- Joined
- Jun 19, 2018
- Messages
- 6,652
- Likes
- 9,409
Well to my ears. I've had a decent bit of listening to the 205. I thought it was not very good. (No DBT done, just listening).
What did you not like about it?
Well to my ears. I've had a decent bit of listening to the 205. I thought it was not very good. (No DBT done, just listening).
What were you listening to it with? With something that has output this clean I just don't see how its even close to possible for it to "sound awful". Unless you are using some bassy headphones or some high power requirement headphones and trying to drive it through the integrated amp?Well to my ears. I've had a decent bit of listening to the 205. I thought it was not very good. (No DBT done, just listening).
remember folks, 99.9999987% gears that using ESS chips are enabling ASRC and the ASRC are not turn-0ff-able
People tend to act ornery when I describe what I heard so I'll refrain. Let's just say I'm not enamored with either the Oppo 105 or the 205.What did you not like about it?
Maybe awful is a strong word. But no I didn't like it. I listened to it using multiple amps and speakers.What were you listening to it with? With something that has output this clean I just don't see how its even close to possible for it to "sound awful". Unless you are using some bassy headphones or some high power requirement headphones and trying to drive it through the integrated amp?
I can add it if you point me to one.I just couldn't find a "sarcasm" smiley
My thoughts exactly. Don't know how this was the sort of official choice. I've seen blogs saying not to use it as it is no good. Rolleyes combined with a whistle seem more appropriate to me.I don't really see the sarcasm in that upside down smiley, but apparently it's the 'sarcasm emoticon'.
I still don't see why level linearity below -80dB should be important, but this might be interesting:Linearity test generated disappointing results however:
I still don't see why level linearity below -80dB should be important, but this might be interesting:
If you look at the measurements stereophile did on the DAC1 or at figure 19 in the AD1853 datasheet (the AD1853 is the DAC in the Benchmark DAC1) you will find exactly the same performance. This tells us two things:
(i) this linearity deviation is most likely not caused by tolerances in the DAC chip but by the delta sigma modulator.
(ii) your linearity test method seems to be working properly …
I still don't see why level linearity below -80dB should be important, but this might be interesting:
If you look at the measurements stereophile did on the DAC1 or at figure 19 in the AD1853 datasheet (the AD1853 is the DAC in the Benchmark DAC1) you will find exactly the same performance. This tells us two things:
(i) this linearity deviation is most likely not caused by tolerances in the DAC chip but by the delta sigma modulator.
(ii) your linearity test method seems to be working properly …
The DAC1, DAC2 and DAC3 all have internal pads on the XLR outputs that should be used to set the output levels to the range that is required by the downstream device. This will allow direct interfacing to virtually any pro or consumer product.What you say is true. Yet the DAC 3 was meant for pro use. A sensitivity of +4 dbu is 1.23 volts and assumes 20 db headroom or +24dbu max input into monitors you might be feeding. 24 dbu is about 12.3 volts. The DAC 1 was set to 2 volts, but could be calibrated to anything up to about 3.7 volts. While it too was meant for pro use it didn't put out as high a voltage. The DAC3 also can have internal jumpers set to 10 or 20 db pads which according to Benchmark preserves the full dynamic range. So it could be configured so that it still has an actual advantage with a lower realized noise floor vs the DAC1.
USB input only. This was intended to mute a USB initialization transient, which we later solved by other means. There was never a mute on the other inputs.Quick question, but I admittedly don't know a lot.
The problem with linearity is at really low input (output?) level? If you read through the Stereophile review, the original firmware had a problem with muting the output if the input level was too low. Could that be the cause?
The DAC1 was introduced in 2002.Yes, that’s (only) four years apart.
So it strikes me: If @amirm makes more «historical» analyses, we may conclude when the development in (digital) audio started to flat out (a bit). Dare we hypothesize that a lot happened between 2008 and 2012, but less thereafter?