tiny minority. If that weren't true, the high end audio industry would no longer exist.

+1

Sonic's position is: "Eat sh*t - a million flies can't be wrong". smile.gif

Yet another example of why I don't read AVS and drink coffee at the same time! ;-) Waterproof LCDs are so expensive...

This has to be the most... ...err... colorful restatement of the McDonald's argument I've ever seen. Keep up the good work!
post #45 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

As opposed to you, I really tested a LOT of audio DAC's. Bought with my money so there is no 'alternate reason' behind my tests. And I know how to read datasheets too. You just tested three players, and decreed that there all the same. Reality is different - Chinese designed DAC's cut corners on quality, they don't follow the published recommendations, their style fits exactly your mantra - 'it works anyway, nobody can hear the difference'.
As far I am concerned there are way more people that say, like I do, that they hear differences in various DAC's than people that claim contrary (that's only 5 of you here). I think that's enough authority.

define a LOT.

explain in detail your testing procedures, tools used, methods, controls etc.

prove reliably that all so called Chinese designed DAC's cut corners that affect sound quality. - Tests and examples please.

what factual evidence do you have that there are more people that believe the way you do?

what factual evidence do you have that supports that claim that there are only 5 of us on all of AVS who are claiming that there is virtually no audible difference amongst modern, competently designed dac's?


I am gonna guess you are going to ignore my post, as you have in the past when I asked you serious questions. rolleyes.gif

Don't take it seriously Jason, he has been doing the same thing to me for weeks.

He seems to have a track record of being long on claims and short on support for those claims. Lately I can't even get him to tell us which article he gleaned his latest holy revelations from.

No worries Arny, I totally get his game....i just like to be able to reinforce to any lurkers/newbies what constitutes false claims (magic) vs factual evidence (science).
post #46 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post


No worries Arny, I totally get his game....i just like to be able to reinforce to any lurkers/newbies what constitutes false claims (magic) vs factual evidence (science).

Right. People can go to any number of forums and be told the same-old, same-old which nets out to "Buy, buy, buy..." which is very passive. AVS seems to be a little different, more oriented towards a prioritized activist approach.
post #47 of 60
When the schematic is not even the same as in manufacturer datasheet, when decupling and ground plane is not done per DAC chip manufacturer recommendations, when the OpAmps used are not the ones that are specifically required by chip manufacturer there is no point of arguing. Sure I have bought and have measured that garbage, but some people won't believe measurements (because religion doesn't rely on measurements), they are offended that the manure they worship is classified as such.
post #48 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

When the schematic is not even the same as in manufacturer datasheet, when decupling and ground plane is not done per DAC chip manufacturer recommendations, when the OpAmps used are not the ones that are specifically required by chip manufacturer there is no point of arguing. Sure I have bought and have measured that garbage, but some people won't believe measurements (because religion doesn't rely on measurements), they are offended that the manure they worship is classified as such.

That's all so much hand-waving and speculation without confirming facts. Got any? Let us see them!!

You appear to be very challenged when it comes to providing anything but baseless assertions.

A qualified engineer, especially one with chops in mixed signal design can make all of those changes without any problems and perhaps with benefits.

YOu are basically saying that DACs can only work in reference designs, and that would be another one of your made-up "facts"!
post #49 of 60
If that reference design asks for a minimum of third-order filter and a specific OpAmps (with minimum noise and slew-rate values), then yes, you cannot provide anything less and end up with similar final quality.
Just buy an eBay DAC from China and we will analyze it. I did it for myself, wanting to check similar complains found on another site. If you are curious, you can buy it from me to see it and test it.
post #50 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

If that reference design asks for a minimum of third-order filter and a specific OpAmps (with minimum noise and slew-rate values), then yes, you cannot provide anything less and end up with similar final quality.

You seem to be changing your story, again.

Here's the post I was responding to:

"When the schematic is not even the same as in manufacturer datasheet, when decupling and ground plane is not done per DAC chip manufacturer recommendations, when the OpAmps used are not the ones that are specifically required by chip manufacturer there is no point of arguing. Sure I have bought and have measured that garbage, but some people won't believe measurements (because religion doesn't rely on measurements), they are offended that the manure they worship is classified as such."

In the post above you faulted any design that was"not even the same as in the manufacturer's datasheet". That prohibits using faster op amps as well as slower op amps.
Quote:
Just buy an eBay DAC from China and we will analyze it.

No, this is your issue - you spend your money to prove yourself right.
Quote:
I did it for myself, wanting to check similar complains found on another site. If you are curious, you can buy it from me to see it and test it.

