I'm learning a great deal here. I also find some of the stated/implied money-values interesting and thought provocative. These phrases, particularly: Those that don’t want to spend the money justify having not done so.
Those that have spent the money justify having done so.
@jl35 I'm actually not able to purchase the cited DCS stack - looks like it's $80K - unless I sold everything, but the house. Is it worth it? Why? Why not? And by the way, I'm totally open to discussing the worth of wealth, it's associated values, and the way people treat each other as though a few hundred-thousand (or millions...) dollars worth of money in the bank is somehow one of the most important features of one's character, or actual value. We do live in a world where plenty of people rank the value of others based entirely on their perceived income station, and this happens from all positions on the scale of perceived wealth. Nevertheless, having HUGE money is not inherently bad, and we can perhaps benefit from some of the things made for big bucks $$$! For instance, I'm very interested in what would happen if one of the people owning a $50K+ system placed a $100 DAC into that system. The Modi 3, for $100 sounds damn good in much of my listening, so I'd love to see what happens when we punch through the biases we can punch through, because I am of the opinion that people with $100's of extra K's have to make that money mean something, so money has a way of magnifying biases, potentially, or am I missing something??? IMO, you just can't make your millions mean much if you never use them, never 'manipulate them, and so we see the birth and rebirth of luxury, to make all the stowed money mean something. What I want to know is how these things DACs truly compare, with awareness of the need so many people have to make their HUGE money meaningful... This is to say, can you set your biases aside long enough to take a low cost DAC seriously, if your gaze tends to rest on DACs that cost $4000, $8000, $40,000? I am sure that people with abundant cash have been able to explore more of the high end stuff, but do they keep the low end stuff available, as a valued part of the equation? What can we learn from such people and are they willing to come forward, to disclose some of the findings I've indicated...? Measurements on the new Schiit Modius, which costs $199, are compelling, but more importantly, for this low-coster, those reviewing the Modius claim it's better than the Modi 3 and one person, quite interestingly, claimed it was better than his RME adi-2. Let me be clear, it was not a side-by-side comparison, but claims were made based on previous experience with the DAC. So, I'm still pondering this issues of OP amp and power supply. How do these show up in the measurements? Is compression reflected in THD+N. I'm attempting to discern how useful the available measurements have become... I hear critique or power supply and OP amp in these low cost DACs, and I want to know if there is any other way to discern the impact of these pieces before plugging it into my system? Heard a little commentary and I did enjoy the pictured argument between a dead man and his measurements. It's an apt metaphor. I thought it could be refined by taking measurements of a piece of meat one might buy from the butcher. It might come in at just the right weight, to meet one's needs, might even be the right temperature, might even be the right cut, etc.... none of this is proof of flavor! Finally, the Modius, low cost beauty? Does this statistical test (below) reveal anything useful about the power supply, OP amps, or ANYTHING else? Please offer a carefully reasoned assessment. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/schiit-modius-balanced-dac-review.13769/ |
I’m fairly new around here, and I think just about everyone comes with a mixed bag, myself included. In the current thread, djones has maintained an argument with a respectable degree of focus. If counter-arguments are worthy of consideration, simply present them and argue them with clarity and useful, as Shroeder put it, "data." I don’t doubt that there are equal, perhaps even better ways of explaining things...? Again, I’m somewhat new, only a little over one-hundred posts. I’m here because I love music. I’m interested in serious scrutiny of the issues at stake. I (I think) have had only one person respond to my questions about how power supply, compression and OP amps might be reflected in measurement data. I’ve heard a number of claims and critiques on the basis of power supply, OP amps and compression, so who has the background to make authoritative claims on these matters. Yes, one person did offer a few quite friendly comments, from what I could detect, but I would love to learn more, if you have a moment... Only one has (apparently) taken up the work of looking over the "data" for the new Modius DAC, which posts a THD+N of as low as .0002 per channel. What does that data contain? One person claims the THD+N would also include power supply noise. @audioman58 claims: ...digital jitter,noise artifacts do matter With genuine interest, I’d like to ask those of you with considerable experience with these somewhat technical matters, and even those with less than considerable experience, and I include myself in the fairly low of the less end of the latter, to take a look at the "jitter" statistics for the Modius - I’m posting the "measurements" data/process after this paragraph.... It sort of embarrasses me that I might look like I’m trying to sell the Modius. I haven’t even heard it, frankly, but it has received many good reviews, a few exceptional reviews, and a little bit of mixed reviews. I ordered one and