1974, I think, and it looks like the "Text of Rule" link goes to my link. Great minds etc.?
1974, I think, and it looks like the "Text of Rule" link goes to my link. Great minds etc.?
So then you want a DX7 since it spanks everything on this graph for half the priceThe line of thought is that the consumer who got a $1000 budget and is looking for an amp/DAC combo unit does not care about $2k+ standalone DACs, but instead if anything better than the dac1421 can be had for those money.
I get that they get compared in this review because they're both multibit, but from a consumer perspective, it's an apples and oranges comparison.
What filters does your DAC include? (Yes I could look it up, but...)
Is there any advantage in your design to digitally limiting before the DAC core vs. just letting the DAC itself (R2R section) clip (limit)? I can think of pros and cons depending upon circuit implementation, just curious your thoughts on the subject.
Really appreciate the interaction and all of your time here!
Thanks,
Don
So then you want a DX7 since it spanks everything on this graph for half the price
Some people can clearly hear a difference between DS DACs and R-2R DACs, but most can't can't hear any difference, they will just do fine with any crap coming out of China....
If my priority was the distortion specification I could just add a large amount of shaped noise and the FFT would be clean as the harmonic products would be spread out and moved up in frequency, just like a DS DAC do.... Yes, I have experimented with it, but see no improvements to the sound and a bunch of negative side effects....
IMO too, thanks don.I do hereby attest that work performed by The King Amir is worthy and all shall affirm that it is So.
Really, what Amir said... There are standards but many are out of date, such as the old stereo amplifier test criteria that do not encompass multi-channel testing or otherwise account for modern AVRs, there are no metrics I know for things like room correction, and no standards to say what must be reported beyond the bare bones. From an engineering standpoint datasheets for consumer products are very sparse in terms of real "meat" and things like THD vs. power specs are all over the map. This allows for market differentiation and gives the manufacturers leeway to report numbers they want to emphasize but make comparisons among products challenging.
Another example: There are some good data converter standards, like the IEEE ones I bring up now and again, but I do not think I have ever seen them mentioned in a consumer product test. They are required for some government programs, and referenced often in the academic and R&D world, but to the average consumer are way too deep and gov't regulatory bodies like the FTC do not enforce their use.
You need to understand enough technical detail to know when you can and can't compare things, and what allowances/changes to make to facilitate comparisons, but asking Amir to adhere to a standard where none exists is pointless (and at times degrading).
IMO! - Don
I've been interested in this question of why R2R allegedly sounds different from DS for some time.
In what measurement(s) does this audible difference show up in your opinion?
And what negative side effects did you encounter as a result of noise shaping?
The current measurements are not able to show the shortcomings of a modern DS DAC as measurements are done using simple steady signals, typically one or two sinus tones, while music is much more complex and dynamic, and it is with complex signal that DS DACs fails as a high order DS modulator is basically unstable, imagine the digital tricks you need to do to get music out of a 1-5 bit DAC....
The current measurements are not able to show the shortcomings of a modern DS DAC as measurements are done using simple steady signals, typically one or two sinus tones, while music is much more complex and dynamic, and it is with complex signal that DS DACs fails as a high order DS modulator is basically unstable, imagine the digital tricks you need to do to get music out of a 1-5 bit DAC.... The first DS DACs was really crappy, some even had low level spurious tones, although they have come a long way since.
Do you have suggestions for measurements that would demonstrate failures of DS DACs (or conversely, the superiority of R2R or multi-bit implementations)?
Here's one suggested several times on this forum, and elsewhere: record (digitize) the level-matched output from the devices under test and null against the original recording. The residuals are indicative of device distortion.
Music is just a signal - discrete representations of voltage. A DAC simply transforms samples into voltages. Signal complexity (deviation from pure tones) has nothing to do with that simple task.
Yes, those flaws, so incredibly evident upon hearing, are apparently well hidden beyond belief. As I've never seen anyone give the good measurements that show the superiority of multi-bit DACs. 1 tone is not enough or two. 6, 8 or even 42 not enough. But they must be keeping the measurements hidden alright.Apparently, 42 tone signals are inadequate as well, since my testing with them has failed to show up any of these hidden flaws.
That is difficult to do. A good idea. The problem is timing. You have to compensate for clocks not being exact, and clocks of the ADC running at a different speed than the DAC. It is theoretically possible.
Considering it is done, how does one interpret the delta?
Subtract the two and then listen to the difference. Or analyze the difference with FFT and other tools to see what's in it.
No DBT and "felt". No surprise then that the measurements didn't back up your biased and emotional response.@soekris
I too would be interested in a measurable way to show this difference. If you have any, please share. In my subjective (no DBT) experience I felt I kept hearing differences between the three multibit units I have had experience with and my DS DACs. But the measurements do not back me up So if you have some please feel free to share.