PS. I'm not talking down either of the DACs you mentioned. I'm just saying measuremets aren't what makes them good.
Good measuring DACs vs.
I recently owned and compared a number of DACs in my system and was particularly interested in the sound of two "perfect measuring" DACs, the Mola Mola Tambaqui and the Benchmark DAC3 HGC. With either of those, it seemed every note came out clearly, cleanly, and accurately, without a hint of distortion. Both have been reviewed by Stereophile, and John Atkinson concluded his review measurements with,
"The Mola Mola Tambaqui offers state-of-the-digital-art measured performance. I am not surprised HR liked its sound."
and,
"Benchmark’s DAC3 HGC offers state-of-the-art measured performance. All I can say is "Wow!"
So, why is it that neither of these two objectively perfect DACs seem to emotionally engage me to the same level as my Mojo Audio Mystique EVO Pro, which is an R2R design using (basically antique) AD1862 "Z" chips? How can I not perceive the same levels of body, tone, or dimensionality from two DACs which exhibit "state-of-the-digital-art measured performance" and that really do nothing wrong?
Showing 3 responses by carlsbad2
Aha. Because the term "measured performance" means nothing. I can measure a ford truck and it is longer than a Ferrari. Does that make it faster? Just because numbers are published doesn't mean they sound better. That hack website that makes ridiculous claims to get clicks proves that. I won't name them. For engaging look at a Lampzator, any of the DHT models. Jerry |
@czarivey thanks for agreeing with my post, even though you apparently (or purposely) don't understand it. |