it should arrive in a few days. I’m prepared to spend more, but I don’t see a reason to do so if I don’t have some sense of improvement on the basis of my research... https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/schiit-modius-balanced-dac-review.13769/What I read is a claim that the jitter, for the Modius, is VERY low, amongst DACs. I know a guy - must be VERY technically adept - on here was pedaling his $8000.00 reclocker, and I know it addressed jitter, so it seems "jitter" is viewed as extremely important around here. Does 8000K for a reclocker look like a sign of importance, to you? So, does the posted review point to a new level of jitter reduction skill available to the low-cost DAC, at least in this instance? I know so little about the tech that I’m at the mercy of all of you when it comes to the role of a reclocker. I was told it impacted jitter, but it really could impact gamma rays, for all I know... are gamma rays part of the sound experience? @mahgister probably knows. Transparency does seem to be a valuable issue, or standard, in this discussion, and how is this equated with a low THD+N? At what point does it become a concern, if it is abandoned? I do think @douglas_schroeder call for evidence is justifiable, AND certainly we can also ask him for evidence on the capacity to hear significant desirable differences across the top 20 measured DACs on the mentioned site. Data for a similar spread of DACs reviewed in like fashion would also work well, I think...? If the differences extend beyond the basic measurements, what are they really pointing to? Are we claiming that a "maxed out power supply" brings bass of greater weight? Is that weight measurable? Is that weight distortion? Maybe the word distortion has become "bad" and we need to ask out distortion might be helping things out. Nelson Pass seems to have a positive relationship with Distortion. He also says, "Don’t push the river," when it comes to design... Incidentally, I’ve just realized how much more bass weight come through my Dennis Had Fire-Bottle, compared to my Schiit Aegir. I hope I’m not downvoting a Schiit product here, but I’m being deadly honest. With 11watts per channel, the Fire-Bottle easily reveals potent bass. The Aegir, which might be more detailed in some respects, falls down in bass richness, some of the time. On the other hand, that detail can come through the Aegir with a liquidity that I have not heard in the Fire-Bottle. So, would any of these differences in bass come out in measurement? YES - I like the bass of the Fire-Bottle better than the bass of the Aegir, but it would be helpful to learn about what I’m getting, and when it comes to a DAC... would love to hear what you all know...! I will readily admit that there is the CENTRAL ISSUE of what sounds good. I am hearing a large number of people point to "analog" as the sound signature of preference, and it is interesting that some people buying DAC’s are doing so with the aim of achieving digital sources that can be made to sound analog. This probably points to a split in how DACs are designed. I understand - and I’m stretching beyond what I can say I know for certain - but, I understand the Nelson Pass is purposefully using distortion in relation to the second harmonic, which people very much enjoy. Tube amps are also designed with resulting distortion and that distortion (in some designs) imparts a feeling for greater soundstage and the illusion of more authentic substance in the expression of the notes of the various instruments. I mentioned bass, above. I am struck that DACs can be very simple and then they can include a fairly large complement of tubes, and people often pair one tube component with another solid state component. Generally and in my small experience, this has been seen in the amp/pre-amp domain, but some people may be seeking to moisten their systems with an expensive full-tube-complement DAC. So, these DACs may be intended to achieve very different things. Perhaps this is where I ask @djones51 if he may be overstating the value of a totally transparent DAC when some people have systems that lean dry, or very dry...? Perhaps the DAC is where the search for accuracy must be redeemed by some moisture, or some pixie-dust? |
I think this is an issue of definition, with @mozartfan seeming to differentiate between a straight DAC and a DAC that includes a tube stage? |
We each approach this, including the way we treat others in this forum, in our own way, as we do most other things. We can use the language, "The only thing getting between advancing the training of one's dog is the owner of the dog." Yes, that's right. "The only thing resisting the improvement of aesthetics of one's interior design is the person in charge of that interior design." You can turn that lens on anything, and yet not everything needs that lens - for instance, we probably should be very tactful in applying our lenses to the behavior of others. The art hanging on my wall is my art, fits my desires and preferences. I buy my art based on a very long history with art and yet, I wouldn't walk into your house and say you have bad tastes, when you are on your very own path in discovering and responding to art. I also wouldn't call you names and act as though I was somehow helping you "upgrade" your artistic sensitivities, by calling you a name. Learning just doesn't work well that way. We really have discovered that antagonizing the student, demeaning the student, calling the student names, punishing the student does not, neither in the short nor long terms, produce a better student. - The motives are all wrong, and lack the very sensitivity that the person claims to be illuminating.
