"Could that be BS since they sell the pricey outboard unit?"
IMO, yes. Implementation is everything.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
09-10-14: Audioengr
"Could that be BS since they sell the pricey outboard unit?"
IMO, yes. Implementation is everything.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio +1 |
Steve, IMO, yes. Implementation is everything. While I cannot agree more with you, sometimes implementations are not correct by initial design concept. I personally cannot approve the use of any Op Amps on the signal path. Yes you are using Op Amps for I/V conversion, but the Berkeley example has them all the way, from DAC chip to output. Further more, claiming that S/PDIF is best as well as DSD to PCM conversion (even done by a computer) is way out of line, at least in my experience. There are many recording engineers who will confirm that DSD even converted to DXD at 352.8kHz/24bit is inferior to pure DSD, not to talk about 176.4kHz/24bit conversion that really truncates DSD. Another point will be their claim that 99% of the current production D/A converters are using multi-bit configurations inevitably is a false statement. There are many DACs built around Burr-Brown/TI devices that feature 4 sets of FIR filters for the purest DSD to Analog conversion possible. Lastly, it is always strange to me that, most audiophiles are professionals in certain field, but they never fail to give "expert opinions" for audio. Just amazing! :-) Best wishes, Alex Peychev APL Hi-Fi |
"It's not BS, as introducing signals having significant high frequency content (e.g., fast risetimes and falltimes), and that likely have significant amounts of noise riding on them, can potentially cause issues at supposedly unrelated circuit points elsewhere in the design."
What are you talking about? Where did you get your EE degree?
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
Steve, I'm surprised at your question. What I'm talking about is the fact that depending on the quality of the design digital noise can couple between different parts of the circuitry in a component, via grounds, stray capacitances, etc. Potentially/theoretically resulting in increased jitter at the point of D/A conversion, and/or effects on analog circuitry. Where did you get your EE degree? BSEE Columbia University MSEE Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute + 33 years experience designing and managing design of analog, digital, A/D, and D/A converter circuits for defense electronics. In any event, the bottom line on both of our posts is the same: Implementation is what matters. Regards, -- Al |
As music servers become more robust and user friendly I believe computers may become less prominent for an audio source and USB may go away.
I think that more reference DAC manufacturers may avoid a USB input over time if music servers become the reference level, fluid user interface source that they should be.
Interesting times. +1.... |
A brief off-topic comment: Matt, congrats on the new Porsche. I (and my wife) have been thrilled with our 2014 Cayman S, which as you no doubt realize is the hard-topped counterpart of your Boxter. Be aware, though, that its stock high performance tires cannot handle snow or ice (assuming they are the same tires as on the Cayman S), and MUST be changed to winter tires if you want to drive on those surfaces. Almarg, I hope you didn't get an automatic Porsche?? |
Sucks getting your bluff called Huh? LOL
Anyway back to a less silly posturing.. If I was Matt considering that at the beginning of this very long journey the original goal was:
"Absolute top tier DAC for standard res Redbook CD"
I'd "really" want to get a listen to the Berkley.. but that's just me.. |
Al,
You were polite in not asking Steve where he got his EE degree.
Charles, |
09-10-14: Almarg
Steve, I'm surprised at your question.
What I'm talking about is the fact that depending on the quality of the design digital noise can couple between different parts of the circuitry in a component, via grounds, stray capacitances, etc. Potentially/theoretically resulting in increased jitter at the point of D/A conversion, and/or effects on analog circuitry.
Where did you get your EE degree?
BSEE Columbia University
MSEE Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
+ 33 years experience designing and managing design of analog, digital, A/D, and D/A converter circuits for defense electronics.
In any event, the bottom line on both of our posts is the same: Implementation is what matters.
Regards,
-- Al
Almarg (System | Threads | Answers | This Thread) Almarg, Very Classy reply! |
"Where did you get your EE degree?
Steve N.
Empirical Audio"
Most unclassy indeed. And then he clams up after Almarg's classy reply, tormented by what his next response should be - even more unclassy.
