Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 3 of 3 1 2 3
Re: Tos Link or analog 5.1
Jordan #160410 03/04/07 11:06 PM
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
K
old hand
Offline
old hand
K
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
I mounted a couple of those Beaks on my dog to help with his parasitic resonances.


Ken. VaSSallo Series M60v2, VP100v2, QS8v2 SVS SB12-Plus
Re: Tos Link or analog 5.1
jakeman #160411 03/04/07 11:43 PM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 213
local
Offline
local
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 213
This is something I hadnt considered about higher end DAC. It is something I can easily believe in.


Quote:

They also vary by the amount of dynamic range they can produce.





Axiom M80, Ep600, Qs8, VP150, Crown XLI 2500 , DBX Driverack PA2, Focusrite Scarlet 2i4
Re: Tos Link or analog 5.1
chesseroo #160412 03/05/07 01:20 AM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 853
aficionado
Offline
aficionado
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 853
Quote:


Facts must be validated by 3rd party, blind and indepedent testing.
Until then, it is subjective speculation and not a very good one at that.




I'm not sure what you are referring to but I am surprised to see you dismiss DACs as an important aspect of performance. A simple test of audibility of different DACs is to install a cheap low sampling rate sound card into your computer and then listen on headphones. Next install a high end 128X soundblaster card and listen again . Even my 11 year old can hear the difference. Same reason that DVD-A mastered at 24bit/192khz sampling sounds better than most CDs mastered at 16bit/44.1khz. I presume you have heard the difference between DVD-A and CD? ADCs (Analog to digital converters) were used to create them.

Good DAC design keeps noise/distortion to a minimum, preserves dynamic range, and faithfully converts the digital signal to analog without introducing unwanted artifacts or dropping data. The expertise that goes into creating good from not so good DACs is a specialized area of electrical engineering and research. There are well accepted performance parameters associated with DACchips such as better signal to noise ratio, dynamic range and channel isolation or crosstalk (much like in an amp). Its not a static area much like the design of computer chips continues to advance.





All good myths but thank you for highlighting them yet again for the newbies who are trying to learn facts and not standard salesmen lines that get consumers to buy more expensive and useless products.

For our next trick boys and girls, how to make your system sound better by placing magical bullets on top of the equipment. My cousin's mother's brother's dog's flea heard a difference, so it must be true.





I don't think these remarks are worth dignifying with a response but the DACs used in receiver/processors, dvd and cd players contribute significantly to their ability to reproduce sound accurately. Its not as simple as converting ones and zeros to analog sound but far be it from me to convince you otherwise.

The good news is that like all chips the performance to price ratio keeps improving and the difference are becoming more marginal. Nevertheless not all audio equipment is created equally. Of the various DACs I have heard over the years the Burr Brown PCM 1792 DAC has outstanding specs and for that reason has found its way into many Denons, Rotels and Anthems. But like many audio products diminishing returns set in and no matter how good a DAC may or not be, a system is only as good as its weakest link. There is also a view that a DAC with 20bit resolution and 120db SNR is at the limit of audibility so DACs with much better specs are unnecessary. Like most audio design it comes down to implementation.

Here's a couple of basic articles on DACs but be forewarned its not light reading and more directed at people with physics or engineering inclinations.

http://psbg.emusician.com/ar/emusic_digging_digital_audio/index.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital-to-analog_converter

Anyway if you want to believe that a good DAC makes no difference thats fine with me. The purpose of this digression was to encourage people to listen to their digital or analog connections and not assume one is necessarily better than the other. Results will vary with the equipment being used.


John
Page 3 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  alan, Amie, Andrew, axiomadmin, Brent, Debbie, Ian, Jc 

Link Copied to Clipboard

Need Help Graphic

Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics24,949
Posts442,517
Members15,620
Most Online2,082
Jan 22nd, 2020
Top Posters
Ken.C 18,044
pmbuko 16,441
SirQuack 13,843
CV 12,077
MarkSJohnson 11,458
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 482 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newsletter Signup
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.4