You wish me to apply your lens, @douglas_schroeder , and I think it would have been worth your time to take notice that I fully embraced your call for "data." I applied your lens. It's worth putting more effort into noticing the things that already meet your interests and alleged requests/standards... So, your rendering and application of "chintziphile" rides on your own motives, which appears to be to sell me, and others, more costly equipment. Maybe it's part of a competitive approach that has often worked for you? Maybe you think I "need" your "vision" or experience of high-end components. You certainly aren't, in the preceding content, evidencing a high-end interest in discussing the finery of the available technology, even when it (possibly) shows up in lower cost equipment... That's fine. I've heard your argument. It includes a tendency to call people names when they do not share your value system... I could push the button a lot harder on this, but if you want to roll around in it a bit, I know you are much more intelligent than you initial spitballs reveal... Are you the kind that has decided his value system should be shared by all? I doubt it, because part of this sort of thinking depends on putting others down as though they are somehow less valuable for their own ways of seeing and processing... I would imagine, if I owned a number of $10K+ components from your list of favorites, you would offer a contrasting set of salutary phrases, very uplifting, even exalted phrases, without knowing a real thing about me, and without much caring, by the way. It's fine to be absorbed by high-end Mercedes Benzes and lean "taut" bodies. That's all fine. I get the attraction, the sexual and visceral basis of your thinking and what moves you. Go for it! I've driven many MB's in my life - I get what it's all about - the "image" of it all, the interpretation of "power" that such things appear to command. Not a bad ride, nice 'finish' work, ok motor, but I'm much more interested in other values when it comes to my buying power, and my ownership experience. In here, I'm more interested in understanding the tech - that's one of my values, so when someone made the critique that this thread obviates "learning," I ask you to give me some insight into how my experience enjoying much deeper richer bass from my fire-bottle might be calculated in terms of THD+N or other factors, and how this might be an analog to desirable DAC tech, perhaps evidenced in more AND less costly examples. At some point, the claims to "better" will interact with what we know about things, what we are learning. The engineers are clearly in touch with this... what kind of background do you have, other than "reviewing" the tech? How well do you know the tech? I don't think you really want to be lectured, who does? But I see the importance of laying bare motives. I want to know how DACs work - what is in them and what does it do? I am permitted to develop a thread on this very topic. .... I don't have any interest in endless claims about how amazing things are in the DAC world of $5000 to $90,000 components, or that there's something wrong with me because I don't have the money to spend on a $5000 DAC. If that's your interest, Mr. Shroeder, please move on. You claimed you don't like to argue, and yet you immediately started out within the components of argument, and quickly moved to what is commonly known as the "ad hominem" fallacy, which distracts from the claim and evidence, while moving to a focus on character. You then doubled-down on character, claiming that somehow you have been able to rise from that grave situation, while never addressing any of the interesting points raised in the posts you were allegedly addressing. You found the points agitating and at odds with your values, so you struck out, so let's have the value discussion... I'd like to start with valuing the people I'm talking with. I appreciate many different points of view, regarding the technology. I'm not here to assess your character, based on your buying preferences, or your methods of conducting reviews. When I read one of your articles a few months ago, it was clear to me that I was studying a mind that is strongly drawn toward things that cost and look a certain way, and that's fine. I am also interested in some of that, in some places, but I'm absolutely much more satisfied with my Toyota than I would be owning most of the MB's I could afford. I love that my seven year old car will likely go 200,000 - 300,000 miles without any serious service needs. To me, that's smart shopping, smart tech, smart living. That's part of my value system. I don't feel a need to make $200K a year, nor buy $10,000K stereo components, because I make choices