This is why in any forum discussion like this, civilities are of paramount importance. |
Jon2020,
Well said, I have high regard for Al's technical knowledge and just as much for his demeanor as demonstrated once again.
Charles, |
Charles1dad,
Unless I am missing someone else, 99.999% of us in this forum would agree with you where Al is concerned.
J. |
|
@Agear said:
He has had a longstanding love affair with Berkley as has the audio press. What has changed from a design and/or sonic standpoint?
I have no idea.. I haven't heard the new unit.. But the review in TAS was pretty through, as was the interview with the designers.. And what I found most interesting is how both reviews mentioned the big improvements in rebook playback..
In any case I surely don't have 16 Grand sitting around to drop on a Dac :-) so how good (or doesn't) it sounds is all academic for me |
Knghifi, Jon, Charles, Guido, thanks very much for your comments. And Erik, thanks for your inputs as well, about both the DAC and the tires.
JoeCasey, yes, I chose the "PDK" automatic. I'm a "purist" about some things to some degree, but not in this case :-)
As you may be aware, btw, the PDK is a seven-speed "dual clutch" automatic, which actually out-accelerates the manual version (at least if the package which includes "launch control" is opted for, which I did not get).
Best regards,
-- Al |
I'd have got the PDK also.. if I was a player like you :-) And FYI the new Michelin Pilot Sport AS/3 all seasons are almost as good as most other brands pure summer only tires, of course a rear drive Porsche still sucks in the snow even with dedicated winter tires.. |
Erikminer :
If I was Matt considering that at the beginning of this very long journey the original goal was: "Absolute top tier DAC for standard res Redbook CD"
I'd "really" want to get a listen to the Berkley.. but that's just me.
+1 |
Manual transmission is past history. Ferrari, Lambo, McLaren all don't even offer anything but paddle shifters. Even Porsche only offers PDK on the new 911 turbo. The human factor is the limiter to much faster 0-60 times. I had a 2007 911 turbo for years and it was manual. It was great but I never got close to the full performance out of it; it needed PDK. The cars speed and tech has superseded my ability to shift quickly enough. And I honestly like paddle shifting; it's like clutchless shifting, but I am still completely in control of when I shift, and what gears I shift into to. But then, in traffic, you can just pop it back into automatic and drive free and easy.
Yes the Berkeley is intriguing. I'm still trying to get a Romulus in as well. The list continues. |
Manual transmission is past history. Ferrari, Lambo, McLaren all don't even offer anything but paddle shifters. Even Porsche only offers PDK on the new 911 turbo. The human factor is the limiter to much faster 0-60 times. I had a 2007 911 turbo for years and it was manual. It was great but I never got close to the full performance out of it; it needed PDK. The cars speed and tech has superseded my ability to shift quickly enough. And I honestly like paddle shifting; it's like clutchless shifting, but I am still completely in control of when I shift, and what gears I shift into to. But then, in traffic, you can just pop it back into automatic and drive free and easy. There's no question with technology, you get higher performance with PDK vs manual. Even F1 cars are PDK now. We all drive sport cars for a reason. I enjoy the art/involvement of driving. Later Porsches are definitely superior and easier to drive fast but sometimes I enjoy the rawness of older models. Looking for add a 993, last of air cool and a nice bridge between old and modern. Price has skyrocketed so tough to find a decent deal. |
+ 1 about Almarg, many times have I seen this gentleman prove what he has said, and has been an asset to me and many others, Al's education with electronics is evident, I knew he had a back ground in electronics, I never asked him what his back ground was, His answers have always been technical, and when I research what he has said in the past when he has helped me, it turns out to be correct, congrats Almarg on such a profound education, and work history!, you sire have my respect! |
JoeCasey - I have owned an '85 911 M491 wide body, '95 993 C2 Cabriolet and '97 993 Twin Turbo. I'm actually selling my yellow 993 cabriolet right now. I agree, the driving experience is more raw, more mechanically connected to the road; no doubt. Manual is a no brainer on the 964 and 993; it's intuitive and literally lets you become one with the car.
PDK vs manual is, coincidentally, very much akin to CD vs LP.