I guess you have one of those amazing (imaginary) kinds of test equipment whose results can't be uploaded to this web site or else you would have already responded positively to repeated requests for you to do so. I'm not going to do your homework for you. Given all the false claims that I've have already caught you in, I'm not going to just take you at your word.
post #51 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

As opposed to you, I really tested a LOT of audio DAC's. Bought with my money so there is no 'alternate reason' behind my tests. And I know how to read datasheets too. You just tested three players, and decreed that there all the same. Reality is different - Chinese designed DAC's cut corners on quality, they don't follow the published recommendations, their style fits exactly your mantra - 'it works anyway, nobody can hear the difference'.
As far I am concerned there are way more people that say, like I do, that they hear differences in various DAC's than people that claim contrary (that's only 5 of you here). I think that's enough authority.

define a LOT.

explain in detail your testing procedures, tools used, methods, controls etc.

prove reliably that all so called Chinese designed DAC's cut corners that affect sound quality. - Tests and examples please.

what factual evidence do you have that there are more people that believe the way you do?

what factual evidence do you have that supports that claim that there are only 5 of us on all of AVS who are claiming that there is virtually no audible difference amongst modern, competently designed dac's?


I am gonna guess you are going to ignore my post, as you have in the past when I asked you serious questions. rolleyes.gif

crickets....

I guess SoNic67 would rather busy himself with grandstanding and posturing and hand-waving then to actually prove his case. Very much like the actions of hucksters and charlatans.
post #52 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

As far I am concerned there are way more people that say, like I do, that they hear differences in various DAC's than people that claim contrary (that's only 5 of you here).
I'm in the market for a quality DAC. Which brand would you recommend?
post #53 of 60
Jason, thanks for the link to the Polk forum. That was an amazing thread to read. It is even nastier than Audio Asylum.
post #54 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post

Jason, thanks for the link to the Polk forum. That was an amazing thread to read. It is even nastier than Audio Asylum.

Unbridled subjectivity can be that way. The discussions have a strong tendency to break down into who can shout "But I heard it!" louder. There is no reliable evidence.
post #55 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by spkr View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

As far I am concerned there are way more people that say, like I do, that they hear differences in various DAC's than people that claim contrary (that's only 5 of you here).
I'm in the market for a quality DAC. Which brand would you recommend?

 

The one that comes inside the gear you probably already own would get my vote.

post #56 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

I guess SoNic67 would rather busy himself with grandstanding and posturing and hand-waving then to actually prove his case. Very much like the actions of hucksters and charlatans.
Did YOU prove your case like you keep obsessively asking me to prove?? Let me see YOUR tests and I can point you your mistakes.
Until now I saw published (free, I am not going to 'pay per view') only the Boston Club 'tests' and already debunked those...
Let's see who the charlatans really are!
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Unbridled subjectivity can be that way. The discussions have a strong tendency to break down into who can shout "But I heard it!" louder. There is no reliable evidence.
That you would accept. Your primary supposition, that only by blind listening A then B and the guessing which one is X can detect the differences, is just that - a supposition, not supported by anything. Is a mechanical assumption of how human psychology and brain works.
Every one knows that, under peer pressure or stress, human brain would rather say 'I cant hear a difference' than go against the crowd and state something that can be wrong or against the peers convictions. There is no incentive/reward to really find the differences, only 'punishment'.
Edited by SoNic67 - 9/5/13 at 9:57am
post #57 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post
 

Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Unbridled subjectivity can be that way. The discussions have a strong tendency to break down into who can shout "But I heard it!" louder. There is no reliable evidence.
That you would accept. Your primary supposition, that listening A then B and the guessing which one is X can detect the differences, is just that - a supposition, not supported by anything.
Every one knows that under stress, human brain would rather say 'I cant hear a difference' than go against the crowd and state something that can be wrong. There is no incentive to really find the differences.

 

Why does it have to be 'going against the crowd"? It is perfectly acceptable to score the results of the listening tests privately so nobody which you have chosen. This seems to be just more supposition on your part.

 

Why is there more stress doing the listening test the blind ABX way than doing it your way?  I don't follow that...

post #58 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

I guess SoNic67 would rather busy himself with grandstanding and posturing and hand-waving then to actually prove his case. Very much like the actions of hucksters and charlatans.
Did YOU prove your case like you keep obsessively asking me to prove??'.

Not obsessively, fruitlessly.

I sure have repeatedly proven my case, and you have been stonewalling me. Again and again!

Let's review the situation - you keep making exceptional claims with zero substantiation of any kind.

You've been bold enough to try to force me to pay you to prove your claims, How ridiculous can you get?
post #59 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic67 View Post

That you would accept. Your primary supposition, that only by blind listening A then B and the guessing which one is X can detect the differences, is just that - a supposition, not supported by anything.

Stop making up words and stuffing them into my mouth!

I've never said any such thing.

BTW, if you are trying to describe an ABX test, you've failed,

"...blind listening A then B and the guessing which one is X..." is not how ABX works.

Can you just get the basics right for a change?
post #60 of 60
can we move on please?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › CD Players & Dedicated Music Transports › DAC or CD player