that give me a hell of a lot of mileage for pennies. This is an example of the notion that wealth is relative. How would you feel, driving most Toyotas? Maybe you do see the intelligence of owning such a vehicle, and I would be interested in hearing the values you associate with a Toyota... I found your call for evidence concerning the possible sonic differences between the top 20 measured DACs, from but one reviewer, quite reasonable. I also called upon you, to provide some "data" for the counterclaim that might be drawn out of the thread you had teased out. Your response was to ignore the entire post and ignore all of its substance. Your response was to mostly ignore the call for deeper analysis and discussion. I would love to hear the result of your mind entering into a conversation with the data results of the testing done on the Modius... Your "past self" was a chintziphile? I think he was much better than that, probably preserved a little innocence and sense of adventure in the wide open field of audio. The joy is in the process. In the 80's and 90's I spent day after day, and hour after hour, FOR YEARS, visiting local high-end stereo shops, where I auditioned EVERYTHING and talked to the sales team for hours. They loved it; I loved it. I bought a lower cost pair of Vandersteen (2ce) and kept them for over twenty-five years. Was that chintzy? None of those salespeople every claim the purchase of a Yamaha AVR was chintzy. My purchase of a 15" velodyne subwoofer was also never sold with the added judgment of "chintzy." Never in all of my face-to-face communication with people selling audio in high-fidelity stores have I encountered a person who wrote off my joyful interest in the tech as chintzy. I think it's worth thinking about these encounters as though they are to be valued on par with face-to-face interaction. It is the screen, the anonymity, and other factors I won't describe (I might, if pressed) that are supporting the IMPULSE that it's just fine attack character when someone else is behaving in ways that run counter to one's own values. Can you imagine buying things at on ground stores and having sales people spit on your character because you decide to buy within your own comfort zone? Let people be themselves, let them conduct their audio search in their own way, if they aren't hurting anyone. |
@ovinewar I appreciate your comment, concerning the division between the search for "truth" and time protected for enjoyment. More and more I see the limits of endless searching, which seems to be pronounced in a commercial culture, where our desires our endlessly pricked, to the point of inflammation.
Perhaps our thread has burned itself out...
Much appreciation to all contributors. If you have final thoughts, please send them along... |
@jjss49 How do you listen? What are you habits of listening, and are they significant to the value of your music listening experiences? |
Those are some pretty awesome statements, @cal3713 and @douglas_schroeder and @grannyring
Your tactic definitely pinches the sarcasm nerve, in me.
So, maybe we can be clear here: there is no space here for conversations that get at the heart of value questions relative to your bottom line?
I didn't realize there would be police of this kind, in here, but there certainly is...
Let's at least talk, for a moment, as "men," as they once said.
I suppose you could have simply tossed me out, so why are you playing with me? Why the group escort?
Am I not permitted herein to inquire as to the actual significance of claims related to power supply, OP amps, and compression in the output impression of low cost DACs? This would appear to me to be an excellent place to truly get at these issues, to learn about them, etc... |
@jjss49 I appreciate your remarks, and I'm interested in anything we can point to that would make up that 10% difference. If possible, I'd like to go beyond "parts cost." What are those parts? What space is there in the tech assessment for creativity, or some kind of special "insight" into what makes something work, a little better... Also, you make a 'aside' comment about cost of ownership. I looked on us-audio daught com and did not see a single Denafrips product for sale. On both the preceding website and e-bay, I did see numerous PS Audio products for sale, including the mentioned DAC and others. PS Audio (itself) appears to be selling the Direct Stream for about $5400 through us-audio. I also see a number of items that are sold used and also for significant reductions from the initial price, if $5400 is the original cost. - one for $4100
- another for $3900
- one on eBay for $3795
- another for $2300 - is it old? it is upgradeable? 1 owner; originally bought for $4000. 9/10 condition.