Best, if possible, to have both as each has their benefits and rewards. |
I also have the new boxter S with PDK and paddle shifters. All the high end cars are going to paddle shifters including the Ferrari's. Once you get use to them the shifting is way faster than using your hand and foot in the old traditional way. I love the car as it is fast and also very smooth ride not like a Corvette where you feel every little bump in the road. |
UPDATE:
Just so that the audio only guys here don't go crazy listening to car banter during the lull....
I spent about 2 hours listening yesterday to my new, fully burned in, ODSE.
Just as good as my loaner! Don't know why, but I was a little worried. Totally unjustified, it sounds amazing! Every time I listen to that ODSE I fall in love with my music all over again!
The current setting of the K-01 will be done on the 23rd. There is one other setting I want to burn in, and I'll do that using the USB input so that gets cooked at the same time. Gonna be a bit before I can compare ODSE DAC to K-01 DAC. I burned my test tracks onto CD, so I will also compare K-01's CD player to my ODSE as well... Sorry, with all the burn in, it's gonna be a bit.
I'm working on another project that I will report on if I can get my ducks in a row. Should be very cool. |
PDK vs manual is, coincidentally, very much akin to CD vs LP. Mattnshilp, exactly my thought except I will concede PDK is superior to manual if performance is major criteria. Tiptronic was a joke but PDK is the real thing ... no human can process faster than a computer. |
Al - Okay, I understand now what you are saying. These are specific effects, like ground-bounce, crosstalk, ground-return sharing, EMI etc..
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
APL wrote:
"Yes you are using Op Amps for I/V conversion, but the Berkeley example has them all the way, from DAC chip to output."
Op-amps are far from perfect, even though the textbooks would lead you to believe it. However, like most things, the answer is "it depends". It depends on how the power for the op-amp is treated and what op-amp you are using. I have done a lot of experimenting with op-amps in the past and learned a lot of things that are not in the textbooks. If you choose the right one and treat it properly in the design, it can be just as good as a discrete circuit and sometimes better because the layout of most discrete circuits does not allow for optimum power delivery. The compact nature of chips allows for optimum power delivery.
"Further more, claiming that S/PDIF is best as well as DSD to PCM conversion (even done by a computer) is way out of line, at least in my experience. "
I never claimed that S/PDIF is the best method for DAC input, but again the answer is "it depends". If the circuit is well-designed, a good coax cable is used and the right receiver chip is used, it can be every bit as good as the best internal USB interface. So close that no one can pick it out in A/B comparison. I have done this.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
09-10-14: Aplhifi-usa
Lastly, it is always strange to me that, most audiophiles are professionals in certain field, but they never fail to give "expert opinions" for audio. Just amazing! :-)
How dare you!.... That could not be more true. Physicians (and possibly engineers) are the worst offenders..... |
Almarg, Mattnshilp, and Jwm, I celebrate the fact that you have embraced your feminine sides. The world would be a better place if more men chose this path...like a Jungian, psychoanalytic balancing of opposites. Furthermore, when you take a corner at speed, you are less likely to spill that skinny, double caramel macchiato |
09-10-14: Joecasey
We all drive sport cars for a reason. I enjoy the art/involvement of driving. Later Porsches are definitely superior and easier to drive fast but sometimes I enjoy the rawness of older models. Looking for add a 993, last of air cool and a nice bridge Joecasey is an a--hole, but I actually agree with the above. Like many audiophiles, I am a closet car guy. My bias has been towards vintage German mobiles, including a 1991 (E34) BMW M5 with Dinan stage II suspension, Dinan chip and UUC motorwerks short shifter, 1989 BMW 735i, 2001 E55 Mercedes, BMW 2008 550is, and a 2005 911. Correct if I am wrong, the newer models leave me cold. Despite the technological leap forward, the quality seems to have sagged. I recently test drove the current generation of Porsches including a Cayman S with PDK, and I was underwhelmed. I found the shorter wheelbase annoyingly bouncy and the PDK soulless. Its just another step in the evolution of driverless cars. The real deal killer for me is the aesthetics. It is part of that lineage of dainty, effeminate mobiles such as the Audi TT and Miata......:/ |
anything made by CHORD is absolutaly awesome....for the money. |
How dare you!....
