Review and Measurements of Totaldac d1-six DAC

[Deleted member 2348]

Technically speaking, yes, but perception-wise (the speakers and the ears being the reconstruction filters) the picture is not that clear.

Sure. But the goal of a DAC is (or at least should be) to reconstruct the original analog signal as it was sampled and digitized. Using this criterion a DAC without reconstruction filter is incomplete. Furthermore the amplifier-speaker-ear "reconstruction filter" is certainly not very well specified.

And all this just to get a DAC that looks great with "illegal" signals (not real, band limited, sampled signals, but typically synthetic pulses or square waves, which violate the sampling theorem) in the time domain.

 

[totaldac]

This was A1 DAC, a different DAC.

 

[graz_lag]

Can you cite an example of where people have gone "too far"?

Keep in mind that it doesn't help when the engineer behind the product comes on this thread and stirs up more shit by acting childish, defensive, and belligerent.

It's all within the Fear-Uncertainty-Doubt marketing strategy.
Look @ the reviews published by magazines that are 100% made up with ADVs : there is always the gear $ five digits price indication right in the review title.
In doing that they push into your mind that 'expensive gears equal higher sound rendering quality'. (Which is true in some case.)
You can afford these indications if you have the budget, if not - you're 'forced' to buy a cheaper gear but with a lot of Fear-Uncertainty-Doubt in your mind to the inevitable point that you feel you should invest money in more expensive gears as soon as you can.
IMHU, the attitude of this manufacturer fills into the FUD marketing strategy.

 

[Snafu]

This was A1 DAC, a different DAC.

Could you please tell us about process of engineering this dac, did you have any measurable targets (distortion, freq response, THD etc) and did you meet them. Where there trade offs to achieve that quality of sound you were looking for. I'm seriously asking and not joking since you have very different approach and targets of engineering with your products.

Thanks

 

[daftcombo]

This was A1 DAC, a different DAC.

Care to give us the specs / graphs we'd like for the DAC tested here then?
It would prevent people here from trying to extract from a french forum the information that should be on your site.

 

[daftcombo]

Could you please tell us about process of engineering this dac, did you have any measurable targets (distortion, freq response, THD etc) and did you meet them. Where there trade offs to achieve that quality of sound you were looking for. I'm seriously asking and not joking since you have very different approach and targets of engineering with your products.

Thanks

The process he wrote:
http://www.totaldac.com/principles.htm

 

[Andrex]

Yes, I saw that, but bandwidth statement is missing.

As far as the measurement of distortion is concerned, there is a long explanation that justifies a sound spectrum measurement limited to 22kHZ.
This explanation seems to be similar to the one you gave in one of your posts.

And it seems to me that a new measure could change the worst of the graphs (THD+N vs Frequency) into something much more decent.

I have a little trouble believing that a Dac who is correct on a few points, and very good on others (linearity), can ultimately be so bad.

Finally, the professional training of its designer is really of the highest level. Probably the best European university in terms of electricity. It is hard to imagine that someone trained there could make such basic mistakes.

 

[BillG]

It is hard to imagine that someone trained there could make such basic mistakes.

Even Nobel Prize winning scientists go off the rails on occasion...

 

[daftcombo]

And it seems to me that a new measure could change the worst of the graphs (THD+N vs Frequency) into something much more decent.

Yes, you can do as Vincent on his site and find something that could be plotted and look nice.

Of course, we can't hear over 20 kHz. But distortion products over 20 kHz can be responsible for audible IMD under 20 kHz once they enter an amp or speakers. Thats is why you can't just put a filer at 20 kHz and be happy with the highest distortion product you get in the audible range. You don't plug your RCA cable from the DAC output directly to your ears do you?

 

[graz_lag]

@KSTR : as it seems the manufacturers do not want to enter into a serious technical discussion & comparison, can you pls. do us a favor in getting an unit of this DAC by them within their 14-days testing offer so that you can run an entirely new set of measurement and publish them ?
You stated you have interest in measurements of audio gears and you own some qualified instrumentation, right?

 

[Dialectic]

Finally, the professional training of its designer is really of the highest level. Probably the best European university in terms of electricity. It is hard to imagine that someone trained there could make such basic mistakes.