So, lots of competition, and thus hard to keep a high price of re-sale. Altogether, I'm not seeing a strong argument for a more expensive 'cost of ownership' in the Denafrips, although this might show up in one of their more costly products. My interest would not extend beyond the Ares ii, which looks to cost roughly $750 USD. I do not know the original cost of the units I've identified, but it appears that you lose more than the (entire) cost of the Ares ii in a resale situation with a PS Audio Direct Stream. So, is that 5-10% improvement worth the expense? And that, of course, is an individually measured conclusion. Perhaps there are other monetary considerations in the contrast, jjss49. You did point to upgradeability, which makes the $2300 option above more attractive. You did point to a broad group of bells and whistles, certainly not present in the Ares, although we don't expect a $750 unit to do it all. Interestingly, Topping DACs often see have to have quite a number of bells and whistles. Also, getting back to the Bifrost 2, we see another unit that is upgradeable at the sub $1000 price domain. It has few bells, but does include a remote. @djones51 mentions transparency. What does that term cover, in terms of the experience of a DAC? Does transparency mean the DAC will read all the musical information and present it all coherently, to the amp? Schiit recently presented their MODIUS DAC, for $199, and it has the lowest distortion reading of any of their DACs. What does this mean, compared to the higher end offerings, the Bifrost, the Yggdrasil, etc. I've mostly seen raves of the Yggdrasil, so what is the specific tech that people are pointing to...? If it measures more distortion than the Modius, what is making it a better sound DAC, despite distortion readings...? |
So, I took a peak at the innards of two DACs, one of which was referred to, above. I looked into the PS Audio directstream DAC, which costs $6000, and then the Denafrips Ares ii is about $1000.00. This is where a trained eye is really needed, because I can only say the parts count and appearance look somewhat similar. This does bring to mind some questions... The assertion that DACs are priced at what the market will bear needs further discussion. I don't think a manufacturer simply ponders what people might willing to pay for the piece, setting the price at that level. There is the question of time invested (research, parts acquisition, assembly, etc...), parts used, and equations that compare the product to other products on the market, and marketing costs. Perhaps this is what is meant, or what is hidden in the notion of "bearing." Marketing itself can be a huge piece of the cost of an item, amounting to as much as 50% of product cost, from what I have heard. This is where word-of-mouth marketing becomes an interesting facet of the cost, perhaps revealing why so many people are responding to products from Schiit and others, who don't appear to be going to great lengths to make their products look flashy and unique, nor do they do much advertising compared to, say, Klipsch. Also, we all know that aesthetics or claiming a particular "expensive part" may be less for performance and more for enticement/marketing purposes. The latter statement calls for scrutiny, which is to say: I'm impressed when someone can even list things like: - amorphous core chokes,
- Mundorf 4 pole caps,
- high performance diodes
The question for me is to what extent are these necessary for high performance? I do understand there is a role for power conditioning and power management in these devices. In my recent study of an unusual offering from an Indian company called ALLO, I noticed that their Revolution DAC, which comes in around $300, emphasized short signal path and the DAC portion of the unit was very small - very small, but a large part of the unit was reserved for power conditioning; or, at least that's what I think I saw. Maybe someone can look it up and tell me what they see, as I'm sure a more thoughtful breakdown of parts would be of great use to many fairly ordinary folk, who enjoy learning about these things. In a hobby where (some) people seem to be forever boasting simplicity, short signal paths, and the like, I guess I'm needing a little more information about the important features of a quality DAC. I mean, I was attracted to the phrase, "amorphous core chokes" and "Mundorf 4 pole caps" and I find that there is always some kind of rhetorical element to the presentation of these devices, but what truly counts??? Maybe I need to start a new thread: what are the important features of a DAC that operates transparently, only sending on the "music" and other recorded "environmental factors" from the recorded digital signal... |
When it comes to the DAC: Is distortion the only word (or the most important...) in transparency AND full realization of the recorded sonic imagery? I have been lead to believe that some DACs handle detail and soundstage differently than others and I'm wondering if these features (of subtle detail and soundstage) are fully reflected in distortion figures. This is to say, FOR EXAMPLE, what kinds of (general) differences might be reflected in two different DACs, with the following THD+N measurements: Or what else am I missing, for purposes of discernment, other than the in-my-ear experience of evaluation... |
Amazing! I jumped from here into a search for the Denafrips Ares ii and found the following statement in a review on Amazon:
"I did a direct A/B comparison between the Ares II and a PS Audio DirectStream DAC. The DirectStream as I had it configured costs $6,899. Granted the DirectStream has more features. However, when comparing sound quality, I would say the the Ares II was almost as good as the DirectStream. Maybe 90-95% of the DirectStream. Without me going back and forth I would not have been able to tell any difference - they're that close (listening on KEF LS50 speakers). The PS Audio DirectStream seemed to have a tiny bit more detail."