That could not be more true. Physicians (and possibly engineers) are the worst offenders..... Sure, physicians and engineers are most welcome! But even Almarg (or anyone else with such extensive experience) would agree that the new Berkeley converter should at least make possible for DSD64 through the S/PDIF inputs via DoP format and let their customers decide whether Pure DSD is better than DSD converted to 176/24 PCM. And DoP sent from their external USB to S/PDIF converter will not have the "negative" impact of having USB input that contaminates signal lines resulting in more jitter. Please correct me if I am wrong. Best, Alex Peychev APL Hi-Fi |
Steve, Op-amps are far from perfect, even though the textbooks would lead you to believe it. However, like most things, the answer is "it depends". It depends on how the power for the op-amp is treated and what op-amp you are using. I have done a lot of experimenting with op-amps in the past and learned a lot of things that are not in the textbooks. If you choose the right one and treat it properly in the design, it can be just as good as a discrete circuit and sometimes better because the layout of most discrete circuits does not allow for optimum power delivery. The compact nature of chips allows for optimum power delivery. Sure, I have also experimented extensively with OpAmps. The only one I currently admire as much as a discrete circuit is the newer MUSES01 by JRC. But I use it in my phonostage. Even the reduced out-of-band noise of Sigma/Delta DACs calls for a very high slew rate OpAmp, but those never delivered what I expected. My opinion, of course. I never claimed that S/PDIF is the best method for DAC input, but again the answer is "it depends". If the circuit is well-designed, a good coax cable is used and the right receiver chip is used, it can be every bit as good as the best internal USB interface. So close that no one can pick it out in A/B comparison. I have done this. I was referring to the Berkeley claims. Of course, you are correct that USB can be as good as S/PDIF (or vice versa) if done correct. That is also my experience. But USB offers a much higher resolution that is desirable, at least for me. Best, Alex Peychev APL Hi-Fi |
Agear, I resent that.... My double caramel macchiato is never skinny!
Truth be told, it's a Grande Vanilla Latte with 3 equals. :P |
"......considering that at the beginning of this very long journey the original goal was: "Absolute top tier DAC for standard res Redbook CD....."
In the eyes of the audio world and the professional reviewers, the list of ABSOLUTE TOP TIER DAC for Redbook CD would most likely include the following(not in order of merit) :-
1. dCS Vivaldi stack
2. Berkeley Reference
3. Esoteric Grandioso
Anything lesser would be considered second tier. JMHO.
The audiophile community looks forward to a shoot-out amongst these 3 sources, most likely by an unbiased dealer who carries all these brands.
Cheers! |
1. dCS Vivaldi stack
2. Berkeley Reference
3. Esoteric Grandioso
Don't look at me!
I'd rather buy a McLaren 650S Spider for that kind of money! Or put a deposit down on a new office building for my practice!
Hell, for that kind of money I could actually AFFORD a divorce!!!!
Lol. |
If the Berkeley Ref at $16,000 comes anywhere close to the sonic quality of the Vivaldi or Grandioso, and it seems to have the potential to do so, going by the reviews so far by CA and TAS, then it would indeed be a very "affordable" top tier DAC. |
Don't sweat it, Matt. My room at RMAF last year had dCS Vivaldis in adjacent rooms on both sides. I listened to these. Although they are very good, I preferred the DAC in my room, the ODSE.
I would welcome a shootout with these DACs but I would rather wait untl the ODSX is available. I think it will be unchallenged in the market. Also more expensive than the ODSE. Both will be offered, since they are at diffent pricepoints.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
"Although they are very good, I preferred the DAC in my room, the ODSE."