I know a lot of bad lawyers who went to Yale, Harvard, and Stanford.

 

[daftcombo]

@KSTR : as it seems the manufacturers do not want to enter into a serious technical discussion & comparison, can you pls. do us a favor in getting an unit of this DAC by them within their 14-days testing offer so that you can run an entirely new set of measurement and publish them ?
You stated you have interest in measurements of audio gears and you own some qualified instrumentation, right?

For me, the measurements have already been done by @amirm . Period.

 

[graz_lag]

... Finally, the professional training of its designer is really of the highest level. Probably the best European university in terms of electricity. It is hard to imagine that someone trained there could make such basic mistakes.

Here we go, another example of how bad the FUD marketing can be in our purchasing process decision ...

 

[graz_lag]

For me, the measurements have already been done by @amirm . Period.

Yeah, but @KSTR is contesting them not me!!!

 

[boXem]

I know a lot of bad lawyers who went to Yale, Harvard, and Stanford.

Are there good lawyers?
(sorry, just kidding, it was too easy for an engineer, I also could have written acountant or salesman)

 

[AndrovichIV]

I’m being perfectly serious.

It’s not just this thread. The glee with which some people seem to sink the boot is just a bit rude.

(Can’t believe an Aussie has to pull people up for being impolite. What is the world coming to )

You have to look at this in context:

1. Dude asks 13K for his product, which is bested by a 9$ Apple dongle or a 35$ chromecast audio
2. Goes after Amirm's measurements without providing any valid reason and crucially, also without offering any competing measurements that may prove that his product is of high quality despite the fact that the guy owns 3 analyzers
3. The only graph he shows for his product doesn't follow industry standard and is a test of a signal at -120 dB or so, which coincidentally makes his product look good. (Might he be crossing a fine line here in legal terms? I don't know, I'm not a lawyer)
4. Vincent's answers are rude, short and uninformative. You can say what you will about the answer of several of the people in this thread but they're not short and uninformative

 

[Dialectic]

You have to look at this in context:

1. Dude asks 13K for his product, which is bested by a 9$ Apple dongle or a 35$ chromecast audio
2. Goes after Amirm's measurements without providing any valid reason and crucially, also without offering any competing measurements that may prove that his product is of high quality despite the fact that the guy owns 3 analyzers
3. The only graph he shows for his product doesn't follow industry standard and is a test of a signal at -120 dB or so, which coincidentally makes his product look good. (Might he be crossing a fine line here in legal terms? I don't know, I'm not a lawyer)
4. Vincent's answers are rude, short and uninformative. You can say what you will about the answer of several of the people in this thread but they're not short and uninformative

To be clear, it would have been fine from my perspective if TotalDac had merely said that it doesn't question the measurements and that subjective impressions are what matter.

Mr. Brient instead attempted to dispute the measurements while failing to provide any support for his objections. This approach is what has made him look like a charlatan here.

I'm sure many other high-end audio manufacturers would have responded no less unreasonably.

 

[totaldac]

I defended against the easy mistake of the frequency response.
The noise floor given on Totaldac web site is just exact, but at 96KHz and without a ground loop or other such problems.
And yes I also explained a lot about the sound optimisation more than the standard measurements.
Thank you for "Charlatan" and bye, no reason to stay here.

 

[Herbert]

I expected this reply at some point. BTW, for 13.000, do you offer a complete overhaul of my flat´s
main power and grounding so that it will meet your Dacs reqirements?

 

[graz_lag]

To be clear, it would have been fine from my perspective if TotalDac had merely said that it doesn't question the measurements and that subjective impressions are what matter.

Mr. Brient instead attempted to dispute the measurements while failing to provide any support for his objections. This approach is what has made him look like a charlatan here.

I'm sure many other high-end audio manufacturers would have responded no less unreasonably.

Indeed, pls. note he has the same approach on the French' forums, so no surprise on that.
The difference however is that here he has got some stiff rebuke by members who can count on the proper technical knowledge with a set of measurement in hand backing them up, we do not have anything of this level in France, unfortunately.
So - and for the millionth time, thank you @amirm for the beacon of light in the darkness of snake oil offering!