What does this imply about parts? Marketing? The market bearing... |
@jjss49 Thanks for the short course! Your information is helpful!
A) Clocking and jitter have been teased out fairly frequently, in my looking about. I know you can buy external re-clockers and spend thousands doing so.
B) Schiit claims in their rendition of Multibit, or True Multibit, a "time-and frequency-domain optimized digital filter," but I couldn't begin to make sense of it...
C) This notion of output being "ported" out of the DAC chip is fascinating. Perhaps there are a variety of ways of achieving this, perhaps with some Mundorf opulence? I jest, but it also intrigues. . .
D) The Allo DAC I mentioned made it clear that management of power is a big thing. I wonder how they pull it off with smaller DACs, like the Schiit Modi.
I have the Modi, presently, and I'm curious about a higher end piece, but I'm struck by how well it fits into my system, not infrequently producing 3-D images from good recordings, and accurate tones in most places, perhaps a bit bright here and there, perhaps a lil under-developed here and there, but perchance this is also partly the fault of the recordings...
|
Well, @Mahgister, do you suggest some recordings that work well for you, in analyzing your system/DAC, etc? |
As I don’t have access to Djones financial records, I personally would like to focus on his reasoning, which is sensible as presented. If a $200 DAC measures .0006 THD+N, are we looking at an output value and how does power supply and/or OP amp compression figure into this measurement? |
What I'm seeking to clarify is how "Power supply noise and OP amp compression" influence THD + N?
What measurements meaningfully capture power supply noise and OP amp compression? |
@djones51 How does the issue of compression figure in? Wouldn't a compressed signal result in distortion? Maybe I need to go over to the technical forum, to dig in a little deeper... Someone brought up OP amps and compression, and power supply, so I'm wondering if measurements can offer any information on those items, or perhaps it's only when you are listening that such things become relevant...
I guess what I want to know is what is covered by the SINAD, as I understand - just read up on this - that it is a calculation that reflects the pure signal against various other possible channels/inputs of distortion.
@audioman58 mentioned "maxed" power supplies, but what is the real world result of a maxed power supply and is this where, as noted by djones51, only those who are fifteen with perfect ears stand a chance of truly appreciating the difference?
|
@mahgister What I'm understanding is that you propose a very involved process of "embeddings." You haven't gone into it and I'm a little timid about asking, as I don't want to be swamped... But I will bite, lightly:
Can you give me a pointer or two that would result in a relatively low cost and low time investment? Or, are you selling this service? You pop in and comment on your DAC, but when I looked it up it cost something like over $200 and I did not see an option for returns...