But, of course! |
That does not suprise me, DCS has been on top of the digital world the last 25 years! |
09-11-14: Aplhifi
But even Almarg (or anyone else with such extensive experience) would agree that the new Berkeley converter should at least make possible for DSD64 through the S/PDIF inputs via DoP format and let their customers decide whether Pure DSD is better than DSD converted to 176/24 PCM.... Please correct me if I am wrong. Having no specific familiarity with the tradeoffs that might be involved, I take no position on that. My only point, as I said in the first of my posts dated 9-10-14, is that "quality of implementation is likely to trump the theoretical advantages and disadvantages of any particular design approach." Audiolabyrinth, thanks for the nice words in your post yesterday. Regards, -- Al |
Audiolabyrinth,
I disagree, check the Audio Exotics site. Their most worshipped DAC currently is the Trinity DAC. That tiny single box has replaced the 3-4 box DCS Vivaldi in several systems in Asia. I think it is quality and implementation that matters, not the number of boxes. For some of them, the cost of the power cords for their Vivaldi stack was almost the price of the Trinity DAC. |
A few minutes after submitting my post just above I received my copy of the October 2014 issue of TAS, containing the Berkeley review and interview Erik referred to earlier. In the interview Michael Ritter of Berkeley addresses in a reasonable amount of detail his rationale for not including a USB interface and DoP capability in the design.
His comments about the lack of USB are very much along the lines of what I said earlier. His comments about the lack of DoP IMO represent a credible, plausible, and well stated design philosophy, especially for a component in this price range. I certainly recognize, however, that similarly credible and plausible cases could be made for opposing philosophies.
Accordingly, I would not categorize the arguments on either side of the coin as being BS, or as being grounds for either rejection or acceptance of a particular candidate. Again, "quality of implementation is likely to trump the theoretical advantages and disadvantages of any particular design approach." But after reading the review and interview, like Erik if I were willing to spend $16K for a DAC I would certainly put the Berkeley on my short list.
Regards,
-- Al
|
Using one op-amp is a lot different that cascading several of them. They do add compression, just like any active stage will, even tubes (but to lesser extent). The fewer the better. That is why I use one. The one I use is a lot more that just I/V converter too. It has 4 different functions.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
I were willing to spend $16K for a DAC I would certainly put the Berkeley on my short list. Fair enough Al, though a $16k converter should at least give the option of DSD64 via S/PDIF. But that is just my opinion, as well as the fact that there is no other reasonable explanation, except for being on a strict budget. Elaboration will be the fact that there is an additional signal path for DSD (basically bypassing their DSP) necessary for providing the DoP/DSD capability, as well as additional clocking. And personally even the true statement of yours: "quality of implementation is likely to trump the theoretical advantages and disadvantages of any particular design approach." It does not really justify using bunch of OpAmps from DAC chips to output. Sorry, it is again just my opinion. Best, Alex Peychev APL Hi-Fi |
One of the consistent complaints concerning Op amps from some noted designers is their reliance on generous levels of NFB and it's sonic consequences. As expected there are divided camps on this issue. Some designers avoid it at all cost and others seem to embrace NFB in their circuits. |
|
"NFB" = "Negative Feedback."
Regards,
-- Al
|
Romulus wins a Golden Ear from the Absolute Sound!
"This all-tubed CD player and DAC is one of the greatest bargains in high-end audio today. What makes the Romulus special is that it sounds so "un-digital," particularly at this price. Rather than sounding flat and congealed, the Romulus opens up the spatial presentation and gives instruments and voices room to breathe. The player has an expansive quality along with a sense of top-octave air and openness. The tonal balance is rich and warm in the bass, which, coupled with the treble smoothness, results in an immediately engaging and fatigue-free presentation. The Romulus doesn't sound "tubey" in the classic sense, but neither does it sound like solid-state. The design and build-quality are beyond what's expected at this price. If you have no analog sources, the Romulus can serve as a preamplifier and DAC with multiple digital inputs, provided you purchase the variable-output option ($1000). Thanks to an innovative hybrid analog/digital volume-control, there's no loss of resolution no matter what the volume setting." -Robert Harley |
Yeah, I'm with Alex on this one...
$16 freaking thousand and no DSD???
Buyers, DO give your heads a firm shaking |