You said you bought yours for something like $25, or did I misread you?
|
@ovinewar and @cal3713 What (we) faced in here was a discussion thread I had begun that soon turned into an assault on one person's character, not so much their point-of-view, a point-of-view that wasn't asserted with any sort of bellicose tone. Maybe you could infer some head scratching or undertones of disgruntlement in the framing of the viewpoint of the person who was subsequently attacked. In fact, the attack messages went beyond attacking the person to name-calling, using words like "objectivist" in a context that blurred the line between the person that was initially attacked and my own efforts to study the workings and relevance of DACs. For instance, people have made a huge deal about jitter, and I noted that one business has been selling a reclocking device at great expense, from my viewpoint, at $8000 dollars. The latest Schiit DAC, the Modius, is claimed to have extremely low jitter, so what are we looking at in this apparently budget friendly DAC? It sounds like it kills off the reclock giant at this level of application. Hell, maybe the Modius would sound amazing, plugged into a $50,000.00 system. I'd like to see if someone has the guts to try it, because I think it takes serious courage to examine one's attachment to money-results, at all levels, and so it may well be that you or I were caught at a price point, unawares. Unawares that the purchased product ultimately performed much the same as something at a vastly lower price point, etc. The response I received offered no input into my interest in studying DACs, but was fixated on the idea that the motives of my thought were tied up in impulses "chintzy." It was a lovely moment, one outside of any precedent or standard for quality service in the face-to-face world of business in a high-fidelity audio store of the kind I frequented regularly until the pandemic. To be more clear: I've never had a salesman, reviewer, nor a fellow hobbyist accuse me of being "chintzy," and I know the person who lobbed the stone is in the business, although in this instance he has taken up a role that has nothing to do with good business practices, good service, etiquette, etc. So, I'm on track with the question of how we relate to one another, herein. Those attempting to deal with people that make all or nothing claims are advised to keep their focus on issues, on their experience, on the reasoning, on the available data, on the knowledge base that is available for these products, their interactions, their limitations, etc. Treating rudeness, or limited points-of-view with rudeness creates and magnifies the very problem of disagreeable moments in the forum. The sense was that two or three people entered the space, continuing a line of attack started elsewhere, appearing oblivious to the new thread, context, and people, myself among them. I am all for discussing the character of interaction that best serves useful discussion. - Politeness is high on my list.
- Civility is high on my list.
- Etiquette is high on my list.
- Learning about all of this stuff is high on my list
If a person takes an approach that seems to favor one perspective In opposition to all others, this can be highlighted quite easily. It just takes a little patience, which pairs well with all of the bulleted items listed... |
@mahgister and @duglas and others, I appreciate the thrust of your comments, and there is one significant piece that is left out of much of this discussion, which may be the largest determiner of the music experience:
The quality of the listening.
You may have perfect ears and still lack the stability of attention to receive the full musical message. This is not a small thing.
Why are we not discussing our listening habits - the one component we all have some control over, which can be improved with ongoing reflection...
My preference would be to share some discussion about how people listen and how they have worked with their listening over the years. My sense is that people don't notice how they listen, and often follow habitual patterns when listening.
One interesting, and I think "audiophile" flavored example, comes from a post I read some months ago, where the person described how difficult it was to listen to his system for more than a few minutes, because he would become absorbed in criticism of his system.
That may sound familiar, or it may not, but what is missing is the fact that everyone is facing "habits" in their listening that impact the experience greatly, probably much more than any particular component. If I sit down and my mind is restless the entire time, for example, it may be nearly impossible to enjoy anything coming my way.
This shifts the focus ever more away from products and consumption to the person. Many people are chasing the wrong thing, not noticing how poorly or inconsistently they listen. And by the way, you may be able to detect differences at minute levels between various components and still fail to sit and relax enough to truly enjoy the music.
So, the listening piece gets more personal, more internal, more real than the next DAC.
Any thoughts? |
@mozartfan I have a tube amp and it is a wonderful performer. I also have a class A amp and it is also blissful. My latest DAC - the Schiit Modius - is not a tube product, but it is transparent and the overall sound quality of my system is beyond anything I thought I would ever own. I may play with another DAC in the near future and I have looked at tube DACs, with a couple landing in my price range: the Black Ice products and the Musical Paradise products come to mind. Actually, the $499 model MP DAC is under redesign and will not be available until year-end, so that's not an option, right now.
Frankly, I have been blown away at every purchase from Schiit. I never dreamed their $799 Aegir would match so well with my Moabs. For people with lower a lower budget, companies like Schiit are a Godsend. |
